Draft File

[mike]

Some concerns are valid here rocky. To be fair to matty though our draft file is far from perfect here in FCM land that by adding these 10 guys to a draft could fix. Currently there is no such thing as a utility player. And if by some miracle one does show up we will really never know as you'd have to find it out by trial and error by playing them at each position in the majors and see how they do. Can't say that's a very realistic or productive way of using up a players service time. Secondly almost all 1B are the high power/high eye type or high contact no power type. That could be fixed by injecting some of these guys into the file. Lastly you bring up high large markets. Not having utility players in a file hurts a small market way more than ever losing a pick that one year would (you gain the pick back next year anyway). By not having utility guys to have proper depth we instead need to carry 5 guys on our bench that cover our health issue players in our lineup. Plus then a few extra in our minors to cover the rest. For literally 0 effort on our part we could gain something very useful. If you don't want to follow the draft file you wouldn't have to like matty said.

[rockybull]

Some concerns are valid here rocky. To be fair to matty though our draft file is far from perfect here in FCM land that by adding these 10 guys to a draft could fix. Currently there is no such thing as a utility player. And if by some miracle one does show up we will really never know as you'd have to find it out by trial and error by playing them at each position in the majors and see how they do. Can't say that's a very realistic or productive way of using up a players service time. Secondly almost all 1B are the high power/high eye type or high contact no power type. That could be fixed by injecting some of these guys into the file. Lastly you bring up high large markets. Not having utility players in a file hurts a small market way more than ever losing a pick that one year would (you gain the pick back next year anyway). By not having utility guys to have proper depth we instead need to carry 5 guys on our bench that cover our health issue players in our lineup. Plus then a few extra in our minors to cover the rest. For literally 0 effort on our part we could gain something very useful. If you don't want to follow the draft file you wouldn't have to like matty said.

the best you can come up with is "well it helps with the utility players" sorry but that don't cut it for me. how many mlb players in real life are super utility players that can hit and field in the infield and outfield? not many, cause most that can hit and field are starters somewhere. now most super utility players in mlb can play multiple positions in the infield or outfield and hit some. but, you can find that in this file. not a ton, but not a ton in real life either. in FA you can usually find an OF that can play all 3 OF positions for pretty cheap and that can hit a little too. and in real life, most teams have 4 or 5 bench spots as well, most have 5. so i don't think the utility player problem is nearly as bad as most want to say. sure, it's not as much as it was in the past, but look around in real life, not all that much different.

i never said this file is perfect, but i like it like this a hell of a lot more than using what matty wants to do here.

at this point, everything you can say is moot, because as i said in my previous post, "a top talent in the draft could have very low signability and falls to one of the playoff teams and they take a chance (cause they were good and he looks like one of top players in the draft) and they end up getting lucky with rolls and they get to sign a top talent at the backend of the 1st round. I mean you’re just letting the rich get richer." that is something that's very real and no matter what is said, i'll never condone this or side with this. this will do far more harm than good. i'll never ever be for that and that will be a huge problem for me if this league allows this (which i don't think the league would).

and if matty did come out and say well no big players would be done like this, then only utility types would be? what the fuck is the point of messing with the thing just for that? you can find solid utility players in this file right now, you just gotta look. sure, they aren't perfect, but it likely wouldn't be realistic if a super utility player can play defense everywhere and hit pretty good too, cause at that point, he's a starting player somewhere on some team. if a team does have one of them, another team that needs a ss or something hard to find will come a calling and offer up something more valuable to the team than them keeping a super utility player. we'll still have this problem, so no no no.

mike, i don't want to argue more with you, i know your stance, you know mine, but this isn't going to help nearly like some may think, i guarantee you that. i said pretty much the problems with this, more harm than good, sorry but that's the truth, and i don't care for the league to implement this then seasons pass and then find out the hard way what just happened. it's not hard to see at all.

[mike]

I'm not really going to add any more to this but also look at the other side of the coin too. Sure a tip talent could fall and a team gets lucky with rolls. But they could also get unlucky and if they try it again the next year and gut unlucky then they lose the pick altogether.

[mattynokes]

Well, it was a good effort. Thanks for the discussion on the idea, guys!

My only concern ... what happens when/if you can't do it?

Nothing. The draft would roll on as normal. That's the beauty of it. Since I'd be editing 5-10 Mogul created draftees to my draftees, if it doesn't work or I can't do one season, no harm, no foul.

having a simple and easy to understand structure is what can help us gain new people to the mogul land.

adding this has basically no benefit and complicates things which would hurt recruiting efforts.

not one person has latched onto the idea of it being interesting watching prospects in a separate file either; not sure why you insist on shoving this idea down our gullets. if you want to be in the league, hop on the waiting list like a normal human.

New people would like say, "what's up with prospect John Smith *Signability Player*? And then it could be easily explained. Unless you're an inbred hillbilly that can only count to three because you lost two of your fingers, this is a pretty simple idea as for what GMs would have to do.

I'm not shoving this down anyone's throat. Andy and I talked about it, he was on the fence, but said to post and see what the league thinks. I'm just addressing the questions, concerns, and ill conceived notions after the file.

I do not want to be a GM again. I like an idea where I can be involved, have an impact, and only need to show up 2 times per season.

I also have a problem where a top talent in the draft could have very low signability and falls to one of the playoff teams and they take a chance (cause they were good and he looks like one of top players in the draft) and they end up getting lucky with rolls and they get to sign a top talent at the backend of the 1st round. I mean you’re just letting the rich get richer, no offense, but screw that.

I just disagree with every bit of your proposal, this is something that I feel will cause more problems/harm than good. When that happens, then it’s time to stay away.

It looks like this will all be for naught, but I still cannot take these type of reasons to be against it. You make it sound like signability could be different from year to year. It wouldn't. It would always be the same as what I posted, where players drafted in the Top 15 would always sign.

It's definitely true that a good team picking late could roll the dice on a signable player that fell and get lucky, but it is structured to help out the teams picking earlier.

I still do not see what problems (with the file) this could create. It's just simple editing of existing draftees

[rockybull]

I'm not really going to add any more to this but also look at the other side of the coin too. Sure a tip talent could fall and a team gets lucky with rolls. But they could also get unlucky and if they try it again the next year and gut unlucky then they lose the pick altogether.

i did look at the other side. i tried to figure out the pros and cons of it, but what i just said, the cons far outweigh any pros it may have. another thing is, the drafts as is some of them have limited top top talent (just depends on the draft) so the bad teams need to have every chance to try to get good talent. so even if a real good top 7 player from the draft falls to a playoff team cause of his signability concerns and the team doesn't get lucky and can't sign the player, you are still hurting the overall draft cause one of the better players in the draft (whether it's a good or bad draft) got eliminated that year and one of those bottom teams missed out on a possible franchise piece.

no matter what you say, the cons continue to be more visible. i'm just completely against this, because i can see how this will go, it's not hard to have vision and see it, you just have to look. this is just change for the sake of change and overall hurts more than helps, and i just can't sign off on that.

---

Well, it was a good effort. Thanks for the discussion on the idea, guys!

My only concern ... what happens when/if you can't do it?

Nothing. The draft would roll on as normal. That's the beauty of it. Since I'd be editing 5-10 Mogul created draftees to my draftees, if it doesn't work or I can't do one season, no harm, no foul.

having a simple and easy to understand structure is what can help us gain new people to the mogul land.

adding this has basically no benefit and complicates things which would hurt recruiting efforts.

not one person has latched onto the idea of it being interesting watching prospects in a separate file either; not sure why you insist on shoving this idea down our gullets. if you want to be in the league, hop on the waiting list like a normal human.

New people would like say, "what's up with prospect John Smith *Signability Player*? And then it could be easily explained. Unless you're an inbred hillbilly that can only count to three because you lost two of your fingers, this is a pretty simple idea as for what GMs would have to do.

I'm not shoving this down anyone's throat. Andy and I talked about it, he was on the fence, but said to post and see what the league thinks. I'm just addressing the questions, concerns, and ill conceived notions after the file.

I do not want to be a GM again. I like an idea where I can be involved, have an impact, and only need to show up 2 times per season.

I also have a problem where a top talent in the draft could have very low signability and falls to one of the playoff teams and they take a chance (cause they were good and he looks like one of top players in the draft) and they end up getting lucky with rolls and they get to sign a top talent at the backend of the 1st round. I mean you’re just letting the rich get richer, no offense, but screw that.

I just disagree with every bit of your proposal, this is something that I feel will cause more problems/harm than good. When that happens, then it’s time to stay away.

It looks like this will all be for naught, but I still cannot take these type of reasons to be against it. You make it sound like signability could be different from year to year. It wouldn't. It would always be the same as what I posted, where players drafted in the Top 15 would always sign.

It's definitely true that a good team picking late could roll the dice on a signable player that fell and get lucky, but it is structured to help out the teams picking earlier.

I still do not see what problems (with the file) this could create. It's just simple editing of existing draftees

"players drafted in the Top 15 would always sign." then you screw the 16th team. good chance a team or more gets screwed and a real good team gets the reward. that's a problem, and a big problem to me no matter how you slice it. if you can't see that, then were are at odds and won't see eye to eye on this. i've stated what i said and i'm standing firm.

"I do not want to be a GM again. I like an idea where I can be involved, have an impact, and only need to show up 2 times per season." I respect that, and it would be nice to have you as part of the league in some way. i just absolutely disagree with this solution though.

[AndyP]

Here's the thing...this isn't "easily explained" because I've yet to hear anyone raise their hand to say "yeah, I totally get this". I sure don't.

And again, I fail to see to see why someone would enjoy this. "Watching development" seems like a really weak explanation. I don't get this and don't get the value and tried to explain that originally Matty. I asked you to post so it would be clear to you that your idea is muddy and likely not enticing as a feature.

I see minimal positives and many more negatives (introducing risk that teams will pass on better talent, edited talents, lost draft picks, etc). To me this is a non-starter.

[hickoxb2]

matty I think if this is something you really want to work, you should "beta-test" it in your own file in your own time, and then show us the results in increments (each sim or every 2 or 3 sims, or whatever) and before the draft. Then we would be able to see its effects and be able to make informed decisions. I know that's a lot to ask of you, but it seems that most people's fears (mine included) are of the unknown and potential future consequences. I (and probably everyone else who's on the fence or a nay-sayer) need to see it in practice before we go forward with something like this.

[hokeyrules]

Not that it matters, but I do not really see the point of doing this, I would much rather have something that is connected to the league in some form, but completely independent.