Lukc
General Manager
Posts: 227 
|
Post by Lukc on Oct 15, 2013 16:29:26 GMT -5
I will say it right now, I am simply not a fan of lettered scouting reports.
Let's just say for example an option:
Player A's current real rating is 85. And let's say that the deviation on current ratings is say +/- 7 points. So if you get it in numbers you could get it anywhere from 78-92. Now, if you get a lettered report, you could get a B, B+ or an A. This player's real grade would be B+.
Now let's say you get the VERY low end of it, so 78 which goes to a B in the report, and this is ALL you know. And you know it's 7 +-. But all you get is a B, so you know it's between that 70-78 range +-7 deviation. So you think ok it could be from 63 to 85. Now, you actually got a 22 point deviation from his current rating, because you get to two deviations - one that is inside the lettered grade and one that goes outside.
If you have numbers and his real rating is 85, you can get from 78 to 92 in the report. A 14 point difference. But because you got a B back, you just know it could be anywhere in that range PLUS the variable.
|
|
|
|
Post by Myles (SAS) on Oct 16, 2013 1:55:45 GMT -5
That's a good point Luka. Perhaps what I'll do is just a letter grade (no deviation) but the letters will have a really wide range at bronze (perhaps just A, B, C, D, F) a smaller range at silver, and then a really small range in gold.
|
|
|
|
Post by orangeparka (MIA) on Oct 16, 2013 2:42:17 GMT -5
That's a good point Luka. Perhaps what I'll do is just a letter grade (no deviation) but the letters will have a really wide range at bronze (perhaps just A, B, C, D, F) a smaller range at silver, and then a really small range in gold. I like it. Better than +/- stuff IMO. |
|
|
|
Post by Jamal (NYK) on Oct 16, 2013 4:36:03 GMT -5
Good point Luck. The letter grade (withouth +/-) differencing the gold/silver/bronce seems the most fair thing to me, obviously with the letter ranges being known for each category.
Note: The goal here shouldn't be quantity, but quality. I'm sure I'm guilty of this as well, we're all busy IRL, but some of the "full" articles were crap and required little thought. IMO, articles about the salary cap, draft boards, league projections, rookies (based on more than just guesswork) etc. are all worthy of attention. The umpteenth article about how amazing your team is - isn't....... This. Although it's not easy to accomplish... and I put myselft first here. Sometimes you try your best but end up writting crap that nobody cares off (and with good reason  ). Obviously not everyone likes the same type of articles, but I also think that the ones involving the whole league/teams like league projections, salary cap, etc could involve more people and give more to the league. I mean that as a way to know what's more interesting in order to try to write more about that type of things. But that's in general, I also enjoy some individual team articles. Jestor's team articles come to mind first here as something I really love reading. |
|
|
|
Post by Rizzo (NO) on Oct 16, 2013 7:23:20 GMT -5
That's a good point Luka. Perhaps what I'll do is just a letter grade (no deviation) but the letters will have a really wide range at bronze (perhaps just A, B, C, D, F) a smaller range at silver, and then a really small range in gold. This seems like it could be the best way to handle the scouting system. |
|
|
|
Post by Myles (SAS) on Oct 16, 2013 9:49:04 GMT -5
Let's try this then:
Bronze: 5 letter grades. 100-87 A, 86-73 B, 72-59 C, 58-45 D, 44-0 F
Silver: 8 letter grades. 100-93 A, 92-85 B+, 84-77 B, 76-69 C+, 68-61 C, 60-53 D+, 52-45 D, 44-0 F
Gold: 12 letter grades. 100-95 A, 94-89 A-, 88-83 B+, 82-77 B, 76-71 B-, 70-65 C+, 64-59 C, 58-53 C-, 52-47 D+, 46-41 D, 40-35 D-, 34-0 F.
The only thing I don't like about this is that 1) there's no way to narrow down the range of the player you are scouting, no matter how many times you scout him you won't be able to get any closer than that range and 2) there's no incentive to scout multiple times. Maybe everyone only will get current ratings the first time to account for that.
|
|
|
|
Post by orangeparka (MIA) on Oct 16, 2013 9:58:42 GMT -5
Let's try this then: Bronze: 5 letter grades. 100-87 A, 86-73 B, 72-59 C, 58-45 D, 44-0 F Silver: 8 letter grades. 100-93 A, 92-85 B+, 84-77 B, 76-69 C+, 68-61 C, 60-53 D+, 52-45 D, 44-0 F Gold: 12 letter grades. 100-95 A, 94-89 A-, 88-83 B+, 82-77 B, 76-71 B-, 70-65 C+, 64-59 C, 58-53 C-, 52-47 D+, 46-41 D, 40-35 D-, 34-0 F. The only thing I don't like about this is that 1) there's no way to narrow down the range of the player you are scouting, no matter how many times you scout him you won't be able to get any closer than that range and 2) there's no incentive to scout multiple times. Maybe everyone only will get current ratings the first time to account for that. I think a range of five is damn close enough though. We wouldn't want scouting to be too accurate. Also, probably in a very small minority here, but I prefer scouting to be even vaguer, with only rough letter grades assigned, and with no table for what the letters correspond to. So a guy would have like an A shooting rating and you'd just know "oh, he has the potential to be an elite shooter", but nothing specific numbers-wise. Scouting with give peeps general ideas and something like bustability, and they'd have to rely more on draft media and the like to gain more info. Then, once the combine rolls around, you have a general idea on a lot of players, and choose the guys you like to personally workout for you, which would reveal more specific stuff like the actual numbers with small deviation. The result would be you'd have a lot of general info/basic idea on a lot of guys, and very specific info on some guys. |
|
|
|
Post by Myles (SAS) on Oct 16, 2013 10:09:26 GMT -5
Just for clarification, the above letters are for current ratings. Potential ratings for each would be wider, probably like 4/5/6 for bronze/silver/gold.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rizzo (NO) on Oct 16, 2013 11:20:39 GMT -5
I'm with OP on this one. I think scouting should be much more of a broad view on the player's ability, allowing us to scout a lot of different players and get a general idea of what they can do. Then, when it is combine time, we could get a much more detailed look at their attributes in number form.
|
|
|
|
Post by rockman (GSW) on Oct 16, 2013 12:37:43 GMT -5
Agree with Rizzo and OP.
|
|
|
|
Post by Myles (SAS) on Oct 16, 2013 19:57:15 GMT -5
So how does everyone feel about that? 5/3 (current/potential) letter grade ranges for bronze, 8/4 for silver, 12/5 for gold? Only current on first scout, current and potential on next scout, silver and gold are still eligible for random bonus information. To clarify, the bonus information could be things like player comparisons, their shooting ratings (with deviation of course), their tendencies, a deeper look into the intangibles (intangibles will be broken up into at least two categories for scouting reports, but bonus information would break it up even more), things like that.
|
|
|
|
Post by jestor on Oct 16, 2013 19:59:49 GMT -5
I think that can work.
|
|
Lukc
General Manager
Posts: 227
|
Post by Lukc on Oct 17, 2013 8:36:58 GMT -5
To me personally, it's all a bit too complicated. And while I am all for awarding those that go the extra-mile, it seems that the award compared to the ones that do 'their job' is too big.
I personally enjoy sim leagues, but if the incentive to write more is that big, that will mean two things really - either I will do it, or will quit because I don't have the time/skills even, because (no offense, just an example) Tim is so prolific in his writing (both quantity and quality) that I just can't compete, so why even bother.
|
|
|
|
Post by Myles (SAS) on Oct 17, 2013 9:12:04 GMT -5
To me personally, it's all a bit too complicated. And while I am all for awarding those that go the extra-mile, it seems that the award compared to the ones that do 'their job' is too big. I personally enjoy sim leagues, but if the incentive to write more is that big, that will mean two things really - either I will do it, or will quit because I don't have the time/skills even, because (no offense, just an example) Tim is so prolific in his writing (both quantity and quality) that I just can't compete, so why even bother. Because there isn't any competition. You don't have to be in the top x%, theoretically, everyone could qualify for Gold. And to break it down, if you want to earn the maximum amount of Gold, you just need to write a combination of 3 insiders or 6 wire taps in a real life month. Since earning gold is good for two scouting periods, you only need to post every other period, or once every four weeks. |
|
Lukc
General Manager
Posts: 227
|
Post by Lukc on Oct 17, 2013 9:15:52 GMT -5
Ah, that's not so bad. I mis-calculated everything then  |
|
).
