Broken Bat - Discussion Forum: This years draft class: Better, worse, or same?

Forum >> Discussions >> This year's draft class: Better, worse, or same?

Post ID	Date & Time	Game Date

#66736	06/29/2019 9:29:15 pm	Jun 4th, 2041
hurstdm Joined: 01/18/2017 Posts: 576 Murfreesboro Moo Cows VI.5	A worse 2041, but I have no science to back up that it's not just random. It's fascinating that most in these threads are discussing the Potential of their draftee prospects even after this statement in this thread from Steve: "Potential display is a lot less accurate for these young guys. Draft on potential along at your own risk." Here's what you might respond: "But what else do we have to discuss and go on?!" To which I might fret: "Exactly!" We've got reports of Potential scores going up, but has anybody seen them go down? I wish someone could show me that high school/college/Japanese/Amateur stats correlate in any meaningful way to anything at all. Nobody's crowing over some high school kid's amateur 4.71 ERA or .284 batting average as a Latin league player and saying he's sure to be a star. Magicians: "The disappointing part for me is that the extra info hasn't been worth anything." Admin: Because all the current players were all generated in one shot and haven't gone though a draft and development cycle, the system hasn't really reach equilibrium. I expect fewer high potential players to be available in the future. What does this mean? Actual high Potential players or faux high Potential players? The near future or the far future? Will prospects not be created in 2042? Was there an announcement to draft based on Potential "at your own risk", then a realization that everyone's still drafting the prospects with the best visible Potential? Magicians: It also makes it sound like this year's draft was more important than others around it, which makes it even more luck based than before, opposite of the intent. I'm worried about this. Also, this change may de-emphasize appraisal skill regarding waivers in favor of luck in the draft one day out of the week. Mules: So, the reality is (would be) that we have the same Potential distribution as before, but the fuzziness of it expands the extremes and thins the most common groups. Good theory.

#66739	06/30/2019 12:48:38 am	Jun 4th, 2041
Frankebasta Joined: 09/15/2013 Posts: 883 Kodiak Mules III.3	Admin: Because all the current players were all generated in one shot and haven't gone though a draft and development cycle, the system hasn't really reach equilibrium. I expect fewer high potential players to be available in the future. What I understand from it is that, IF MY THEORY IS CORRECT, we are having a situation similar, _BUT OPPOSITE_ to New Coaches. New Coaches are showing straight 10s in all skills as newborn. The 10 will move up or downward till its real value over 4 or 5 season. The Skill might turn out to be a 1 or a 20. All were 10 in the beginning. Now, New Prospects are the opposite: sometimes showing a wrong value, which will correct itself in time to show the real Potential. Maybe Steve is trying to tell us that a New Prospect is showing as a pot17 or as a pot9 at 16 years of age, will sharpen his potential with time and by the age of 22 will be shown as a pot 12 or pot14. To reach his real value of pot13 as a major leaguer at 25yo This is just my speculations. It would be a process consistent with the game's mechanism Updated Sunday, June 30 2019 @ 7:03:50 am PDT

#66741	06/30/2019 5:08:13 am	Jun 4th, 2041
Seca Joined: 05/05/2014 Posts: 5198 Waterloo Dinosaurs Legends	(My take) The new draft is like a water pipe. New prospects go in one end. Draft picks come out the other. As they move through the pipe (development cycles) their potential (actual potential, not just displayed potential) changes. This first go the pipe was completely empty. Instead of putting new prospects in the end of the pipe, the entire pipe needed to be filled. The prospects placed further along the pipe didn't get the usual development time, so their potential didn't settle as much as future prospects will. My question is how does the system maintain balance? Say college gets hit extremely hard one season. Will the new prospects added reflect/compensate for this? Or will college be barren for a few years while it recovers?

#66742	06/30/2019 6:58:19 am	Jun 4th, 2041
Longviewess Joined: 09/23/2018 Posts: 111 Frederick Keys III.3	Possible theory: The range of POT (regardless of accuracy) we are seeing is the same as every other year. Being able to see it before selecting is making it seem like it has increased this season. Some people seem to get draft boards loaded with 13+ POT draftees. Others (like me)get boards loaded with 9-11 POT draftees with an occassional 12 or 13 POT. Seems like a normal distribution to me, even if I would prefer a board loaded with 13+ draftees.

#66744	06/30/2019 8:27:23 am	Jun 4th, 2041
MukilteoMike Joined: 08/09/2014 Posts: 3294 Inactive	I based my statement on what Steve said, that he expects this season to have more Superstars than normal. Eliminating that and going with the idea that all seasons produce the same quality, the new draft will distribute the better players earlier in the season. I have no problem with that; that's real life drafts, after all. The issue is the game still produces wildly different draft boards. To put it bluntly, that stinks. I love the extra info, but it's only one step in improving the draft. I hope others come.

#66745	06/30/2019 8:49:04 am	Jun 4th, 2041
wuggla Joined: 05/10/2013 Posts: 1058 Colorado Springs Vultures VI.28	My draft after 4 picks looks better. To early for making any changes to the draft. Let's wait to see training and potential goes up or down? To few picked and way to few training cycles. To judge what my picks are doing. I plan to wait 2 seasons or 3 for full effective scouting reports of this years draft. The info on stats from amateur/overseas gives us usable data to draft choice from. Love reading the stats on the 4 draft boards so far.

#66759	06/30/2019 8:23:30 pm	Jun 8th, 2041
12twelve Joined: 02/05/2017 Posts: 131 Inactive	It definitely appears that there are a lot more higher POT players this year, and the comment by Steve that they may not be as high in the future does make this as much luck with the RNG as before, just providing more info to support the all-powerful POT number that we now see in advance, so we have to hope to hit the jackpot this year before the course correction takes effect. It seems that for the most part, owners are still making their primary selection based on POT. All of the additional info may be considered on a lesser scale, but POT rules all. If the intent of the additional information was for owners to put some strategy into the process and actually do some research on stats and other attributes before making our selection, thus putting our analytical skills to the test, wouldn't it be better if POT were not revealed until after the selection is made, like before? I feel that would make it most comparable to real life because we'd have to do some analysis before making the selection, using our own biases for what we value in a prospect. To further test our analytical abilities, maybe we also dispose of the VG, Good, etc. comment altogether until selection is made. I like the extra information, but I feel it is still the luck of the draw because everyone instantly looks to the POT figure. I recommend that it remain hidden until after the selection is made like before.

#66761	06/30/2019 10:45:38 pm	Jun 8th, 2041
MukilteoMike Joined: 08/09/2014 Posts: 3294 Inactive	I agree about losing the potential pre-draft. If that happened, though, I absolutely think the worded scouting potential should stay. I've mentioned before that I actually wish the numbered potential would vanish entirely. Add scouting remarks for the missing hitting and pitching skills to balance that a bit. Make those more vague, though, and say "negative" if projected to be under 10 and positive" if above 15. No comment implicitly tells us "between 10 and 15". I think those different terms would be needed to separate themselves from the others. Sorry for the tangent. Back to the heart, yes, remove numbered potential before a player is drafted (and hopefully all together).

#66862	07/07/2019 11:24:57 pm	Jul 7th, 2041
buffmckagan Joined: 12/22/2013 Posts: 651 Scranton Bears Legends	My draft board has been uncharacteristically loaded with 13+ pots, not to brag. I think it's better, but I could be totally wrong in terms of the forest vs. the trees

#67093	07/20/2019 10:10:30 am	Aug 21st, 2041
Dcmrulz Joined: 02/14/2013 Posts: 588 Inactive	I'm about to find out the impact of this inaccurate potential scouting, as this draft class has gotten me 2 13s, 3 14s and a 15 POT.