Post ID | Date & Time | Game Date | Function |
---|---|---|---|
#11860 | 11/15/2014 7:49:44 am | ||
Jynxed Joined: 08/26/2013 Posts: 284 Inactive | I tend to agree with Newt, I dunno if it's just random bad luck or if the smaller pool somehow triggered this. | ||
#11868 | 11/15/2014 9:38:57 am | ||
newtman Joined: 11/02/2013 Posts: 3343 Inactive | I should clarify, I know it is bad luck that I am seeing 0 very good or 13+ potential prospects every week. My contention is that when we had larger pools the depletion never took away all the good prospects, so you could pull a great guy in the last week even if you had terrible drafts the first 9 weeks, whereas now that the pools are smaller if you have shoddy luck the first 3 or 4 weeks you are highly unlikely to pull a 14 potential guy in week 10 the way I did last season. There just aren't enough high quality prospects. | ||
#11872 | 11/15/2014 10:16:54 am | ||
Meccanodonte Joined: 04/21/2014 Posts: 370 Inactive | How many would be "enough"? One could not find a star caliber player every week, even though everyone would like to. |
||
#11880 | 11/15/2014 1:26:24 pm | ||
Jason2327 Joined: 09/02/2014 Posts: 717 Abilene Patriots IV.3 | true mec,but at the same time no team is so cursed to never get a single star from the draft. | ||
#11882 | 11/15/2014 1:36:09 pm | ||
Holmes Joined: 11/07/2013 Posts: 1175 Inactive | Newtmans point was, with the larger pool you were less likely to find a star prospect in the first two or three rounds, but you had better chances of still finding someone decent in the tenth round. So those of us who weren't lucky enough to hit pay dirt so far this season have little to hope for until next season starts. With two high potentials and two duds so far, I can't really complain, but my hope that there will be something even vaguely decent in the six rounds that are yet to come is fading fast. Now imagine you've been away on a family vacation for the first three draft rounds... | ||
#11885 | 11/15/2014 2:05:53 pm | ||
newtman Joined: 11/02/2013 Posts: 3343 Inactive | Mec, it's not about finding a star every week, it's about the chance of finding a star after mid-season having gone from a decent percentage chance to looking like near impossible. For those that didn't find a star in the first four weeks it screws them over big time forcing them to have to use free agency to pick up the even slimmer pool of serviceable prospects. Holmes, exactly, thank you. My guess is Steve is trying to make 11 and 12 potential guys needed again, the problem is the talent imbalance won't get worked out this way for 5 to 8 seasons at least as the people who are already set up nicely won't feel the pinch til a decent percentage of their current roster retires and their minor league reserves start drying up. |
||
#11889 | 11/15/2014 3:27:10 pm | ||
MukilteoMike Joined: 08/09/2014 Posts: 3294 Inactive | The pure randomness of drafts is one of the reasons why I think we need a true draft for the first one each year. The studs, at least, would then be evenly distributed. | ||
#11909 | 11/16/2014 3:29:09 am | ||
Meccanodonte Joined: 04/21/2014 Posts: 370 Inactive | Ok Newt, I hadn't understood what you meant. We'll see. Should be true, i'd agree with you. |
||
#11926 | 11/17/2014 12:54:14 am | ||
Favuz Joined: 02/26/2014 Posts: 631 Oxnard Sunsets IV.3 | anyway, 12 SI guys are not so bad, especially for pitcher with low fielding skills and DH type hitters. example, Lorenzo Rangel Or, for the hitters Samuel Poole. I know, i'd love a team full of 14/15 Si guys too, but we have to settle on what luck has given us |
||
#11961 | 11/18/2014 6:36:02 am | ||
newtman Joined: 11/02/2013 Posts: 3343 Inactive | I worry how competitive some of these guys would be should the team they are on get promoted to league level I (Legends) or II. My closer is 11 potential and shuts guys down at league level VI and V for one inning, but I wonder if he'd do the same consistently in Legends (pretty sure answer is no). |