Quote:
Originally Posted by md40022
Yeah, I'm with Dave on this one. I've had plenty of guys either stay stagnant for an extra year or even digress for a period, only to then come around and get better.
I agree that once it becomes pretty obvious that the guy isn't progressing you have to cut him. Like has been said, that guy just sucks up playing time from others - so you have to cut him. But I don't agree with "never" sending a guy back down a level only because I can tell you first hand that I've had guys like that end up panning out..... Now if you send the guy back down a level and he's still not cutting it, then let him go - totally.
|
All good points, and I don't disagree. It's kind of a chicken and egg proposition. I really try to look at a prospect's age and experience versus the league average at each level, and try not to let a player advance too quickly. So, due to my caution, it's rare that a guy advances too quickly. But it happens, and that's an exception to the general rule.
I have no problem leaving a guy at a level for another year, to let him acclimate. And, if a prospect advances fast, I would not hesitate to promote to MLB from AA, for example; although it's rare.
The other thing is, you have injuries along the way, especially to pitchers. That basically re-starts the development clock, and some guys need to go through all the steps while re-habbing, say from Tommy John surgery. If a prospect slows due to injury, that doesn't mean he lacks talent. You have to figure out if he can recover.
My approach also depends heavily on drafting college players; not teenagers. The best ones are ready for A+ ball, or even AA maybe. Relatively high floor. In just a few years, I will know if they have MLB in their future. At 21 or 22 or 23, they are unlikely to improve or grow or fill out remarkably, like the raw teenagers.