Posted by robusk on 7/2/2010 12:14:00 PM (view original):

Posted by r0b0t on 7/2/2010 12:10:00 PM (view original):

Posted by robusk on 7/2/2010 12:09:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 7/2/2010 12:03:00 PM (view original):

Posted by robusk on 7/2/2010 10:34:00 AM (view original):
Yeah.  If they opt out it happens at rollover.

And you are one of the worst managers of talent I have ever seen in HBD.  Solid at acquiring talent, but your teams always underachieve and your players never peak properly and fall off too quickly.

heh - that HR WS 3 seasons ago must have been painfull for you to watch.

Meh.  The thing about playoffs is that they are a partial crapshoot.  The managers who are smart continually put themselves within a pretty good shot of winning one...  but they don't necessarily win them for whatever reason.

With the talent you had/have, you should have been knocking out dherz en route to a WS 3-4 times by now...  except that you ruin every player you touch and have thus not been a position to win anymore.

The biggest problem are two rounds of five, which leave a lot more than usual up to luck and can lead to good teams being eliminated a little easier. I think once you reach the championship series, it's a different game.

I tend to agree...

Except that between a load of WSs in NCAA and the most recent WS in HR (plus the loss to Fargo in the ALCS last season), I have lost in the WS to teams that I wouldn't expect to win 4 games out of 20 versus my teams.  On the other hand, I have made the WS and NLCS way too many times in $ despite having exteremely undertalented teams.

So I think the 7 game series still end up left to chance far more often than they should.

Posted by moy23 on 7/2/2010 12:07:00 PM (view original):

Posted by robusk on 7/2/2010 10:37:00 AM (view original):

Posted by r0b0t on 7/2/2010 10:36:00 AM (view original):

Posted by robusk on 7/2/2010 10:34:00 AM (view original):
Yeah.  If they opt out it happens at rollover.

And you are one of the worst managers of talent I have ever seen in HBD.  Solid at acquiring talent, but your teams always underachieve and your players never peak properly and fall off too quickly.

It's because the low training and medical budgets, mixed with the rapid promotions. Guys just don't get a change to improve much. It's a reason I'm always hesitant to trade for anyone from moy who has been in that system for two or more seasons.

Exactly

I understand this... I acquire international talent rather well, get them just good enough to make the ML (sometimes), then promote them, then trade them before they turn 27 in a blockbuster deal so some other sucker can get these guys that have peaked early - meanwhile I have others I've acquired as internationals that are ready for the ML to replace the recently departed.

Its a vicious cycle - but its my vicious cycle.

Posted by dherz_263 on 7/2/2010 12:14:00 PM (view original):

Posted by r0b0t on 7/2/2010 12:11:00 PM (view original):

Posted by robusk on 7/2/2010 12:10:00 PM (view original):

Posted by r0b0t on 7/2/2010 12:04:00 PM (view original):

Posted by robusk on 7/2/2010 11:42:00 AM (view original):
What do you guys think about amateur scouting by the way?  In my mind, there are only four options that make sense:
20 in both
20 in college, 0 in HS
0 in college, 20 in HS
0 in both

anything in between is a waste, but unfortunately you can't really fully transition a budget without doing it in $4m increments.

Right...  I am transitioning right now in a couple of worlds I think.

But it should always be the goal.

I'd been pushing it on bret for many seasons now. Especially for teams who rely on the draft to add players.

Hell, I tend to pick up free agents with one year contracts just for the sake of getting a pick for them next year.

This is the model I'll be using more and more in $.  Is 20/20 that much better than 18/18?

Posted by robusk on 7/2/2010 12:14:00 PM (view original):

Posted by r0b0t on 7/2/2010 12:10:00 PM (view original):

Posted by robusk on 7/2/2010 12:09:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 7/2/2010 12:03:00 PM (view original):

Posted by robusk on 7/2/2010 10:34:00 AM (view original):
Yeah.  If they opt out it happens at rollover.

And you are one of the worst managers of talent I have ever seen in HBD.  Solid at acquiring talent, but your teams always underachieve and your players never peak properly and fall off too quickly.

heh - that HR WS 3 seasons ago must have been painfull for you to watch.

Meh.  The thing about playoffs is that they are a partial crapshoot.  The managers who are smart continually put themselves within a pretty good shot of winning one...  but they don't necessarily win them for whatever reason.

With the talent you had/have, you should have been knocking out dherz en route to a WS 3-4 times by now...  except that you ruin every player you touch and have thus not been a position to win anymore.

The biggest problem are two rounds of five, which leave a lot more than usual up to luck and can lead to good teams being eliminated a little easier. I think once you reach the championship series, it's a different game.

I tend to agree...

Except that between a load of WSs in NCAA and the most recent WS in HR (plus the loss to Fargo in the ALCS last season), I have lost in the WS to teams that I wouldn't expect to win 4 games out of 20 versus my teams.  On the other hand, I have made the WS and NLCS way too many times in $ despite having exteremely undertalented teams.

So I think the 7 game series still end up left to chance far more often than they should.

Posted by r0b0t on 7/2/2010 12:18:00 PM (view original):

Posted by robusk on 7/2/2010 12:06:00 PM (view original):

Posted by r0b0t on 7/2/2010 12:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by robusk on 7/2/2010 11:22:00 AM (view original):

Posted by r0b0t on 7/2/2010 11:19:00 AM (view original):

Posted by robusk on 7/2/2010 10:57:00 AM (view original):
What ended up being the consensus on that trade in DM by the way?

Which one?

Where the dude is trading a perennial MVP candidate...

That player looks good, but it seems his overall is better than his peripherals. He'll be a third baseman. He's got projected contact at 100 for me, probably high 90's when it's over. His power could touch the 70's, and his splits could hit the 80's. That's all great, and it's comparable to one of the top picks each year, but I guess it sounds like people are more enamored with him than I am. He's probably an all-star and a batting champ, but I thought the guy I traded for was better, actually.

That guy should have gotten even more out of that deal. He needn't have included an extra player himself and could have gotten more value in return. The one guy is just an inflated overall rating. The pitcher isn't more than a fifth starter at best. Just not a good return.

Yeah.  I agree with all of that assessment except for I saw the guy as having 87 power (although my ADV scouting sucks, I was thinking it had to be close given how much he was purchased for in the IFA market).  Based on the

88

87

85

99

81

 I saw, he looked pretty f'ing sexy..  especially with a good makeup.

He is a tard.  It really is less of an issue to me that someone made a stupid trade...  it happens all the time and I myself have tried to talk people into doing it before (obvi.).  However, I just think it should be a pretty standard rule that people should not be trading players above a certain skill level in their first season...  no matter what sort of haul they think they are getting.

General & Fielding Ratings
Event	Season	Height	Weight	OV	RA	GL	AS	AA	PC	DU	HE	SP	PA	TP	MK
Current	-	6-1	191	69	73	72	72	69	6	60	91	64	38	100	85
Projected	-	6-2	198	92	78	82	83	79	15	84	98	70	41	100	91
Spring Training	8	6-1	191	67	73	68	72	65	6	60	91	64	38	100	85
Opening Day	8	6-1	191	68	73	70	72	67	6	60	91	64	38	100	85
RegularSeason	8	6-1	191	68	73	71	72	68	6	60	91	64	38	100	85
RegularSeason	8	6-1	191	69	73	72	72	69	6	60	91	64	38	100	85

Batting & Pitching Ratings
Event	Season	CN	PW	LH	RH	BE	BR	BU	PP	ST	CT	LH	RH	VE	GB	P1	P2	P3	P4	P5
Current	-	80	70	61	70	63	59	20	35	31	13	5	7	7	32	45	0	0	0	0
Projected	-	100	75	81	84	63	77	29	39	38	19	11	13	9	38	49	0	0	0	0
Spring Training	8	75	70	57	66	60	55	19	35	31	13	5	7	7	31	44	0	0	0	0
Opening Day	8	77	70	59	68	61	57	20	35	31	13	5	7	7	32	45	0	0	0	0
RegularSeason	8	78	70	60	69	62	58	20	35	31	13	5	7	7	32	45	0	0	0	0
RegularSeason	8	80	70	61	70	63	59	20	35	31	13	5	7	7	32	45	0	0	0	0

It is probably somewhat random in the guys you miss, but you do see a substantial change in numbers with 20/20. And the increased accuracy with projected ratings helps greatly in ordering guys as you'd like.

I always rationalized it by saying that if I cut each of those down and increased prospect payroll and the international market, I might be able to get one stud player a year. But if I skimp on those other two and keep it at 20/20, I tend to be able to get 4 or 5 ML guys out of it. Even if the back-end guys are relievers or situational, they're still coming cheaper than they would as international prospects.

I'm starting to try the international market out more in different worlds, because there seemed to be a pendulum swing away from them after there was originally a ton of overbidding, but even when allocating money properly, you don't always get good value. I've signed a few in DM, but I think I would have fared better in that world initially if I had a 20/20 amateur budget and neglected the internationals entirely.

Posted by r0b0t on 7/2/2010 12:19:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 7/2/2010 12:07:00 PM (view original):

Posted by robusk on 7/2/2010 10:37:00 AM (view original):

Posted by r0b0t on 7/2/2010 10:36:00 AM (view original):

Posted by robusk on 7/2/2010 10:34:00 AM (view original):
Yeah.  If they opt out it happens at rollover.

And you are one of the worst managers of talent I have ever seen in HBD.  Solid at acquiring talent, but your teams always underachieve and your players never peak properly and fall off too quickly.

It's because the low training and medical budgets, mixed with the rapid promotions. Guys just don't get a change to improve much. It's a reason I'm always hesitant to trade for anyone from moy who has been in that system for two or more seasons.

Exactly

I understand this... I acquire international talent rather well, get them just good enough to make the ML (sometimes), then promote them, then trade them before they turn 27 in a blockbuster deal so some other sucker can get these guys that have peaked early - meanwhile I have others I've acquired as internationals that are ready for the ML to replace the recently departed.

Its a vicious cycle - but its my vicious cycle.

But like I said before, people will eventually stop trading for guys that have been with your team long enough to screw up.

Posted by r0b0t on 7/2/2010 12:28:00 PM (view original):

It is probably somewhat random in the guys you miss, but you do see a substantial change in numbers with 20/20. And the increased accuracy with projected ratings helps greatly in ordering guys as you'd like.

I always rationalized it by saying that if I cut each of those down and increased prospect payroll and the international market, I might be able to get one stud player a year. But if I skimp on those other two and keep it at 20/20, I tend to be able to get 4 or 5 ML guys out of it. Even if the back-end guys are relievers or situational, they're still coming cheaper than they would as international prospects.

I'm starting to try the international market out more in different worlds, because there seemed to be a pendulum swing away from them after there was originally a ton of overbidding, but even when allocating money properly, you don't always get good value. I've signed a few in DM, but I think I would have fared better in that world initially if I had a 20/20 amateur budget and neglected the internationals entirely.

Posted by r0b0t on 7/2/2010 12:31:00 PM (view original):
moy, I'd be interested in doing a duplicitous collusion with you. If we were making a possible Yorvit trade, I'd be more inclined if I had an assurance that you'd also sign one of my Type A players, as well.

Posted by r0b0t on 7/2/2010 12:28:00 PM (view original):

It is probably somewhat random in the guys you miss, but you do see a substantial change in numbers with 20/20. And the increased accuracy with projected ratings helps greatly in ordering guys as you'd like.

I always rationalized it by saying that if I cut each of those down and increased prospect payroll and the international market, I might be able to get one stud player a year. But if I skimp on those other two and keep it at 20/20, I tend to be able to get 4 or 5 ML guys out of it. Even if the back-end guys are relievers or situational, they're still coming cheaper than they would as international prospects.

I'm starting to try the international market out more in different worlds, because there seemed to be a pendulum swing away from them after there was originally a ton of overbidding, but even when allocating money properly, you don't always get good value. I've signed a few in DM, but I think I would have fared better in that world initially if I had a 20/20 amateur budget and neglected the internationals entirely.

In $, if you can budget 10-12M in extra prospect payroll you can typically get one extra "top half of the first round" player per season.  Then its just a matter of bidding properly, and getting lucky. 

I think it depends on the world. BP gets some steals every year in $ through it. Like this dude for just $10m, despite only allocating $10m to his prospect budget as well: