BuzzerBeater Forums

BB Global (English) > New Draft System / Potential

New Draft System / Potential

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
24882.213 in reply to 24882.200
Date: 4/22/2008 12:39:31 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
44
If the skills are independently generated (and have the same normal distribution) then the mean value of all 12 skills for a player will be close to the mean value of distribution. But we aren't really interested in the mean skill of a player, we are interested in his top 4 or 5 skills, and whether they are clustered in a way that can make a useful C or PG.

But you also want to make sure (or at least a very good chance) that every team in every league will get one player that he could add to his team (or trade for someone who will). Over the long term with a roster of 12-15 and career of 12-15 seasons, you will want to replace a player per season.

So it's probaby better that a 5 is more of rating than a ranking. In a ranking, the top 5% of rated players might be labeled as "5". But they might not be that much more skilled than the next 20% who were "4", especially after a few seasons of training (or not training).

This Post:
00
24882.214 in reply to 24882.213
Date: 4/22/2008 1:22:25 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
00
How will you ever know the potential of a drafted player which you did not scout? Is it visible or will it remain a guess forever?

This Post:
00
24882.215 in reply to 24882.214
Date: 4/22/2008 1:45:36 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
304304
Potential will be a viewable attribute on all players, including those on the TL.

NO ONE at this table ordered a rum & Coke
Charles: Penn has some good people
A CT? Really?
Any two will do
Any three for me
Any four will score
Any five are live
From: JayP
This Post:
00
24882.216 in reply to 24882.215
Date: 4/22/2008 4:15:37 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
00
Has anybody seen a player on the draft list whose potential is higher then their current star rating?

I have 11 players on my list who have been scouted twice and all have a potential equal to or lower than their star rating. Is it safe to assume that their are no 3-star players out there with 5-star potential?

This Post:
00
24882.218 in reply to 24882.217
Date: 4/22/2008 4:26:06 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
304304
I have a 2 star SG with 3 star potential.

NO ONE at this table ordered a rum & Coke
Charles: Penn has some good people
A CT? Really?
Any two will do
Any three for me
Any four will score
Any five are live
From: chespirito

To: JayP
This Post:
00
24882.219 in reply to 24882.216
Date: 4/22/2008 4:26:42 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
8080
I have 9 that have been scouted twice and non of them ha a higher potential than star raiting, so at least it is a good hypothesis.

This Post:
00
24882.220 in reply to 24882.219
Date: 4/22/2008 4:30:35 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
304304
I have 9 that have been scouted twice and non of them ha a higher potential than star raiting, so at least it is a good hypothesis.


And it's incorrect - see my previous post.

NO ONE at this table ordered a rum & Coke
Charles: Penn has some good people
A CT? Really?
Any two will do
Any three for me
Any four will score
Any five are live
This Post:
00
24882.222 in reply to 24882.220
Date: 4/22/2008 4:39:36 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
8080
Thanks. I probably had started typing my answer when you posted your comment, and for some stupid reason messages posted between the post you are replying to and your reply are not shown... Annoying.

This Post:
00
24882.223 in reply to 24882.222
Date: 4/22/2008 5:26:45 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
00
I think that the players are biased toward being a 5 star. I have 33 visable players and I have 13 5 stars. Even out of 48 thats a high proportion.

Advertisement