Proposal (259 views)

[TimPig]

I was thinking about this after the Shout discussion/controversy surrounding the lottery, and a way that some teams might be able to help themselves.

What if we implemented a system where we allowed GMs to pay a certain price to "scout" players? I was thinking $1,000 per attribute and $7,500 to scout true potential (this was a reward in 4.0 but cost $6,500). I'm guessing most people would lean towards scouting Inside, so maybe we could even increase the price on scouting Inside to $3,000 or something, I don't know. In a scouting report, you'd find out an exact attribute rating.

Not only would this increase activity by getting GMs to write more articles, but also would make it so those who got screwed in the lotto can still help themselves by scouting a guy who they think might be available at 10-15 or later in the first.

I think about someone like Drazen Petrovic, who tempted Fecta with his A- Outside, but was obviously a huge risk due to the D+ Inside. Fecta could've scouted Petrovic's Inside to find out if he'd ever be useful as a scorer. We've seen players like Bossert (C+/A+) be outstanding scorers, but guys with the same grade set who never shoot the ball and are therefore worthless. This might help reduce some of that unknown.

Odin suggested this might slow down the draft, but that could be fixed by saying all scouting reports must be purchased prior to the draft beginning.

Odin then asked how someone would know who to scout, so that's where someone like Fecta, who is picking at 15, would need to be smart and look at the teams in front of him and who he thinks they might be drafting. If he's picking 15, it'd be dumb to waste bucks and a scouting report on Hakeem/Jordan who will go well before he picks. I guess you could even use scouting reports during the season, but that probably wouldn't be wise considering the random lotto and having no idea where you'll pick.

I guess we could even implement a maximum number of scouting reports per season, but I don't think that's necessary. IMO if you're willing to put in the time to write tons $5,000-quality articles to have more money to buy scouting reports, you should be able to. You'd have to spend $15,000 just to scout one player in his entirety (minus potential), so it's not like people would be able to abuse this too heavily.

Added the poll just to gauge overall interest. Obviously this hasn't been approved by Odin in any way, so I'm just trying to feel things out.

[skrouse]

Eh not really a fan of knowing the actual number. even a range seems like a bit too much insight.

Would be more in favor of a rookie scouting combine or some type of pre draft rookie sim

[Druce]

I appreciate you thinking up an idea and adding it for discussion. I've always been a fan of us knowing a players individual attribute grades.

[Druce]

May 3, 2018 23:55:30 GMT TimPig said:

I was thinking about this after the Shout discussion/controversy surrounding the lottery, and a way that some teams might be able to help themselves.

What if we implemented a system where we allowed GMs to pay a certain price to "scout" players? I was thinking $1,000 per attribute and $7,500 to scout true potential (this was a reward in 4.0 but cost $6,500). I'm guessing most people would lean towards scouting Inside, so maybe we could even increase the price on scouting Inside to $3,000 or something, I don't know. In a scouting report, you'd find out an exact attribute rating.

Not only would this increase activity by getting GMs to write more articles, but also would make it so those who got screwed in the lotto can still help themselves by scouting a guy who they think might be available at 10-15 or later in the first.

I think about someone like Drazen Petrovic, who tempted Fecta with his A- Outside, but was obviously a huge risk due to the D+ Inside. Fecta could've scouted Petrovic's Inside to find out if he'd ever be useful as a scorer. We've seen players like Bossert (C+/A+) be outstanding scorers, but guys with the same grade set who never shoot the ball and are therefore worthless. This might help reduce some of that unknown.

Odin suggested this might slow down the draft, but that could be fixed by saying all scouting reports must be purchased prior to the draft beginning.

Odin then asked how someone would know who to scout, so that's where someone like Fecta, who is picking at 15, would need to be smart and look at the teams in front of him and who he thinks they might be drafting. If he's picking 15, it'd be dumb to waste bucks and a scouting report on Hakeem/Jordan who will go well before he picks. I guess you could even use scouting reports during the season, but that probably wouldn't be wise considering the random lotto and having no idea where you'll pick.

I guess we could even implement a maximum number of scouting reports per season, but I don't think that's necessary. IMO if you're willing to put in the time to write tons $5,000-quality articles to have more money to buy scouting reports, you should be able to. You'd have to spend $15,000 just to scout one player in his entirety (minus potential), so it's not like people would be able to abuse this too heavily.

Added the poll just to gauge overall interest. Obviously this hasn't been approved by Odin in any way, so I'm just trying to feel things out.

On the flip side, there is no excuse for drafting a guy with Petrovic's grades in the top 10. D+ inside combined with every other grade except outside was a recipe for failure.

[eric]

There are plenty of things people "screwed" in the lotto can do already, though. There's no reason Jordan Howard should be on the Trailblazers instead of the Hornets. There's a 100% chance there are some other decent players in the FA scrap heap, and there are plenty of decent players wasting away on other rosters. Put some decent players together and you can trade for a good player, or get draft assets, or bucks. Setting a DC for sim one and coming back for lotto is 4.0 tanking, no one should expect that to work with the 5.0 lotto system.

[h7t]

May 4, 2018 1:15:02 GMT skrouse said:

Eh not really a fan of knowing the actual number. even a range seems like a bit too much insight.

Would be more in favor of a rookie scouting combine or some type of pre draft rookie sim

this is me as well.

A draft sim would be pretty amazing. Maybe a small series of three games where you've got a chance to see how some deep picks would perform.

[fason]

Woah, Eric just called Fecta lazy.

[Deleted]

how about someone commish a wheel league so i don't have to fucking deal with it anymore

[TimPig]

May 4, 2018 2:24:07 GMT h7t said:

May 4, 2018 1:15:02 GMT skrouse said:

Eh not really a fan of knowing the actual number. even a range seems like a bit too much insight.

Would be more in favor of a rookie scouting combine or some type of pre draft rookie sim

this is me as well.

A draft sim would be pretty amazing. Maybe a small series of three games where you've got a chance to see how some deep picks would perform.

This is exactly what the summit was and it was removed for 5.0.

[skrouse]

May 4, 2018 6:05:32 GMT @odin said:

how about someone commish a wheel league so i don't have to fucking deal with it anymore

Wheel blows

[Deleted]

May 4, 2018 6:05:32 GMT @odin said:

how about someone commish a wheel league so i don't have to fucking deal with it anymore

You kinda brought this on yourself Odin. You’re the one that complained about people complaining about tanking the loudest. I believe you even posted a poll and he poll said people didn’t want an unweighted lotto...

[Deleted]

tmbsl5.proboards.com/thread/6/draft-style

Literally *5* people voted for an unweighted lotto

[Deleted]

Im not annoyed by peoples complaints about this. Im annoyed by everything sim. If it wasnt this, it would be something else.

[Deleted]

May 4, 2018 12:20:13 GMT @odin said:

Im not annoyed by peoples complaints about this. Im annoyed by everything sim. If it wasnt this, it would be something else.

work sucks 

[ahebrewtoo]

This is just another chore for the commish and a place for active (GMs with bucks) GMs to separate themselves and make the non-active GMs even less likely to enjoy sim league.

[pedro el guapo]

I do!

[pedro el guapo]

oh wait, I guess it's a different kind of proposal

[TimPig]

May 4, 2018 1:15:02 GMT skrouse said:

Eh not really a fan of knowing the actual number. even a range seems like a bit too much insight.

Would be more in favor of a rookie scouting combine or some type of pre draft rookie sim

My question is why though?

I understand that knowing every attribute for every player can take a lot of fun out of it, but in the system I proposed that'd cost hundreds of thousands of bucks every year.

[skrouse]

May 4, 2018 16:52:11 GMT TimPig said:

May 4, 2018 1:15:02 GMT skrouse said:

Eh not really a fan of knowing the actual number. even a range seems like a bit too much insight.

Would be more in favor of a rookie scouting combine or some type of pre draft rookie sim

My question is why though?

I understand that knowing every attribute for every player can take a lot of fun out of it, but in the system I proposed that'd cost hundreds of thousands of bucks every year.

because even irl you don't know a players true ability, you can only give grades based on the data of past performance to project the future.  Just feels like too much insight, idk

[skrouse]

... which is why a Summit would be better IMO. But if that's a ton of work for Odin or if others don't like it I'm ok with out it

[Deleted]

Combine gives plenty of info

[dump]

team whatever is less work for the commish

[duc15]

May 5, 2018 4:26:59 GMT dump said:

team whatever is less work for the commish

I’m always team this