Broken Bat - Suggestions: Overhaul of player acquisition

Forum >> Suggestions >> Overhaul of player acquisition

Post ID	Date & Time	Game Date	Function

#16081	03/16/2015 6:13:31 am
Jalapeno5 Joined: 06/01/2014 Posts: 226 Inactive	There's been a lot of debate lately about what should/shouldn't be included in the search parameters etc; but here's a completely new idea for debate - how about potential/attributes are removed completely from the search screen and replaced with actual stats to search on now that we have game information available from all levels of the minor leagues? In the real world - all this information would be widely available to managers, and stuff like potential would be largely unknown. I personally don't believe the current system's going to work. Every player with 14+ potential is going to have too many claims for securing their services to be anything other than dumb-luck, and is anyone honestly going to set-out to secure themselves a 10 potential (or less) player? These values may as well not be included in the dropdown. I get that it's a time saving, and that's fine - but I'd be much happier with a time saving based on allowing owners to scout the best players by their known, proven performance on the field at their respective levels. This way, lower potential players that are excelling in the minors are made more useful and appealing; and the flip side is higher potential players will again become 'hidden gems' if they're currently underperforming. I suspect there will broadly be a correlation between performance and potential - but bringing up the player card to see the player's attributes could again be considered 'scouting'.

#16091	03/16/2015 10:04:13 am
FurySK Joined: 02/07/2015 Posts: 299 Inactive	Big issue i have here is that it has to be all talent, or it doesn't work. Second, it would take closer to a decade to fully phase it out (some teams probably have detailed spreadsheets of players. The big issue with your idea is that if it applies to just FA, then it only really adds one step to the equation. any non-bot drop is going to have multiple mail inquiries about the talent of the player they just dropped. People will likely keep detailed records of players they drop, and players they pick up. Which leads me to two. People will simply be more active in acquiring and releasing players. If people don't like a player, they'll dump him and grab another. If it's league wide, it's a change in philosophy that i think is harmful overall. Players here probably wouldn't want to go from known attributes to attribute masking just like that. Updated Monday, March 16 2015 @ 10:04:34 am PDT

#16094	03/16/2015 11:12:42 am
Jalapeno5 Joined: 06/01/2014 Posts: 226 Inactive	I don't think you've fully understood where I was trying to go with that - I'll try and explain it a bit better. Nothing would change on the player cards or the way in which you can view them - what would differ would be the search mechanism. The search mechanism would enable you to search free agency/waivers based on the player's performances in the minor or major leagues rather than their projected values. The idea being that everyone's definition of what makes a good player will vary slightly. So - you want a 3B at AAA with between 0.950 and 1.00 Fielding Percentage, fine - search for it using those parameters, you'll likely get quite a few results. You want to refine that - OK, let's say he needs 60 games at 3B under his belt. That's whittled our pool down further. You also want him to have some batting ability - let's throw acceptable values in your prefered batting/base stealing stats into the mix. A couple of players might come out of this search, which may or may not have 13+ potential necessarily; but regardless are probably a good fit for your team and tactics. Just wonder if this would enable owners to better gauge performance based on their own specified criteria, team playing style and hard data that's readily available to managers in real life. Seems that Potential's currently interpreted as the single most important variable, which might be true for prospects, but it's a pretty intangible asset. If you want the facility to be able to quickly grab the best available player in the game it should be from measurable criteria - developing prospects should be the long game; and to this end all we'd be doing under this proposal is effectively interrogating the middle two tables on the player card rather than the top one when searching for new talent. It would be a significant change, so probably isn't on the cards - I just find it slightly strange we're still only able to make selections on approximated values now that there's a wealth of experiential data available from the minors. On a related note, in the current world-order is there any point in presenting the potential value on the player's card as a '?' now you can search for it - I think it would make it easier on mobile users to show the actual value on player cards now that it's more overt.

#16107	03/16/2015 4:52:15 pm
Slug5373 Joined: 12/23/2014 Posts: 376 Inactive	I happen to like this idea, it is different and would add a realistic element as well as a owner's personal tastes regarding player evaluations. However, you are correct in saying it would be a HUGE change. This is one reason I don't see it happening, some of the most, we'll call it passionate, owners don't like radical ideas as this is. I agree that this current system is a time-saver and all that. I find it very helpful myself. However, like you said, everyone will just claim all the 14 potential players without even thinking about it. Then, its even more of a crap-shoot than it was before. That, I feel, is the humungous benefit of this idea. However, other issues exist besides those mentioned above. You mentioned using minor league statistics for prospects in the search engine. This is all fine and well except that minor league statistics are only kept for each season after which they are deleted. That, I know for a fact, will not change. It will simply take too much memory to maintain and it is not worth it. You could theoretically have minor league statistics for just that season on the search engine, but early in the season especially, 100 plate appearances is simply not enough to evaluate the player. Even late in the season, 450 plate appearances is not enough. I am a proponent for not having the potential shown to aid those willing to work in finding "hidden gems." However, other than that, I feel like the system should stay the same as there is really no other alternative. I understand that it is not the greatest system, but it is a fair system and will work just fine in the long run. May the luckiest, I mean best manager win! JKJK Updated Tuesday, March 17 2015 @ 8:20:53 am PDT

#16118	03/16/2015 6:58:36 pm
Tiger504 Joined: 06/17/2014 Posts: 1314 Kalamazoo Bloody Tigers III.4	While I am going to admit that many times a 14 pot player is worth going for, it is not a given that they will turn out. They also may have deficiencies that some owners would wish to avoid. There will be times when a 13 or even 12 pot player would do a better job than a 14. With that in mind, I believe anyone that just looks at potential and places their claims that way will find success elusive. I've even got some 11 pot guys that contribute on my team.

#16129	03/17/2015 5:18:34 am
Mig2012 Joined: 09/26/2012 Posts: 547 Inactive	No need to be one or the other. I’m in favor of adding search filters for stats while keeping all the filters we already have.

#16144	03/17/2015 8:20:22 am
Slug5373 Joined: 12/23/2014 Posts: 376 Inactive	Wow, can't believe I'm saying this, but I agree.

#16181	03/17/2015 8:15:57 pm
slugfest2015 Joined: 12/21/2014 Posts: 168 Inactive	mig2012 has it right this time!

#16261	03/19/2015 5:29:57 pm
tc_ferdzz Joined: 11/13/2011 Posts: 135 Inactive	but would this change the game much?...i may be misunderstanding or missing something in your description, but if the player cards stay the same, then you search by stats...it brings up a list of players, you look at the card and see his potential...if it's bad, you don't pick him up... sure it might make it hard to find some high potential players that perform badly, and then they are sort of "hidden gems"...but those that have the will and time, will just expand their search criteria and click on each guy so that they can see their ratings... i'm not saying i reject the idea, on another game i play, i proposed a similar idea about hiding attributes for stats and playing the game off of that, but (unless i am misinterpreting your idea) don't see this as much of a game changer as you think it will be...

#16263	03/19/2015 5:47:12 pm
admin Joined: 01/27/2010 Posts: 4985 Administrator	Which stats would we add filters work? Is statistics from different league levels weighted differently? Seems like these could be complicated filters, no? Steve

#16266	03/19/2015 6:34:09 pm
dwindacatcher Joined: 04/03/2014 Posts: 633 Inactive	I have to say I don't like this idea at all. There is no way to judge a player on minor league stats when I have no idea who they played. Or even how minor league schedules are produced. Some guys might end up always going against some teams extra starter they have stashed in aaa so their line is in the .230s and another might be an older guy at the wrong level blowing aa pitching out of the water and cut when the team went bot. Also, if a guy has been in FA all year, but you really need say a catcher or relive to fill an injury hole than he won't even show up on a search because he has no stats.