|
Post by Paul DePodesta on Jun 5, 2007 0:57:32 GMT -5
First, I've talked about this with the commish but i want to bring it to the publics knowledge. What if we added for each draft class, real life draftees. Like for example, Pitchers David Price or Rick Porcello who are projected to be the cream of the draft pool this year. But we can start doing this by adding prospects from last years draft like the Daniel Bards, Andrew Millers etc.
I know some of you want to see the guy actually play MLB and see the scouting reports, but theres alot alot of info on these guys to be alot more accurate in how to make them. The commish doesn't have to make them all, it could be just like 15-20 real life's per draft or whatever the consent is, could be more could be less.
Second suggestion, To bring up even more trade activity in the offseason, have a Weekend of Winter Meetings or a Day or two of Winter Meetings on AIM. An even more intriguing idea would be awarding the team who makes a trade a certain incentive but that's just up to the Commish. The winter meetings could just be an event for trade discussion and rule proposals.
|
|
|
Post by Andy Van Slyke on Jun 5, 2007 7:26:30 GMT -5
I like the draft idea.
|
|
|
Post by Billy Beane on Jun 6, 2007 13:35:26 GMT -5
this will mess up the talent in UCSL, however, because the draft is based on which players retire that year, so that there is always the same amount of talent in the league, this would mess that up.. (plus created players really mess up the file a lot of times)
|
|
|
Post by Jose Canseco on Jun 6, 2007 16:53:18 GMT -5
I agree with Beane...although I LOVE that the Dodgers have a intelligent GM finally...sad sack organization...
|
|
|
Post by Paul DePodesta on Jun 6, 2007 22:43:12 GMT -5
Thanks for the respected comment Reds Btw, To fix up and bring reality to the League. Why not just change the names in the draft pool of players who are VERY similar to the real life ones. What would you do is generate the draft pool, then start looking for comparisons and switch their name to the real one for example, The computer generated Jerry Rice, that player most compares to David Price. That would create a bit more realism. For some reason, it's just funner to handle real life names.
|
|
|
Post by Jose Canseco on Jun 6, 2007 23:09:40 GMT -5
Thanks for the respected comment Reds Btw, To fix up and bring reality to the League. Why not just change the names in the draft pool of players who are VERY similar to the real life ones. What would you do is generate the draft pool, then start looking for comparisons and switch their name to the real one for example, The computer generated Jerry Rice, that player most compares to David Price. That would create a bit more realism. For some reason, it's just funner to handle real life names. that idea isnt bad but the thing is in this league ALOT of rookies get new names...
|
|
|
Post by Bill Stoneman on Jun 6, 2007 23:37:01 GMT -5
Yeah, but then when those real life guys start hitting the real life majors, and they're a completely different player, or they never make it past AA ball, it won't be any more realistic, but it'll have been alot more work.
High school and College stats aren't all that telling, and most guys who look like Babe Ruth in either one don't turn out to be that good. It's tough to go off of.
On top of that, if we stay at the rate we're simming, a season takes 2 months...figure another month for offseason (2 weeks preferably), and we're doing 4 seasons a year. We'd run out of real players fast. I think it's nicer to have a steady flow of guys through imports and name changes, that way we don't run out when there are no more worthy guys.
I know name changes don't always turn out realistic (like Hayden Penn being a power hitting 3B), but it can be if you want it to be...
|
|
|
Post by Paul DePodesta on Jun 6, 2007 23:46:51 GMT -5
The point was kinda of missed, what i was referring is that you don't do it for the WHOLE DRAFT CLASS, possibly like for 32 players, like only one run round or even two rounds. As much as you can. obviously the whole pool would be insane and impossible to do since it's too much.
|
|
|
Post by Billy Beane on Jun 7, 2007 0:53:07 GMT -5
you can change all of your draftee's names.. just find similar players that you drafted to who is in the draft class and do it that way.
(what i like to do is go through history and find old time guys and change my players names to them)
|
|
|
Post by Bill Stoneman on Jun 7, 2007 0:53:57 GMT -5
No I understand what you're saying, but that's alot of work to do to edit all of those guys. Not editing and just changing the names to guys "similar" to them is somewhat pointless, as any GM could do that after they draft them. Most of those real life 1sts won't become anything...for example lets go back 10 years to the 1997 draft and see who has made an impact:
1. Matt Anderson, DET- Saw the bigs as a RP/CL, and now is a career minor league who is happily living off of his bonus. 2. J.D. Drew, PHI- Didn't sign, but that doesn't affect this. Successful ML career, worthy guy. 3. Troy Glaus, ANA- Successful ML career, worthy guy. 4. Jason Grilli, SF- Has seen some ML time, but as a below average reliever. 5. Vernon Wells, TOR- Success 6. Geoff Geotz, NYM- Never saw the majors. 7. Dan Reichert, KC- See Jason Grilli 8. J.J. Davis, PIT- 106 ML at bats, .465 OPS 9. Michael Cuddyer, MIN- Decent-Good ML player 10. Jon Garland, CHC- Good ML pitcher 11. Chris Enochs, OAK- Never saw majors 12. Aaron Akin, FLA- Never saw majors. 13. Kyle Peterson, MIL- 91 Crappy ML innings 14. Brandon Larson, CIN- 291 ML Ab's, .570 OPS 15. Jason Dellaero, CHW- 33 ML AB's, 3 hits 16. Lance Berkman, HOU- Best pick of the round. Baseball Cube says Glaus is...I disagree... 17. John Curtice, BOS- Never saw majors. 18. Mark Mangum, COL- Never saw majors. 19. Ryan Anderson, SEA- Overhyped, never saw majors. 20. Adam Kennedy, STL- Solid ML 2B 21. Eric Dubose, OAK- Saw ML, crappy for 188 IP 22. Jayson Werth, BAL- Decent backup for a year, hasn't played baseball since 05. 23. Donnie Bridges, MON- Never saw majors 24. Tyrell Godwin, NYM- 3 ML AB's 25. Glenn Davis, LA- Never saw majors 26. Darnell McDonald, BAL- 32 ML AB's 27. Kevin Nicholson, SD- Who? 97 ML AB 28. Tim Drew, CLE- The one brother without talent. 80+ horrible innings 29. Troy Cameron, ATL- Never saw bigs 30. Jack Cust, ARI- 144 crappy ML AB before this year. 1 hot stretch this year. 31. Jason Standridge, TB- 119 bad ML IP
So by my count that makes 22/31 guys who made the bigs, and 7 guys who have done any kind of quality work in the Major leagues. So we'll put all that time into researching all of these prospects to add some "reality", and get a max of 5-10 guys who will be decent in real life when they finally do make it (many seasons down the road for us). It's cool to see familiar names, but it's tough to get it to be anything like the real player, which is why it's nice to add them through imports and those routes. I'm not saying it's a stupid idea or anything, but I guess I'm just not that into it. Maybe I'm in the minority..that's why this thread is here!
I'm glad that someone actually posts their ideas for once instead of never saying anything though.
PS- I weep to think the Mets could have had Jon Garland, Lance Berkman, or even Kennedy or Cuddyer instead of Goetz. Oh well, can't have successful drafts all the time...
|
|
|
Post by Paul DePodesta on Jun 7, 2007 2:25:18 GMT -5
IMO, i think this is the start for more creative ideas for this league, it would be really good. The more ideas, the better. I think we can all agree that theres always more room for improvement.
|
|
|
Post by Jose Canseco on Jun 7, 2007 13:02:07 GMT -5
IMO, i think this is the start for more creative ideas for this league, it would be really good. The more ideas, the better. I think we can all agree that theres always more room for improvement. man I love where this is going but I have to agree with mike on this(and the fact berkman is the best of that class)...
|
|
|
Post by Paul DePodesta on Jun 7, 2007 22:29:56 GMT -5
Another interesting this to point out that in every sport, the drafts are very comparable, some work out and some don't. I think we have gotten to a point where we have known to adjust to these type of scenarios. But hey, im just throwing the idea out there to see how far we can take it
|
|