Broken Bat - Suggestions: Minor Draft Change

Forum >> Suggestions >> Minor Draft Change

Post ID	Date & Time	Game Date

#67201	07/26/2019 6:14:53 am	Sep 12th, 2041
Haselrig Joined: 04/13/2014 Posts: 2790 Novi Doubledays III.4	Any argument against allowing people with rosters at 50/50 to access their draft slate for the week and then decide whether they want to cut a guy or not?

#67203	07/26/2019 6:26:36 am	Sep 12th, 2041
lostraven Joined: 07/02/2016 Posts: 1269 Corvallis Ravens II.1	How long has this game been running? Alternatively, any thought to adding a little flavor to the game history and announce a minor-league roster expansion to 51 or 52? Or would that too dramatically affect the waiver wire in a negative manner? If not, I'd certainly +1 the base suggestion if it's not too difficult to program.

#67223	07/26/2019 7:37:23 pm	Sep 14th, 2041
hurstdm Joined: 01/18/2017 Posts: 576 Murfreesboro Moo Cows VI.5	I think an argument could be that this change would essentially be a ninja way to expand the full roster to 51 or 50 1/2. I don't think I'm in favor of any roster expansion. In fact, I'd generally argue the opposite.

#67225	07/27/2019 4:03:20 am	Sep 14th, 2041
AssumedPseudonym Joined: 10/26/2016 Posts: 1130 Deerfield Beach Rats V.7	With the way the draft has been reworked so that you can actually see what you’d be getting, not being able to access the draft board with a full roster — not even actually signing anybody, just looking over your options — would essentially be no different than not being able to access the free agent market with a full roster. I wholeheartedly endorse and offer my +1 to this idea. Even with the old draft, this would have been an improvement.

#67227	07/27/2019 12:57:03 pm	Sep 14th, 2041
amalric7 Joined: 01/20/2016 Posts: 2238 New York Lancers V.4	I really, really like this idea...but I'm going to play devil's advocatee here. This is like having your cake and eating it, or having the option to eat it or not (which is fine for cake but not here). Having to open a roster spot just so you can make a draft pick often leads to a heart-wrenching decision, and just as often that draft pick turns out to be a bum so you feel like you cut a prospect you have no guarantee of getting back for no good reason. But making that cut allows you the choice to draft and also helps keep the talent pool fresh for everyone else, which is the whole point of the roster limit. I hate making that cut as much as anyone, but in all fairness I think that's the way it has to be.

#67228	07/27/2019 2:04:52 pm	Sep 14th, 2041
AssumedPseudonym Joined: 10/26/2016 Posts: 1130 Deerfield Beach Rats V.7	I strongly disagree with that line of reasoning, and I’m not sure you could convince me that it makes any sense while the free agent market remains available to view by owners with full rosters. The players are already generated and exist, or at least as much as any other player has been drafted at some point already has. The only difference here is that they would need to be acquired with a different transaction — drafting as opposed to signing via free agency or waivers. Your draft board represents players your scouts have been keeping an eye on for the past week. (This was true even with the old draft system, you just didn’t have any real specific details.) The players on free agent market have openly visible stats that you can check at any time. Not being able to look at your draft board is essentially equivalent to telling your scouts that you’re not interested in their reports because your roster is already full, while still having the freedom to browse the free agent market (for Major League players and prospects alike) at will. This makes no sense to me at any level.

#67235	07/28/2019 4:08:23 am	Sep 18th, 2041
amalric7 Joined: 01/20/2016 Posts: 2238 New York Lancers V.4	I did say I was playing devil's advocate. Giving actual baseball reasoning doesn't always work, though - your reasoning makes sense, but sometimes that doesn't work as a game (ie. Broken Bat) mechanic. Is it better for us to view our draft boards without making a cut? Of course it is. The point I'm making is that it's better for Broken Bat if more prospects - even borderline ones - are put back into the FA/waivers pool, which is why things are they way they are and always have been. It's almost a rich-get-richer idea, or at least a rich-avoid-getting-less-rich approach. Again, as I said before I like the idea from an individual perspective, but on the bigger picture not so much. Updated Sunday, July 28 2019 @ 4:09:08 am PDT

#67237	07/28/2019 4:50:02 am	Sep 18th, 2041
Haselrig Joined: 04/13/2014 Posts: 2790 Novi Doubledays III.4	The point I'm making is that it's better for Broken Bat if more prospects - even borderline ones - are put back into the FA/waivers pool, which is why things are they way they are and always have been. Is it? It may have been the way it was done up until now, but the new draft is more like the recruiting system in Hardwood. Taking players you don't plan on keeping would likely be more detrimental than under the previous system.

#67241	07/28/2019 4:13:47 pm	Sep 20th, 2041
Rock777 Joined: 09/21/2014 Posts: 9608 Haverhill Halflings III.1	I disagree. If you take a player you won't keep, you'll cut him, which means some one else will have to cut a player to pick him up. Which gives you an opportunity to get another player. I don't see how cut and release would be a disadvantage unless the guy was really good, but somehow less valuable then the other 50 guys on your roster? Back on the OP, I don't have a strong opinion. I don't see any issues with it. But at the end of the day, what is the likelihood that your 50th best player is going to make the squad anyhow? I think we would still have the gut wrenching decision anyhow about which guy to cut, so I don't think that will be lost. Only the deep regret of cutting a guy to end up with a choice of bums.

#67244	07/28/2019 9:23:08 pm	Sep 22nd, 2041
Haselrig Joined: 04/13/2014 Posts: 2790 Novi Doubledays III.4	Alright, let's say the player you draft and release is an 11 POT high-school senior. We'd agree nobody is likely to pick him up, yes? (Note: this is entirely speculative since I don't know how the POT fuzziness is likely to manifest, but this is sort of my Platonic ideal of a draft system in this game) What if he's actually a 13 POT who would have developed in college? By drafting him, you've effectively removed a 13 POT college prospect from the '43 or '44 draft pool.

#67245	07/28/2019 10:11:07 pm	Sep 22nd, 2041
allen54chevy Joined: 11/22/2015 Posts: 475 Inactive	By drafting him, you've effectively removed a 13 POT college prospect from the '43 or '44 draft pool. This is something to consider... and even worry about. I hope some fresh blood get added to the college pool each year or that some players really blossom while in college . HW college players are about worthless. But as to the original idea... I view it as we currently have 49 men rosters with a flex/draft position available. How many players do we need? 49, 50, 52? Expand it to 55 and we (all of us super active users commenting so far on this thread) will likely find 5 more quality players to fill our roster and still will have a hard time deciding which to cut.

#67246	07/28/2019 10:20:51 pm	Sep 22nd, 2041
Rock777 Joined: 09/21/2014 Posts: 9608 Haverhill Halflings III.1	I don't think his POT is going to "sharpen" until someone drafts him. So he will always show as a POT 11. At least if you draft him and drop him, a newbie team might pick him up to train. But if you are that worried, just draft the 22 year old instead. Unlikely you will get ten 17 year olds in the current format.

#67247	07/28/2019 10:31:07 pm	Sep 22nd, 2041
Haselrig Joined: 04/13/2014 Posts: 2790 Novi Doubledays III.4	I don't think his POT is going to "sharpen" until someone drafts him. What are you basing this on?

#67248	07/29/2019 1:08:04 am	Sep 22nd, 2041
Haselrig Joined: 04/13/2014 Posts: 2790 Novi Doubledays III.4	Expand it to 55 and we (all of us super active users commenting so far on this thread) will likely find 5 more quality players to fill our roster and still will have a hard time deciding which to cut. It's not about roster expansion, it's about being blind. It's measured decision making vs wild gambling. The game asks me to cut a (as much as we can know) known quantity in exchange for a Let's Make a Deal style Door #2 and in place of making a shrewd ownership decision based on the weighing of one opportunity against another, the game substitutes the Fear of Missing Out. Doesn't seem to mesh with the spirit the rest of the game engenders.

#67250	07/29/2019 5:00:55 am	Sep 22nd, 2041
amalric7 Joined: 01/20/2016 Posts: 2238 New York Lancers V.4	That's an excellent way of putting it, Haselrig, very nicely done. Consider the devil cast back in his pit, I'm all in favour.

#67251	07/29/2019 5:15:50 am	Sep 22nd, 2041
Haselrig Joined: 04/13/2014 Posts: 2790 Novi Doubledays III.4	Heh, woke up in a debatin' mood

#67252	07/29/2019 6:27:40 am	Sep 22nd, 2041
AssumedPseudonym Joined: 10/26/2016 Posts: 1130 Deerfield Beach Rats V.7	The game asks me to cut a (as much as we can know) known quantity in exchange for a Let's Make a Deal style Door #2 and in place of making a shrewd ownership decision based on the weighing of one opportunity against another… This is what I was really trying to get at in my post, just argued from a slightly different perspective on it with better wording than I managed.

#67254	07/29/2019 8:38:33 am	Sep 22nd, 2041
Haselrig Joined: 04/13/2014 Posts: 2790 Novi Doubledays III.4	Just wanted to clear up any ambiguity with why this was suggested in the first place. When "should I stay, or should I go" has no clear answer in an artificial environment like a game, I see that as a problem. That's what we have here. We aren't given enough information to make a decision and are left choosing between standing pat and missing an opportunity or making the leap with rabbit's foot in hand and likely regretting it. I'd rather risk adding a virtual roster spot than foster resentment where it isn't necessary.

#67255	07/29/2019 11:55:31 am	Sep 22nd, 2041
admin Joined: 01/27/2010 Posts: 4985 Administrator	Any argument against allowing people with rosters at 50/50 to access their draft slate for the week and then decide whether they want to cut a guy or not? You mean see the percentages, available pitchers/position players etc? Steve

#67256	07/29/2019 12:01:11 pm	Sep 22nd, 2041
Haselrig Joined: 04/13/2014 Posts: 2790 Novi Doubledays III.4	Instead of clicking on the "Draft Player" button and getting the 50/50 warning you would see your slate of ten players. If you click on one of their draft buttons you'd get the 50/50 warning, but you'd see the ten available players before you decide if you want to cut someone to make room to draft one of them.

#67259	07/29/2019 3:23:18 pm	Sep 23rd, 2041
Rock777 Joined: 09/21/2014 Posts: 9608 Haverhill Halflings III.1	I don't think his POT is going to "sharpen" until someone drafts him. What are you basing this on? Not 100%, but I think that is how sharpening works right now. Guys who aren't on team never get sharpened. It happens with the Training updates. Guys who aren't on a team, don't get sharpened. But I suppose it depends on how Steve has amateur development implemented. I would certainly hope players don't sharpen while they are still on their Highschool teams. Seems like it would eliminate that feature, which would be unfortunately. I like having at least some mystery on the guys we draft.

#67262	07/29/2019 4:01:41 pm	Sep 24th, 2041
MukilteoMike Joined: 08/09/2014 Posts: 3294 Inactive	I would bet the other way. The consensus seems to be we saw more potential "sharpening" last season. If it the clarity is prompted by drafting, wouldn't we have seen just as much this season? I agree that it makes sense for it to occur after being drafted, but I'm not convinced that's the model.

#67266	07/29/2019 5:32:00 pm	Sep 26th, 2041
Rock777 Joined: 09/21/2014 Posts: 9608 Haverhill Halflings III.1	Pretty sure the 2 point swings we saw last season had more to do with developing algorithms than sharpening. I don't ever remember seeing FAs sharpen.

#67268	07/30/2019 4:01:40 am	Sep 26th, 2041
Yuri84 Joined: 10/14/2014 Posts: 639 Apple Valley Raccoons IV.4	As someone who's permanently struggling with full roster, I vote in favor of Haselrig's suggestion.

#67270	07/30/2019 7:57:56 am	Sep 26th, 2041
Haselrig Joined: 04/13/2014 Posts: 2790 Novi Doubledays III.4	Not 100%, but I think that is how sharpening works right now. Incremental improvement during the prospects amateur career is how I'm hoping this goes. Seems like the most sustainable system would be to feed under-cooked high-schoolers into the bottom of the stack and have them improve organically like they do in the minors until they get drafted or fall off the top after graduating college. Neither the farm or this form of the draft really requires human input to work.

#67272	07/30/2019 10:43:28 am	Sep 26th, 2041
StretchDynamo Joined: 05/16/2016 Posts: 64 Inactive	I really enjoyed the discussion in this thread, a lot of interesting points all around. +1 on the original idea, though!

#67278	07/30/2019 3:11:57 pm	Sep 27th, 2041
Frankebasta Joined: 09/15/2013 Posts: 886 Kodiak Mules III.3	Pretty sure the 2 point swings we saw last season had more to do with developing algorithms than sharpening. I don't ever remember seeing FAs sharpen Agree. Last year was a matter of implementing a new model. All reports are consistent in that it involved the 4th and 5th (6th?) round. Later rounds were born with fuzzinness included. However, I disagree on the other assumption, Rock. Sure, "sharpening" of fuzzy potential takes place along with training. So FAs will not benefit from it because they do not train. But prospects DO train! Different training, I think. But their skill are improving. At least from one season to the next, if not from week to week. It is stated on the player's card! Look at his SI total at the start of the season, as an Amateur, and then as a Minor leaguer: he gained points. They are trainingl! Makes sense to think that fuzziness is improving along with training the same way other players are revealing changes in Range of Arm skills

#67282	07/30/2019 4:09:10 pm	Sep 28th, 2041
Rock777 Joined: 09/21/2014 Posts: 9608 Haverhill Halflings III.1	Incremental improvement during the prospects amateur career is how I'm hoping this goes. I kind of hope it doesn't. If they are fully sharpened before we draft them, it takes a lot of the assessment skill out of the game. Right now someone who does a good job analyzing the performance stats (like Seca), can do a better job drafting/claiming. If the fuzziness disappears during the amateurs, it minimizes the usefulness of that skill.

#67283	07/30/2019 4:10:37 pm	Sep 28th, 2041
Rock777 Joined: 09/21/2014 Posts: 9608 Haverhill Halflings III.1	They are training! Yes, I agree they are training. I am just hoping amateur training doesn't trigger sharpening the same way minor/major league training does. Or at least at a much lower rate. But that is just my hope. Updated Tuesday, July 30 2019 @ 4:11:57 pm PDT