First Round Busts

[Dactyl]

Like some others here, I had concerns about the scouting system and the accuracy of my scouting director's evaluations. Well, according to the Fangraphs website, 60% of the first round picks in the MLB draft are busts in the sense that they never see the majors. That's in the real world, and it pretty much reflects the rates I'm seeing, even with a very good scouting director and $12.5 million per season funneled into scouting.

[StyxNCa]

Originally Posted by Dactyl

Like some others here, I had concerns about the scouting system and the accuracy of my scouting director's evaluations. Well, according to the Fangraphs website, 60% of the first round picks in the MLB draft are busts in the sense that they never see the majors. That's in the real world, and it pretty much reflects the rates I'm seeing, even with a very good scouting director and $12.5 million per season funneled into scouting.

My current shortstop was a player I drafted with the #7 pick 3 seasons ago. Two seasons ago I bought him up even though I didn't feel he was ready, but his defense was something I was desperate for. I never drafted him for his bat so last season when he led the majors in batting with a .339 (.024 better than the #2 leader) I was shocked, plus he was A-1 at shortstop. He is really the only first rounder I have had that amounted to much of anything though a few are now starters on other teams, but I like the fact that there are no gimmes.

[Vogon Poet]

My first 1st-round pick was a 3B with 80 power potential (I use the 20-80 scouting scale). He hit the snot out of the ball in short-season ball. Next year, I get a new scouting director and his potential ratings plummet. Looks like an awful prospect. He's hit like .330 with power in High-A, but the potential ratings haven't budged.

I've barely had time to play, so I have no clue how he'll turn out. Still trying to wrap my mind around how stats and ratings interact.

[magnet]

I play with scouting and coaching off, and there is still no sure things. I just don't like the situations like the one Vogon mentioned.

[StyxNCa]

Originally Posted by magnet

I play with scouting and coaching off, and there is still no sure things. I just don't like the situations like the one Vogon mentioned.

I use scouts only to steer me in the direction of a player. After that I monitor his performance and pretty much decide when I think they are ready or if they won't ever be, at least for my needs.

[Matter2003]

Originally Posted by magnet

I play with scouting and coaching off, and there is still no sure things. I just don't like the situations like the one Vogon mentioned.

I don't understand I guess...

One guy thinks the player has a lot of potential and the new guy doesn't think he has as much potential...

If this was not the case, why do teams change lots of players when new coaches or GM's come in? They obviously have differing opinions in regards to the abilities of the players on that team...

[84Hammy]

Yeah, I play with ratings off and just look at scouting for friendly advice.

[Raidergoo]

Originally Posted by Vogon Poet

Still trying to wrap my mind around how stats and ratings interact.

I, however, am trying to wrap my mind around the concept of having a Vogon Poet around with a Bill Murry avatar. The cognitive dissonance is bracing.

Good to see you!

[Giants44]

I would like to see more guys with high potential, but that just don't reach it.

in the existing game too many late first rounders have overall potential in the 30's or 20's.

I would rather see guys that have potential 60+ but never reach it.

I believe that better mirrors the way it works IRL - I doubt very many teams left Wed draft believing their first round pick has a ceiling as a 25 player.

I do believe the majority of first rounders should bust, I would just like to see more potential, for potential.

[Kitsune]

I brought my up my first overall pick who was projected to be an ace for a taste of the majors in his first season ... and in his first ever game, he tore his UCL, needed Tommy John Surgey and his career was over.

[Wolfbane]

I realise Markus has put a good effort into trying to replicate realism in the draft, but he probably realises there is still a good way to go. In OOTP10, the player and CPU simply draft the best player available(BPA) because there are no concerns about college commitment, bonus/contract demands, multi-sport player signability etc..... This creates a situation where you would expect lower bust % in the early rounds and a lower breakout rate in the later rounds than in real life.

In reality, I would say a good 10%, maybe even more of the top100 players in terms of potential, are not drafted anywhere near those picks. Until draft pick signing, bonus demands, and contract demands (some players want a higher paying contract than MILB minimum or a MLB contract like Pedro Alvarez) are implemented along with players dropping in the draft for these reasons, realism will be off. For this reason, I will continue to promote this addition until it is implemented(it was done partially with staff, hopefully draftees are not that much harder).

That said I like the draft system quite a bit when scouting is on. With scouting innaccuracy, sometimes you get better reads on players leading to late round steals, or painful busts and overdrafts. Also, player developments success stories of late rounders who see potential jumps is great to see, even if that is not a direct cause of the draft itself.

[Dactyl]

Giants44, with the settings I mentioned above, I get plenty of high-rated busts. My scouting director rates lots of the players in the draft as four and five star. A lot of the time, there are even players left in the fourth or fifth round who have four or five star ratings. As is to be expected, most of these players don't pan out. I think OOTP10 does a pretty good job in terms of the number of players with high ratings. The fact is that, after the first dozen or so players in the real-life major league draft, there are rarely any players left that scouts would rate as can't miss.

[Vogon Poet]

Originally Posted by Raidergoo

I, however, am trying to wrap my mind around the concept of having a Vogon Poet around with a Bill Murry avatar. The cognitive dissonance is bracing.

Good to see you!

Interesting nugget for you: when Douglas Adams first sold the movie rights to The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, Ivan Reitman signed on to direct and Bill Murray was the first choice for Ford Prefect. Unfortunately, Reitman and Adams had wildly different ideas, couldn't agree on anything and the film fell apart.

Reitman made Ghostbusters instead.