Draft Discussion - Video of latest draft results

[tessl]

Re: Draft Discussion - Video of latest draft results

I'll preface my remarks by saying I sim nothing. I play every game of the season in manage mode. That's the perspective from which I approach this. I'm also still playing mlbts 23. I see lineups full of hitters in my franhise with 50's contact/vision and they have batting averages in the low .200 but the sim engine and game engine are not the same. Those guys are guaranteed below Mendoza line if I put them on my team. Again, sim engine and game engine are not the same.

In a 162 game season in manage mode - no simming - a pitcher needs to have minimum 60 h/9 to be even a marginal MLB pitcher. 80 Stamina to be able to go 5 or 6 innings. Stamina always declines. Draft projection of stamina increasing is incorrect. Pitch counts get high due to lots of foul balls.

Batters need minimum 70 contact/vision to get to .200 or higher. BA tends to be low due to balls programmed to be fair down the line curving foul and subsequent plate appearance resulting in a out.

Unless progression changed from 23 to 24 I suspect the scouted progression in attributes do not match actual progression which is the main problem with the draft and quality of players.

2 attributes don't increase. Pitcher stamina and speed. Overall rating is in many cases a false way to calculate value. You have to look at a breakdown of attributes.

Brief analysis of each team's first pick.

Baltimore sp 84 stamina 43 h/0 73 potential. C potential might or might not make it from 43 to 60. Unlikely to make it to 70 or higher and he won't be at 84 stamina when he gets there. Likely a future long relief pitcher.
Boston sp 80 stamina 42 h/9 75 potential. Sames as Baltimore except he will be even worse because stamina is lower.
NYY sp 97 stamina 41 h/9 80 potential. He has the stamina to be a legit MLB pitcher if his h/9, break and control progress. I'd draft him but not in the first round.
Tampa C 40's contact 30's vision 47 arm 75 potential. Unlikely to ever develop into a MLB level catcher. Arm strength and contact/vison too low.
Toronto RF 40's contact 40's vision 30's power 80 potential. Could eventually develop into a singles hitter 41 contact R which 70% of MLB plate appearance are is very low.
CHA 3B 76 contact R 70's vision D potential. This is what the game has done for many years. Good player who could be a great player but D potential he won't develop.
Cleveland SP 86 stamina 45 h/9 87 potential. Great player If durability is good he should be a star. Legit high first round pick.
Detroit 1B 58/50 con/pwr R 73/67 con/pwr L 92 potential. Legit hitter although I'd prefer better vs rhp than lhp. Legit first round pick.
KC Sp 80 stamina 54 h/9 90 potential. Should develop into a MLB level pitcher but stamina will decline to mid 70's before he gets there. 4 or 5 inning pitcher with good stuff.
Min 2B 32 con R 40 Con L 36 vision 75 potential. Never make it to MLB. 30's con/vison vs rhp too low even for A potential.
Houston SP 72 stamina - good relief pitcher. Never a starting pitcher. Stamina too low.
LAA LF 53 con R 87 Con L 86 vison 77 Pot. Good hitter but once again vs LHP is only 30% of MLB plate appearances. High vision makes him a singles/doubles legit prospect. Reverse the vsL/vsR he is ready now.
Oakland 1B 40's contact 50/60 pwr 40's vision 89 Pot. Could progress into a legit hitter in 7 to 10 years.
Sea SP 63 stamina. Similar to Houston but worse. Never a starting pitcher. Possible marginal bullpen guy. Another example of the game drafting on projected attribute progression which is flat out wrong.
Texas SP 39 h/9 84 stamina 82 potential. If the develops into a mlb talent he will be 4/5 inning guy with declining stamina.
Atl SP 61 h/9 86 stmina 73 potential. Good pitcher but potential isn't great. Shouldn't be a first round pick but compared to others in this pool he is a legit first round pick.
Mia CF 70/61 contact 52 vison 96 speed 63 potential. Same as CHA - they give you a good player with D potential. They have been doing this for years.
NYN RF 40's con 50's vision 82 speed 75 potential. Could develop in 8 to 10 years but with that potential it's iffy.
Phi SP 65 h/9 81 stamina 87 potential. Legit high first round pick if durability is good. With stamina at 81 I'd bring him up now and get as much as possible before it declines.
Was 1B 60's con 47/65 pwr 64 vison 78 potential. Should develop into a singles/doubles hitter with power vs lhp.
CHN SP 57 h/9 88 stamina 95 potential. Legit high first round SP. BB/9 is low but he has excellent stamina and should develop into a solid MLB starter if durability is high.
Cin SP 30's contact 20's vision 96 potential. Scouts love him. Unlikely he will progress from 30's 20's to MLB level even with 96 potential.
Mil 2B 30's con 30's vision 75 potential. Will he get +40 contact/vison with C potential? I've never see it.
Pit SP 54 stamina. I've covered this. CPU relies on scouting projection for stamina to increase. It won't.
Stl SP 64 h/9 80 stamina 76 potential. Good prospect but stamina will decline and he will be a 5 inning pitcher at best.
Az SP 68 stamina. 4th first round SP who will never be a SP.
Col LF 60's contact 30's power 70 vision 85 potential 55 speed. Will develop into a legit singles hitting outfielder with little speed.
LAN SP 67 stamina. 5th first round SP who will never be a SP. Drafted based upon false progression expectation.
SD SP 57 h/9 50's k/9 60's bb/9 97 stamina 89 pot. Excellent high first round pick. Future Cy Young winner if durability is good.
SF LF 60/50 con 30/20 pwr 72 vision 72 potential 68 speed. Should develop into a good singles hitter with above average speed.

I see a few very good starting pitchers but aside from that I see the same flaws that have existed for many years. Glad didn't buy mlbts 24. When you buy mlbts 25 please post another draft video and thank you for posting this.

[Cycloniac]

Re: Draft Discussion - Video of latest draft results

I'll preface my remarks by saying I sim nothing. I play every game of the season in manage mode. That's the perspective from which I approach this. I'm also still playing mlbts 23. I see lineups full of hitters in my franhise with 50's contact/vision and they have batting averages in the low .200 but the sim engine and game engine are not the same. Those guys are guaranteed below Mendoza line if I put them on my team. Again, sim engine and game engine are not the same.

In a 162 game season in manage mode - no simming - a pitcher needs to have minimum 60 h/9 to be even a marginal MLB pitcher. 80 Stamina to be able to go 5 or 6 innings. Stamina always declines. Draft projection of stamina increasing is incorrect. Pitch counts get high due to lots of foul balls.

Batters need minimum 70 contact/vision to get to .200 or higher. BA tends to be low due to balls programmed to be fair down the line curving foul and subsequent plate appearance resulting in a out.

Unless progression changed from 23 to 24 I suspect the scouted progression in attributes do not match actual progression which is the main problem with the draft and quality of players.

2 attributes don't increase. Pitcher stamina and speed. Overall rating is in many cases a false way to calculate value. You have to look at a breakdown of attributes.

Brief analysis of each team's first pick.

Baltimore sp 84 stamina 43 h/0 73 potential. C potential might or might not make it from 43 to 60. Unlikely to make it to 70 or higher and he won't be at 84 stamina when he gets there. Likely a future long relief pitcher.
Boston sp 80 stamina 42 h/9 75 potential. Sames as Baltimore except he will be even worse because stamina is lower.
NYY sp 97 stamina 41 h/9 80 potential. He has the stamina to be a legit MLB pitcher if his h/9, break and control progress. I'd draft him but not in the first round.
Tampa C 40's contact 30's vision 47 arm 75 potential. Unlikely to ever develop into a MLB level catcher. Arm strength and contact/vison too low.
Toronto RF 40's contact 40's vision 30's power 80 potential. Could eventually develop into a singles hitter 41 contact R which 70% of MLB plate appearance are is very low.
CHA 3B 76 contact R 70's vision D potential. This is what the game has done for many years. Good player who could be a great player but D potential he won't develop.
Cleveland SP 86 stamina 45 h/9 87 potential. Great player If durability is good he should be a star. Legit high first round pick.
Detroit 1B 58/50 con/pwr R 73/67 con/pwr L 92 potential. Legit hitter although I'd prefer better vs rhp than lhp. Legit first round pick.
KC Sp 80 stamina 54 h/9 90 potential. Should develop into a MLB level pitcher but stamina will decline to mid 70's before he gets there. 4 or 5 inning pitcher with good stuff.
Min 2B 32 con R 40 Con L 36 vision 75 potential. Never make it to MLB. 30's con/vison vs rhp too low even for A potential.
Houston SP 72 stamina - good relief pitcher. Never a starting pitcher. Stamina too low.
LAA LF 53 con R 87 Con L 86 vison 77 Pot. Good hitter but once again vs LHP is only 30% of MLB plate appearances. High vision makes him a singles/doubles legit prospect. Reverse the vsL/vsR he is ready now.
Oakland 1B 40's contact 50/60 pwr 40's vision 89 Pot. Could progress into a legit hitter in 7 to 10 years.
Sea SP 63 stamina. Similar to Houston but worse. Never a starting pitcher. Possible marginal bullpen guy. Another example of the game drafting on projected attribute progression which is flat out wrong.
Texas SP 39 h/9 84 stamina 82 potential. If the develops into a mlb talent he will be 4/5 inning guy with declining stamina.
Atl SP 61 h/9 86 stmina 73 potential. Good pitcher but potential isn't great. Shouldn't be a first round pick but compared to others in this pool he is a legit first round pick.
Mia CF 70/61 contact 52 vison 96 speed 63 potential. Same as CHA - they give you a good player with D potential. They have been doing this for years.
NYN RF 40's con 50's vision 82 speed 75 potential. Could develop in 8 to 10 years but with that potential it's iffy.
Phi SP 65 h/9 81 stamina 87 potential. Legit high first round pick if durability is good. With stamina at 81 I'd bring him up now and get as much as possible before it declines.
Was 1B 60's con 47/65 pwr 64 vison 78 potential. Should develop into a singles/doubles hitter with power vs lhp.
CHN SP 57 h/9 88 stamina 95 potential. Legit high first round SP. BB/9 is low but he has excellent stamina and should develop into a solid MLB starter if durability is high.
Cin SP 30's contact 20's vision 96 potential. Scouts love him. Unlikely he will progress from 30's 20's to MLB level even with 96 potential.
Mil 2B 30's con 30's vision 75 potential. Will he get +40 contact/vison with C potential? I've never see it.
Pit SP 54 stamina. I've covered this. CPU relies on scouting projection for stamina to increase. It won't.
Stl SP 64 h/9 80 stamina 76 potential. Good prospect but stamina will decline and he will be a 5 inning pitcher at best.
Az SP 68 stamina. 4th first round SP who will never be a SP.
Col LF 60's contact 30's power 70 vision 85 potential 55 speed. Will develop into a legit singles hitting outfielder with little speed.
LAN SP 67 stamina. 5th first round SP who will never be a SP. Drafted based upon false progression expectation.
SD SP 57 h/9 50's k/9 60's bb/9 97 stamina 89 pot. Excellent high first round pick. Future Cy Young winner if durability is good.
SF LF 60/50 con 30/20 pwr 72 vision 72 potential 68 speed. Should develop into a good singles hitter with above average speed.

I see a few very good starting pitchers but aside from that I see the same flaws that have existed for many years. Glad didn't buy mlbts 24. When you buy mlbts 25 please post another draft video and thank you for posting this.

In terms of SP stamina, I would argue that you should just bump starter stamina slider.

I haven't had any issue with guys under 80 stamina being able to pitch 5, 6 or 7 innings.

Like you, I've been a manage mode/CPUvCPU player.

Also, I haven't had the issues you've had with contact needing to be that high to get above .200. I would re-examine your contact and solid hits sliders maybe.

Gameplay is easy to tweak to get where you want, regardless of attributes. It's the sim engine that's much harder.

[countryboy]

Re: Draft Discussion - Video of latest draft results

Unless progression changed from 23 to 24 I suspect the scouted progression in attributes do not match actual progression which is the main problem with the draft and quality of players.

What doesn't match????

Scouting isn't meant to be a magic 8 ball that tells you definitively how a player is going to progress/develop. It's not meant to state definitively that this prospect is going to have a contact rating of 76 and this prospect is going to have contact rating of 45.

You keep saying the draft is broken because scouting progression and actual progression do not match 1:1. That isn't how it is intended to work, nor should it ever be intended to work.

[Cycloniac]

Re: Draft Discussion - Video of latest draft results

What doesn't match????

Scouting isn't meant to be a magic 8 ball that tells you definitively how a player is going to progress/develop. It's not meant to state definitively that this prospect is going to have a contact rating of 76 and this prospect is going to have contact rating of 45.

You keep saying the draft is broken because scouting progression and actual progression do not match 1:1. That isn't how it is intended to work, nor should it ever be intended to work.

I agree with this.

I wouldn't mind if the scouting reports used 20/80 scale also for current and future projections. Or at least an option to use 20/80 scale because I know it may not be everyone's cup of tea.

[Armor and Sword]

Re: Draft Discussion - Video of latest draft results

I agree with this.

I wouldn't mind if the scouting reports used 20/80 scale also for current and future projections. Or at least an option to use 20/80 scale because I know it may not be everyone's cup of tea.

I loved having the 20/80 scale as it is still used IRL.

[MiracleMet718]

Re: Draft Discussion - Video of latest draft results

What doesn't match????

Scouting isn't meant to be a magic 8 ball that tells you definitively how a player is going to progress/develop. It's not meant to state definitively that this prospect is going to have a contact rating of 76 and this prospect is going to have contact rating of 45.

You keep saying the draft is broken because scouting progression and actual progression do not match 1:1. That isn't how it is intended to work, nor should it ever be intended to work.

This exactly. There are supposed to be busts and supposed to be gems that pop up. Think of how many first rounders never pan out to anything in the MLB and on the flip side, how many low draft picks because great players. That’s probably the one part I like about MLBTS drafting is that drafting a player in a certain draft spot doesn’t mean that’s where they will end up in the MLB.

I do think they need to add 4 more draft rounds so you can get 10 new players a season. I know they do it at 6 because we still only have 93 man rosters, but adding 120 more players to the draft pool would go a long way in terms of player ratings and not needing players to jump to the MLB so early. You can have one guy do that while your other couple of picks take 3-6 years to eventually pan out. Hard to replicate that when you only get 5-6 draftees each year.

[IndianSummer]

Re: Draft Discussion - Video of latest draft results

This exactly. There are supposed to be busts and supposed to be gems that pop up. Think of how many first rounders never pan out to anything in the MLB and on the flip side, how many low draft picks because great players. That’s probably the one part I like about MLBTS drafting is that drafting a player in a certain draft spot doesn’t mean that’s where they will end up in the MLB.

Absolutely, think of some of the busts, Todd Van Poppel, Nick Senzel, Blake Swihart etc. and the steals like Mike Piazza and Albert Pujols. I wouldn’t want the scouting to always reflect the player perfectly.

[MiracleMet718]

Re: Draft Discussion - Video of latest draft results

Absolutely, think of some of the busts, Todd Van Poppel, Nick Senzel, Blake Swihart etc. and the steals like Mike Piazza and Albert Pujols. I wouldn’t want the scouting to always reflect the player perfectly.

I wouldn’t consider Senzel a bust since he at least has some decent stats. I was thinking more like Mark Appel and Brandon Wood. But yes we are saying the same thing (just wanted to stick up for Senzel since he was decent on my fantasy team in 2019 ).

[djflock]

Re: Draft Discussion - Video of latest draft results

I agree with this.

I wouldn't mind if the scouting reports used 20/80 scale also for current and future projections. Or at least an option to use 20/80 scale because I know it may not be everyone's cup of tea.

I was really hoping for this years back but kind of gave up considering it was too much of a task for them to even fix broken lineup and bullpen logic.

I felt like each rating should come with a 20/8 style rating for actual and potential. So you could get an 18 yr old with no power who still had the potential to turn into a power hitter. Kind of a way for player to be able to compete change archetypes.

[MiracleMet718]

Re: Draft Discussion - Video of latest draft results

I was really hoping for this years back but kind of gave up considering it was too much of a task for them to even fix broken lineup and bullpen logic.

I felt like each rating should come with a 20/8 style rating for actual and potential. So you could get an 18 yr old with no power who still had the potential to turn into a power hitter. Kind of a way for player to be able to compete change archetypes.

I believe the 20/80 got taken out because people complained and didn’t understand how 20/80 worked. So a lot of people got confused why it never went above 80 and instead of trying to explain it to people who probably wouldn’t end up understanding, they went back to the ratings model.

[Cycloniac]

Re: Draft Discussion - Video of latest draft results

I believe the 20/80 got taken out because people complained and didn’t understand how 20/80 worked. So a lot of people got confused why it never went above 80 and instead of trying to explain it to people who probably wouldn’t end up understanding, they went back to the ratings model.

It's a shame because I feel like it's a missed opportunity to teach. I'm confused because you have storylines, which is great for teaching folks about the game.

Sports video games should be fun, but they're great teaching tools too.

[MiracleMet718]

Re: Draft Discussion - Video of latest draft results

It's a shame because I feel like it's a missed opportunity to teach. I'm confused because you have storylines, which is great for teaching folks about the game.

Sports video games should be fun, but they're great teaching tools too.

Agreed, but it’s easier to teach the history of baseball through a game mode than it is the distinct rules of baseball and asking people to read. I always refer to their rules breakdown in game that explains everything in franchise from the 40-man roster to how waivers and DFAs work and all that stuff. Most people skip right over it though and then complain something isn’t working correctly when all they have to do is do a little reading right in the game.

[Cycloniac]

Re: Draft Discussion - Video of latest draft results

Agreed, but it’s easier to teach the history of baseball through a game mode than it is the distinct rules of baseball and asking people to read. I always refer to their rules breakdown in game that explains everything in franchise from the 40-man roster to how waivers and DFAs work and all that stuff. Most people skip right over it though and then complain something isn’t working correctly when all they have to do is do a little reading right in the game.

I love reading the in-game guide every year. Sometimes, it gives helpful nuggets about the way the game works under the hood that folks don't realize, or SDS themselves doesn't fully explain in streams and such.

[tessl]

Re: Draft Discussion - Video of latest draft results

In terms of SP stamina, I would argue that you should just bump starter stamina slider.

I haven't had any issue with guys under 80 stamina being able to pitch 5, 6 or 7 innings.

Like you, I've been a manage mode/CPUvCPU player.

Also, I haven't had the issues you've had with contact needing to be that high to get above .200. I would re-examine your contact and solid hits sliders maybe.

Gameplay is easy to tweak to get where you want, regardless of attributes. It's the sim engine that's much harder.

You have no problems because you mess with sliders. I don't adjust sliders. That's cheating. I try to beat the AI as is from the developers. That is exactly why the developers won't fix their game and instead focus on gimmicks.

[KnightTemplar]

Re: Draft Discussion - Video of latest draft results

I don't adjust sliders. That's cheating. I try to beat the AI as is from the developers.

There’s nothing cheating about it, nothing. Why do you think they have difficulty levels? Same as sliders. Every gamer is different. Gamers eye sight, reaction with the controller, etc., etc.