so first of all.. are we doing a round 2 this year?  There are still quite a few guys i'd be interested in available, so i'm happy to continue drafting.  Shame we can't run it in parallel with the FA period.

Secondly - on the draft this season.  I think the varying scouts is really making for a different sort of draft.  I don't think i've ever seen this much variety in the scouts.  The guy i took with the 24th pick was ranked #2 on my personal draft board.  I was sure he wouldn't be there.  After all, my scout thinks he's perennial cy young material.  :) 

I'm guessing not everyone's scouts saw him that way. 

Anybody else notice this? I don't recall quite this much variety between scouts in the past versions.  Haven't decided if it's a good or a bad thing yet.  Probably will depend on how good my scout is.  *grin*

Tempus

---

South Beach Sunburn GM

Yeah, I just posted an updated league file (will send out email shortly). We'll do round 2+, but we'll have stricter time limits.

Yeah, there is quite a difference in scouts. The whole scouting system was completely rewritten, and various things can play into it, such as the setting in game that controls how different scouts see things, as well as whether your scout favors tools or abilities.

I can't wait to see how my picks do or don't pan out.

Well, if nothing else, the sunny outlook from some of the scouts makes it seem like there will be a good influx of new talent with this draft class.

However, if the "doom and gloom" NY scout is correct, all but a few of the players drafted will probably struggle... in T-Ball...  and if you're a pitcher who struggles in T-ball, then you really have a problem... 

We'll see how it works out.  I do hope my scout isn't right though, because if he's on the mark, this draft class was worse than the previous one.  The scout for Bowie though thinks he can find a 20-game winner in the fourth round...

---

Caelon
GM New York Empire

Similar stuff here, my scout absolutely loves my picks so far ...

I got two 5 stars in the first round, Pantoja is 10/10/10 and Taylor is 10/9/10 to him.

The guy I grabbed in the 2nd round was my #7 overall pick based on scout ratings heh

So it's definitely weird.

---

GM of Chattooga Eagles
The Eagle's Nest

Yeah, there is quite a bit of variance in the scouts. We can always look at tweaking the settings next year, but so far I'm not sure the variance is really a bad thing.

Plus, we'll all get to know the new scouting system and feel a little more in control of it next year. We might want to tweak our budget settings and scout projections, etc.

If you take the very high level view of things though, even if scouts are less accurate then without scouts at all, even without scouts it was just as common for 1st rounders to bomb as to bust.

Not to mention that OOTP9 has a new version of player development, etc. Hopefully the end result will be a more fun draft experience, with more uncertainty as to how your picks will really pan out.

Granted, you do want high draft picks to have a better chance at being good, which is the whole idea behind the draft order being as it is. We will just have to see, but I can honestly say I'm having more fun with this draft than I have in OOTP in a long time.

caelon:

NY Selects SP Carlos Martinez.

OSA thinks this guy couldn't pitch his way out of a wet paper bag.  My scout thinks at least he could be solid to dominant... in AA-ball.  (OK, OK, he was one of only five "two-star" prospects my scout saw, and only one of about 16 my scout saw as better than a one-star scrub...)

Guess we'll wait and see... 

Doza:

I hear ya.  I am VERY concerned about the difference in scouting.  It seems unrealistic.  Only the first pick overall seemed to be a unanimous pick for some sort of talent, but other told me he was a 3.5 star player, still not the 5 star player some scouts say.  But for pitchers its worse.  The closer I just picked is a 5 star guy.  Other scouts say he's a 2 star guy. W-T-F!

caelon:

Yeah, the NY scout has Eric Bond as a one-star, 6/6/5 guy.  Bowie's scount, Mr. Sunshine, saw him as 8/7/6 and a couple stars, rating his stuff as "Great potential."

So who knows.  I'm guessing that the player development algorithms might have been tuned such that a fair number of these players will eventually, hopefully, get talent increases, and the scouts are mostly just guessing where they'll fall.  Especially with the pitching... but in MLB, they often say "There's no such thing as a pitching prospect." 

What level of scout ability are we using?  What level is the "OSA" set at?  We won't know for a few seasons probably, but if scouting ends up being way off the mark often enough, we might consider raising the quality of both a bit more, if it will help.  I do like to see some difference in scouting between teams - gives some personality and variety - but I, too, am a bit concerned by the vast differences between various scouts with the same exact ability ratings.

Guess time will tell. 

Scouts are set to 7/10 like they were in 6.5, but we may need to up that one more notch.

Also, I'm thinking your budget allocation to amateurs, as well as your projection settings will also impact this.

I think you can only change your scouting budget allocation during certain times of the year, but we can't allow folks to game the game such that you could dump 100% into amateurs just for the draft, and then change it back.

We probably will only allow this before the draft pool is announced, and then you're stuck with what you pick for that whole year.

I don't really know what kind of impact the budget settings would have on people's draft pool scouting though. Maybe none. Will have to look at it further.

I posted this somewhere here or in an email, but recall what the manual says about projection:

Scouting Director that favors ability will base players' potential ratings on what the player can already do and project what he thinks the player will become in the future. Think of this type of scout as more of a "Moneyball" scout.

The director that favors tools will base the players' potential ratings on the maximum peak the player could achieve. In theory, a scout that favors tools will find more superstars, while a scout that favors ability will find more serviceable major league players.

I read this as saying that favor ability will be a more conservative judge of amateurs. They all have fairly low current ability, and this type of scout will probably be more accurate with current player abilities (majors). I could see this resulting in lower overall ratings.

As for tools, I see this as ignoring their current ratings, but looking more at their potential.

So favoring ability will give you more conservative, serviceable players, and probably be more accurate with major league scouting, while favoring tools will give you the occasional superstar in return for less consistently serviceable players. I don't know whether this would be more accurate for amateurs than majors or not.

Add to this the whole budget allocation thing, which also could influence accuracy, and THEN, the scouting director's scouting ratings.

In any event, this is my interpretation of what the manual says. I could be wrong.

i'm guessing my scout favors tools, although i'd have to check in game to be sure.

anyway, it'll be nice having a some 4/5 star players in the minors again.  Currently I don't think i have anything over 1 star.

Tempus

---

South Beach Sunburn GM