Asunto: Draft

3 B's and a C, None of which was above 3*. I did keep the only 3* because I want to see what his stats are scouted.

Considering there were only two A's (No A+ at all) in my league and they we're 5/6's I'd rather not bother with the draft to be honest. Feels like we're putting in more effort for an overall weaker yield.

there is one advantage of draft ... you get to choose the position. but that is about it. well and try to prevent getting C and D players

players didnt reflect their potential.
a B player ranging from 2 to 4.5 ???

My first overall "A" pick:

94/92/94/50/53/51/96

A secondary in the 50s does not make for a "star player" as the mouse-over description for A's states. Ignoring both tech and shoot (which makes him not good right from the start), his EQ for defense is only 78.39. Maybe that's a "star" for a brand new team, but certainly not any teams that have been around more than a season.

He is over 75 aq and eq...

I liked the draft and I liked that it is not full of Mr. Orr's. Realistic should be that there are a handful of good players and 1-2 future star players. The only problem I see is the low OR tied to SA level. Be nice if there was a bonus linked to rating so the newer teams can at most sell the player. As there are far better players on the market for 10k. But all in all a great start

I agree... there should NOT be a full round of star players. But, there should be 2 or 3 players who can crack the roster at some point in I.1. Our league had no such players.

I think your being hindered by success. With a fully developed seasoned team built from within and on the market the bar for making a I.1 team is set at a certain OR level per age, then C/L and finally Q. So most teams your level are looking for 400+ OR , 6/6 with 80+Q per position to even be able to ride the bench for a few years before being sold. Your league will have about 1300 players from the SA and draft this season. I doubt that there would be 50 players who would meet this level each season. Right now there are 11 players being scouted to either be dropped, sold or developed. 15% I would think would be a bit high for I.1 teams each week and I am guessing that number will increase a few more players before the end of the day.

The other factors riding against this is the lack of player types for hockey. You have 4 player types G,D,C,W so this adds to the lack of upward mobility for the SA and drafted players.

The lower based teams will sell off any 90% players with their lower OR or not bother with them either.

I think in hockey this draft will help the teams with SA12 to SA15 who are at the bottom of I.1 and top of II.2 but it will take time for that to come to fruit.

Where the draft will come into its own is the other sports where there are many positions on the team and holes each team needs to fill. If we had more options for F and D in hockey then I am sure the draft would carry a little more weight that it was hyped but I think for the best teams its going to be business as usual where they get 1 to 3 players a year worth keeping and the rest will be market or RFA.

I think it will have little to no impact on hockey, some impact in football and will impact handball but the next sport from the ground up it will have major impact. Which I think is where it should be with the age of each game engine.

I agree with this, I wasn't expecting any star quality players really but I did at least hope that we'd have a slightly higher chance of getting better players than the average churn out from the sports academy since the draft requires a bit more effort than just logging in.

Maybe I just went into it with the wrong expectations.

Yeah... I mean I'm not terribly upset with my 1st pick's OR (it's 258 which isn't HORRIBLE for this point in the season), but his unscouted Qs (as a goalie) are 71 GOA, 55 PAS, 56 TEC. That's not even worth keeping on my roster.

I certainly wouldn't call him a "key" player. Given that the draft only happens 4 times per season, I don't think it'd be absolutely atrocious for them to beef up the average quality of the players in it. I mean the way it is now, I'd actually just rather have the normal SA pulls every 4 weeks than this trash. Because whereas before, luck dictated what my SA pulls were during those weeks, now I actually have to log in, scout, and do work to get the same (or worse) players as I was getting before. That's stupid.

I don't want this in handball or basketball either.

The problem is this:
your facilities have to be pretty high level (HR and SA) for the draft to have usefulness, but by the time you have facilities high enough to have good scouting and at least a few picks in the draft, the player quality is significantly worse than what's in your team already.

Theoretically, the draft could be useful in the first few seasons of basketball if not for this fact. It becomes worthless the way it's currently set up though, because people will only get 1 maybe 2 picks in the draft in those early seasons, and their scouting will suck so bad that they'll have no idea which players are actually worth drafting. So it'll be a shot in the dark.

HOW IS THAT ANY DIFFERENT THAN THE WAY SA PULLS ARE NOW? Random shots in the dark.

This is a complete let down of something that could have added a very interesting element to the game.

Furthermore, I don't know if they thought they were being "cute" by having 4 drafts in the season, but that makes zero sense.

No professional sport anywhere has several drafts during the year.

If they only had 1 draft at the end of the season (as every professional sports league does), they could improve the average quality of the players in the draft (across the board) as follows:
A+ player: 93-99 AQ
A player: 85-92 AQ
B player: 75-85 AQ
C player: 65-75 AQ
D player: 50-65 AQ
E player: anything worse

Since there's only 1 draft a year, it wouldn't be too unbalanced (even the best teams would get maybe 1-3 usable players from the draft - which is how things are in real life).

1)
Make the draft position based off of final position in the standings only (with a lottery obviously) so the teams with the lowest OTR (teams with the lowest anticipated sponsorship money the following season) get some sort of consolation prize to keep them playing.

2)
Use the same formula to calculate number of players in the draft. I think it makes sense to have several players left over after the draft is over. That's fine.

But when it comes to scouting, have it so that each WEEK, teams can scout anywhere from 1 to 4 players (depending on the level of their HR dept). These players can be selected/EDITED at any point during the week, but will be locked in at a set time/day (maybe saturday morning or something), with the results of the scouting posted following that update.

Again... this is more realistic. Teams don't scout 4 prospective draftees in a single day. There's combines, rookie reports, they'll scout them over several games, etc...

That also allows teams a little bit more flexibility (rather than having to log in EVERY day to scout new players if they don't have the PRO pack).

-------

I mean seriously, that's how the draft should have been. It makes sense, and it would add value. The current draft does neither.

That sounds pretty good.

Draft was disappointing. Spent many credits for very poor quality players. A's barely keepable, B's garbage

I like the suggestion of 1 draft after the end of the season with more quality players.

Had 3 draft picks.
1st round pick "B" ranked Dman
2nd round pick "B" ranked goalie
3rd round pick "C" ranked wing

D was 2 star that I rejected
Goalie 2.5 that I kept
Wing 1 that I rejected.

Currently scouting goalie.

I have 11 HR and 10 SA.

Fairly disappointed with this other than I got to choose positioning. Only one A player was drafted in my league. I find that my SA sends me equal to better players than this without the hassle of scouting people that I didn't draft and others rejected so they have disappeared from the game.