Quote:
Originally Posted by lukasberger
It would be fairly time intensive to do this for the real guys. We actually have the stats, but linking them is another issue. We'll hopefully have quite a few guys done by release.
The other thing is, stats just don't tell you much, especially for HS guys. A guy who hits .600 in Minnesota HS ball is not demonstrably better, and is likely worse than one who hits .275 in Orange County or Miami-Dade HS ball.
|
The database prospects are not the issue here, at least for me. I completely understand why they wouldn't have histories. Game generated amateurs are what needs to be improved. I think most people would rather have the generated amateurs to have a more fleshed out history rather than to deal with feeders.
Quote:
Originally Posted by frangipard
1) It might be an easy help for the stats-only guys if there was a third way to play, which is "ratings for amateurs only." That is, if guys want to play the game as stats-only in general, but still want to have an interesting draft experience, have a game mode such that the one time they can see a scouting report is before the draft.
2) Just a repeat from the suggestions forum: it would add a lot of have a "projected round" for each potential draftee, reflecting the scouting/media consensus.
|
I like both of these!