Minor League Balance?

[Juggernt]

In addition to not letting roster sizes get out of hand, should I ensure that each minor league team is balanced in terms of positions? For example, I notice my AAA team has 4 CF, and I wonder if each of them is getting enough playing time to develop.

I know the game will fill in ghost players in order to play games, but I'm more interested in ensuring that I give each of my players the best chance to get better. So, if fourth best AAA CF won't get playing time, is dropping him to AA better for him?

[TGH-Adfabre]

Yes but.
How many total OF are on the team?
Is he actually a CF? Look at his Arm, Error and Range to be sure he should be classified as a CF.
How old are they, over 25 and they are probably fully developed or close.
Are they too young/ undeveloped to be in AAA?
There is more to it than just 4 CF. I personally like 6 OF at each MiLB level. My reasoning is that I do not want to play Minor League Disabled List manager. There are enough innings for 6 OF.
I tend to like larger minor league roster limits (35) so I do not have to micro manage minor league injuries.
Good luck,
Tom (LP)

[Juggernt]

Originally Posted by TGH-Adfabre

Yes but.
How many total OF are on the team?
Is he actually a CF? Look at his Arm, Error and Range to be sure he should be classified as a CF.
How old are they, over 25 and they are probably fully developed or close.
Are they too young/ undeveloped to be in AAA?
There is more to it than just 4 CF. I personally like 6 OF at each MiLB level. My reasoning is that I do not want to play Minor League Disabled List manager. There are enough innings for 6 OF.
I tend to like larger minor league roster limits (35) so I do not have to micro manage minor league injuries.
Good luck,
Tom (LP)

Yeah, I'm just wondering how much I have to manage rosters at every level. My Assistant GM is rated Outstanding, so I assume I can let him handle most of it. It just seems like I have lots of red arrows at the moment. I know sculpting a system takes time, so I simply want to understand more about how things work than my specific current issues.

[TGH-Adfabre]

I have to admit I do not use the arrows.
There are times when my minors are so young or undeveloped that I may not have many players that qualify for AA or AAA. I set up my whole system and then I release and sign on opening day and after the draft. Those are my two big MiLB roster adjustment periods. I try to keep it to just those two.
More than that and I stop having fun and it feels like doing the dishes.

[NoOne]

Originally Posted by Juggernt

In addition to not letting roster sizes get out of hand, should I ensure that each minor league team is balanced in terms of positions? For example, I notice my AAA team has 4 CF, and I wonder if each of them is getting enough playing time to develop.

I know the game will fill in ghost players in order to play games, but I'm more interested in ensuring that I give each of my players the best chance to get better. So, if fourth best AAA CF won't get playing time, is dropping him to AA better for him?

dropping may be better in some cases.. there's defintieyl a break-even somewhere if you are motivated to find it... i'd wager it depends on level of their development. they don't "have" to be in AAA to fully develop, that's for sure. is this a good player or a bench warmer? if the latter, who cares, lol. i doubt you have 4 viable CF at AAA, and if you do you should trade the 2-3 you like less, ie not in future mlb plans.

more players is actually better than fewer when it comes to Minors. if you have starved levels, odd things will occur... if you have too restrictive of age/service time requirements you will see odd things or force odd thigns to occur... be wary and careful of these settings... simpler is better. don't create bottlenecks etc.

one option for minor leagues i strongly suggest is the "play based on potential" [sic]. finite space in league settings - easily found with manual if unfamiliar. This is the best way to ensure leageu-wide that the 'better' prosepcts play more often.

Wtih this option on and you have 2+ 'better' prospects at same level, i'd consider demoting the lesser developed of the two, or look into temporary cross-training at a compatible position relative to the player while on the same team. the high pot will play first, then the lower will be used if highly rated over a "21/80 pot" guy even if it's not his positon most times. if poorly rated and you like him, force over the higher port players that exist.

players do develop "slightly" better if they get playing time in the minors -- per manual, not abstract thought. in the MLB playing time does NOT affect development, again, per manual. not my theory. i've seen enough players with little playing time rise up the ranks just fine too... it's not a huge hinderance if it's not long-term... eventualyl scouting accuracy will correct itself enough for the mlb-viable palyers becuase tehy are infinitely better than MiL lifers.

so, to answer you question... they sorta miss out a bit by not playing much. if it's due to scouting inaccuracy, there's nothign you can do about it anyway... you won't force a visibly weaker player to start over another one would you? no reason to, but evnetualyl they look better and play within 2-3 years. if they develop fast, it will correct itself sooner. league level or pro years influences accuracy quite a bit. (combo of age and pro years is my best guess - ie 18 vs 21 yo draftee is different curve even though same zero pro years)

you probably only have 10-20 prospects that you actually care about in your entire system... you can force them to start and let the mil managers worry about the rest, if need be. i waffle between micro-managing and hands-off with a few locked players. i even hybridize the two.. instead of ai handling the others, i let them move through based on league age/service time requirements, even if they smash competition -- they aren't mlb players anwyay and it improves my mil morale + any possible side effects that may exist from winningn teams)

in any case, if you want a player to start, you can force them at any level. their position turns Red in the roster and transaction screen when forced to a position -- easily see who is starting, if multiples at that position.

if you manage all aspects of the minors, you will likely win more in the minors... upto you. it probably provides a very marginal boost to % development success / morale related thigns.

most efficient way is to just control the better prosepcts and delegate the rest of the work to mil managers and your asst gm. i'd still maintain control of important stuff like signing/firing personell or players of any type. let them do the promos/demos and depth charts... "Lock" players through the player strategy screen or "disable ai promotions" in context menu when you right click one. force start option will only be in the player strategy screen, if i recall.

* may also want to change another player strat setting while in the MiL -- bench @ minimal dtd injury. don't play mil players hurt, if they are important to your future... winning does not matter in the MiL, lol. it's mostly an e-peen achievement with minimal positive effects.

if you lock some players and force start as needed, you can let ai handle all other aspects... click "Ask AI to set up complete MiL system" in "Rosters and Transations" screen at anytime. move your locked players on your own, though. when stats tell you that ratings are off, you will place them better than the AI.

who cares about the junk in the mil... if any of that junk experiences TCR or scouting accuracy improvements that warrant extra attnetion, add them to locked players... or remove those that lose potential etc etc... even a shortlist helps... i sort by league level, then scrow down thorugh player profiles and promote as needed 2-3 times per season. (day one, after draft, then sometime in july is my system)