Picking the "right" draft pick

[Tech Man Dan]

Hey everybody,

I got hooked on 2005 a few weeks ago and have not been able to quit playing it!

I was wondering, what is the best way to pick the right draft pick? At first I tried going by draftees abilities (FG=A, FT=B-, etc) but what about their Potential? I have noticed that many players who did not go high in each draft still had wonderful numbers.

For example, in my game there are several players who were undrafted, yet their overall ability score is like in the 70s. Is this because they were draft picks wiht Excellent potential?

I'm sure it's a combination of many factors, I'm just trying to focus on the biggest determining factor (abilities, potential, high draft pick, strength of draft, training, etc.). Any thoughts? Thanks for your replies...

[dsigns]

I usually just take the highest pick then if I want someone different its pretty easy to trade since they have higher ratings.

I also like a player having great potential, they will become better faster.

[Tech Man Dan]

Thanks for the response.

I know you can do all that. I'm just wondering if it is better to draft someone who is has "Excellent" potential or a high draft pick? Probably both, I'm sure.

[Micchy_boy]

well try drafting players with high projected pick. since they will be gone if you dont pick them up. then try signing players with excellent potential that was projected undrafted or late 2nd round picks coz they will not be pick by AI teams.

in my other dynasty, i sign a player with excellent potential but projected undrafted. his rating at off-season was 48 but after the training camp it became 56. not bad for a player i sign for 385K.

[Tech Man Dan]

Yup, that's what I'm talking about. I began tracking players the other teams pick and several of them are undrafted but their overall score is in the 70s. This might be stating the obvious, but it seems like if you want quick players who can contribute immediately, draft players who have limited potential but are high in the draft. It seems like their beginning ratings are better than everyone else but they are essentially a "flash in the pan".

Of course the best would be draftees who are high in the draft AND have high potential.

[Seraph]

Yup, that's what I'm talking about. I began tracking players the other teams pick and several of them are undrafted but their overall score is in the 70s. This might be stating the obvious, but it seems like if you want quick players who can contribute immediately, draft players who have limited potential but are high in the draft. It seems like their beginning ratings are better than everyone else but they are essentially a "flash in the pan".

Of course the best would be draftees who are high in the draft AND have high potential.

Thats why i always edit the database before ... i put excellent potencial to all top 5, and good to top 10

[Goldberg]

Olowakandi of minessota was a first overal pick, Joe Smith in milwaukee was a 1st overall pick also... Sam Bowie was drafted between Hakeem and Jordan... and I can go one and one... oh yeah... the first five overall picks are always excellent potential....... if you want realism, I would not edit anything. Some top 5 are excellent, others are limited, much more realistic this way... top 5 are less likely to be bust but many top 5s have been bust...

[COOLmac©]

not to mention danny manning. the number one pick. and some guy in boston i remember. the number one PRICK

[Mark.]

and some guy in boston i remember. the number one PRICK

[Tech Man Dan]

It's been my experience (from a VERY STRONG draft year) that most of the picks available were either average to limited. Some were good and the second pick (a power forward) had excellent potential (I'm going to try and get him!!!).

Anyway, I was just wondering if anyone had a way to predict which picks would be better than others. Thanks for the comments!

[COOLmac©]

and some guy in boston i remember. the number one PRICK

yeah i just dont remember his name....but he was a center or a power forward. Such a waste of pick for boston. anyone recall that guy i'm referring to?

[Goldberg]

When I draft, I take an overall look and go with my gut instinct. If he is 18, his rating is more likely to be lower than a 22 year old, even if he is ranked before him... more likely but not always...

More specific, I look at position important ratings such as hands for PG, rebonding for C/PF, toughness for C/PF, etc. I also look at off/def awareness.

Then I look at my team, what positions are needed most and where I am in the dynasty development. If I am in a rebuilding mode, I will pick 20 to 22 year old kids who can help me now. If I'm a winning team, I will take a chance on a 18 year old "project" like Detroit did with Milicic.

Draft is a lot of luck also, like real life, but if you do your homework by scouting well and taking the guys you are strongly considering drafting in 1on1 tryouts, then luck is diminished, and the guy you draft is much more predictable.

But as everyone said, excellent or good potential is always better than limited or very limited. In fact, I only draft average, good, and excellent potential prospects. If my scout don't believe in its potential, how can I give such a kid a guaranteed contract?!

[Metsis]

I usually only scout guys with good or excellent potential... One thing for sure is that you can't teach size! So if you see a big guy high in the draft that has even average potential you should go for it if his projected ratings look any good...

I got from a very strong draft just yesterday a shooting guard that is 6'7" tall and that's tall for the rookie SG in this game... His shooting values looked A's and he was projected as a late first round pick... I just had to have him. He turned out to be a steal with fieldgoals at 85 and threes at 80.

So a guy with exceptional size with a high projection and good ratings should be looked for... Especially with good potential too...

To sum this up:
1. Potential
2. Position
3. Size
4. Skills - physical (speed, quickness and jumping don't change that much)
5. Skills - rest

Don't forget about size... That's a big thing in the game of basket ball... If you can get a big guy that is good, he's going to be better than a small guy that's good... Especially in the CPU game... Allen Iversons are rarer than Kobe Bryants, that's what I'm saying... Keving Garnetts and Tim Duncans are rarer than Zach Randolphs and Shareef Abdur-Rahims...

[Junk_Yard_Dawg]

it depends what team I am and what I need , but with about thr 7 dynastys i got goin I end up taken Hakim Warrick all the time , I rarely get the chance to be in the top 5 and get a chance at Chris Paul or Andrew Bogut. me persoanly I like the multi positional players , the ones that can pull of playing both SF or SG , or my favorite a very atheltic PF like Wayne Simien. My last Dynasty with the Kings , I dumped just about every one , Webber , Bibby, Pedja, so I had 3 first rounders and 2 2nd rounders. So this is what I drafted just for Example.

6th overall I took Chris Taft PF from Pitt. to replace Webber.
13th overall I took Joey Graham SG Oklahoma St. to replace Pedja
15th overall I took Hakim Warrick SF Syracuse to play either SF or SG

in the 2nd round I got a steal , the computer for some reason when you take out there generated DBF's and replace them with your custom ones slips up. ( WoOt)

so in the 2nd round at the 13th position I grabbed Daniel Ewing from Duke , that Ill probaly start at PG

I ad to forfeit my other pick cause my roster was full.

But basically I go after guys that can double up positions , Like Taft can play Center or Forward , Ewing can pla either guard , stuff like that.

[Tech Man Dan]

Draft is a lot of luck also, like real life, but if you do your homework by scouting well and taking the guys you are strongly considering drafting in 1on1 tryouts, then luck is diminished, and the guy you draft is much more predictable.

But as everyone said, excellent or good potential is always better than limited or very limited. In fact, I only draft average, good, and excellent potential prospects. If my scout don't believe in its potential, how can I give such a kid a guaranteed contract?!

Well, you can't always trust 1 on 1 tryouts. When I first started out, I went by abilities, I would draft guys who were Aa, Bs, and Cs in scoring (I figured scoring was the best thing in the game right?), so I went after this SG pick who probably was a B or B-, was quick and generally was decent. He was higher in the draft than my pick so I thought he was a lock for me.

In 1on1 tryouts he went up against Paul Pierce and made him leave his jock at the 3pt line practically everytime. So I thought "whoa! I got a steal here!" So when it comes to draft time, I get 'im thinking I'm doing great. However, after 4 or 5 years he never got higher than the low 60s and I traded him. 5 years later I look at him and he's a 63. So 1on1s don't always mean anything. They are pretty random, just like scoring in the game. You can sim a game and win by 20, and then sim it again and lose by 10.

Thanks for the comments! They have all been pretty good!

[J@3]

I find the tryouts are best at discovering good PG's and SG's... not much good for SF's at all, although I've learnt with C's and PF's if you want to get an accurate idea of what they'll be like as players, when the other guy takes a shot and you grab the rebound either start trying out post moves or just dunk it back in... you wont get the point because you didn't clear the ball, but it gives you a good indication of how well the guy would go playing in the post or whatever.

[Goldberg]

Tech man: About his 60 something rating... you have to look at potential... thats what everbody is saying... he was most likely limited potential... If you sim games, go with potential more than anything, as the overall rating will improve much more... if you play games, go with how the player feels to you rather than overall rating...

BTW: Anyone wanting advice on pre-draft homework should check the 3rd page of The_X dynasty. Really well done and you can learn about how a veteran prepares for the draft.

[Tech Man Dan]

To Goldberg: Thank you! That's basically what I have been wanting to hear and what I have started doing in the game (looking at potential above all else). I have started drafting pretty much just the high potential and high ability picks. (this is probably an obvious conclusion to everyone else, just not me, DOH!...)

Of course there is always trading as well. I have gotten my hands on some pretty good players lately. I'm in the twentieth year of my dynasty so results of my drafting days are pretty much over but I am having a good deal of fun at trading players. Thanks for the responses!

BTW: Anyone wanting advice on pre-draft homework should check the 3rd page of The_X dynasty. Really well done and you can learn about how a veteran prepares for the draft.

Where is this page?

[Goldberg]

In this forum, the thread with the following title:

X's Bobcats Dynasty '05/06 0-0 *OFF-SEASON FINALE 16/02/05*

And with The_X as author.

Check page 3 to see draft preparation.

[Tech Man Dan]

Hey Goldberg,

Thanks for the info. I figured it out from your previous post. While X is a very good read (I especially liked his commentaries on the workouts ), it wasn't exactly what I was hoping for. I guess I was looking for something with a little bit more analytical observations about draft picks rated abilities. Like, can a letter desgination given for an ability (such as a B- given for FG) be translated to a number? Does the strength of the draft affect this numerical designation?

I.e. does a B- mean a 72 in a strong draft and a 65 in a weak draft, or is the number constant throughout? I think this might be a worthwhile project for someone to do. To come up with a chart, for example (these is just a stab in the dark, so no flames please):

Letter Designation---Numerical Value---Potential Range (VL to E) (1-19)
A ----------------------- 80 ------------------- 81-99
A- ---------------------- 75 ------------------- 76-94
B ----------------------- 70 ------------------- 71-89
B- ---------------------- 65 ------------------- 66-84
C ----------------------- 60 ------------------- 61-79
C- ---------------------- 55 ------------------- 56-74
D ----------------------- 50 ------------------- 51-69
D- ---------------------- 45 ------------------- 46-64
E ----------------------- 40 ------------------- 41-59

I know this is probably not as accurate as h*ll, but just for example. So someone could use a chart like this and say, "Hmmm, draft pick X has scouted FG ability of B- and he has average potential. That means he will start out with a 65 and in 10 years could have a FG rating of 74." or something like that. I think this would be very useful for the game. I never could quite understand why scouts give alpha designations for abilities when we use numerical ones...

Just my two cents worth...

[ossangar]

and some guy in boston i remember. the number one PRICK

yeah i just dont remember his name....but he was a center or a power forward. Such a waste of pick for boston. anyone recall that guy i'm referring to?

nervous pervous ellison. and manning was a Damn good player till he got injured

[Andrew]

Pervis Ellison was actually drafted by Sacramento and played a couple of years in Washington before joining the Celtics. Still a waste of a draft pick and cap space in a free agent signing, though.

[COOLmac©]

would it be cool if the high draft picks we have in the game get serious injuries and they will eventually be poor players like manning(after the injuries) and nerous pervis ellison. even though they were scouted to have high potentials.