Broken Bat - Bug Reports: Potential of Players Drafted in Round 6 Increased by 1

Forum >> Bug Reports >> Potential of Players Drafted in Round 6 Increased by 1

Post ID	Date & Time	Game Date

#65147	05/01/2019 7:07:04 am	Aug 9th, 2040
Seca Joined: 05/05/2014 Posts: 5197 Waterloo Dinosaurs Legends	Is this only true for players drafted this year and moving forward? Being a little nickpicky, but as far as I can tell this was introduced in round 5? So not all players this season affected? Now that will be true for potential on prospects -- and that value will gradually sharpen. My crystal ball says: - a surge in waiver liquidity next season (or 2?). Obligated to keep draftees longer. Will need roster spots. - there will be numerous threads asking for a larger roster. - development emphasis will shift a little away from pot bars and more towards current SI and minor league performance. - comparing potential bar to rational skill projections will become an important manager ability. - development will be more dynamic and less "fire and forget". Greater reward for following prospect growth, potentially greater punishment for snap judgments. - this isn't just draft reform, its game reform. It will change how we look at development. It will change how we look at waivers. Certainly still a ton of RNG involved, but all in all I suspect it increases the "skill". These skills may be a little new to some managers (those of us that regularly slum with 12 pot players may have a little head start).

#65149	05/01/2019 7:17:10 am	Aug 9th, 2040
lostraven Joined: 07/02/2016 Posts: 1269 Corvallis Ravens II.1	Yes, waivers in particular are going to be increasingly a more challenging prospect (no pun intended). My biggest worry is that we'll have to put even more work into our waiver wire searches, and I already put a lot of work into that department. Not really a complaint, just an anticipation. Will have to widen searches a bit more than I already do.

#65159	05/01/2019 2:30:37 pm	Aug 9th, 2040
amalric7 Joined: 01/20/2016 Posts: 2236 New York Lancers V.4	Well that turned out nicely. Looking forward to the challenge this represents.

#65161	05/01/2019 2:41:25 pm	Aug 9th, 2040
Bridger Joined: 08/04/2016 Posts: 264 Muncie Flyers III.4	My standard daily waiver searches will no longer be sufficient...but that's a good thing. Auto-pilot isn't interesting...

#65169	05/01/2019 6:37:23 pm	Aug 14th, 2040
Longviewess Joined: 09/23/2018 Posts: 111 Frederick Keys III.3	While we are making the skills and potential for every player variable so they can be a complete mystery why not extend that to the age, height and weight as well. That way the 16 POT future superstar 17 year old prospect you drafted can turn out to be 25 years old and an 11 POT who forged his birth certificate. #sarcasm #makingpotentialvariableisabadidea

#65175	05/01/2019 8:58:52 pm	Aug 14th, 2040
Rock777 Joined: 09/21/2014 Posts: 9588 Haverhill Halflings III.1	I think this is fine. But my question is how many players will we have to choose from? Because if we are still getting a slate of below average players as first round options, it really won't matter how much extra data we have. Is there going to be better control over skill? So we actually have similarly rated players to compare and choose from each round?

#65178	05/02/2019 6:54:57 am	Aug 14th, 2040
Seca Joined: 05/05/2014 Posts: 5197 Waterloo Dinosaurs Legends	That way the 16 POT future superstar 17 year old prospect you drafted can turn out to be 25 years old and an 11 POT who forged his birth certificate. I get the hyperbole. I oversold the impact in my previous post, at least for some managers. Players can already miss their potential both on the high side and on the low side. I'm sure I'm not the only manager that currently evaluates prospects through the lens of "Do I like him at his current pot? Do I still like him if he comes up short? Is there a chance he surprises?" The change is not that big a deal if you already have this mindset. Those who blindly put faith in potential bars will be in for an adjustment. Because if we are still getting a slate of below average players as first round options, it really won't matter how much extra data we have. Is there going to be better control over skill? So we actually have similarly rated players to compare and choose from each round? I'm ok with a larger list. Under the current system, a large list likely yields several guys with identical/similar scouting. With no additional information, this is a crap shoot. With the new system the larger list giving players with similar scouting is fine. Good even. Along with the scouting you can see skills and have seasons of amateur data. This is a decision. (I get that you are pleading for just 1 good option, but that's more Eeyore posting). All that said, you've been vocal in your concern over early-bird bonus. A larger slate improves consistency. Improved consistency depletes the pool faster. Depleting the pool faster increases the importance of arriving early. One of the neat things about the change (IMO) is that it will increase the number of good prospects without increasing the number of good prospects. There will be more grey which may even out draft luck (those on a good run will have to cut someone, and it may be less clear who that should be) which in turn improves waiver liquidity.

#65213	05/03/2019 6:26:07 am	Aug 19th, 2040
Rock777 Joined: 09/21/2014 Posts: 9588 Haverhill Halflings III.1	But also easier to hide at least 1 good player on your draft board, because people still have to use some skill to identify him. I just think its dumb when you are choosing from junk players your scouts think have no potential in the first round. Incredibly unrealistic and immersion breaking. At least lie to us about their potential if we get them in the first round. Updated Friday, May 3 2019 @ 6:27:45 am PDT

#65215	05/03/2019 6:42:35 am	Aug 19th, 2040
Seca Joined: 05/05/2014 Posts: 5197 Waterloo Dinosaurs Legends	That's fair. I looked through a lot of team 2040 drafts last week. I found several (numerous is too strong) bot teams that only drafted 2-3 players this season, but clearly had a better draft year than I did. There is something a little wrong with that. I hinted at this in my previous post, but if uncertainty in the potential bar increases supply without increasing supply, that should help with pool depletion.

#65230	05/03/2019 3:27:07 pm	Aug 20th, 2040
Rock777 Joined: 09/21/2014 Posts: 9588 Haverhill Halflings III.1	It should help some. Just because its harder for people to identify the truly good players. But there will be just as many under and over rated guys. Still not happy if I get all POT 11s in round 1. Even if a couple of them are really POT 12s