Schauwn
Well-Known Member
Can we just work out a deal for you to manage my minor league system while you're 100% immersed?
-
Registration is disabled due to constant spammers. Email [email protected] and we will temporarily re-enable registration for you.
Gooksta's 2044 WBL Draft Grades
- Thread starter Gooksta
- Start date
I will let you know when I've got mine sorted out, ha ha.
All jokes aside, managing the minor leagues is one of the most fun parts to me. If the riggers are REALLY bad for a few seasons, I'll probably just devote all my time to mastering the minor league squads. I almost have my rating system pulled together so I can create an automated dev plan for all the players.
All jokes aside, managing the minor leagues is one of the most fun parts to me. If the riggers are REALLY bad for a few seasons, I'll probably just devote all my time to mastering the minor league squads. I almost have my rating system pulled together so I can create an automated dev plan for all the players.
Gooksta
Well-Known Member
So true.. I try to add versatility where ever I can. Especially to fringy prospects
Yeah, you did a good job with him. The only downside in his specific case is that he started with that ultra low range rating of 20. From my analysis, once those ratings get into the 35-40 range you have a real good 1B prospect if you give them enough time at the position to learn it. That's where @Mr. Radpants dude will be awesome. Still, even with a 20 range your guy has developed well enough to be serviceable at 1b if needed and that gives you a nice option for where you want him to play depending on where your other power players are.
As a good example, Tamham Ridha is always a very good glove at 1B (55 position rating, but he plays higher) and his infield ratings are 40/40/40/25.
http://utopia.allsimbaseball9.com/game/lgreports//players/player_12672.html
I don't want to reveal all of my trade secrets, but you should definitely ignore the CPU's positional assignment for a lot of these players when you draft them and look at what their actual fielding ratings are when assigning them positions to develop.
I know a lot of you guys are familiar with this, but it seems to me that some people really aren't, so I'll go through what I've found out. Their actual fielding ratings don't change much at all, but their positional ratings will progress pretty rapidly early in the minors and then slower as they age. They also improve very rapidly at positional ratings during spring training. Generally speaking there is a hierarchy of positional skill sets that goes:
Infield
SS > 2B > 3B > 1B
Outfield
CF > RF > LF
For players who have both infield and outfield skills, here is the hierarchy of fielding ratings
SS > 2B > CF > 3B > RF > LF > 1b
If a player has the skills to be a good positional player at SS or CF they can play any other position in the infield/outfield with their fielding skillset as long as you give them enough development times. For SS, 2B, and CF you are looking for players with fielding ratings in the 70 range at least to have an above average glove at the position or 60+ for average glove... As you work your way down the list, a player with worse fielding ratings can achieve higher positional ratings. A LF with 40s and 50s ratings can be a 65 positional player. A 1b with 40s fielding ratings can have a good positional rating.
So the important thing to do in order to keep these players straight, IMO, is assign them the position that you think fits them best when you first draft, buy, or obtain them. Then you won't end up 5 years down the road realizing that your "2b" Khing Khong doesn't have the fielding ratings to be a really good 2b and probably should have been trained as a 1b the whole time, where he would turn out to be a really nice glove (he's got a good enough bat to play there as well).
http://utopia.allsimbaseball9.com/game/lgreports//players/player_7665.html
Generally speaking, you want to look at range and errors for all fielding positions, according to the hierarchy I posted above. Arm/turn DP is more or less important depending on position.
Now since it is easy to find any rigger with average to below average fielding ratings to play C/1B/LF and become a good positional player, those are the positions where you really want a premier bat.
I know a lot of you guys are familiar with this, but it seems to me that some people really aren't, so I'll go through what I've found out. Their actual fielding ratings don't change much at all, but their positional ratings will progress pretty rapidly early in the minors and then slower as they age. They also improve very rapidly at positional ratings during spring training. Generally speaking there is a hierarchy of positional skill sets that goes:
Infield
SS > 2B > 3B > 1B
Outfield
CF > RF > LF
For players who have both infield and outfield skills, here is the hierarchy of fielding ratings
SS > 2B > CF > 3B > RF > LF > 1b
If a player has the skills to be a good positional player at SS or CF they can play any other position in the infield/outfield with their fielding skillset as long as you give them enough development times. For SS, 2B, and CF you are looking for players with fielding ratings in the 70 range at least to have an above average glove at the position or 60+ for average glove... As you work your way down the list, a player with worse fielding ratings can achieve higher positional ratings. A LF with 40s and 50s ratings can be a 65 positional player. A 1b with 40s fielding ratings can have a good positional rating.
So the important thing to do in order to keep these players straight, IMO, is assign them the position that you think fits them best when you first draft, buy, or obtain them. Then you won't end up 5 years down the road realizing that your "2b" Khing Khong doesn't have the fielding ratings to be a really good 2b and probably should have been trained as a 1b the whole time, where he would turn out to be a really nice glove (he's got a good enough bat to play there as well).
http://utopia.allsimbaseball9.com/game/lgreports//players/player_7665.html
Generally speaking, you want to look at range and errors for all fielding positions, according to the hierarchy I posted above. Arm/turn DP is more or less important depending on position.
Now since it is easy to find any rigger with average to below average fielding ratings to play C/1B/LF and become a good positional player, those are the positions where you really want a premier bat.
Last edited:
I would say it was like at least half of the dudes I looked at had a better natural position than their listed position. Especially the "CFs" Most of those dudes have like 50 range, ha ha.
For Example, Chris Reardon was listed as a 2B in this year's draft, which might explain why he fell to the 2nd round when he had a better bat than a lot of dudes selected ahead of him. His range and error rating were borderline for a 2B player in my system and he had a much better arm than he needed, but I really didn't like his 45 turn DP rating at 2B. Based on my system (subscribe to newsletter) his combination of ratings should make him a really solid field player at 3B if his batting ratings pop (hey it was a bad draft class this year).
He's already got a positional rating of 60 at 3B (started at 30) now after not even a full season of A ball. I'll probably cross train him at 2B (where he should be able to reach a 50-55 positional rating) to add to his versatility now, but I like to list my players by their primary position.
He's already got a positional rating of 60 at 3B (started at 30) now after not even a full season of A ball. I'll probably cross train him at 2B (where he should be able to reach a 50-55 positional rating) to add to his versatility now, but I like to list my players by their primary position.
The flip side of this was Alfie Almquis who was listed as LF in the draft pool despite having 75/65/65 OF fielding ratings. That dude is a CF all the way where a bat like his is really rare. Now after half a season of A ball he's already got a 75 positional rating at CF so I'd play him at LF and RF to improve his versatility so he can play all 3 spots. Then if he never reaches his hitting potential, at least you've created an awesome 4th outfielder.
I'm really regretting not trading up for Alfie, lol.
Reardon had a top 10 best bat of the draft pool according to OSA last season.... which says something about how bad the draft pool was
Gooksta
Well-Known Member
This is what I try to do. My minors is stock full of CF'ers I'm am try to get to learn all 3 of spots.
Rutgers Mike
Dr. Sad
Tell me about Jon Funk.
Gooksta
Well-Known Member
Impact bat! Got one right
Mr. Radpants
Trog Five Standing By
I think I accidentally turned on that assistant GM feature.
40 range is always going to limit him, so I'd play him at LF full time and he should end up with a positional rating of 50 or even 55 at some point since he's still young and has time to grow through experience (those last 5-10 positional points come slowly) and not be a complete liability at that spot. Definitely make sure you have him there in spring training, since that's the only time positional growth comes fast for a player of his age. Until he's at least a 50 positional player, he's going to be a pretty huge liability in the field and at this point his fielding is bad enough that he's offsetting the positive he brings with his bat (since he's been kind of cold this season hitting).
I'd be using him as a DH (on my team) but since you've already got an awesome DH you have to just leave him in LF as a liability in the field.
He's similar to one of my players Carter Gibson, who was a 45 positional player at LF until I played him there all last season in AAA and he bumped to 50 this year. Hopefully one more year of spring ball and he'll be a 55 positional LF player and I'll be able to use him there without having his fielding be a liability. I'm "fortunate" to have an open slot for him at DH this season so I get to take advantage of his bat without the fielding issues.
FWIW, each position seems to have a tipping point between liability and not liability in the field. A 55 rated LF is going to probably be a neutral player and a 50 rated player going to be slight negative and a 45 a pretty big liability.
Mr. Radpants
Trog Five Standing By
Just kidding, that's a fair idea Travis. I've been meaning to dig in and manage my minors diligently and haven't found the time yet. That's a good point about grabbing him a secondary position while I can.
Yeah, I just trolled through the C prospects until I found one with good infield ratings. He'd make for the best of the bunch, probably.
Idk and idk. The release date is in game and it starts when i remember to start it
So I assume the "draft pool" on the website right now is inaccurate?
I looked through the "failed to signs" from last season and I see that there was definitely some shenanigans by certain teams not signing hardly any of their players in pretty high rounds. It would have been nice to be able to draft one of those guys instead of having a team in front of me draft a player and decide not to sign him.....
4 first round players and 10 second round players "failed to sign" and that seems a bit much to me. Now I'll assume some of you actually wanted to sign some of those guys (I wanted my 1st rounder that failed to sign) but I still calls shenanigans on more than half of the 2nd round "not signing."
I personally failed to sign one of my two 1st rounders, despite offering him what he asked, but the rest of my failings were later round auto drafted CPU guys that were "impossible."
We should make a house rule about that if it is a problem in the future. "Have to offer at least what player is asking" or something like that. If you can't afford slot value for your draft picks you should at least look to trade out because holy fuck.
I looked through the "failed to signs" from last season and I see that there was definitely some shenanigans by certain teams not signing hardly any of their players in pretty high rounds. It would have been nice to be able to draft one of those guys instead of having a team in front of me draft a player and decide not to sign him.....
4 first round players and 10 second round players "failed to sign" and that seems a bit much to me. Now I'll assume some of you actually wanted to sign some of those guys (I wanted my 1st rounder that failed to sign) but I still calls shenanigans on more than half of the 2nd round "not signing."
I personally failed to sign one of my two 1st rounders, despite offering him what he asked, but the rest of my failings were later round auto drafted CPU guys that were "impossible."
We should make a house rule about that if it is a problem in the future. "Have to offer at least what player is asking" or something like that. If you can't afford slot value for your draft picks you should at least look to trade out because holy fuck.
Last edited:
Well then certain people shouldn't have given wolfcheats21 shit about it, because it seems like it is more common than just WOLFCHEATS
Would be fun but I (or osick) would have to go through every team to look at their offers. If there is no export for a team then i offer everyone their demand for that team.
All the guys you failed to sign were late rounders that the CPU probably auto drafted, so you didn't have any control over the "impossible" thing. That wasn't what I was tombout though. 60% of the 2nd round going unsigned is what made me say HMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
Mr. Radpants
Trog Five Standing By
Thanks for running the draft you four cheaters. JD being the exception since he posted what happened.
Just take away comp picks unless someone posts evidence that they can't sign someone. There's no need for them.
Just take away comp picks unless someone posts evidence that they can't sign someone. There's no need for them.
I agree
OU throwing trog stones at Wolfman from his 4 second round picks in 2050 (3 of them compensatory) trog house.
Wat
WE NEED A RULE CHANGE
Don't mind me, I'm just baking the cookies of discontent.
Don't mind me, I'm just baking the cookies of discontent.
You have 3 compensatory 2nd round picks in 2050 because you didn't sign any of ur 2nd rounders, wOUrst offender.
Here we have a trog trogging.
A) you can only have one comp pick by rule.
B) You can only have one pick per round per year. So the only way to get one is not signing that pick
C) Even if i could have had one, i didnt because not only did i trade my 2nd last year, i signed all the ones i did pick
Always. Be. Closing.
A) you can only have one comp pick by rule.
B) You can only have one pick per round per year. So the only way to get one is not signing that pick
C) Even if i could have had one, i didnt because not only did i trade my 2nd last year, i signed all the ones i did pick
Always. Be. Closing.
Partial Truths at best
[xtable=skin1|cellpadding:0|cellspacing:0|629x642]
{tbody}
{tr}
{td}Amsterdam Tulips: Failed to sign 2nd round draft pick Auliffe Murch.{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td}Amsterdam Tulips: Failed to sign 2nd round draft pick Albert Blenkinson.{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td}Amsterdam Tulips: Failed to sign 2nd round draft pick Mark Wilson.{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td}Amsterdam Tulips: Failed to sign 3rd round draft pick Mike Myers.{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td}Amsterdam Tulips: Failed to sign 4th round draft pick Jeff Gideon.{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td}Amsterdam Tulips: Failed to sign 5th round draft pick T.J. Quach.{/td}
{/tr}
{/tbody}
[/xtable]
I WANTED TO DRAFT AULIFFEEEEEEE MURCH U whOUre!
[xtable=skin1|cellpadding:0|cellspacing:0|629x642]
{tbody}
{tr}
{td}Amsterdam Tulips: Failed to sign 2nd round draft pick Auliffe Murch.{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td}Amsterdam Tulips: Failed to sign 2nd round draft pick Albert Blenkinson.{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td}Amsterdam Tulips: Failed to sign 2nd round draft pick Mark Wilson.{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td}Amsterdam Tulips: Failed to sign 3rd round draft pick Mike Myers.{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td}Amsterdam Tulips: Failed to sign 4th round draft pick Jeff Gideon.{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td}Amsterdam Tulips: Failed to sign 5th round draft pick T.J. Quach.{/td}
{/tr}
{/tbody}
[/xtable]
I WANTED TO DRAFT AULIFFEEEEEEE MURCH U whOUre!
The draft order shows fuckin 30 2nd round picks in the 2050 draft, so I'm not sure the "one compensatory pick" thing is working either.
We have 18 teams.... What is 18*2?
Yeah i was thinking of 49, i honestly dont remember the 50 draft but i always sign my guys.
One thing is for sure, i had no more than one comp pick this year. I do trade from time to time and future seconds are sometimes part of it.
And you're not allowed to trade comp picks technically,so i didnt even pick with them. I say technically because i cant tell what is a comp pick or not so im sure i trade the wrong ones sometimes.
Ive tried to abolish comp picks outright several times, ive been shot down every time.
Im about to mike gundy you
Ive tried to abolish comp picks outright several times, ive been shot down every time.
Im about to mike gundy you
Bear with me here...
My point was.... there are 18 teams in the league... Without comp picks there should be 18 picks per round, right? In the 2051 draft there will be 22 first round picks, 29 2nd round picks and 25 3rd round picks (after that it is all 18). So somehow there are a total of 22 compensatory picks in those three rounds even though each team is "only allowed one" (should be a max of 18 comp picks).
There were 4 unsigned picks in round 1 (Lisbon, False Bay, Cairo, North Dakota) each of us were awarded a compensatory pick (making 22). Now Cairo and Lisbon also failed to sign their 2nd round picks as well (so they should not be awarded a comp pick for the 2nd rounders, right?). So 11 unsigned 2nd round picks(I miss-counted as 10 the first time) from last season which adds up to 29 picks. The problem is that Lisbon, Cairo, and 2 of Hamspterdam's 3 2nd round picks shouldn't be awarded comp picks right? That would mean there should only be 11-4+18=25 picks in round 2 instead of 29.
To me it looks like you were awarded 3 comp picks to me, Lisbon was awarded 2 comp pics (a first and a second), Cairo was awarded 2 comp picks (a first and a second). Therefore I stand by my glass hOUses claim! OU the wOUrst offender receives 3 comp picks instead of 1. OH THE HUMANITY! RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE.
I'm only joking about the trogging at you, but am serious about trying to point out that the compensatory pick system isn't functioning as thought. The way it is set up, it appears that players get comp picks for each missed pick in rounds 1-3. I also assume @fignuts and @Schauwn prolly missed the sim or something because it doesn't look like any of their guys signed at all unless they auto-signed. I know JD said he tried to sign his guy and I tried to sign my guy, so really no harm no foul.
Mr. Radpants
Trog Five Standing By
Wait, Travis didn't sign his first rounder?
I signed one of my 2 first rounders (I traded back with JD to get 2) but was not able to sign the other. I offered the other dude what he asked for and he did not sign. :shrug: