Scouting Question

[Cavicchi]

Quote: Originally Posted by Knight165

I believe the discovery is driving what you scout is representing on that player. But by 99...do you mean his OVR(current) or his potential rating....which would mean he is an A potential player. Does the scout you are using to give you that info have a low discovery rating?....and is he a better pitcher or position player scout. That could be what it is. Your scout could be giving you bad info because he is a poorly rated scout for that player. (sorry for the poor writing and sentence structure.....on my phone) M.K. Knight165

The scout I use has high Discovery rating and also for position player, something in the 90's. in scouting you get current and potential, and I am talking potential--that's what it says, potential. When I look at what the player has for attributes, I just can't see why or how anyone could project him to be a 99 potential.

Even if a scout was rated poorly with regard to discovery or position, he still should give projected attributes that match what he projects to justify his belief. Do you think a scout would report a player to have 99 potential and then not project attributes that reflect his belief?

[cardinalbird5]

ETA is how fast they develop I thought. Potential is their cap. I understand a 99 potential doesn't mean they will ever be a 99 overall, but I scout 90+ potential guys and their caps look completely awful. How accurate are all of these things during the draft with good scouts?

[Cavicchi]

Quote: Originally Posted by cardinalbird7

ETA is how fast they develop I thought. Potential is their cap. I understand a 99 potential doesn't mean they will ever be a 99 overall, but I scout 90+ potential guys and their caps look completely awful. How accurate are all of these things during the draft with good scouts?

I haven't done the draft yet, but I do have good scouts. The thing is, how can good scouts, or any scouts for that matter, project someone to be 99 when their attributes in no way reflect that prediction? I am talking fully scouted, not just the first time they appear.

[stlcards234]

This is just my take on the matter, and have no real concrete evidence to back it up. But from my understanding, it is possible to have 90 pot even with a prospect who has only 50/55 potential in contact or power. I don't believe that because you have a 90 potential player, that every stat will average out to be 90. You could have a poor batter but maybe his durability or throwing accuracy potential is so high that it drives up his overall potential (much like how some prospects can be misrepresented because they have 90+ durability, but poor stats elsewhere).


Not sure if I explained myself in an understandable manner. In essence, I believe the potential/overall ratings are reflection of all stat categories, which can at times be unfairly weighted. (For example, 99 durability versus 99 R Power would have huge implications on who you would rather have but may not be reflected on computer generated ratings)

[Cavicchi]

Quote: Originally Posted by stlcards234

This is just my take on the matter, and have no real concrete evidence to back it up. But from my understanding, it is possible to have 90 pot even with a prospect who has only 50/55 potential in contact or power. I don't believe that because you have a 90 potential player, that every stat will average out to be 90. You could have a poor batter but maybe his durability or throwing accuracy potential is so high that it drives up his overall potential (much like how some prospects can be misrepresented because they have 90+ durability, but poor stats elsewhere). Not sure if I explained myself in an understandable manner. In essence, I believe the potential/overall ratings are reflection of all stat categories, which can at times be unfairly weighted. (For example, 99 durability versus 99 R Power would have huge implications on who you would rather have but may not be reflected on computer generated ratings)

It's not that every stat has to average out to 99, and I am talking about 99, but there has to be a point of reference and what I see has no reference, contact, power, speed or anything else that shows.

[MLB Bob]

Quote: Originally Posted by Cavicchi

It's not that every stat has to average out to 99, and I am talking about 99, but there has to be a point of reference and what I see has no reference, contact, power, speed or anything else that shows.

what is this players potential ratings? Maybe give some facts and we can understand what you are saying. Good starting point of reference for people that have no idea what your point of reference is. It could be like you say, a glitch, a mystery poor scouting, poor programming but we're all guessing with out the same info you have

[Cavicchi]

Quote: Originally Posted by MLB Bob

what is this players potential ratings? Maybe give some facts and we can understand what you are saying. Good starting point of reference for people that have no idea what your point of reference is. It could be like you say, a glitch, a mystery poor scouting, poor programming but we're all guessing with out the same info you have

Ask and ye shall receive:

SS Billy Buscher Overall 41 Potential 99.

Contact Actual and Potential 38--63, Power 27--47, speed 38--69 Fielding 28--71 Arm 32--63

2B Johnnie Ellsworth Overall 43 Potential 99.

Contact actual and potential 35--63, Power 36--52, speed 35--55, Fielding 38--67 Arm 36--47.

There are others in the 90's but I think the examples above are enough.

[MLB Bob]

thank you, i was hoping youd take the post as sincere...i'll take a look a plug some ratings with the info you posted...it does seem odd.