Quote:
Originally Posted by jpeters1734
|
there absolutely used to be, but it's not worth my time to look. it could be on one of many other pages than the one you links.
think about it... otherwise there'd by no benefit to promoting players.. you could leave them in rookie or AAA (relatively the same to context) and just let them continue to develop with the slight boost form overperforming statistics along with playing time.
i think you said it too.. riding the bench in the mlb is better than riding the bench in the MiL ... it means the same exact thing, lol.
"However, a player will develop faster on the MLB bench than the AAA bench "
that logic agrees with my statment above in a very parrellel way.
now, you also said that riding the mlb bench is not better than playing in AAA.. .which is substantiated by less than what i am using to draw a conclusion, and that's okay (stuart smiley reference). it's just a maybe.. and i'd wager numerous contexts where it would not be true. players that are too developed for AAA absolutely should not be there. they will hurt their ratings more often than help at that point. even the mlb bench is better for a year, no more.
One more thing i almost forgot -- the modifiers per league -- essentially tells you the ~ceiling, more or less for development at that level. soft ceiling... soft cap i think is a term used in some games. there's a reason why AAA is lower than MLB. even if not directly causal to it, it is a representation or reflection of it -- to fill the league it uses that to give ratings that fit, for example.. .so it is related one way or another.
as far as 'better development' i guess it needs minimum not to be incompetent, but again that should be common sense.. you aren't bringing severely undeveloped players to the MLB just for kicks.