How Can You Feel Heard (1,303 views)

[eric]

when there are proposals or concerns, i do research and post proof for the decisions i make

the question is not what proof you will believe

the question is - in the case of decisions that don't go your individual way, what do you individually have to see to believe your concern was heard?

[mazunga]

By yeeting the wheel.

But seriously, just a " here is why im not doing that" with a reason is enough for me.

[Majic]

In my view, the commissioner is here to run the league and stop any proposals that could be bad for the league or create competitive imbalance.

When a situation arises where there is a majority vote or a unanimous vote the commish should provide clear communication before veoting.

Have a dialogue, take the time to listen, actually listen and not just throw out some obscure data you pulled, and find a way meet in the middle.

When providing data display it in a clear way that anyone in the league can understand. explain what was looked at, what you measured and how it was measured. Please do not provide simple formulas or short hand for what information you looked at.

From that data, explain the ways that the change would be bad for the league, providing examples when applicable. When this discussion is done, and its clear to everyone why it would be bad for the league you can then veto it

[rw]

My biggest issue is the predictability of drafted players. It is a net negative to have a profile. Players should be based on their potential at draft time.

I know you say that is ambiguous and subjective. I would say exactly! We have too much information.

It is a net negative to have a profile. Frederic Weis was the correct pick at #3 and that's wrong and crazy.

[kc]

I don't care nearly as much as some of the guys here do. Do your thing eric. I'm just here so I don't get fined.

[trofie-guest]

I'm posting behind 7 Proxies so good luck tracking me.

That being said I have received a couple texts so I'm going to just type this out.

First, I think Eric does a great job and is by far the best commissioner we've had.

1. I did see the post in shout about how an 8 - 0 vote wasn't implemented and Eric said that was only a third of the league at the time. I agree that shouldn't be implemented. However you implemented a 5-1 just this year on resignings so where is the logic?

2. I don't like the wheel at all mainly because of point 3.

3. The main reason I enjoyed this thing , what 10 years ago now was to build teams and I loved doing that. My main method was drafting. I feel like that is nearly impossible with the way players are built and profiles altered a day before we see college stats. You can't formulate a plan for picks in a certain draft because who knows how players will look. There is 0 point to profiles. Just get rid of them, they serve no purpose and actually hinder the player moving forward. Just look at the past season and where the top 5 players at their respective positions were drafted .

WS Point Guard
16.2 Ja Morant - Proflie 6th overall
14.3 Kira Lewis Jr. - No profile - undrafted
13.3 Steve Mitchell- No profile - 2nd round
12.6 Tyrese Haliburton profile - 8th overall
11.4 Tony White - No profile - undrafted

WS Shooting Guard
12.6 Latrell Sprewell - Profile - 5th overall
11.3 Charlie Bell - No Profile - 9th overall
11.0 Hassan Adams - No Profile - 1st overall
10.7 Murray Jarman - No Profile- 7th overall
10.6 Joseph Forte- No profile - 4th overall

WS Small Forward
20.7 LeBron James - Profile - 1st overall
12.3 Larry Bird - Profile - 1st overall
11.4 Carmelo Anthony- Profile- 3rd overall
10.8 Nickeil Alexander-Walker- no profile - 22nd overall
10.8 Harold Miner- no profile - 8th overall

10.3 Juwan Howard - Profile - 4th overall
10.1 Jaxson Hayes - Profile - 3rd overall
10.0 Shaquille O'Neal- Profile - 1st overall
9.1 Armen Gilliam - Profile - 5th overall
8.5 Chris Bosh- Profile - 7th overall

WS Center
11.2 Kwame Brown - Profile - 11th overall
9.6 Solomon Alabi - No profile -16th overall
9.5 David Robinson - Profile - 1st overall
9.3 Tyson Chandler- Profile - 1st overall
8.4 Mehmet Okur- No Profile - 2nd rounder

Eric seems to do a good job with bigs(which makes sense), but not so well with Pg's and Sg's. 8/10 of the top WS Pg's have no profile. 9/10 of the top SG's have no profile.

[TinyTimPig]

Profiles being edited the day before does make planning ahead tricky. I get that Eric is busy and can't do it days/weeks in advance - and the draft builder can't build them that early - but the way it is now does take much of the fun out of drafting.

It was one thing when a profile was too strong so Eric nerfed the potential a bit or something along those lines, but now 100% of profiles are edited so there's really no telling what one player may look like between reading their profile the day of sim 1 and re-reading it the day college stats are posted. We used to spend some time debating profiles in the thread, and sometimes those changes would be taken into account during the actual build. That isn't the case anymore as I think people have stopped putting much (any?) stock into profiles.

I asked Eric about this and his response was "BK", which makes tons of sense, but we've moved on from BK but haven't moved on from the problems he caused when we let him DM for whatever reason. It's OK to let us have some fun with the profiles from time to time. Steve Francis (he's just one example) was a fun player in college and early in the pros and many of us have fond memories of him. Let us have that in sim too! We've never had issues in previous iterations of sim when Odin made Alabama players better than IRL, or 20s did the same with Nebraska guys, or BK wrote glowing profiles for West Virginia guys in creation, and so on.

If the DM has a fond memory of someone and wants to create them a bit better than they were IRL (or dislikes the guy and writes them worse), that doesn't seem like it should be a problem.

Profiles let everyone be on the same footing with the same knowledge - they're posted publicly and we can all read and interpret them as we please, and use college stats and grades as additional data. When the profiles are edited the day before the players are built, it removes one of those data points entirely and makes it virtually useless.

[TinyTimPig]

Also after re-reading the OP I realize this thread was not meant to be an airing of grievances lol.

[TinyTimPig]

I think it’d help people feel heard if you remember that a lot of us aren’t familiar with advanced statistics. Explanations in simple English would be helpful.

[Herby New Year!]

Type your analysis up in word, screen cap it, post it to imgur, and upload as an img link. That would help me feel heard.

[eric]

Oct 6, 2022 10:49:32 GMT -5 Majic said:

In my view, the commissioner is here to run the league and stop any proposals that could be bad for the league or create competitive imbalance.

When a situation arises where there is a majority vote or a unanimous vote the commish should provide clear communication before veoting.

Have a dialogue, take the time to listen, actually listen and not just throw out some obscure data you pulled, and find a way meet in the middle.

When providing data display it in a clear way that anyone in the league can understand. explain what was looked at, what you measured and how it was measured. Please do not provide simple formulas or short hand for what information you looked at.

From that data, explain the ways that the change would be bad for the league, providing examples when applicable. When this discussion is done, and its clear to everyone why it would be bad for the league you can then veto it

this is why i specified that the question is NOT what proof you will believe - there is inevitably going to be a case where it's still not clear to you, no matter what proof there is, you still think the change should happen, and the same goes for every other gm in the league, that's just how people work

in that inevitable case, when the decision doesn't go your way, what do you have to see to believe your concern was heard?

[Majic]

Oct 6, 2022 14:36:25 GMT -5 eric said:

Oct 6, 2022 10:49:32 GMT -5 Majic said:

In my view, the commissioner is here to run the league and stop any proposals that could be bad for the league or create competitive imbalance.

When a situation arises where there is a majority vote or a unanimous vote the commish should provide clear communication before veoting.

Have a dialogue, take the time to listen, actually listen and not just throw out some obscure data you pulled, and find a way meet in the middle.

When providing data display it in a clear way that anyone in the league can understand. explain what was looked at, what you measured and how it was measured. Please do not provide simple formulas or short hand for what information you looked at.

From that data, explain the ways that the change would be bad for the league, providing examples when applicable. When this discussion is done, and its clear to everyone why it would be bad for the league you can then veto it

this is why i specified that the question is NOT what proof you will believe - there is inevitably going to be a case where it's still not clear to you, no matter what proof there is, you still think the change should happen, and the same goes for every other gm in the league, that's just how people work

in that inevitable case, when the decision doesn't go your way, what do you have to see to believe your concern was heard?

Have a dialogue, take the time to listen, actually listen and not just throw out some obscure data you pulled, and find a way meet in the middle. Be open to other ideas even if/when you disagree or don't understand. Discussing things in a rational manner and finding common ground before ultimately deciding one way or the other is helpful. 

[Majic]

Oct 6, 2022 12:46:56 GMT -5 TinyTimPig said:

I think it’d help people feel heard if you remember that a lot of us aren’t familiar with advanced statistics. Explanations in simple English would be helpful.

I have liked everything Tim has added in here, I first wanted to state that. 

But this one really speaks to one of my main issues, eric posts the formula or short hand (or whatever its called) for what his findings produced and it rarely makes actual sense to me. 

A simple written explanation as to what you looked at and considered for the data and then an explanation of what you found would be helpful. 

[eric]

Oct 6, 2022 11:30:41 GMT -5 rw said:

My biggest issue is the predictability of drafted players. It is a net negative to have a profile. Players should be based on their potential at draft time.

I know you say that is ambiguous and subjective. I would say exactly! We have too much information.

It is a net negative to have a profile. Frederic Weis was the correct pick at #3 and that's wrong and crazy.

Oct 6, 2022 12:26:37 GMT -5 Trofie said:

3. The main reason I enjoyed this thing , what 10 years ago now was to build teams and I loved doing that. My main method was drafting. I feel like that is nearly impossible with the way players are built and profiles altered a day before we see college stats. You can't formulate a plan for picks in a certain draft because who knows how players will look. There is 0 point to profiles. Just get rid of them, they serve no purpose and actually hinder the player moving forward. Just look at the past season and where the top 5 players at their respective positions were drafted .

over the past ten drafts before 3034, the total profile ws/48 is .108 and the total nonprofile ws/48 is .061, or about the gap between malcolm huckaby and kira lewis jr.

the reason profiles were brought closer to non profiles was because people complained they were too far apart. it was not difficult to bring these numbers closer together and it would not be difficult to move them further apart, since i already build from two different baselines for profiles and nonprofiles. the question of this thread is not that that gap should be, though, it is how can you feel heard when by definition only one of the group who want it further and the group who want it closer can get what they want. if you're in the group who doesn't, what can convince you your concerns were heard?

[eric]

Oct 6, 2022 12:26:37 GMT -5 Trofie said:

My main method was drafting. I feel like that is nearly impossible with the way players are built and profiles altered a day before we see college stats. You can't formulate a plan for picks in a certain draft because who knows how players will look.

Oct 6, 2022 12:39:34 GMT -5 TinyTimPig said:

It was one thing when a profile was too strong so Eric nerfed the potential a bit or something along those lines, but now 100% of profiles are edited so there's really no telling what one player may look like between reading their profile the day of sim 1 and re-reading it the day college stats are posted.

my claim is that the player will look like their stats and growth in the pros as much as i can control them to do so. though we've seen less than 1000 total MP from steve francis so far, here's how that comp looks right now:

poor scoring efficiency (47% to 53%)
made up of very poor FG% good FT% and middling 3P% (42% to 43%, 95% to 80%, 32% to 34%)
very strong rebounding pg (5.4 to 5.4)
lowish assists for pg (6.8 to 5.8)
solid but not great stocks (1.1 to 1.8)
very high turnovers for assists (5.7 to 4.0)

the big misses are scoring efficiency and turnovers, but he's also received 0 upgrades of any kind and is still only in year two. although we'll know more after the season since he'll get PT on a minor league team now, i contend that with expected upgrades he'd end up very close to his irl stats, which anyone can look at any time they want, and so anyone can know pretty much what a profile will end up being once i'm done with it

by comparison, giving a rotating cast of draft masters carte blanche to indulge their own personal biases, when no one knows how long a draft master will serve (or how petty they'll be), would necessarily be a less reliable source of information, even more so if we allow the commissioner to correct egregious cases (how egregious? how many?)

i agree this isn't really the point of the thread but it comes up a lot so it should be addressed

[Majic]

Oct 6, 2022 14:48:45 GMT -5 eric said:

Oct 6, 2022 11:30:41 GMT -5 rw said:

My biggest issue is the predictability of drafted players. It is a net negative to have a profile. Players should be based on their potential at draft time.

I know you say that is ambiguous and subjective. I would say exactly! We have too much information.

It is a net negative to have a profile. Frederic Weis was the correct pick at #3 and that's wrong and crazy.

Oct 6, 2022 12:26:37 GMT -5 Trofie said:

3. The main reason I enjoyed this thing , what 10 years ago now was to build teams and I loved doing that. My main method was drafting. I feel like that is nearly impossible with the way players are built and profiles altered a day before we see college stats. You can't formulate a plan for picks in a certain draft because who knows how players will look. There is 0 point to profiles. Just get rid of them, they serve no purpose and actually hinder the player moving forward. Just look at the past season and where the top 5 players at their respective positions were drafted .

over the past ten drafts before 3034, the total profile ws/48 is .108 and the total nonprofile ws/48 is .061, or about the gap between malcolm huckaby and kira lewis jr.

the reason profiles were brought closer to non profiles was because people complained they were too far apart. it was not difficult to bring these numbers closer together and it would not be difficult to move them further apart, since i already build from two different baselines for profiles and nonprofiles. the question of this thread is not that that gap should be, though, it is how can you feel heard when by definition only one of the group who want it further and the group who want it closer can get what they want. if you're in the group who doesn't, what can convince you your concerns were heard?

Ok, so this is a good example where I think your data is skewed and not taking into account the full scope of things.


At least from what I can tell in this example you are comparing roughly 10 profile player per season to 50 non profile players per season. If that is the case then of course the numbers are going to skew towards the profile players as there alot more non-profile players to choose from. 

If that is how you are producing your ws/48 number then I personally think your data is flawed, and thus do not agree with it. I dont know how/what the correct way to judge this by would be but I tend to look at trofies data and agree with his overall point more. 

Overall I think the consensus is that profile players should generally be better players and typically should all be selected within the top 15-ish picks. There will always be situations where a player or two drop but that should be rare rather the norm. We want the big name players to be worthy of the top picks and not have a situation where a profile ends up hurting them. 

[20s]

I’ll be honest, I haven’t read a profile in 20 seasons at least

[eric]

Oct 6, 2022 12:26:37 GMT -5 Trofie said:

1. I did see the post in shout about how an 8 - 0 vote wasn't implemented and Eric said that was only a third of the league at the time. I agree that shouldn't be implemented. However you implemented a 5-1 just this year on resignings so where is the logic?

i won't implement something that has data to show it's bad for the league just because it's popular, especially if it's only popular among a subset of the league

i will implement something that has data to show it's good for the league so long as it isn't unpopular

[eric]

Oct 6, 2022 14:44:25 GMT -5 Majic said:

Oct 6, 2022 14:36:25 GMT -5 eric said:

this is why i specified that the question is NOT what proof you will believe - there is inevitably going to be a case where it's still not clear to you, no matter what proof there is, you still think the change should happen, and the same goes for every other gm in the league, that's just how people work

in that inevitable case, when the decision doesn't go your way, what do you have to see to believe your concern was heard?

Have a dialogue, take the time to listen, actually listen and not just throw out some obscure data you pulled, and find a way meet in the middle. Be open to other ideas even if/when you disagree or don't understand. Discussing things in a rational manner and finding common ground before ultimately deciding one way or the other is helpful. 

so let's take the example in this thread: "players are too predictable", but you feel players are too UNpredictable, that too much already rests on tc and rng. it's literally impossible for there to be common ground there, if there's a change either rw gets what he wants or you get what you want, and the other guy thinks we made things even worse. when you're that other guy, what do i do to make you feel heard?

[Trofie-guest]

Oct 6, 2022 15:03:43 GMT -5 eric said:

Oct 6, 2022 12:26:37 GMT -5 Trofie said:

My main method was drafting. I feel like that is nearly impossible with the way players are built and profiles altered a day before we see college stats. You can't formulate a plan for picks in a certain draft because who knows how players will look.

Oct 6, 2022 12:39:34 GMT -5 TinyTimPig said:

It was one thing when a profile was too strong so Eric nerfed the potential a bit or something along those lines, but now 100% of profiles are edited so there's really no telling what one player may look like between reading their profile the day of sim 1 and re-reading it the day college stats are posted.

my claim is that the player will look like their stats and growth in the pros as much as i can control them to do so. though we've seen less than 1000 total MP from steve francis so far, here's how that comp looks right now:

poor scoring efficiency (47% to 53%)
made up of very poor FG% good FT% and middling 3P% (42% to 43%, 95% to 80%, 32% to 34%)
very strong rebounding pg (5.4 to 5.4)
lowish assists for pg (6.8 to 5.8)
solid but not great stocks (1.1 to 1.8)
very high turnovers for assists (5.7 to 4.0)

the big misses are scoring efficiency and turnovers, but he's also received 0 upgrades of any kind and is still only in year two. although we'll know more after the season since he'll get PT on a minor league team now, i contend that with expected upgrades he'd end up very close to his irl stats, which anyone can look at any time they want, and so anyone can know pretty much what a profile will end up being once i'm done with it

by comparison, giving a rotating cast of draft masters carte blanche to indulge their own personal biases, when no one knows how long a draft master will serve (or how petty they'll be), would necessarily be a less reliable source of information, even more so if we allow the commissioner to correct egregious cases (how egregious? how many?)

i agree this isn't really the point of the thread but it comes up a lot so it should be addressed

This is the problem imo. That's not your job and wasn't the point of sim league when we started this. Thus the point of draft profiles. You also shouldn't be doing this do 10-12 players when you have no way of "controlling" how the other non profile players turn out. 

[Majic]

Oct 6, 2022 15:18:49 GMT -5 eric said:

Oct 6, 2022 14:44:25 GMT -5 Majic said:

Have a dialogue, take the time to listen, actually listen and not just throw out some obscure data you pulled, and find a way meet in the middle. Be open to other ideas even if/when you disagree or don't understand. Discussing things in a rational manner and finding common ground before ultimately deciding one way or the other is helpful. 

so let's take the example in this thread: "players are too predictable", but you feel players are too UNpredictable, that too much already rests on tc and rng. it's literally impossible for there to be common ground there, if there's a change either rw gets what he wants or you get what you want, and the other guy thinks we made things even worse. when you're that other guy, what do i do to make you feel heard?

I would love for rw to explain his thought process more as I have a different interpretation on what he is saying than you do. I thought he was speaking to the scouting ability and having certainty in knowing what a player is exactly rather than the unknown without scouting. If this is what he is saying then I would agree with him. 

When I speak of TC reliance I am talking about how often a players ceiling is determined by how good, or bad, of a TC a player has. Some GM's don't like the dice roll, especially with high draft picks, because when a player busts or never grows it tough to pivot from that.  

Let me ask this in relation to the example we were discussing.. what does the ws/48 look like if you compare the top 10-15 drafted non-profile players from each draft to the profile players. This would compare prospects of what should be determined as equal skill.

[kc]

Oct 6, 2022 15:13:27 GMT -5 20s said:

I’ll be honest, I haven’t read a profile in 20 seasons at least

Ive read MAYBE 3 profiles since i've been in the league. In my opinion it's pointless to read them with college stats/scouts 

[eric]

Oct 6, 2022 15:09:15 GMT -5 Majic said:

Oct 6, 2022 14:48:45 GMT -5 eric said:

over the past ten drafts before 3034, the total profile ws/48 is .108 and the total nonprofile ws/48 is .061, or about the gap between malcolm huckaby and kira lewis jr.

the reason profiles were brought closer to non profiles was because people complained they were too far apart. it was not difficult to bring these numbers closer together and it would not be difficult to move them further apart, since i already build from two different baselines for profiles and nonprofiles. the question of this thread is not that that gap should be, though, it is how can you feel heard when by definition only one of the group who want it further and the group who want it closer can get what they want. if you're in the group who doesn't, what can convince you your concerns were heard?

Ok, so this is a good example where I think your data is skewed and not taking into account the full scope of things.


At least from what I can tell in this example you are comparing roughly 10 profile player per season to 50 non profile players per season. If that is the case then of course the numbers are going to skew towards the profile players as there alot more non-profile players to choose from. 

If that is how you are producing your ws/48 number then I personally think your data is flawed, and thus do not agree with it. I dont know how/what the correct way to judge this by would be but I tend to look at trofies data and agree with his overall point more. 

Overall I think the consensus is that profile players should generally be better players and typically should all be selected within the top 15-ish picks. There will always be situations where a player or two drop but that should be rare rather the norm. We want the big name players to be worthy of the top picks and not have a situation where a profile ends up hurting them. 

one problem i have with trofie's approach is it's skewed wildly depending on which year of win shares you look at. for example 3032 sg had 4 profiles in the top five, 3030 had 1 profile c and 4 profile sf, 3028 had 0 profile sg and 4 profile pg, and that's just looking back five years. i was making all those players the whole time, i didn't wildly alter my approach from year to year, but the results do alter wildly, so it can't be a good measurement of my approach

the second i have is it begs the question of which profile specifically should be top five caliber, and let's keep looking at sg with the names of sg profiles from 3030 back:

tyler herro
anthony peeler
doug christie
jim jackson
latrell sprewell (has two top five finishes)
anthony edwards
brandon roy
j.j. reddick
randy foye
avery bradley
evan turner

aside from brandon roy, who's the big name there who should be a no doubt top five sg? this isn't rhetorical - you say profiles shouldn't end up hurting players, i say they shouldn't make them better than they were either, and if you want brandon roy to be better talk to fecta since he's the one who never upgraded him

[Sapular]

Oct 6, 2022 15:13:35 GMT -5 eric said:

Oct 6, 2022 12:26:37 GMT -5 Trofie said:

1. I did see the post in shout about how an 8 - 0 vote wasn't implemented and Eric said that was only a third of the league at the time. I agree that shouldn't be implemented. However you implemented a 5-1 just this year on resignings so where is the logic?

i won't implement something that has data to show it's bad for the league just because it's popular, especially if it's only popular among a subset of the league

i will implement something that has data to show it's good for the league so long as it isn't unpopular

NOT EVERYTHING IS ABOUT DATA!  That is the part you are failing to understand or even acknowledge.  Sometimes there is a fun element you can look at.  YOU choose to live in a world that data drives EVERYTHING.  Data drives your happiness, your sadness, how you react to a pandemic, how you choose to spend your free time. Not everyone operates that way.  This is a perfect example of not being heard.  You go right to data to argue a point.  Data does  not acknowledge a persons thoughts or feelings.  Also, who says its bad for the league?  Your data?  

I think all anyone is asking you to do is be a person, a human with emotion and feelings.  Your responses are very dismissive.  I am not a stupid person but at the same time I will not pretend to even understand half of your responses, your formulas or whatever math you choose to represent your point of view.  How about a metric that shows how many human GM's have left and how quickly that occurs after a specific ruling or rule being carried out?  

Being heard is having your point discussed and understanding how and why someone feels that way, not just throwing some data point and saying you are wrong.  

[eric]

Oct 6, 2022 15:24:16 GMT -5 Trofie-guest said:

Oct 6, 2022 15:03:43 GMT -5 eric said:

my claim is that the player will look like their stats and growth in the pros as much as i can control them to do so. though we've seen less than 1000 total MP from steve francis so far, here's how that comp looks right now:

poor scoring efficiency (47% to 53%)
made up of very poor FG% good FT% and middling 3P% (42% to 43%, 95% to 80%, 32% to 34%)
very strong rebounding pg (5.4 to 5.4)
lowish assists for pg (6.8 to 5.8)
solid but not great stocks (1.1 to 1.8)
very high turnovers for assists (5.7 to 4.0)

the big misses are scoring efficiency and turnovers, but he's also received 0 upgrades of any kind and is still only in year two. although we'll know more after the season since he'll get PT on a minor league team now, i contend that with expected upgrades he'd end up very close to his irl stats, which anyone can look at any time they want, and so anyone can know pretty much what a profile will end up being once i'm done with it

by comparison, giving a rotating cast of draft masters carte blanche to indulge their own personal biases, when no one knows how long a draft master will serve (or how petty they'll be), would necessarily be a less reliable source of information, even more so if we allow the commissioner to correct egregious cases (how egregious? how many?)

i agree this isn't really the point of the thread but it comes up a lot so it should be addressed

This is the problem imo. That's not your job and wasn't the point of sim league when we started this. Thus the point of draft profiles. You also shouldn't be doing this do 10-12 players when you have no way of "controlling" how the other non profile players turn out. 

the question is whether you can formulate a plan for picks though. since player stats aren't going to change between when the profile is written and when i edit it, my point is that you can do so regardless of the edits

[eric]

Oct 6, 2022 15:25:22 GMT -5 Majic said:

Oct 6, 2022 15:18:49 GMT -5 eric said:

so let's take the example in this thread: "players are too predictable", but you feel players are too UNpredictable, that too much already rests on tc and rng. it's literally impossible for there to be common ground there, if there's a change either rw gets what he wants or you get what you want, and the other guy thinks we made things even worse. when you're that other guy, what do i do to make you feel heard?

I would love for rw to explain his thought process more as I have a different interpretation on what he is saying than you do. I thought he was speaking to the scouting ability and having certainty in knowing what a player is exactly rather than the unknown without scouting. If this is what he is saying then I would agree with him. 

When I speak of TC reliance I am talking about how often a players ceiling is determined by how good, or bad, of a TC a player has. Some GM's don't like the dice roll, especially with high draft picks, because when a player busts or never grows it tough to pivot from that.  

Let me ask this in relation to the example we were discussing.. what does the ws/48 look like if you compare the top 10-15 drafted non-profile players from each draft to the profile players. This would compare prospects of what should be determined as equal skill.

you're killing me

the question was "when you're that other guy, what do i do to make you feel heard?"

when i've showed you everything and you still don't agree, you still think it's skewed, there's nothing more to look at, the decision goes against you

when that happens, because it always will eventually, no matter what ends up happening or not happening today, what do i do to make you feel heard?

[eric]

Oct 6, 2022 15:37:41 GMT -5 Sapular said:

Oct 6, 2022 15:13:35 GMT -5 eric said:

i won't implement something that has data to show it's bad for the league just because it's popular, especially if it's only popular among a subset of the league

i will implement something that has data to show it's good for the league so long as it isn't unpopular

NOT EVERYTHING IS ABOUT DATA!  That is the part you are failing to understand or even acknowledge.  Sometimes there is a fun element you can look at.  YOU choose to live in a world that data drives EVERYTHING.  Data drives your happiness, your sadness, how you react to a pandemic, how you choose to spend your free time. Not everyone operates that way.  This is a perfect example of not being heard.  You go right to data to argue a point.  Data does  not acknowledge a persons thoughts or feelings.  Also, who says its bad for the league?  Your data?  

I think all anyone is asking you to do is be a person, a human with emotion and feelings.  Your responses are very dismissive.  I am not a stupid person but at the same time I will not pretend to even understand half of your responses, your formulas or whatever math you choose to represent your point of view.  How about a metric that shows how many human GM's have left and how quickly that occurs after a specific ruling or rule being carried out?  

Being heard is having your point discussed and understanding how and why someone feels that way, not just throwing some data point and saying you are wrong.  

what's the difference between a response that dismisses and a response that disagrees?

put another way, can i ever disagree with you without you feeling like you haven't been heard?

and what does that mean for the extremely common scenario where two GMs disagree and i have to pick a side?

[Sapular]

Oct 6, 2022 15:52:41 GMT -5 eric said:

Oct 6, 2022 15:37:41 GMT -5 Sapular said:

NOT EVERYTHING IS ABOUT DATA!  That is the part you are failing to understand or even acknowledge.  Sometimes there is a fun element you can look at.  YOU choose to live in a world that data drives EVERYTHING.  Data drives your happiness, your sadness, how you react to a pandemic, how you choose to spend your free time. Not everyone operates that way.  This is a perfect example of not being heard.  You go right to data to argue a point.  Data does  not acknowledge a persons thoughts or feelings.  Also, who says its bad for the league?  Your data?  

I think all anyone is asking you to do is be a person, a human with emotion and feelings.  Your responses are very dismissive.  I am not a stupid person but at the same time I will not pretend to even understand half of your responses, your formulas or whatever math you choose to represent your point of view.  How about a metric that shows how many human GM's have left and how quickly that occurs after a specific ruling or rule being carried out?  

Being heard is having your point discussed and understanding how and why someone feels that way, not just throwing some data point and saying you are wrong.  

what's the difference between a response that dismisses and a response that disagrees?

put another way, can i ever disagree with you without you feeling like you haven't been heard?

and what does that mean for the extremely common scenario where two GMs disagree and i have to pick a side?

yes it happens every day at my home with my wife.  We disagree constantly.  However, through civil discourse, I may not get my way but my wife acknowledges my side of things, recognizes how I feel and chose to go a different way and provides her reasons.  

NONE of this is about 2 GM's disagreeing.  This is 100% about a majority of people wanting one thing but your data point says something else so you do what a data point says not what a majority of the people want and yes 8 is slightly over a third but of the people that did vote, it was an overwhelming majority.  People don't vote because what we want and votes mean nothing.  You have said that and proven it by saying that you will not do something even if that is what the league wants because you have a data point that says it is bad for the league. That is proof you are not listening to people.  You simply do what data tells you to.  There are times when we don't care about a data point proves or shows.  This is you not listening to the group.  Listening and feeling heard would go along the lines of "  I see what you are saying and understand why you, the league want this, but here is why I dont think it is a good idea.  We could do X,Y,Z which will have a similar impact or effect and these ways ARE better for the league." Simply pointing out data and saying "No"  is not listening at all. 

[TinyTimPig]

Oct 6, 2022 15:03:43 GMT -5 eric said:

my claim is that the player will look like their stats and growth in the pros as much as i can control them to do so.

Ok, so players are modeled after their real-life counterparts as much as you can control them to do so. In order to have players modeled in such a way, you must do some research into their real-life stats prior to building them and...

Oct 6, 2022 15:03:43 GMT -5 eric said:

giving a rotating cast of draft masters carte blanche to indulge their own personal biases, when no one knows how long a draft master will serve (or how petty they'll be), would necessarily be a less reliable source of information

...personal biases of the Draft Master - a role that is generally undesirable as made evident by the high turnover - will not be acknowledged, despite it being one of the few things that can add entertainment to the role...

Leads me to the question...

Why is there a draft master and why are there profiles? Why don't we back the compensation back down to 25,000 and I'll just list out the 10 profile players whose stats you should research, and then do the strengths for non-profile guys (or we can just randomize them because that's pretty much what I do anyway).

It's clear they're very rarely read and my spending 3-4 hours every two weeks to write them all seems like an enormous waste of time.

[TinyTimPig]

Oct 6, 2022 15:03:43 GMT -5 eric said:

even more so if we allow the commissioner to correct egregious cases (how egregious? how many?)

Also, I've already done the research on this portion regarding your editing of profiles, which you refuse to stop doing despite the reason for you starting it no longer being relevant.

You didn't edit profiles - or did so incredibly rarely - in 5.0. You hardly did it for the first 15 or whatever seasons of 6.0. You were forced to do it when BK was given DM responsibilities, but refuse to relinquish that role since his departure.

BK isn't DM anymore. He can't be the excuse.