Amateur Draft Player Generation Problems

[ike121212]

I've run into 2 major issues with ficitonal amateur drafts in my leagues. I've run hundreds in different era's, with era pcm's and neutral pcm's, and scouting turned off.

1. There is not enough quality starting pitching created. The typical draft created 2 75/80+ prospects and 75 20/80 prospects. The depth and quality of Catching prospects is greater than the Starting Pitching prospects. It's almost of if someone forgot that a team needs a 4 or 5 man rotation.

2. The Starting pitching rating calculation is delicate enough mid-grade prospects are almost impossible to generate. This just compounds the my first problem, and makes drafting a miserable experience. Below are some details (notice that 1 rating point takes a SP from 45 to 80):


With a 15 endurance prospect, here's what I've found by adjusting (using 1-20 scale):

10 stuff/ 10 movement/ 10 control = 20
10/10/11 = 26
10/11/11= 34
11/11/11 = 40
11/11/12 = 45
11/11/13 = 80
11/12/12 = 80
12/12/12 = 80

The game is producing a ton of 20's (some are actually pretty good), and a bunch of 80's (some really aren't that good). It's very hard to produce much in between. It's extremely rare to see anyone between 50 and 70. Whatever the formula is to calcualte the rating, I think it needs an adjustment.

[ChapmanOSU1]

Agreed, you'll have a few high potential guys, but then it seems the rest are all 20.

[ike121212]

Please look into this. I'm tired of every decent starter being gone in the first 10 picks of the draft.

[SkyDog]

I wonder if it's some sort of odd reporting issue with 20-80. I'm not seeing this at all using 1-100.

[HH20xx convert]

Originally Posted by SkyDog

I wonder if it's some sort of odd reporting issue with 20-80. I'm not seeing this at all using 1-100.

A couple of other threads indicate this is a reporting problem in the 20-80 display only.

[ike121212]

Originally Posted by SkyDog

I wonder if it's some sort of odd reporting issue with 20-80. I'm not seeing this at all using 1-100.

It does seem just a little bit better with 1-100, and your neutral pcm/settings. The obvious rating hole is gone, but the distribution is still pretty bad. I would never have imagined that would matter, and then I started working with your quickstart. I still don't find it nearly good enough. 10 picks in, there's rarely a starting pitcher left with potential greater than 20. I won't be happy until I see 30-40's left late in the 2nd round, like other positions.

[ike121212]

Help me live my dream of drafting a decent SP in the 2nd round!

[Carplos]

Ignoring the overall rating listed, what do the actual potentials say?

Have you tried increasing the Trad. PCMs?

[ike121212]

I have played around with increasing the pitching pcm's. The problem I run into is that it benefits the handfull of good pitchers that are generated more than the 20's. If you go too far, you get 6 Walter Johnson's some years. It's a pretty delicate balance with the tools we've been given. I'd like to see the real problem addressed.

[Carplos]

I ask about the actual potentials of STF/MOV/CTL, because it could be a problem with what's calculating the overall rating rather than the creation of decent SP prospects.

[ike121212]

I definately agree with you. There are some decent pitchers who are rated 20 or 21....mixed throughout 10 pages of prospects. 1 simple problem may be making things look much worse than they are. When you combine it with historical pcm's, it get's very frustrating to draft with.

Looking at a test draft, there's a 68/42/49 who grades as a 21. It certainly doesn't seem right to me. It was even worse with 1-20 scaling.