You're looking at it as a PT manager, SotD. If you already have a 20 rider squad at the end of transfers, this draft is not going to help you in any way to score more points. In that case it could make sense to help develop a semi-decent domestique.
As a CT manager with 15 riders, where your point per rider ratio is arguably more crucial, I don't think I would be wasting these 2 slots with riders who could at best be decent domestiques in 3-4 seasons. There are imo better options still available of riders who can become more relevant in CT than said half-talents.
Interesting discussion folks. Of course it is completely dependent upon the situation you find yourself in coming out of the regular transfer season.
In that context, if this new innovation had been included last season for CT teams, I'm fairly certain that I'd have gone for some of the decent cobbled support already picked up in my 1st list, as was a key terrain for WCC, with lots of race days for that speciality across the C1/2 C2HC (and even HC) calendar that we had selected. My list for the 2nd round would have the top half dozen or so slots at the very least filled with still quite exciting lvl 1 + 2 talents left in the DB. Of course the 'stars' have not been missed, but there remain guys who will be at minimum very solid PCT level domestiques when maxed still unemployed. WCC ended transfers with 15 riders plus 1 loan-in to fill in unused RD's.
Every team this year will have had to make a similar assessment of their existing position, and round 1 picks thus far are the outcome in each case. I don't think there is fundamentally any right or wrong answer!
I personally used 1st pick to get some help in areas I am weak at, and my 2nd pick is going to be a youngster (if he will not be touched, which is likely the case)
You're looking at it as a PT manager, SotD. If you already have a 20 rider squad at the end of transfers, this draft is not going to help you in any way to score more points. In that case it could make sense to help develop a semi-decent domestique.
As a CT manager with 15 riders, where your point per rider ratio is arguably more crucial, I don't think I would be wasting these 2 slots with riders who could at best be decent domestiques in 3-4 seasons. There are imo better options still available of riders who can become more relevant in CT than said half-talents.
Maybe. But I'm trying to look at it from a CT perspective. As a PT manager I don't see a need for 20 "strong" riders. Maybe 15. So I don't see why CT managers should need more than 10. Hence the point with me wanting to develop further for next season being even more critical at CT level.
Also I think you are underestimating the level of the talents available. There are some who would be 3rd tier GC materiale at PT level left, some potential PT level leadout sprinters (I would probably not go for them though, looking at the remaining DB), but even more important there are strong puncheurs in the DB that would be worth more than 50K when maxed - easily. I picked up one of those as level 3 myself at 50K for development reasons only. I would definately do the same at CT level, just at a lower exp level. The talents I can pick up are lieutenaints at best, because I am at PT level, but I can easily spot 5-10 talents who in themselves would be CT level leaders or subtop leaders. And would also work very well at PCT level as cheap helpers.
But I'm also looking at CT as a development league where you want to be at MOST 2 seasons. And if you are there at most 2 seasons I would be looking to develop the hell out of the remaining 7 riders (outside the 6-10 important riders).
I don't see domestiques scoring points at CT level unless they strike luck. It's not like the PT where domestiques are actually important in terms of the overall points haul.
The point of not paying any wages is a no-argument for this. Managers should treat it like the min number of riders were raised to 17 and the cap space was raised to 1.3M because thats basically what this is. So effectively the drafted riders are just 50k guys = equal to other team members in terms of value of roster spots.
If we're talking about he premier talents left available and not about a local talent that maxes at 74HI or stuff like that then i would have suggested every CT manager to pick the talent up earlier and sign the domestique later through the draft. My reason would be that quite a lot of talents get picked up as stagiares in the last days of transfers while not a lot of quality domestiques get picked up at the same time.
I disagree... If you had 17 riders and another 100K wages you had further options to do other sort of deals, loans etc. - In theory, yes, in reality I do see it as a difference, because this is a fixed and shut area with absolutely no chance to interfere. And in that case I find development the best possible solution.
I do agree, however, that while most talents have gone for 50K, this season, your point is absolutely valid, but I still believe that getting a free talent after the team is set, no more loans are possible, and all leaders are set (and hopefully a decent set of domestiques is also in stall), then getting 76-79 key stat talents is easily the way to go.
I feel like the core team should be solved before draft, because you have no way of knowing whether or not you will get a useful draft rider. The 3-4 useful riders could be picked up within the final seconds of the transfermarket, or picked up ahead of you in the draft. Then what? Pick your number 5-6 choice for that? Seems unlogical to me, as that rider is certainly worse than what you could do with a talent. Also you would always lose out on your rivals unless you get a top 3 pick, as other teams already signed the better deal. So signing the 5-6th choice is just damage control, for basically nothing.
I doubt that anyone with a key MO, HI, TT, SPR or cobbled setup really lack a rider for that leader. If they do,they have planned badly in the transfers imo or have been extremely unlucky with silent auctions.
So what is best? To assign the best possible rider, who is still likely to score somewhere between 0-25 points, or to develop a rider that can be used at PCT level, or be sold/traded for better riders in the future? For me it's a no brainer.
Then there's that other possibility of going for riders that COULD snatch a breakaway win.
But signing 4th tier helpers (or worse) at this point really is a bad strategy for me. Even more so with signing possible disturbance-elements.
I do, however agree, that if you have no sprinter at all, it could be sensible to pick up the best possible solution, although, I still would argue that he would only interfere with the original plans, which obviously is to NOT attend the sprints, and instead score points elsewhere/in other ways. So getting a low-end top 10 sprinter in to prohibit your other riders from doing their (payed) duty, seems like a bad call imo.
Anyway, there's no right or wrong here, those are just my thoughts, and how I would play it.
In this case we disagree for once. Obviously it depends massively on the type of team you have and there is no perfect choice for every team. and the ambitions (promotion ambitions or just developing a team core for the first season) you have for the season is also a key reason for whatever draft strategy you take. (I also expect to see more talents taken in the second draft round too)
Of course you would have further options if that 17 rider thing would be true. But i dont think its much of a stretch to treat it like that.
Another point is that i would need to like a talents stats a lot to spend 3-4 years to develop a lvl1 talent while a domestique is much more replacable and you wont get as attached to them as to the talents. And i am not sure about this as unlike you i dont have an up to date DB and i didnt look into lvl 1 talents as much as i probably should but i think the difference between talents left is probably bigger than the difference between maxed riders left?
And for some terrains there are still quite a few riders left. Of course someone like Othman would be nice but there are surely other 74-75 HI gus left who would do a solid job for one season.
And i disagree that a team that still needs a domestique for a certain domestique has screwed up. The db has become so deep in terms of quality riders that there are a ton of guys every year that should have a contract. And its not as if it really matters who your 7th or 8th TT guy is as long as he is a solid time triallist. And whether your fourth or fith guy in your mountain guy is 73, 74 or 75 doesnt have the biggest effect either so you can leave that roster spot open till the draft and decide to get the best talent available instead of taking whichever "yeah this talent seems okayish once maxed too" lad falls to you.
The point of not paying any wages is a no-argument for this. Managers should treat it like the min number of riders were raised to 17 and the cap space was raised to 1.3M because thats basically what this is. So effectively the drafted riders are just 50k guys = equal to other team members in terms of value of roster spots.
If we're talking about he premier talents left available and not about a local talent that maxes at 74HI or stuff like that then i would have suggested every CT manager to pick the talent up earlier and sign the domestique later through the draft. My reason would be that quite a lot of talents get picked up as stagiares in the last days of transfers while not a lot of quality domestiques get picked up at the same time.
I disagree... If you had 17 riders and another 100K wages you had further options to do other sort of deals, loans etc. - In theory, yes, in reality I do see it as a difference, because this is a fixed and shut area with absolutely no chance to interfere. And in that case I find development the best possible solution.
I do agree, however, that while most talents have gone for 50K, this season, your point is absolutely valid, but I still believe that getting a free talent after the team is set, no more loans are possible, and all leaders are set (and hopefully a decent set of domestiques is also in stall), then getting 76-79 key stat talents is easily the way to go.
I feel like the core team should be solved before draft, because you have no way of knowing whether or not you will get a useful draft rider. The 3-4 useful riders could be picked up within the final seconds of the transfermarket, or picked up ahead of you in the draft. Then what? Pick your number 5-6 choice for that? Seems unlogical to me, as that rider is certainly worse than what you could do with a talent. Also you would always lose out on your rivals unless you get a top 3 pick, as other teams already signed the better deal. So signing the 5-6th choice is just damage control, for basically nothing.
I doubt that anyone with a key MO, HI, TT, SPR or cobbled setup really lack a rider for that leader. If they do,they have planned badly in the transfers imo or have been extremely unlucky with silent auctions.
So what is best? To assign the best possible rider, who is still likely to score somewhere between 0-25 points, or to develop a rider that can be used at PCT level, or be sold/traded for better riders in the future? For me it's a no brainer.
Then there's that other possibility of going for riders that COULD snatch a breakaway win.
But signing 4th tier helpers (or worse) at this point really is a bad strategy for me. Even more so with signing possible disturbance-elements.
I do, however agree, that if you have no sprinter at all, it could be sensible to pick up the best possible solution, although, I still would argue that he would only interfere with the original plans, which obviously is to NOT attend the sprints, and instead score points elsewhere/in other ways. So getting a low-end top 10 sprinter in to prohibit your other riders from doing their (payed) duty, seems like a bad call imo.
Anyway, there's no right or wrong here, those are just my thoughts, and how I would play it.
In this case we disagree for once. Obviously it depends massively on the type of team you have and there is no perfect choice for every team. and the ambitions (promotion ambitions or just developing a team core for the first season) you have for the season is also a key reason for whatever draft strategy you take. (I also expect to see more talents taken in the second draft round too)
Of course you would have further options if that 17 rider thing would be true. But i dont think its much of a stretch to treat it like that.
Another point is that i would need to like a talents stats a lot to spend 3-4 years to develop a lvl1 talent while a domestique is much more replacable and you wont get as attached to them as to the talents. And i am not sure about this as unlike you i dont have an up to date DB and i didnt look into lvl 1 talents as much as i probably should but i think the difference between talents left is probably bigger than the difference between maxed riders left?
And for some terrains there are still quite a few riders left. Of course someone like Othman would be nice but there are surely other 74-75 HI gus left who would do a solid job for one season.
And i disagree that a team that still needs a domestique for a certain domestique has screwed up. The db has become so deep in terms of quality riders that there are a ton of guys every year that should have a contract. And its not as if it really matters who your 7th or 8th TT guy is as long as he is a solid time triallist. And whether your fourth or fith guy in your mountain guy is 73, 74 or 75 doesnt have the biggest effect either so you can leave that roster spot open till the draft and decide to get the best talent available instead of taking whichever "yeah this talent seems okayish once maxed too" lad falls to you.
Disagreements are absolutely cool. It makes for some interesting discussions rather than just supplementing eachother in things we do agree upon
My point is, that if you need a 73-75MO rider or whatever at this point, you should have picked him up while the transfermarket was still open, so you would get to pick his stats, rather than having to rely on others not picking him before you in a draft. Hence my comment on "fucking up".
Several CT managers have gone for stagiares, which is OK, but IMO it would have been wiser to not make those bids, and attach those riders (under the interpretation that they would like to build on him), on a draft spot instead to make the most of his development.
I believe some managers have spent a total of 50K or more on stagiares (I might be wrong). In that case I would have rather spent it on picking up the best possible (and suited) FA rider on 50K, and use those drafts on making 2 of them permanent assignments.
I do understand that some have already signed enough talents, for it to be an unhealthy solution to pick up another 2, but I do think that for majority of the CT teams, the overall strategy has been to sign riders that will do well in the season, and some riders to aid him in doing so. Then adding a talent here and there obviously.
And if that strategy is in fact true, then I don't think many people are in actual need of getting that extra 73COB rider or 74MO rider with no notable backup stats to support it, just for the sake of getting another. If you have a 78COB rider (unless you got him VERY late) you already have a couple of 73-74 guys around him. Same goes with sprinters, puncheurs and climbers. I don't think many teams (as far as I can see), have left their captains in an open spot.
I do agree that TTT setups could be usefull for a "whatever" kind of rider, but what is then best? The last random 74TT rider or the development rider who maxes at 78, while having 70 right now? It certainly doesn't make a difference of much once on the road. And the 74TT rider is a toss-away next season, while the talent will be usefull throughout the promotion task.
And like I said, there are no right or wrongs here, this would just be my thinking if I had a CT team. I would not (after the transfers) be in a state where I was in actual need of a certain rider type, unless I had been very unfortunate. Like some of the teams who had to make a last minute sales, might need a certain type now. But if everything went relatively smooth the team would have been fitted by now, and then I would basically just be adding depth for no apparent reason. Something that, in the CT, would give basically no points at all, while talents would add nothing either, but would in the future.
I would never be in a spot where I needed to close a gap in the team now, and if I was to add another cobbler to my cobbled leader (a top 5 CT cobbler), that certain rider would be 4th or 5th tier in my already built-up team. When I glance at the CT teams, that would be my understanding of those too.
And yes, there are certainly talents within the pool, who at maxed level would be on a wage well above 50K. Some of those riders have been sold for as much as 650K this season. So in terms of actually getting somewhere in the game I would find it significantly more feasable to do the talent approach at CT level, rather then signing a low-end filler, to throw away once renewals start.
Of course if you can find a rider you would want to keep on longer terms, that would be a decent approach to, even if maxed or at level 4 unmaxed, but normally I would say it isn't a logical, nor tactical approach. But I also see PT managers picking up 5th-6th tier riders as their last pickups for no apparent reason, and I find that rather unlogical too, but I'm not saying my approach is the correct one - just the one, that for me, seems logical
I do think that there are some riders out there that can be solid point scorers in the CT still though, so I don't get why I'd go for a talent over one of them if I'm looking to build the strongest team possible this season.
Why would I pick up a talent that will max out at 74 or 75 when I can pick up a guy who is already 75COB rider with 73SP/72ACC to be third in line in my 6 man deep cobbles lineup.
These riders don't cost me anything, so the way I see it is if there is a guy left that could be useful this season then I should try and draft him, especially if he isn't young enough to be seen as someone I would have wanted to tie down to a contract to make sure I had for a few seasons.
Or to me it would make sense to try and get a guy that could be a low end domestique on multiple terrains, as he could slot into my lineup on different terrains and fill a few gaps, so I don't have to send a climber as the last man in my cobbles roster or a sprinter to a hilly one day race for instance.
He might not be of enough quality to sign ahead of one of my paid riders but his versatility would be useful to have even if he isn't as strong on any one terrain as it means the last guys on that terrain aren't as weak as a rider that has no skills there but specialises somewhere else.
Atlantius wrote:
Well in CT it can be difficult to fit in enough support riders for 3-4 leaders (as in my case). In that case getting some more depth in those areas is much better than signing a talent I didn't want enough to sign in the first place.
I do agree that it's too late to find an outright leader but the draft riders are very good for providing depth and/or filling gaps to get a few points from races that would otherwise have been certain 0-pointers.
If you have 4 leaders and 11 helpers, I do hope that the helpers have been picked with their leaders in mind - If so, they should easily suffice. It's not like the leaders need 4 riders to back them up with great stats. Having a top GC rider would probably love a 77 and a 75MO rider to support him, but it could also be a 72MO/76HI rider as a domestique sometimes. And he could be the main hilly domestique too..
I understand where you're coming from - especially in terms of the lack of depth-points in CT.
However last year in PCT we saw the importance of having a full strong team if you have a top sprinter. More often than not we saw my team and Orange doing a large share of the work throughout the day since the game regarded our sprinters as top favourites. The result was that come the last 5 km our sprinters had the least support left and didn't get the results they should have.
Having 11 helpers, subtract 2 talents crucial for the future but not top helpers yet, another loaned in who isn't a top helper either. That leaves 8 riders left and since the top helpers at most can do 1,5 leader programs you only really have 2 support specialized in the given terrain. With a top leader where the team is forced to work all day that is not enough to actually have anyone left with energy in the finale.
In my case I had to wiggle in some support for König after having used full wage cap without fillers. I did get the loan deals I needed but that still left me with two riders to support one of the divisions top stage races. Adding another decent climber on top of that certainly help.
Kulppi didn't get any helpers signed as there weren't any spots left and he is my weakest "leader". The draft allows me to at least secure him a little help.
Had I kept my team to having decent leaders on max 2 terrains I'd probably think the same way as you and go for talents, but my top priorities have already been signed.
sammyt93 wrote:
I do think that there are some riders out there that can be solid point scorers in the CT still though, so I don't get why I'd go for a talent over one of them if I'm looking to build the strongest team possible this season.
Why would I pick up a talent that will max out at 74 or 75 when I can pick up a guy who is already 75COB rider with 73SP/72ACC to be third in line in my 6 man deep cobbles lineup.
These riders don't cost me anything, so the way I see it is if there is a guy left that could be useful this season then I should try and draft him, especially if he isn't young enough to be seen as someone I would have wanted to tie down to a contract to make sure I had for a few seasons.
Or to me it would make sense to try and get a guy that could be a low end domestique on multiple terrains, as he could slot into my lineup on different terrains and fill a few gaps, so I don't have to send a climber as the last man in my cobbles roster or a sprinter to a hilly one day race for instance.
He might not be of enough quality to sign ahead of one of my paid riders but his versatility would be useful to have even if he isn't as strong on any one terrain as it means the last guys on that terrain aren't as weak as a rider that has no skills there but specialises somewhere else.
You definately shouldn't pick up the level 1 riders that will max at 74/75, but rather those maxing at 77/78
If you can pick up a rider at this point that will move directly in at 3rd place in your 6 man deep cobbled setup, why didn't you pick him up over the other 3 he's pushing a step back, earlier?
Whether or not you'll sign him for free or for 50K won't make any difference does it? Aren't you allowed to renew these free riders just like you do normally? If not, then yes, absolutely no reason to develop a talent that will just be thrown directly into the FA pool!
I understand the reasoning behind wanting to be able to feat a full roster of relevant riders, but in reality I don't see it giving a real benefit. If I put 5 cobblers and 3 mountainers I don't think you'll be worse off than putting 8 cobblers. They won't all be of use IMO. Some will be used purely for fetching water early on the stage, and basically all riders with higher than 50COB and 55FL should be able to do that.
Atlantius wrote:
Well in CT it can be difficult to fit in enough support riders for 3-4 leaders (as in my case). In that case getting some more depth in those areas is much better than signing a talent I didn't want enough to sign in the first place.
I do agree that it's too late to find an outright leader but the draft riders are very good for providing depth and/or filling gaps to get a few points from races that would otherwise have been certain 0-pointers.
If you have 4 leaders and 11 helpers, I do hope that the helpers have been picked with their leaders in mind - If so, they should easily suffice. It's not like the leaders need 4 riders to back them up with great stats. Having a top GC rider would probably love a 77 and a 75MO rider to support him, but it could also be a 72MO/76HI rider as a domestique sometimes. And he could be the main hilly domestique too..
I understand where you're coming from - especially in terms of the lack of depth-points in CT.
However last year in PCT we saw the importance of having a full strong team if you have a top sprinter. More often than not we saw my team and Orange doing a large share of the work throughout the day since the game regarded our sprinters as top favourites. The result was that come the last 5 km our sprinters had the least support left and didn't get the results they should have.
Having 11 helpers, subtract 2 talents crucial for the future but not top helpers yet, another loaned in who isn't a top helper either. That leaves 8 riders left and since the top helpers at most can do 1,5 leader programs you only really have 2 support specialized in the given terrain. With a top leader where the team is forced to work all day that is not enough to actually have anyone left with energy in the finale.
In my case I had to wiggle in some support for König after having used full wage cap without fillers. I did get the loan deals I needed but that still left me with two riders to support one of the divisions top stage races. Adding another decent climber on top of that certainly help.
Kulppi didn't get any helpers signed as there weren't any spots left and he is my weakest "leader". The draft allows me to at least secure him a little help.
Had I kept my team to having decent leaders on max 2 terrains I'd probably think the same way as you and go for talents, but my top priorities have already been signed.
I understand the reasoning behind this, but doesn't necessarily agree... A team can also be too strong for it's leader. I saw that when I tried to win the TdF in 2016, where I had Lecuisinier, Vasyliv and Novak as main leaders for mountains and Coppel etc for the flat/hills. Spilak would have been MUCH better of keeping Lecuisinier at home. He expected the team to do all the work instead of reacting when the GC riders attacked.
I do understand the reasoning behind having a strong flat team for the sprints though, but I think it's fair to say that some level 1-2 talents are close to the same level of the best maxed ones. Not there yet, but not worse at a significant enough level to chose the old fart over the young developper that will become better soon (maybe even next season). The reasoning would be that you don't sign the best helpers now, but rather the number 5-8 in your setup. And at that level I don't think a 76FL rider at the age of 30-32 would be the better pick than a level 1-3 rider with 73-74FL.
Same goes for all other terrains. Why pick a 74MO rider when you can pick a a level 2-3 rider with 70-72MO? Will it really do the difference in your leader performing when he already have 2-3 better climbers around him no matter which you pick?
sammyt93 wrote:
I do think that there are some riders out there that can be solid point scorers in the CT still though, so I don't get why I'd go for a talent over one of them if I'm looking to build the strongest team possible this season.
Why would I pick up a talent that will max out at 74 or 75 when I can pick up a guy who is already 75COB rider with 73SP/72ACC to be third in line in my 6 man deep cobbles lineup.
These riders don't cost me anything, so the way I see it is if there is a guy left that could be useful this season then I should try and draft him, especially if he isn't young enough to be seen as someone I would have wanted to tie down to a contract to make sure I had for a few seasons.
Or to me it would make sense to try and get a guy that could be a low end domestique on multiple terrains, as he could slot into my lineup on different terrains and fill a few gaps, so I don't have to send a climber as the last man in my cobbles roster or a sprinter to a hilly one day race for instance.
He might not be of enough quality to sign ahead of one of my paid riders but his versatility would be useful to have even if he isn't as strong on any one terrain as it means the last guys on that terrain aren't as weak as a rider that has no skills there but specialises somewhere else.
You definately shouldn't pick up the level 1 riders that will max at 74/75, but rather those maxing at 77/78
If you can pick up a rider at this point that will move directly in at 3rd place in your 6 man deep cobbled setup, why didn't you pick him up over the other 3 he's pushing a step back, earlier?
Whether or not you'll sign him for free or for 50K won't make any difference does it? Aren't you allowed to renew these free riders just like you do normally? If not, then yes, absolutely no reason to develop a talent that will just be thrown directly into the FA pool!
I understand the reasoning behind wanting to be able to feat a full roster of relevant riders, but in reality I don't see it giving a real benefit. If I put 5 cobblers and 3 mountainers I don't think you'll be worse off than putting 8 cobblers. They won't all be of use IMO. Some will be used purely for fetching water early on the stage, and basically all riders with higher than 50COB and 55FL should be able to do that.
The only riders I found maxing at 77/78 were sprinters and whilst I will need to make my leadout train younger in the future, the riders I would be more likely to target to do that are already on other teams rather than what is left over at this point.
I just don't see why any talents that are going to reach that level on other terrains would still be on the table at this point, if they are that good then surely they would have been picked up by other teams during transfers and not be about for the draft. (If this isn't the case and you've identified others I'd like to see a list after the draft is over)
The others are Taramarcaz who garnered enough interest to go for more than €50,000, Cancellara who is only 1 point lower in Cobble than Veelers but can be part of a TTT train (so more versatile as he fills 2 spots) and as a Swiss team it's nice to let him retire in a home team and Gatto who is primarily signed to leadout Aregger, but his cobble ability for this season is a nice fit and basically replaces the released Zafferani with his secondary function.
Knowing Veelers was still on the table late I still chose to pick up Olei as my last €50,000 FA knowing getting the talent in for the longterm was better than signing Veelers as then I'm taking a risk on drafting a domestique that could get chosen before my pick rather than a talent I want that would be in my team for years to come.
So in essence I'm using the draft to supplement depth beyond what I deemed worthy of getting a €50,000 contract as the draft is a riskier option as others could take the guy before your turn and you lose more by that happening to a talent rather than a guy you could use but don't necessarily need for 1 season.
Even though you get to renew the Draft riders afterwards if you wanted a talent badly enough to put him at the top of your draft list then I think you should have signed him before the draft as that would be harder to find then a 74-76 main stat helper would be to pickup in the draft and the difference in talents is more than the difference in 2 similar established riders so missing a talent through the draft and signing the helper first instead risks more.
sammyt93 wrote:
The only riders I found maxing at 77/78 were sprinters and whilst I will need to make my leadout train younger in the future, the riders I would be more likely to target to do that are already on other teams rather than what is left over at this point.
I just don't see why any talents that are going to reach that level on other terrains would still be on the table at this point, if they are that good then surely they would have been picked up by other teams during transfers and not be about for the draft. (If this isn't the case and you've identified others I'd like to see a list after the draft is over)
The others are Taramarcaz who garnered enough interest to go for more than €50,000, Cancellara who is only 1 point lower in Cobble than Veelers but can be part of a TTT train (so more versatile as he fills 2 spots) and as a Swiss team it's nice to let him retire in a home team and Gatto who is primarily signed to leadout Aregger, but his cobble ability for this season is a nice fit and basically replaces the released Zafferani with his secondary function.
Knowing Veelers was still on the table late I still chose to pick up Olei as my last €50,000 FA knowing getting the talent in for the longterm was better than signing Veelers as then I'm taking a risk on drafting a domestique that could get chosen before my pick rather than a talent I want that would be in my team for years to come.
So in essence I'm using the draft to supplement depth beyond what I deemed worthy of getting a €50,000 contract as the draft is a riskier option as others could take the guy before your turn and you lose more by that happening to a talent rather than a guy you could use but don't necessarily need for 1 season.
Even though you get to renew the Draft riders afterwards if you wanted a talent badly enough to put him at the top of your draft list then I think you should have signed him before the draft as that would be harder to find then a 74-76 main stat helper would be to pickup in the draft and the difference in talents is more than the difference in 2 similar established riders so missing a talent through the draft and signing the helper first instead risks more.
Well they are there... I have (without doing a lot of footwork) found 2 77HI riders, a bunch of 76HI riders with different combinations - some with 72-74MO, some with strong sprints and good acceleration. There are also atleast 4 riders with 76COB, and a bunch with 76-79FL, aswell as some strong TT'ers from 75-78, some of which with a very strong MO or SPR too. Some 80-81PRL riders, aswell as quite some 76MO riders with good backup stats.
There are plenty of reasons why those riders aren't picked up. The most logical explanation is that they are level 1, and PT/PCT teams feel they are too much of a burden because of the entire loan out aspect. CT teams have the "luxury" of developping from low level extremely fast.
You think that if you wanted a subtop talent "badly" then he should be signed previously, while I think fillers/versatile riders should be signed before. I feel that quality is what needs to be signed first. Not future quality
. Maybe my phraseology was a little confusing!
