|
AlleyViper posted:Unfortunately for that plan the pubbie pool has gotten significantly smaller. but we still have art!
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 00:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 13:53 |
|
|
EvilBeard posted:but we still have art! 102 game winner Art Vandelay? gently caress that guy
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 01:23
|
|
|
saintonan posted:Thanks TMB, I was gonna wait for the new thread to say hi, but since you mentioned me, may as well speak up. see, now this is an example of a good choice in bringing back an old owner! (please boot davewillie) welcome back!
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 02:58
|
|
|
Draft prospects just popped up in Clemens* and boy do I really, really, really, really REALLY hate not having current ratings.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 13:16
|
|
|
AlleyViper posted:Draft prospects just popped up in Clemens* and boy do I really, really, really, really Its pointless, like all these changes did is that I will never want to draft again. Like I know they never changed how projections work, and before you could tell some projections were very wrong even at 20/20 by looking at the difference between current and projected. Now it is just a complete crap shoot. I will now be able to zero out 4 budgets forever and not care. That is what this did. Why bother having college, high school or IFA if I can not get an accurate ready of that players skill. All they had to do was make current fuzzy based on scouting. So if it is an IFA your current could be way wrong at 2 IFA, same with high school or college. That would make sense. Hire lovely scouts get lovely reports, but no instead our scouts have no idea how good or bad of a player they are right now but they can tell you how good they will be! It makes no loving sense. Scrotos fucked around with this message at 14:01 on May 27, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 13:58
|
|
|
The whole point of knowing prospects' current ratings is just to infer their ceiling, though. No one gives a poo poo what some prospect's RL stats are gonna look like. The point of knowing their current is so you can ballpark whether they're ML capable independent of what your scouts are telling you about their ceiling. That's exactly what WiS is trying to stop.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 14:19
|
|
|
saintonan posted:The whole point of knowing prospects' current ratings is just to infer their ceiling, though. No one gives a poo poo what some prospect's RL stats are gonna look like. The point of knowing their current is so you can ballpark whether they're ML capable independent of what your scouts are telling you about their ceiling. That's exactly what WiS is trying to stop. Right but what I am saying is make their currents and their ceiling dependent on how well you paid your scouts. So like if you have 0/0 hs/college then not only will you get laughably wrong projections, you will get laughably wrong currents. It makes sense that bad scouts would judge current just as badly as they would judge potential.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 14:25
|
|
|
Scrotos posted:Right but what I am saying is make their currents and their ceiling dependent on how well you paid your scouts. So like if you have 0/0 hs/college then not only will you get laughably wrong projections, you will get laughably wrong currents. It makes sense that bad scouts would judge current just as badly as they would judge potential. I think if you have 0/0 hs/col then you should get no projections at all. No scouting = no draft. Apart from that I agree with you, and that may be where all this ends up in the end. I really think splitting draft scouting into hs/col is too fine of a granularity - just make a bucket for draft scouting and another bucket for international scouting and be done with it.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 14:37
|
|
|
saintonan posted:I think if you have 0/0 hs/col then you should get no projections at all. No scouting = no draft. Apart from that I agree with you, and that may be where all this ends up in the end. I really think splitting draft scouting into hs/col is too fine of a granularity - just make a bucket for draft scouting and another bucket for international scouting and be done with it. Yea I do not think that will happen because I made the same post in the HBD forums and I am getting mocked for being an idiot.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 14:38
|
|
|
saintonan posted:The whole point of knowing prospects' current ratings is just to infer their ceiling, though. No one gives a poo poo what some prospect's RL stats are gonna look like. The point of knowing their current is so you can ballpark whether they're ML capable independent of what your scouts are telling you about their ceiling. That's exactly what WiS is trying to stop. It's hugely important in the upper half of the first round when deciding how to rank your board matters. I've got two hitters on my Clemens* board right now, a 19 year old projected for 81/74/48/73/88 and a 22 year old projected for 38/74/81/87/91. Pretty similar quality bats despite the shift between splits and contact. But those are pretty high numbers for a 22 year old player to reach. Where is he starting? Are those splits at 50/55 or are they at 65/70? Without current ratings I probably have to just rank the 19 year old guy higher for no other reason than his age makes him less likely to have unrealistically high projections, where before I could get a gauge on how likely either is to reach their projections and rank accordingly. There are other ways to neuter the ability to draft well with low draft budgets than this. I have to believe that this change, along with their supposed "fuzzy" projections, are an attempt to increase the likelihood of draft busts, which is really not something I want a part of in a game like this.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 15:01
|
|
|
Yea draft busts in this game will be its death nail. A team could never compete at the bottom with one or even two missed prospects. Or if you flip it that means by accident the better player slips down the board to a better team. Also taking a quick glance and comparing my projected ratings it seems they still auto rank based on currents like they use to. So the default rankings give a hint of their current rankings.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 15:03
|
|
|
AV I draft 95th so I am not trying to game anything but do you see Walter Dorsey? I see him as a super stud pitcher and am trying to see how variable they made the projections now.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 15:06
|
|
|
AlleyViper posted:It's hugely important in the upper half of the first round when deciding how to rank your board matters. I've got two hitters on my Clemens* board right now, a 19 year old projected for 81/74/48/73/88 and a 22 year old projected for 38/74/81/87/91. Pretty similar quality bats despite the shift between splits and contact. But those are pretty high numbers for a 22 year old player to reach. Where is he starting? Are those splits at 50/55 or are they at 65/70? Without current ratings I probably have to just rank the 19 year old guy higher for no other reason than his age makes him less likely to have unrealistically high projections, where before I could get a gauge on how likely either is to reach their projections and rank accordingly. I guess I misunderstood. I was under the impression that high scouting budgets would increase both current and projected ratings, so that if you had 20M hs scouting, you'd have accurate current and projected numbers for that 19 year old. Since adv scouting doesn't kick in until someone gets signed, what scouting controls draft current ratings?
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 15:13
|
|
|
They already had a degree of draft busting programmed in between injuries and the fact that you can miss a guy even at 20/20. Imagine picking first overall and not only are you forced to take Royce Sewell or Jack Strickland over Aaron Hanson or Glen Little, but you also really have no idea on what you're getting with Sewell or Strickland. Woof. If you want to increase bust likelihood outside of injuries then make player development more important. If my guy fails I'd at least like to know that it was my own fault. Scrotos, I don't see that guy.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 15:15
|
|
|
To play devil's advocate, making the top picks unreliable and creating a chance that mid-round picks are superstars should kill tanking, right? The tanking problem was created by the fact that with a sufficiently smart group of owners, superstars hardly ever slip past the first few picks and you're lucky to get league average by the middle of the round. Obviously it's a problem if the best player in the draft slips to me because scouting and projections are a clusterfuck. But if a really good guy can slip to a team that tried to compete but fell short and picks at like 18... That might be a good thing.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 15:20
|
|
|
I'm all for increasing the possibility that a high pick falls later in the round, especially as someone who has had to draft especially low in Clemens* compared to where my team has finished because none of the bad teams want to open their windows and call guys up. I just don't think removing currents is the best way to do it. I honestly think I'd rather they make it so that we can see even fewer prospects than we currently do as an alternative if that's the end game. Introduce regional scouting, something. At least give me control to pick the best of the crap that I see. Otherwise it's seriously just a lottery. Let a machine spit out a ticket with some random numbers, maybe you win. You won't know until after the fact. E: for that matter, and this is a personal preference thing, I find it more fun to know that a guy slipped to me because of someone else's slip up. "Oh man, I can't believe this dude fell to me! Thank god davewillie was there to take another lovely MIFer and atheist valued that pitcher more than I do" is a lot more gratifying. saintonan posted:Since adv scouting doesn't kick in until someone gets signed, what scouting controls draft current ratings? Right now, no budget. There are no current ratings for draftees at all. AlleyViper fucked around with this message at 15:36 on May 27, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 15:33
|
|
|
AlleyViper posted:Right now, no budget. There are no current ratings for draftees at all. I guess that makes sense from a programmatic standpoint (hs/col/intl affect projections only, adv handles all currents), but it really seems like an oversight not to be able to see draft currents.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 15:51
|
|
|
Is the new update going to be active for this league or no?
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 16:37
|
|
|
Yep, it'll be active for Dimaggio S32.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 17:38
|
|
|
Man I can't wait until we fill up so I can finance a Scrooge McDuck money pool for Chick Wehner
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 21:54
|
|
|
Power of Pecota posted:Man I can't wait until we fill up so I can finance a Scrooge McDuck money pool for Chick Wehner at least we all know that we have no chance at Chick someone will still need to keep you honest, though
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 23:00
|
|
|
If anyone has any suggestions for new owners let me know. The waiting list is empty.
|
|
#
?
May 27, 2015 23:17
|
|
|
Why does MikeT think he is in charge of the forums? Also lol at him saying they are not listing to the echo chamber. They absolutely are.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2015 01:33
|
|
|
Scrotos posted:Why does MikeT think he is in charge of the forums? Because he basically is
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2015 02:22
|
|
|
ThatsMyBoye posted:If anyone has any suggestions for new owners let me know. The waiting list is empty. Go Public?
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2015 04:03
|
|
|
This looks like something super cool that I would get unreasonably obsessed with.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2015 20:05
|
|
|
Just joined as the Vancouver Directors after duyarvish said there were some openings. I'm glad this thread exists so hopefullly I learn to just merely suck as opposed to being completely incompetent this season Twitter is @sathauros
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2015 20:36
|
|
|
Everyone is afraid to join Jeffs, Tavarin and I's division 
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2015 20:43
|
|
|
Scrotos posted:Everyone is afraid to join Jeffs, Tavarin and I's division I have no problem with the division, that franchise is an EPA Superfund site.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2015 20:47
|
|
|
saintonan posted:I have no problem with the division, that franchise is an EPA Superfund site. gently caress uublog
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2015 21:50
|
|
|
nasboat posted:gently caress uublog It was Art's old team, he had a tradition to uphold.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2015 22:02
|
|
|
Last spot just got claimed by a pubbie who doesn't have the best track record but oh well, we're full
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2015 22:40
|
|
|
ThatsMyBoye posted:Last spot just got claimed by a pubbie who doesn't have the best track record but oh well, we're full Haha he literally has not had a team better than 2 over .500 despite 30 seasons.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2015 22:41
|
|
|
Argh, we couldn't have waited one more day? 
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2015 22:46
|
|
|
ArtVandelay posted:Argh, we couldn't have waited one more day?  Lets play ball!
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2015 22:57
|
|
|
Guy's track record doesn't seem to indicate he'll be holding onto that team for long anyway. Cam Surkmap will be a pitching coach but his patience is only 11, Footsie Everett has a patience of 77 though so drat right he's staying on.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2015 22:59
|
|
|
ThatsMyBoye posted:Guy's track record doesn't seem to indicate he'll be holding onto that team for long anyway. Footsie
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2015 23:21
|
|
|
you're a good man, Rob Blair, for saving me from the wolves of the fielding coach competition yet again
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 01:29
|
|
|
I'm out in the hill country of Texas with intermittent cell coverage, but tomorrow night I'll be at the rangers game and then fort worth and should be able to pay attention at least a little bit.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 01:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 13:53 |
|
|
Get out of my state.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2015 02:22
|
|
