Did I promote too soon?

[hitmanwa]

I pretty much skipped AAA, am I still ok?

[The Game]

Most ML talent skips AAA. AAA tends to be for players who bounce in and out of the majors.

[olivertheorem]

Hard to say without seeing his potentials beforehand. He looks like a Matt Dominguez clone, only with worse defense. I wish he was that good in my Astros game; in mine, he's mid-minors filler.

[goalieump413]

Well, it's the Houston Astros, so maybe you get a pass, but...

Yeah, you pulled the trigger a little too soon. He just hasn't played enough games in AA or above ball. Even in A ball, he only had 334 AB's. Players take time to develop, but it depends on how fast things are going, and if he's getting good coaching.

But I guess it depends on what you think his ML role will be. If you believe he's got starter quality talent, and you do because he has 50 games played in your current 2016 season, then I'm more sure he should have been given until your current 2016 season to get called up.

But now that he's in the Bigs, you might as well ride it out. Just make sure you have some depth at 3B and in the minors.

He is pretty smart, which will help, but if his work ethic is only normal, he might hit his ceiling too soon.

[nebradska]

According to the manual, just by being in the major leagues, a player will continue to develop normally. As far as I can tell, promoting a player to the bigs too early does not stunt development.

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by nebradska

According to the manual, just by being in the major leagues, a player will continue to develop normally. As far as I can tell, promoting a player to the bigs too early does not stunt development.

The question is should it? I have never liked this aspect of the development system, as I feel development should be ties to multiple factors such as coaching, playing time (hitting and fielding separately) injuries, randomness. I would like to see the ability to assign players to winter leagues as yet another method to help develop players as well. That really goes back to my original though though....playing time and coaching should both be major factors in development. Losing either could stunt a players growth, and certain players may require better than quality coaching even into their prime playing years, while other players may not. I think the more factors and variables help create an art to developing players. It just feels a bit simplistic to me me right now, since as a GM, a feel I have very little influence on players' development.

[PSUColonel]

On another note, bench players who do not get adequate playing time SHOULD accumulate rust.

[Syd Thrift]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

On another note, bench players who do not get adequate playing time SHOULD accumulate rust.

I'm pretty positive that they do. Otherwise, I know that in years past OOTP has an algorithm in there where if a player isn't hitting well at whatever level he's at, there's a chance of a ratings decrease. IOW the best way to tell if a guy is overmatched at a given level isn't really so much to make a calculation based on his ratings or even look at your scouting reports with the red and green arrows, it's to look at how the player is actually doing at that level. If a scout says a guy should be sent down but is hitting .350, you can probably get away with keeping him where he is. If he's hitting .180, you probably should have sent him down last week.

[goalieump413]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

On another note, bench players who do not get adequate playing time SHOULD accumulate rust.

In real life yes, but haven't we been told that any active player on a 25 man roster continues to develop?

[Cinnamon J. Scudworth]

Originally Posted by nebradska

According to the manual, just by being in the major leagues, a player will continue to develop normally. As far as I can tell, promoting a player to the bigs too early does not stunt development.

That's not how I read it. Here's the list of factors it says will influence development:

Player development

It includes playing time (but only for minor leaguers, not major leaguers), coaching, and "challenge":

Players respond differently to challenges. Often, a player who is tearing up Double A hitting might not be developing very quickly, because he isn't being challenged. Similarly, putting an overmatched rookie into your major league starting lineup could actually hurt his development.

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by goalieump413

In real life yes, but haven't we been told that any active player on a 25 man roster continues to develop?

That's why I commented on this

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by Cinnamon J. Scudworth

That's not how I read it. Here's the list of factors it says will influence development:

Player development

It includes playing time (but only for minor leaguers, not major leaguers), coaching, and "challenge":

My post meant to include major leaguers. It's a valid reason to start bench players as a manager...otherwise you could just use your starters until they tire, and the AI doesn't really do thiat.

[ihatenames]

Originally Posted by goalieump413

In real life yes, but haven't we been told that any active player on a 25 man roster continues to develop?

Yes but I'm pretty sure that refers to just playing time. Meaning you don't have to start them for them to develop. I think if they are overmatched they can still suffer talent hits just like any other level.

[hitmanwa]

This is where he ended up at the end of 2016. I'll see where it goes and update it. Thanks guys,

[dmacgreg37]

Originally Posted by The Game

Most ML talent skips AAA. AAA tends to be for players who bounce in and out of the majors.

While I disagree about the "most" part, several top level guys certainly skip AAA. They do, however, usually play significantly more AA than this prospect did.

[goalieump413]

Originally Posted by ihatenames

Yes but I'm pretty sure that refers to just playing time. Meaning you don't have to start them for them to develop. I think if they are overmatched they can still suffer talent hits just like any other level.

This is why it's a little confusing...(quoted from the manual link)

However, major league players and players on a reserve roster develop normally even without playing time.


Therefore, it appears that even if a player on your 40-man isn't playing, he's still developing/progressing. I can then only assume that they wouldn't take any performance hits due to lack of playing time like they would with injury or fatigue recovery.

[goalieump413]

Originally Posted by hitmanwa

This is where he ended up at the end of 2016. I'll see where it goes and update it. Thanks guys,...

I think you'll be fine. It looks like he progressed pretty well, playing in as many games as he did. Check his player development report and, as an overall suggestion, look into upgrading your hitting coach or bench coach if you can. Also, if you think he's going to become a stud, do a "practice" offer extension, to see where his mind is. You don't need to sign him, but sometimes it can work in your favor, especially with a tight budget team.

[olivertheorem]

Originally Posted by goalieump413

This is why it's a little confusing...(quoted from the manual link)

However, major league players and players on a reserve roster develop normally even without playing time.


Therefore, it appears that even if a player on your 40-man isn't playing, he's still developing/progressing. I can then only assume that they wouldn't take any performance hits due to lack of playing time like they would with injury or fatigue recovery.

Not exactly right. The reserve roster is what you have if you don't use minors, and since it doesn't play games the players develop as if they were riding the pine in the bigs. The 40-man is a separate entity, and in a league using minors anyone on the 40-man but in the minors still needs PT to develop.

Bench guys do not currently accumulate rust, but I would argue that they should at a rate of 1 per game not played after 7, and said rust should go down at the same rate it does in spring training (which rate I forget at the moment).