Developing high school hitters

[ccd494]

Has anyone had any success in actually getting high school hitters to develop? I'm getting very frustrated with it.

I use a standard universe. I send any 0.5 star present MLB value high school drafted hitter to the Complex League, where they are maybe 1.0 star in ratings relative to the FCL. And they promptly hit .150 and their potential ratings plummet.

Here's an example from one of my saves: I clicked around to see why my guys are so bad, and it seems like most of the AI teams are having older players play in the Complex leagues. The 2024 season starts for the FCL next week in my game, and the Opening Day pitcher my team will face for the Orioles Black is a 23 year old 1.5 star present value as rated against MLB, potential 2.5 stars. He was drafted in the second round out of Mississippi State in 2023, did not pitch anywhere for the Orioles. He has started 4 games for the Orioles High-A team in 2024, with an 85 ERA+. What is he doing in the FCL?

It isn't just the Orioles. The Marlins have multiple 22 and 23 year olds with 1.5 present MLB stars in their FCL rotation.

What have people been doing with those 0.5 star present value/4.0 star potential high school hitters? My top 2023 draftee in that save was picked with 25 CON, 30 POW, 30 EYE on the 20-80 scale. He had a .202 OBP and .221 SLG in 110 plate appearances in 2023. His present CON has bumped to 30, POW to 40, but his potential is starting to erode a bit. My coaching staff in the FCL is pretty good. But he's just getting eaten alive by guys 4-5 years older than him. And this seems pretty standard across my saves.

[NoOne]

***Edit - keep them matched to level of competition.. all you can do. bad is relative... know the slash of that league.. players have bad streaks.. so, don't conisder them overatched if ratings and age is right due to poor performance... if it is catastrophically bad, that's the only time i'll demote someone below what their ratings deserve. If rtings keep improving, they are fine even if hitting ".200" ... but if ratings are stagnant and they are striking out 2-3 times every single game, then i might consider that they are overmatched.... age is a big part of it... but some 18-19 yo with appropriate ratings can play at AAA/ML level, but it is rare. They will often flounder really badly at an upper level, and a demotion despite their ratings is in order, imho. Keep pushing that boundary... a month of futility in minors won't ruin a player*

don't assume poor performance caused the drop in ratings.

younger draftees have less accurate ratings. there is more risk picking an 18 y.o. than a college aged kid. this is how it is reflected in the game -- in addition to more risk involved during development due to more time and opportunity for things to go wrong.

comes with hgher reward, as when you actually do accurately scout these younger players, the great ones will have a higher ceiling than nearly all college kids.... and lots more time for it to drop a bit while developing, lol.

performance is a very, very small proportion of development and only in the minors. in ml, playing time is all you need to avoid degradation. Think about it... when you hit a homerun, does that make you stronger or improve your coordination? no, it does not. you don't get better by getting hits. you get better by improving approach and technique, building muscle, improving coordination through repetition etc...

way more often that 18 yo's ratings are much lower than what your scout initially sees. it will adjust fairly quickly in the first 1-2 years in your system. draftees often come with bloated ratings. the worse your scouting, the more false-positives there are. thousands of players drafted and maybe 100?some ever make it to the MLB on average. only a handful are good-to-great players, at best and no guarantee there's even 1 perennial all-star in any draft year. adjust expectations... it is a lesson in futility and scouting incompetence. Lots of insecurity sorrounds this... can't say scouts suck, but the results speak for themselves.... they clearly suck at scouting players based on old methods. the historical percentages don't lie. it's like pretending america wasn't a slave-owning country because it makes someone feel bad, lol. same irrational stupidity and insecurity to deny reality of the situation. new metrics that correlate better are even more proof of the ineptitude of the human eye when it comes to scouting baseball players.. it's virtually useless.

if they are matched for the quality of competition, i wouldn't worry too much about their resulting stats. in this case if the ratings drop over first couple years, just assume it's bad draft scouting - plus, you'll be happier and it is the more common reason.

Looking at trade value can give a glimpse behind curtain, but can be wrong too. if no one wants the 18yo rated like a superstar, ther's a good chance he's not accurately rated.

it's less often TCR and more often faulty scouting of younger players. expect the info you have at time of draft to be total ****... there's a reason why even a top-10 draft pick isn't a sure-thing in RL.. even pickingn from the very best prospects is a 50-50 proposiotn that quickly turns into a total crapshoot within 10-20 picks lol... and after a few rounds like getting struck by lightning.

[andyhdz]

Originally Posted by ccd494

Has anyone had any success in actually getting high school hitters to develop? I'm getting very frustrated with it.

I use a standard universe. I send any 0.5 star present MLB value high school drafted hitter to the Complex League, where they are maybe 1.0 star in ratings relative to the FCL. And they promptly hit .150 and their potential ratings plummet.

Here's an example from one of my saves: I clicked around to see why my guys are so bad, and it seems like most of the AI teams are having older players play in the Complex leagues. The 2024 season starts for the FCL next week in my game, and the Opening Day pitcher my team will face for the Orioles Black is a 23 year old 1.5 star present value as rated against MLB, potential 2.5 stars. He was drafted in the second round out of Mississippi State in 2023, did not pitch anywhere for the Orioles. He has started 4 games for the Orioles High-A team in 2024, with an 85 ERA+. What is he doing in the FCL?

It isn't just the Orioles. The Marlins have multiple 22 and 23 year olds with 1.5 present MLB stars in their FCL rotation.

What have people been doing with those 0.5 star present value/4.0 star potential high school hitters? My top 2023 draftee in that save was picked with 25 CON, 30 POW, 30 EYE on the 20-80 scale. He had a .202 OBP and .221 SLG in 110 plate appearances in 2023. His present CON has bumped to 30, POW to 40, but his potential is starting to erode a bit. My coaching staff in the FCL is pretty good. But he's just getting eaten alive by guys 4-5 years older than him. And this seems pretty standard across my saves.

I actually have lousy luck developing pitchers. Batters are way easier. You just have to be patient with them when they are that young and know that breaking into the majors at 23 or 24 is perfectly fine so patience is key. One thing is that I do have service limits on my R, A, A+ levels to prevent 23 year olds from being anywhere near the rookie level. My AAA and AA league have no service limits but I do have a hard age cap of 29 for AA. My preference entirely but 30+ year olds should stick to AAA if they can't make it in the bigs. If they can't meet any of these restrictions they shouldn't be in any organization. Gotta keep the minor league meat grinder churning.

[Dannyshinn121]

Originally Posted by ccd494

Has anyone had any success in actually getting high school hitters to develop? I'm getting very frustrated with it.

I use a standard universe. I send any 0.5 star present MLB value high school drafted hitter to the Complex League, where they are maybe 1.0 star in ratings relative to the FCL. And they promptly hit .150 and their potential ratings plummet.

Here's an example from one of my saves: I clicked around to see why my guys are so bad, and it seems like most of the AI teams are having older players play in the Complex leagues. The 2024 season starts for the FCL next week in my game, and the Opening Day pitcher my team will face for the Orioles Black is a 23 year old 1.5 star present value as rated against MLB, potential 2.5 stars. He was drafted in the second round out of Mississippi State in 2023, did not pitch anywhere for the Orioles. He has started 4 games for the Orioles High-A team in 2024, with an 85 ERA+. What is he doing in the FCL?

It isn't just the Orioles. The Marlins have multiple 22 and 23 year olds with 1.5 present MLB stars in their FCL rotation.

What have people been doing with those 0.5 star present value/4.0 star potential high school hitters? My top 2023 draftee in that save was picked with 25 CON, 30 POW, 30 EYE on the 20-80 scale. He had a .202 OBP and .221 SLG in 110 plate appearances in 2023. His present CON has bumped to 30, POW to 40, but his potential is starting to erode a bit. My coaching staff in the FCL is pretty good. But he's just getting eaten alive by guys 4-5 years older than him. And this seems pretty standard across my saves.

It seems that this seems more like a bug, I don't usually use it, but it constantly amazes me why this is possible. I of already got used to the fact that this https://edubirdie.com/capstone-project-writing-service helps me with the capstone project and in case I something doesn't understand or doesn't go according to plan I turn to their help. This is already not the first time Edubirdie helps me with my projects not only in college but also in other field.

[Sweed]

I have my R league set at

22 age
3 yrs pro service

From wikpedia FWIW

but no team can have more than three players with four or more years of minor-league experience

Since we cannot specify "no more than three players with four or more years" I think it best to just go with the hard limit of 3 yrs. The age limit check of 22yrs is done on opening day so 23yr old players can still play if their b-day comes during the season. That's fine IMHO as any 23 yr old in my CL's aren't dominating with overwhelming skills. If they're that good they have already moved up the chain.

The advice in this thread is solid. IE patience is the key. Sure they may bust but that happens IRL, a lot One thing to do, if you haven't already, is to set lineups to be filled with potential as the number one factor over current skill. Make your MiL managers play the guys that have potential and need to develop. They're MiL managers and are not paid to "win now". This may result in you seeing some players struggling but they're not learning anything sitting on the bench. They need to sink or swim.

[koohead]

Originally Posted by andyhdz

I actually have lousy luck developing pitchers. Batters are way easier. .

My experience as well. I tend to invest in collecting prospect bats and spend my money in the FA market on pitching.

[koohead]

To get back to the OPs comments and observations about what AI teams are doing in the low minors, I really force myself to ignore stats at these levels because of this reason. My 18/19 year olds are playing against more advanced competition. If I like their potential ratings and they are doing something, they will move through the first 2 levels (I kept the short A level in my world) each year without much scrutiny. It's only when they hit Low A and High A that I start looking at their performance to see if they are developing or will end up as organizational depth. HS players in general are volitile...so I do expect some to flame out. I have my TCR at 125, so I don't have the wild swings that some others see and enjoy. But it definitely seems to me that the younger a player is, the more volatile their development is

[BIG17EASY]

In my game based on standard settings, the complex league is actually a slightly more skilled league than the lowest rookie teams (GCL, etc.). If you have relative ratings turned on, you can see this by changing a prospects relative ratings between the two levels. Because of that, I only send high school draftees to the GCL and never the complex league. I know the AI puts draftees there, but I only use the complex league for players promoted from the international complex with a few free agent fillers to complete the roster, if needed.

[billyray1984]

I have the same experience with very young to young players, wether they are IFA or high-school bats. They very rarely develop. Pitchers are even worse. This mirrors real life since high-ceiling/low-floor type of prospects fall off a cliff all the time.

At the same time, you need to give these players time and a winning environment for them to develop and try to reach their ceiling. If they all are unhappy because the team loses 80% of their games, they won't develop.

What I do to help my stateside complex and summer league teams from completly sucking and giving my young guys a chance to perform :

1. Hard age caps to prevent the AI from having 24 year olds in the entry levels. I don't care about washed up 27 year olds in A ball since by then, the good 21 year olds will keep up anyway.

2. Signing or keeping organizational pieces in the entry levels to insure I have older guys (20-21) who can actually produce at those level, even if they have no ceiling and no chance to make the majors.

3. I will now keep younger guys in my stateside complex or in the summer leagues even if they destroy the level, unless their ratings compared to A ball is okay. Sometimes summer league guys will go to the ACL when they are getting older to serve as the aforementionned depth pieces.

4. Some if not most of the 20-21 year olds I draft will play in rookie ball right after the draft in my system. Previously, these guys would go straight to short season A, but that doesn't exist anymore. They do get automatically promoted to A ball the next year though.

5. I draft college bats and college arms in the first rounds and rarely will pick a HS guy in the first round unless he has a high floor.

I used to cut guys very agressively at the entry levels due to the draft being longer, but now with only 20 new guys entering the system every year, I can let them mature a bit longer before throwing them in A ball or releasing them.

[Pelican]

This is a productive thread with great advice for the thorough and patient player. I have no doubt that, with care, it is possible to groom that rare but exceptional star, from the time he is 18 years old. Alas, I am unlikely to experience that thrill, because I am too impatient, plus my sims crawl along, so that five or six years development could take, well, five or six years IRL.

Those of us with less patience focus on college players, and not just the guy with a year of juco, but three or four-year players. Particularly if they have played in a competitive environment like the SEC, with solid stats they should have a relatively high floor, as well as a high ceiling. And you may get away with putting that 22 or 23-year-old guy in high A or even AA to start. Skip all that developmental stuff, or, rather, leave it to the college programs. To be sure, it does not take a genius to groom a solid college star (although pitchers are damn unpredictable). But it can be a way to get a quick return on your investment.

I console myself by imagining it’s like the NFL Draft. The best college players. Proven. Ready for the Show.

[Curve Ball Dave]

PATIENCE is the key. As much we'd like it to be, player development is not a straight line. A kid out of HS is going to have ups and down and expect ratings to fluctuate before they finally start to crystalize once he's around 23-24 years old which will be five or six years after he's drafted. Hopefully by that time he's ready for a Spring Training invite or a backup role. Sure, there are young phenoms but most guys drafted out of HS will take a long time to develop and there will be peaks and valleys along the way.

I like to keep prospects at a level at which they can succeed as long as they're eligible (I have age and service time limits). I'd much rather he dominate at a lower level than get his butt handed to him at a high level. Don't be in a big hurry to promote. Let him get established and see some success at a level first.

The game mirrors real life all too well. If a top five draft pick manages to become a contributing MLB player that alone is a win. They can't all be All Stars and HOFers.

[Hrycaj]

Originally Posted by Curve Ball Dave

PATIENCE is the key. As much we'd like it to be, player development is not a straight line. A kid out of HS is going to have ups and down and expect ratings to fluctuate before they finally start to crystalize once he's around 23-24 years old which will be five or six years after he's drafted. Hopefully by that time he's ready for a Spring Training invite or a backup role. Sure, there are young phenoms but most guys drafted out of HS will take a long time to develop and there will be peaks and valleys along the way.

I like to keep prospects at a level at which they can succeed as long as they're eligible (I have age and service time limits). I'd much rather he dominate at a lower level than get his butt handed to him at a high level. Don't be in a big hurry to promote. Let him get established and see some success at a level first.

The game mirrors real life all too well. If a top five draft pick manages to become a contributing MLB player that alone is a win. They can't all be All Stars and HOFers.

Have you found that leaving a successful player at lower level has been better for development? Per the manual it reads:

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.

I am not criticizing your strategy because the first line reads players respond differently, so the way I understand it is, not every guy likes to be challenged. I ask because as a stats only player I find myself challenging most of my prospects but I really have no idea if that strategy is working or not. Do you take personality factors into account? Appreciate any feedback.

[Curve Ball Dave]

Originally Posted by Hrycaj

Have you found that leaving a successful player at lower level has been better for development?

In my experience, all things being equal, I've found it's better to err on the side of caution. Yes, every player is different but before I promote a guy I want to see him have some success first at the level he's at. That may mean keeping him at a lower level for another couple of weeks, months, or the whole season. By the same token, if he's struggling at a higher level the decision to demote him is not taken lightly. And because every player is different the time I'm willing to keep him at a higher level and hope he comes around is never set in stone either.

[billyray1984]

Originally Posted by Hrycaj

Have you found that leaving a successful player at lower level has been better for development? Per the manual it reads:

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.

I am not criticizing your strategy because the first line reads players respond differently, so the way I understand it is, not every guy likes to be challenged. I ask because as a stats only player I find myself challenging most of my prospects but I really have no idea if that strategy is working or not. Do you take personality factors into account? Appreciate any feedback.

Not the OP but my philosophy on this changed due to the limited number of draft rounds. Back when you had 60 + rounds and many more teams in the minor leagues, if a guy had shown he could hit in rookie ball, he would get an insta promotion to rookie + or short season A wether his current ratings supported that move or not. Same thing if guys stunk up the joint : one repeat and you were out. There was a need to be more agressive with promotion/cutting due to the huge number of guys entering the minors every year. New guys needed playing time.

Now I go by age more than anything else, since the jump from rookie to A ball is much harder than previously and I have less players : the previous bottleneck that was in AA is now in A ball. Now I'll keep guys in the entry levels longer and it's pretty rare for a 19 year old to be promoted to A ball in my system, unless his ratings relative to A ball would show him as an average player there.

When it comes to A ball though, you repeat once if necessary and if you still suck the next year, you get cut or you become a career guy there until I decide to cut you. Same thing for every level afterward. Once a guy gets to 21-22 and has played pro ball for 3+ years, his final outcome is much, much clearer than when he is 18.