|
Post by Commish_Ron on Dec 20, 2016 11:06:05 GMT -5
The PBLRC would like to solicit feedback on this issue from the GMs.
For those not familiar with this setting, if it is active there will be a league level drop down on the player screen. All ratings will adjust to be relative to the selected league. So, a player might be 1.5 star at the major league level but 3 stars at AA. I do have a preference on this but I will do my best to lay out the pro and con cases without my bias.
Pros
1. It can help to create some separation in a sea of one star players. When looking at their ratings relative to A, a majority of the guys will remain 1 star, but some will show more. Those are the 1 star guys that have a better chance of contributing at the major league level.
2. It can help with decisions on who and when to promote. I.E. You may have 2 players, each .5/2 relative to PBL and both in AA. However, relative to AA one may be .5/4 and the other 4/4. Obviously the second player has maximized his development potential at AA and is ready to be promoted to AAA.
Cons
1. Can be clunky. The drop down to change levels is only on the player screen but the setting persists. So if you go to a player, then flip to relative to AA, everything in the game will show ratings relative to AA until you go back into any players screen to change it.
2. Making more information available to the GMs could possibly have an adverse affect on parity. Basically the argument is maybe not everyone would use this feature so it would only benefit those that do.
Note: I used star ratings as my examples. However, this setting does affect all ratings.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 20, 2016 12:43:08 GMT -5
Seems rather extraneous since if youre deciding between two similiarly rated overall players, you should be using their contact and power ratings and the such, not a total overall rating
|
|
|
Post by Mac_Yankees GM on Dec 20, 2016 13:28:21 GMT -5
I like having the ability to get a little more information and maybe be able to better develop my prospects. I think this is worth trying.
|
|
|
Post by Tim_GiantsGM on Dec 20, 2016 17:53:18 GMT -5
In addition to star ratings by league level: - batter characteristics (contact, power, eye, etc) change to represent the proficiency at a selected league level
- pitcher characteristics (contact, movement, control) change to represent the proficiency at a selected league level
Fielding, pitch, and other ratings are not impacted.
As Ron highlighted, once you select a league level for one player, all players in the PBL universe would be impacted, so a GM needs to return to the PBL level once an evaluation session has been completed.
My experience with this is that this feature makes it much easier to change one player and then view, compare, and evaluate all players on one or more rosters. It makes it easier to determine which players are fully developed at a selected league level and vice versa. I have found this feature useful in determining which players should be promoted and demoted. Also, it is more informative than the up-arrows and down-arrows that appear on some of the roster screens.
|
|
|
Post by David_ExposGM on Dec 20, 2016 18:46:40 GMT -5
Will give this a cautious OK, after some deliberation. But be prepared to see a bunch of "decent-at-their-level" players instead of a ton of "one-stars". To me, it's kind of the same difference, but admit there is a bit more detail.
Will be interested in the voting results!
|
|
|
Post by Sean_RedsGM on Dec 20, 2016 19:45:07 GMT -5
I really don't understand the pushback against this proposal. If you'd like to keep things the same, then you don't change the setting on your game screen.
|
|
|
Post by Tim_GiantsGM on Dec 20, 2016 20:03:22 GMT -5
I really don't understand the pushback against this proposal. If you'd like to keep things the same, then you don't change the setting on your game screen. Exactly.
|
|
|
Post by Commish_Ron on Dec 20, 2016 20:43:41 GMT -5
I really don't understand the pushback against this proposal. If you'd like to keep things the same, then you don't change the setting on your game screen. Yeah, that was my take Sean. Maybe people are not clear on what this really is. If you never touch the drop down you would never see a difference in your game from what is there now. I totally get the valid reasons why some people don't want to use it. But I don't really understand the No vote to deny me the functionality. Unless you think it gives me an advantage. But then my counter to that would be that you have the option to use it. <shrug>
|
|
|
Post by NickP_Marlins GM on Dec 20, 2016 22:40:09 GMT -5
I really don't understand the pushback against this proposal. If you'd like to keep things the same, then you don't change the setting on your game screen. Yeah, that was my take Sean. Maybe people are not clear on what this really is. If you never touch the drop down you would never see a difference in your game from what is there now. I totally get the valid reasons why some people don't want to use it. But I don't really understand the No vote to deny me the functionality. Unless you think it gives me an advantage. But then my counter to that would be that you have the option to use it. <shrug> After reading this I switched to yes. If it's just a preference that I and other GM can control then why not.
|
|
|
Post by BrianTwins on Dec 20, 2016 22:43:38 GMT -5
I really don't understand the pushback against this proposal. If you'd like to keep things the same, then you don't change the setting on your game screen. Well, I voted no and would be happy to share my 2 cents. If the progression of a player is visible at various levels of play (ML, AAA, AA...etc), it becomes very easy and clear when a player is ready to move between levels. I enjoy the ambiguity of the current system because it forces the human GM's to read between the lines and doesn't provide a clear signal when a player is ready to be promoted or demoted. I have been working at this skill over my time in the PBL, and have made many mistakes as evident by the extreme ammounts of movement by some of the players in my minor league system. I feel as though by making this proposed change to the PBL it would remove an element of skill that has been developed by (some of) the human GM's. I welcome your counter arguments to change my perspective.
|
|
|
Post by Commish_Ron on Dec 20, 2016 23:11:12 GMT -5
I really don't understand the pushback against this proposal. If you'd like to keep things the same, then you don't change the setting on your game screen. Well, I voted no and would be happy to share my 2 cents. If the progression of a player is visible at various levels of play (ML, AAA, AA...etc), it becomes very easy and clear when a player is ready to move between levels. I enjoy the ambiguity of the current system because it forces the human GM's to read between the lines and doesn't provide a clear signal when a player is ready to be promoted or demoted. I have been working at this skill over my time in the PBL, and have made many mistakes as evident by the extreme ammounts of movement by some of the players in my minor league system. I feel as though by making this proposed change to the PBL it would remove an element of skill that has been developed by (some of) the human GM's. I welcome your counter arguments to change my perspective. You make a very good point. That makes a lot of sense. Thanks for weighing in.
|
|
|
Post by Texas Rangers on Dec 20, 2016 23:18:42 GMT -5
I really don't understand the pushback against this proposal. If you'd like to keep things the same, then you don't change the setting on your game screen. Well, I voted no and would be happy to share my 2 cents. If the progression of a player is visible at various levels of play (ML, AAA, AA...etc), it becomes very easy and clear when a player is ready to move between levels. I enjoy the ambiguity of the current system because it forces the human GM's to read between the lines and doesn't provide a clear signal when a player is ready to be promoted or demoted. I have been working at this skill over my time in the PBL, and have made many mistakes as evident by the extreme ammounts of movement by some of the players in my minor league system. I feel as though by making this proposed change to the PBL it would remove an element of skill that has been developed by (some of) the human GM's. I welcome your counter arguments to change my perspective. Shockingly cogent points from the great dunce of the north. This may well swing my vote.
|
|
|
Post by AstrosGM_Shane on Dec 20, 2016 23:22:28 GMT -5
Well, I voted no and would be happy to share my 2 cents. If the progression of a player is visible at various levels of play (ML, AAA, AA...etc), it becomes very easy and clear when a player is ready to move between levels. I enjoy the ambiguity of the current system because it forces the human GM's to read between the lines and doesn't provide a clear signal when a player is ready to be promoted or demoted. I have been working at this skill over my time in the PBL, and have made many mistakes as evident by the extreme ammounts of movement by some of the players in my minor league system. I feel as though by making this proposed change to the PBL it would remove an element of skill that has been developed by (some of) the human GM's. I welcome your counter arguments to change my perspective. Shockingly cogent points from the great dunce of the north. This may well swing my vote. haha. This swung my vote instantly. This to me makes a ton of sense and he is right. It is a part of the game that requires some educated or gut feeling guess that has a different outcome for every player in it's own unique way that makes the game challenging in a real life way. In real life, even if there was an electronic algorithm to tell you what to do, would the whole MLB use the same algorithm? But that doesn't even really matter, because it's the unpredictability of predicting when it's best for players to move up to get them most of them and help them reach their potential.
|
|
|
Post by Texas Rangers on Dec 20, 2016 23:34:35 GMT -5
Shockingly cogent points from the great dunce of the north. This may well swing my vote. haha. This swung my vote instantly. This to me makes a ton of sense and he is right. It is a part of the game that requires some educated or gut feeling guess that has a different outcome for every player in it's own unique way that makes the game challenging in a real life way. In real life, even if there was an electronic algorithm to tell you what to do, would the whole MLB use the same algorithm? But that doesn't even really matter, because it's the unpredictability of predicting when it's best for players to move up to get them most of them and help them reach their potential. Nailed it Shane. Because of this logic, my vote is switched. Because of Shane, who has made some pretty good points, and not due to anyone else. Namely Brian. Who is swine.
|
|
|
Post by BrianTwins on Dec 20, 2016 23:36:15 GMT -5
haha. This swung my vote instantly. This to me makes a ton of sense and he is right. It is a part of the game that requires some educated or gut feeling guess that has a different outcome for every player in it's own unique way that makes the game challenging in a real life way. In real life, even if there was an electronic algorithm to tell you what to do, would the whole MLB use the same algorithm? But that doesn't even really matter, because it's the unpredictability of predicting when it's best for players to move up to get them most of them and help them reach their potential. Nailed it Shane. Because of this logic, my vote is switched. Because of Shane, who has made some pretty good points, and not due to anyone else. Namely Brian. Who is swine. I'll swine you anytime day or night. Check the footer Texas.
|
|