Draft pool idea

[James-Eagles]

Ok I made this post awhile ago but add a little randomness.
But this time I have made spreadsheet that once the draft class is put in with there risk value. Rich just has to open and copy paste. It randomly generates each time it is open or edited so there would be no way of knowing until it is imported after the draft.

All numbers are up for debate but say but keep them 10% since what I created used a random number from 1 to 10.
Risk level would be known before draft so while random. It is informed.
All would be add/subtract to POT but can't go over max but can go under min(only changes ACT if POT goes below it)
Risk can be assigned when class is build or set randomly and can be weighted if random.
There can be any number of "risk/boost" categories

There is a few example off the time of my head.

Example 1 high risk
10% +3 or -3
20% +2 or -2
20% +1 or -1
or
10% +3,+2,+1
20% -1,-2
30% -3

Basic boost
10% +1
90% +0

High boost Zero risk but chance of upside.
70% +0
10% +1
10% +2
10% +3


What I like about this over random boost is it is an informed selection if you don't like high risk you can avoid it but if you want to gamble you can. This could make after 1st round be interesting how soon to do you take chance on a high risk player.

Please just discuss the idea of informed randomness and worry about the boost numbers later.

[Mitch-Oilers]

If I'm following you, this idea adds a sense "good scouts" or "bad scouts" in your organization.

Would every player be given a risk rating?

[James-Eagles]

I wouldn't believe it is bad scouting or good scouting but more coaches and owners falling in love with an aspect of a player and ignoring the flaws. I just think it will add more interest to the draft.

as for will all have some "risk". It would be possible to have can't miss picks where they are100 +0 boost or 10% +1 something like that. I think the high reward high risk should be rare.

[Dan-Cincinnati]

Love this idea.

It makes drafting Malik McDowell possible, or u can get a guy like Frank Clark. Both guys were risky/gambling picks. 1 worked, 1 didn’t. Would love to add this randomness to our drafts, and it would also keep things interesting late because there would be more good players left due to other GMs just swinging for the fences and gambling

[Mitch-Oilers]

I say we should seriously consider some version of this idea.