|
|
Post by MistleTacoe on Jan 18, 2017 10:41:22 GMT -6
I am a fan of 20s idea
|
|
|
|
Post by SPL on Jan 18, 2017 11:21:43 GMT -6
I am a fan of 20s plan as well
|
|
|
|
Post by eric on Jan 18, 2017 11:35:13 GMT -6
Heebs can you expound upon your third option? I'm not sure I'm fully grasping what you mean and what the process would be. First, the issue with undrafted college players. The issue is that undrafted players show up in multiple years. So if we were selecting from college players in 2000, there would be a lot of overlap on rosters for 1998, 1999, 2001, and 2002. That overlap causes two problems. First, the draft master has discretion to mine the big names and leave the scraps for later draft masters to comb through. Second, it's a pain in the ass to keep track of which players have been used - the big names will be easy but most players will never be big names in the league. I don't want to (and don't want to create a system in which my successor will have to) search through old draft classes to make sure each player they're picking hasn't been created before. The proposed solution would be to randomly select the year and say only freshmen from that year can be used. The draft master can draw from their entire college career in creating their grade set and/or profile, but they have to have been a freshman in the random year to be part of that class. I considered using four year periods, but that doesn't solve the overlap. We could create a thread with players that have been used and do a quick cntl+f - that'd be easier than clicking through all of the old draft threads and cntl+f'ing. I guess that's a solution to the second problem - but we've still got the first problem. What I would do is make an Excel sheet with a full list of every player's name. Then you could paste in however many names you had set up for a given class and a VLOOKUP column would let you know if the player had already been used. |
|
|
|
Post by eric on Jan 18, 2017 11:38:26 GMT -6
What I am thinking right now is we continue with 4.0 until the final player from the currently posted draft clssses retires (so the last player from the 3047 and earlier drafts). I like this because it doesn't give a hard deadline of a last season so there would still be some suspense and intrigue waiting to see retirings, but it would still give a rough timeline so people can act accordingly. We would then start 5.0 with a new creation draft and throw all the other classes back in the randomizer. Thoughts? So whatever solution we ended up going with for drafts after 3047 would just be filler classes until the real ones wash out. This seems like the best plan to me. I feel like any plan is a mix of novelty / annoyance, if we knew it was temporary it would be easier to tolerate either way. |
|
|
|
Post by Odin on Jan 18, 2017 16:07:56 GMT -6
i think it would be neat to do a couple of things: 1. make a large list of players and pull 70 random players from it each season. tmac, barkley, and lanier in the same class. we could do a variant of it after the 47 class to see if it's something that we might want to do in 5.0. I've seen other leagues do it and it seemed to work well. 2. start 5.0 with all fake players so we have more draft classes to work with |
|
|
|
Post by SPL on Jan 18, 2017 16:23:56 GMT -6
I would be a fan of odin's 2nd idea of starting the league with fake players and add in real classes. Will give us more draft classes.
|
|
|
|
Post by Face-in on Jan 18, 2017 16:48:27 GMT -6
I'm not a fan of either of those ideas, sorry Odin.
|
|
|
|
Post by Odin on Jan 18, 2017 16:54:39 GMT -6
I'm not a fan of either of those ideas, sorry Odin. Whats wrong with the first |
|
|
|
Post by Face-in on Jan 18, 2017 17:07:15 GMT -6
I personally like looking forward to classes from certain years (84, 96, 03, etc)
|
|
|
|
Post by Lazy Pete on Jan 19, 2017 10:41:56 GMT -6
Not really related to future drafts but more about ways to improve 5.0. Want to get this idea preserved for the record somewhere.
Heebs brought up an idea about player builds in the new league that I thought was interesting yesterday. It would be to cap shot blocking builds for prospects in an attempt to make one-way offensive bigs a more viable option in this league.
The basics are as follows:
-Bigs can be built with up to 40 shot blocking as a starting attribute
-Wings up to ~20 shot blocking
-PGs up to ~10 shot blocking
The concern that 20s and Eric mentioned was that this brings a lot of random chance into which prospects software decides to grow in shot blocking, which is one of the fastest growing attributes w/o camps. My idea to resolve this would be for Eric to develop a macro that would cap shot blocking as an attribute at an ultimate limit of, say, 65.
After TC each season, Eric's macro would change any player w/ a shot blocking attribute >65 back down to 65. That way, 20s or whoever is making the players can be reasonably sure that a big starting w/ 40 shot blocking will be among the best in the league at some point in their career.
Thoughts/critiques/additions welcome.
|
|
|
|
Post by eric on Jan 19, 2017 12:28:34 GMT -6
Not really related to future drafts but more about ways to improve 5.0. Want to get this idea preserved for the record somewhere. Heebs brought up an idea about player builds in the new league that I thought was interesting yesterday. It would be to cap shot blocking builds for prospects in an attempt to make one-way offensive bigs a more viable option in this league. The basics are as follows: -Bigs can be built with up to 40 shot blocking as a starting attribute -Wings up to ~20 shot blocking -PGs up to ~10 shot blocking The concern that 20s and Eric mentioned was that this brings a lot of random chance into which prospects software decides to grow in shot blocking, which is one of the fastest growing attributes w/o camps. My idea to resolve this would be for Eric to develop a macro that would cap shot blocking as an attribute at an ultimate limit of, say, 65. After TC each season, Eric's macro would change any player w/ a shot blocking attribute >65 back down to 65. That way, 20s or whoever is making the players can be reasonably sure that a big starting w/ 40 shot blocking will be among the best in the league at some point in their career. Thoughts/critiques/additions welcome. v1 of the macro took 10.5 minutes to check/change 650 players and had 100% success rate wow it will take longer the more players it has to change because it has to type those values in, i would say 15 minutes at the most though wow what a great macro not siding for or against the idea, just giving info |
|
|
|
Post by SPL on Jan 19, 2017 12:44:52 GMT -6
Not really related to future drafts but more about ways to improve 5.0. Want to get this idea preserved for the record somewhere. Heebs brought up an idea about player builds in the new league that I thought was interesting yesterday. It would be to cap shot blocking builds for prospects in an attempt to make one-way offensive bigs a more viable option in this league. The basics are as follows: -Bigs can be built with up to 40 shot blocking as a starting attribute -Wings up to ~20 shot blocking -PGs up to ~10 shot blocking The concern that 20s and Eric mentioned was that this brings a lot of random chance into which prospects software decides to grow in shot blocking, which is one of the fastest growing attributes w/o camps. My idea to resolve this would be for Eric to develop a macro that would cap shot blocking as an attribute at an ultimate limit of, say, 65. After TC each season, Eric's macro would change any player w/ a shot blocking attribute >65 back down to 65. That way, 20s or whoever is making the players can be reasonably sure that a big starting w/ 40 shot blocking will be among the best in the league at some point in their career. Thoughts/critiques/additions welcome.
I would be a huge fan of this, it would be a nice change of pace for 5.0
|
|
|
|
Post by Heebs on Jan 19, 2017 13:10:15 GMT -6
I also like the blocking cap if we can do it in a way that doesn't cause the commish a lot more work.
|
|
|
|
Post by eric on Jan 19, 2017 13:16:07 GMT -6
press two buttons and go watch half an episode of Dragon Ball Z Super Kai Ultimate
badda bing badda boom betty boop
|
|
|
|
Post by Lazy Pete on Jan 19, 2017 13:19:31 GMT -6
What would be really interesting would be to apply this to an existing league and see if the reduced blocking really will improve the quality of offensive bigs. I guess the biggest problem would be that an existing league would probably have a lot more guys over 65 shot blocking
|
|
|
|
Post by Face-in on Jan 19, 2017 13:24:49 GMT -6
Great idea!
Let's go to 5.0 right now!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by Heebs on Jan 19, 2017 13:24:51 GMT -6
Save the file now, run a sim, get aggregate stats.
Open the saved file, run the macro, run a sim, get aggregate stats.
Compare aggregate bigs FG% in each scenario.
Ab-a-dee ab-a-dee ab-a-dee thats all ladies and gentlemen!
|
|
|
|
Post by 20s Navidad on Jan 19, 2017 13:25:01 GMT -6
press two buttons and go watch half an episode of Dragon Ball Z Super Kai Ultimate badda bing badda boom betty boop No thanks if I have to watch that crap |
|
|
|
Post by eric on Jan 19, 2017 14:06:53 GMT -6
press two buttons and go watch half an episode of Dragon Ball Z Super Kai Ultimate badda bing badda boom betty boop No thanks if I have to watch that crap .png/revision/latest/scale-to-width-down/180?cb=20140926024327) |
|
|
|
Post by Odin on Jan 20, 2017 0:05:56 GMT -6
All I know is I will certainly trade my picks regardless so it doesn't really matter.
|
|
|
|
Post by Face-in on Jan 26, 2017 9:04:35 GMT -6
Pete mentioned in shout yesterday how we should maybe try running an experimental league with fbb 3 software to see if it's something we could switch to for 5.0.
Let's get this going. I'm willing to do much of the setup work. First we need to figure out who's interested in participating and what we'll need to do to get started.
|
|
|
|
Post by SPL on Jan 26, 2017 9:33:02 GMT -6
I will particpate
|
|
|
|
Post by eric on Jan 26, 2017 9:35:19 GMT -6
Pete mentioned in shout yesterday how we should maybe try running an experimental league with fbb 3 software to see if it's something we could switch to for 5.0. Let's get this going. I'm willing to do much of the setup work. First we need to figure out who's interested in participating and what we'll need to do to get started. it's a busy time for me until the second week of february or so, if we don't go full bore until then i can participate |
|
|
|
Post by Face-in on Jan 26, 2017 9:45:42 GMT -6
Wouldn't even be meant to be competitive or too time consuming. Just 10-15 people trying figure out what can be changed/tweaked to make that software an option.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
Joined: January 1970
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 26, 2017 9:48:50 GMT -6
I'll do it
|
|
|
|
Post by Lazy Pete on Jan 26, 2017 9:49:40 GMT -6
I would do it
|
|
|
|
Post by Lazy Pete on Jan 26, 2017 9:51:24 GMT -6
I think we'd need someone with the ability to upload to thatsimlife.club too. I think one of the biggest keys will be trying to keep things digestible the way they are here, so the ability to post team rosters, etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by MJ on Jan 26, 2017 9:59:36 GMT -6
Feel like I have the new software on my old commish laptop somewhere unless this version is within the last year
|
|
|
|
Post by Odin on Jan 26, 2017 10:57:16 GMT -6
hello, yes, i will play test league
|
|
|
|
Post by Heebs on Jan 26, 2017 13:59:07 GMT -6
I would do it.
|
|
