Discussion Forum

Forum >> Discussions >> 2038 Draft Round 1   Bookmark This Forum Thread

Post ID Date & Time Game Date Function
wickersty
Joined: 05/11/2017
Posts: 1002

Deadwood Perambulators
II.1

Broken Bat Baseball
But I do get a kick out of the "I want better" draft posts.

You’re oversimplifying what saying, and making it seem like I’m just whining about better picks. What I’m wishing for is a better clumping/grouping of draft picks, representative of the value of the early rounds.

My *best* choice in round 1 should not be a total waste of time pot10. There’s something wrong with that. There’s something wrong with a round 1 choice set having nothing even remotely representing a player with any kind of value or potential value.

Part of the charm and fun of this game for me is the “long play”. It takes season after season to build a decent team and system, and try to keep it competitive and advance. I *enjoy* the fact that I can’t just press a button and get rock star players. That there are busts or players that don’t live up to expectations. I’m not complaining about a lack of instant gratification here, or entitlement to pot15s in round 1.

I’m only talking about tweaks to avoid what feels like too common a round 1 and 2 board that’s barren of any kind of talent.

Updated Monday, October 8 2018 @ 1:28:51 am PDT
dsz071
Joined: 09/12/2015
Posts: 334

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
First off, Mike, my post wasn't directed at you. I also wish we had more control over who we have to choose from each week. You've played this longer than I have and with far more success. With that being said, from what I can tell our 10 draft choices are generated completely randomly based on what pool we choose. You called it giving some teams bums and others superstars but I don't see it that way. I believe it's just random but we can agree to disagree, that's fine.

Wick, yes, my post was directed at posts like yours. But you are far from the only one so if you took it as a personal attack, I apologize. But to me, the original post you made did seem a tad bit whiny and I get a kick out of people whining about things... It makes me laugh. Anyway, to your point about there not being enough talent in the first two rounds. Whether they just aren't that good or get injured, early round draft picks are not guaranteed to be good players, in any sport. Greg Oden, Vince Young, anyone? I had a few spare minutes this morning so I went and looked back, starting in 2013 (because baseball players usually take a few years to make it to the majors and hit their stride) I went back 20 years to 1993. Out of 604 first round draft picks, only 113 have been MLB All-Stars and let's face it. The way the ASG has been forever with it being mandatory that each team be represented, that's not exactly the huge accomplishment you might think. That's 19% of first round picks going on to "greatness." Not terribly impressive to me. I have no idea what the rate is for BB first round draft picks, I don't have anywhere near that kind of time. But I'm fine with not getting 10 superstars to pick from in the first round. Again, I would absolutely like more control over who I do get to choose from but I don't know the answer. I only know what I like from the online management games I've played. There are others that I like more but I have no idea how difficult it would be to implement here even IF Steve did want to change.

I've already rambled long enough but figured I would reply to the people that responded to my sarcastic little post. Have a good day.
wickersty
Joined: 05/11/2017
Posts: 1002

Deadwood Perambulators
II.1

Broken Bat Baseball
My point remains not that I, or anyone else, should be getting 10 superstars to choose from in the first round, or even that I or everyone should be guaranteed 1 superstar in the first round. At no point did i say that, and in fact I’ve tried to restate clearly: all I’m saying is that the first round shouldn’t be so often filled with only total turds that have no business being in the first round. A serviceable 12 pot with something better than an embarrassing build belongs in the 1st round, and that supports the “not all 1st rounders are stars” argument (which by the way I agree with). But 10 total bums to choose from in the first round, with no hope of being kept for any reason, doesn’t make any sense. You should not expect a superstar in the first round just because it’s the first round. You should not even expect a star. But you should also not expect, more years than not, a first round totally devoid of anything that resembles serviceable replacement level talent.

Updated Monday, October 8 2018 @ 11:04:40 am PDT

And by the way, it’s not even really that big of a deal. It’s a conversation about a game that we like and how one aspect of it might make some more sense with an adjustment.

Updated Monday, October 8 2018 @ 11:14:33 am PDT
MukilteoMike
Joined: 08/09/2014
Posts: 3294

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
I didn't think the comment was directed at me. I simply was stating my opinion and stance. And I never allow anything said here to offend me. Not even personal attacks, which unfortunately do occur. I don't think anything said in this thread was anything like that.
Peace out.
dsz071
Joined: 09/12/2015
Posts: 334

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
Good deal. It's nice to find other people that don't get offended nowadays because holy crap... they're everywhere!
ephenssta
Joined: 06/29/2016
Posts: 196

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
Positive scouting report turns into a pot 9. Definitely not what I wanted from a round one pick

http://brokenbat.org/player/186812
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
I agree with Wickersty here.

I think the main point is, why are we evaluating "Above Average" (and lower!) players in the first round. What team goes into a draft thinking, "we only want to evaluate slightly above average players; none of those super-star types?"

There are plenty of "Very Good Potential" players who turn out to be busts. Seem like everyone could be getting a slate of "Very Good" players in the first round, and there would still be plenty of busts. We are forced into kind of a weird dynamic with the shared pools. If the pools help defined the player characteristics, but were not shared amongst all owners it would solve several issues in the game:

1) Draft time would no longer matter
2) More even distribution of talent
3) Players would never disappear off your draft list

The easiest way to do this would be to dynamically create players when a team picked a pool to draft from. Pools could still have overall "sizes", which would effect the quality of players distributed in later rounds, but it would make it very easy to control the quality of players created in each round. I would think round #1 should have a couple "Very Goods", while finding a "Good" in round 10 should be the rare sleeper.

Once someone picked a player, the other nice would be deleted from the DB.




Updated Monday, October 8 2018 @ 7:35:25 pm PDT
Meccanodonte
Joined: 04/21/2014
Posts: 370

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
It's true that not every 1st round pick goes to majors in real life, but as you know real life has multiple variables which have impact.
BB is a (beautiful) simpler approximation.

I'd like, for example, more dynamic potential. A pot 12 could turns out a pot 13 or 14 and viceversa.

I picked 1 pot 14 in last 60 tries. It's not easy to remain competitive when even 1st and 2nd round of the draft are trash only because of lack of luck.
amalric7
Joined: 01/20/2016
Posts: 2235

New York Lancers
IV.2

Broken Bat Baseball
I don't mind how the draft works, but I can see the sense in the suggestions others have made.
To me the draft should be a crapshoot, like in real life (this is some consensus in the NFL, where the idea is to have as many picks as possible, because each one is a dart throw), but that's perhaps because I've been quite successful (/lucky) drafting.

Ignoring my rookie year 1st rounder, I've kept 9/12 1st round picks. My worst was this season's (2038) 11 POT bust, I've instantly cut a 12 POT (2031) and also released a bad build 13 POT (2035) after two weeks on the roster. The rest have been 13-16 POT players, so perhaps I've done better than most, but at least three of those have capped early so nothing is guaranteed.
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
I've kept 4/14 of my first draft picks (since it started recording). Four POT 11, six POT 12, two POT 13, and two POT 14. Only one of the players I kept is really 1st round quality.

I kept both POT 14s, but one is a bench utility infielder with no hitting report (or Bat Control). The one POT 13 I kept is top of my cut list. A useless relief pitching HR machine I doubt I will ever give significant time too in the majors. The POT 13 I cut became a below average pitcher in LL-5/6.

I kept one POT 12, who is a slow developer but at 26 I am still hoping will be a decent relief pitcher in his rookie year. My one 1st round quality player was a POT 14 Starting Pitcher who at 29 years old is the #5 starter on my team.



Previous Page | Show All |