Broken Bat - Discussion Forum: Another Draft Idea

Forum >> Discussions >> Another Draft Idea

Post ID	Date & Time	Game Date	Function

#16127	03/17/2015 12:03:44 am
MukilteoMike Joined: 08/09/2014 Posts: 3294 Inactive	I don't think I've had terrible drafts, but frankly that doesn't make any difference. We tend to look at our results to measure whether or not something is good; that's a poor way of looking at things. You want a longer perspective? Here you go: Let's look at just the top 5% of players/pitchers whatever/whoever they happen to be. Now let's assume an owner makes all 10 of their draft picks every year for 10 seasons. A decade should make things balanced, right? Not even close. Odds are that one in every 25 owners would get zero or one of those top players over an entire decade. On the flip side, one in every 25 owners would get 9 or more of them. Oh, but that's too small of a group to consider, right (unless you're one of the 4% who got completely screwed)? Let's bump it up. The bottom quartile of teams would average 2 players from their drafts that are in the top 5%, while the top quartile would average 8. There you're talking about half of all teams and they have an average disparity of 6 super studs on their roster due to drafts alone, due to pure dumb luck.

#16137	03/17/2015 6:51:45 am
mytton Joined: 11/15/2014 Posts: 45 Inactive	Mike, I agree that the small number of draft picks will mean it will take relatively longer for things to even out, but I think your numbers in that last post are flawed. With any random pick, I have a 1 in 20 chance of picking a top 5% talent. So, making 100 selections, my chances of getting no top 5%ers at all would be 19/20 to the power 100. That's a one in 168.9 chance, not one in 25. In fact we are not making single random picks, but taking our choice from 5 presumably randomly selected options. Even allowing for incomplete information and players valuing different types of players, this can only increase the chance of getting hold of a top talent in any given week. The maths for this looks a bit daunting, but consider: after say half the draft pool has been selected, significantly more than half the top 5% players will have gone. Those selections must have gone somewhere, so the chances of any specific player getting none of them is surely smaller than the 1 in 169 figure above. I think the current system works well, resembling a 10 round draft with one round per week, and the quality of the remaining pool diminishing slightly with each passing round. Allowing players to only partially scout 5 players per week means that draft order is rendered almost irrelevant (those who jump in first each week getting a tiny advantage). I'm wary of the suggestion of an option to draft specifically pitchers or position players or whatever. It needs to have a downside to it. I think taking 'best available player' should always be the best long term option. Concentrating on a specific category of player should involve a compromise in quality, so there is a long term cost to balance out the filling of a short term need. If we must allow players to choose 'Pitchers Only' for their draft pick, then at least reduce the number of players offered for selection. Choosing to select from 3 pitchers or 5 'allsorts' might be an interesting decision to have to make.

#16139	03/17/2015 7:40:31 am
MukilteoMike Joined: 08/09/2014 Posts: 3294 Inactive	Mytton, the low 4% was one or zero super stars over the decade.

#16156	03/17/2015 11:37:56 am
mytton Joined: 11/15/2014 Posts: 45 Inactive	Ah yes, I misread that line in the post. Apologies, should have double checked before posting. The numbers do make sense now.

#16159	03/17/2015 12:07:39 pm
Rock777 Joined: 09/21/2014 Posts: 9592 Haverhill Halflings III.1	Fact is, IRL teams don't walk away equal from drafts. There is a lot of luck involved in real life drafts. And even those who do well in the draft seldom make the choices to capitalize on those picks. That's what baseball is all about. Making the right choices. You are just as likely to be successful from picking up the right pieces off the waivers and free agency, then from getting lucky in the draft. I haven't had much luck in the draft either, but I think its working just fine. We don't all play all the same teams each year. If every team got the same set of players to work with every year, this would quickly become a VERY boring game. I think the draft works perfectly as it is. And statistically you will always average out over the long run. Self correcting algorithms might make things look better in the short term, but personally I think they would take away from the game. I prefer the more realistic aspect of luck in the draft.

#16160	03/17/2015 12:11:12 pm
Rock777 Joined: 09/21/2014 Posts: 9592 Haverhill Halflings III.1	Mike - one more thing. Like I said its more about choices than luck. Some of the top performers in the league right now were drafted by human teams and dumped onto waivers. Bad choice in dumping the guy, good pickup by the guy who pulled him off waivers or FA. Just because a player gets a good player in the draft, doesn't mean he'll use him right. Plus POT isn't an exact measure of goodness. Some players don't reach POT, some players are just bad despite having high SI. And I also think some folks (not you necessarily ) are more concerned with SI than the actual potential for the player to be successful, of which I believe SI is only one component. ^- very good point. Image if real life teams could just scroll to the end of the page and see the POT for each player in the draft. That would make the draft way quicker (and much more boring). Updated Tuesday, March 17 2015 @ 12:15:17 pm PDT

#16164	03/17/2015 1:57:45 pm
Pig_Cola Joined: 09/15/2013 Posts: 1445 Glendale Marshals III.2	1. Increase the size of the HS, College, and Latin Academy to 3,500 and Asian and International to 1,000 since there are more users than before. 2. Eliminate players with less than 10 pot.

#16165	03/17/2015 3:11:18 pm
Rock777 Joined: 09/21/2014 Posts: 9592 Haverhill Halflings III.1	I think the draft is very fun as is. Its feels like a lottery (just like real life drafts). I dislike ideas to make it more "fair" and less fun (not referring to your suggestion Pig_Cola, although I would prefer to leave the draft as is in general). Its like opening a pack of baseball cards and seeing if you got any valuable players. If not, you have to do some thinking to figure out which guy has the best potential to be useful for your team. The fact that you have to do that analysis based off spotty scouting reports is both realistic and very fun to me. Updated Tuesday, March 17 2015 @ 3:13:46 pm PDT

#16168	03/17/2015 3:51:06 pm
MukilteoMike Joined: 08/09/2014 Posts: 3294 Inactive	Apparently Brokenbat Vegas has crowds at the roulette tables and leaves the blackjack tables to me. Bizarre. Be sure to watch the trends closely as displayed on the board. Oh man. They only have 6 to 5 tables. And no craps. WTH? Updated Tuesday, March 17 2015 @ 4:07:02 pm PDT

#16183	03/17/2015 11:22:44 pm
Jason2327 Joined: 09/02/2014 Posts: 718 Abilene Patriots III.2	sorry my bad,looking back i did have 1 14 pot. pitcher early in my first season but i cut him later on because he wasn't developing.and no,the 13 pot. 1B isn't on the team either because i had a log jam and still do at 1B.did count up the 12 pot.'s i have seen in almost 3 season's and the number is 9.