Do You Trust the Arrows when Promoting in the Minors?

[discodude5]

It would be better if there weren't so many players with arrows.
If you had maybe 3 green 3 red in your whole organization for guys that are truly crushing a level or actually over matched (not a 20 ab sample, maybe even let us set a minimum).
This won't matter much to some of you that are really focused on your minors and probably run it so well that you don't have guys like these but for some of us it can be useful if we can quickly glance at the screen and these arrows can help catch someone that we missed.
Right now like mentioned they are not much use.

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by brigmcneil

I don't mind the arrows. For me they are just another small indicator just like our scouts. Remember Billy Bean's rant with his scouts in Moneyball? "If the ratings say he can hit, why isn't he hitting?" :-)

and exactly who are the arrows? That's another big part of the issue to me...it's a generic AI...it's not individual members of any teams' staff.

[OutS|der]

My opinion is if the arrows are meant to stay then they should be accurate and reflect what your minor league coaches or scouts actually think.

Otherwise they need to go if they don't serve any purpose

[BaseballGOAT]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

and exactly who are the arrows? That's another big part of the issue to me...it's a generic AI...it's not individual members of any teams' staff.

It can't just be a simplified version of the opinions of minor league coaches? Not everything has to be drawn out. To me, it's not anything generic. I use it as what the coaches think.

[BusterKing]

Just because you don't like the arrows you don't get to decide to remove them.

[Bluenoser]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

and exactly who are the arrows? That's another big part of the issue to me...it's a generic AI...it's not individual members of any teams' staff.

The arrows are your minor league coaching staff.

http://manuals.ootpdevelopments.com/...ction_overview

[JerseyPirate]

I don't mind the arrows but my biggest issue if that any player who's not an 3+ player, they must stay at the Rookie ball level for 3 seasons before or they get a red arrow when you move them to A ball. That just isn't realistic to stay at that level that long.

[Sweed]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

and exactly who are the arrows? That's another big part of the issue to me...it's a generic AI...it's not individual members of any teams' staff.

The problem with blindly asking for things to be removed is often the one asking doesn't actually know how the game works.

Seriously why would the arrows be based on one generic code, for all teams, when each team already has a staff coded with preferences and abilities? If we're allowed to "hand off" these decisions to our staff, why wouldn't the recommendations, when we don't do that, be from out staff?

Yes, I said I don't trust them other than as something to draw my attention. Kind of like if someone on my staff said "I think Joe B. is ready to move up", my next move would be to do my own research before taking his word for it.

Originally Posted by Bluenoser

The arrows are your minor league coaching staff.

http://manuals.ootpdevelopments.com/...ction_overview

Thank you for saving me the time.

[Bluenoser]

Originally Posted by JerseyPirate

I don't mind the arrows but my biggest issue if that any player who's not an 3+ player, they must stay at the Rookie ball level for 3 seasons before or they get a red arrow when you move them to A ball. That just isn't realistic to stay at that level that long.

One thing to keep in mind - the arrows are the opinion of the coaches. In baseball, you have a large organization, lots of people will also have an opinion, you included. Take the suggestions of others, in this case coaches, then do your own due diligence and decide where the player should be.

Advice is free and should never be shunned. You may not always follow it, but you should never ignore it.

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by Sweed

The problem with blindly asking for things to be removed is often the one asking doesn't actually know how the game works.

Seriously why would the arrows be based on one generic code, for all teams, when each team already has a staff coded with preferences and abilities? If we're allowed to "hand off" these decisions to our staff, why wouldn't the recommendations, when we don't do that, be from out staff?

Yes, I said I don't trust them other than as something to draw my attention. Kind of like if someone on my staff said "I think Joe B. is ready to move up", my next move would be to do my own research before taking his word for it.


Thank you for saving me the time.

Please stop with the sarcasm.

I get what you are saying...but it would be far better to have something to the effect of Coach X thinks Player Y is overmatched at the AA level. Each staff member should have an INDIVIDUAL opinion. When you lump them all into an arrow (one way or the other) it becomes generic on some level. It might be some strange culmination of the staff, but I think it reality, a GM could ask Coach X what he thinks, and then turn around and ask coach Y the same thing. The idea is to get a well simulated, working front office model. The arrows don't accomplish this.

[BaseballGOAT]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

Please stop with the sarcasm.

I get what you are saying...but it would be far better to have something to the effect of Coach X thinks Player Y is overmatched at the AA level. Each staff member should have an INDIVIDUAL opinion. When you lump them all into an arrow (one way or the other) it becomes generic on some level. It might be some strange culmination of the staff, but I think it reality, a GM could ask Coach X what he thinks, and then turn around and ask coach Y the same thing. The idea is to get a well simulated, working front office model. The arrows don't accomplish this.

Way too much micromanagement for most people

[BIG17EASY]

Originally Posted by BaseballGOAT

Way too much micromanagement for most people

Agreed. Now that we have first and third base coaches, you're talking about five opinions per minor league team. For most people playing a typical MLB setup, that's 30-plus opinions from minor league staff to sort through, plus the opinions of your big league staff. No thanks. I much prefer one suggestion that's considered a consensus for the entire staff in the organization.

[brotherblues]

Always seen the arrow as just the scouts' opinion, or the minor league coaches' opinions, or [insert whoever you wish to insert here]'s opinion. In the end it's just a suggestion, and you're free to agree and act on it, or disagree and don't.

[Cod]

Originally Posted by Bluenoser

The arrows are your minor league coaching staff.

http://manuals.ootpdevelopments.com/...ction_overview

Good find. What still confuses me is whether or not the arrow is from the player's current staff or something more? How would the player's current coach know if he will succeed at the next level if he's only managed at the current level? I like the arrows, I just think they need to mean more. Maybe one of the positions we need in the game is that of Minor League Coordinator, which would be the person providing these suggestions from a holistic view.

Curious, does setting minor league promotion / demotion to auto have any effect on the arrows? If I see a green arrow, does that mean he will be auto promoted at soon?

[tonnage]

All I know is that when I left control of the minor league system to the minor league managers, I had way more green and red arrows, releases I didn't agree with, etc. It bothered me so I took over full control. In my current fictional league, with my control, I have two red arrows at double A (and I don't agree with them), and six or seven green arrows at triple A, and that's it! Way fewer than before. But I do like the "minor league coordinator" idea suggested by Cod.

[Bluenoser]

I don't think a coach would know how a player will do at the next level, nor should he. That's not his concern. His concern is that he thinks the player is ready based on how he's done at the current level. It will be up to the coaches and manager at the next level to decide if he belongs there or not.

How far do we go with micro management? Adding more positions isn't the answer imo. Doing your homework as a GM is.

I think some people are reading too much into the arrows. The arrows are not the be all to end all. You do not have to promote/demote anyone based on them. They are just a suggestion. Think of the arrows as an alarm that reminds you to do something. That's all.

The final decision on what to do with the player is up to you.

[Sweed]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

Please stop with the sarcasm.

I get what you are saying...but it would be far better to have something to the effect of Coach X thinks Player Y is overmatched at the AA level. Each staff member should have an INDIVIDUAL opinion. When you lump them all into an arrow (one way or the other) it becomes generic on some level. It might be some strange culmination of the staff, but I think it reality, a GM could ask Coach X what he thinks, and then turn around and ask coach Y the same thing. The idea is to get a well simulated, working front office model. The arrows don't accomplish this.

So you're saying you knew how the game worked before asking, yet again, for something to be removed? No, you did not. Now you are moving the goalposts.

Please stop with the senseless snide remarks you've been making, in multiple threads, since a league was redacted. Something was removed from the game and you've been off the deep end ever since. It's only a game.

Welcome to ignore, the only one I've done in over 20 years.

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by BIG17EASY

Agreed. Now that we have first and third base coaches, you're talking about five opinions per minor league team. For most people playing a typical MLB setup, that's 30-plus opinions from minor league staff to sort through, plus the opinions of your big league staff. No thanks. I much prefer one suggestion that's considered a consensus for the entire staff in the organization.

Basically it would be coaches at THAT level with the exception of staff in scouting and/or development. Also…why do you guys seem to have an issue with delagating authority? The GM can or should have as little or much control as he wants. Sonic someone wants to micromanage they can…if someone doesn’t they don’t have to. A lot of you guys seem to always miss that point whenever you start ripping apart ideas.

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by Sweed

So you're saying you knew how the game worked before asking, yet again, for something to be removed? No, you did not. Now you are moving the goalposts.

Please stop with the senseless snide remarks you've been making, in multiple threads, since a league was redacted. Something was removed from the game and you've been off the deep end ever since. It's only a game.

Welcome to ignore, the only one I've done in over 20 years.

No problem..

[BaseballGOAT]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

Basically it would be coaches at THAT level with the exception of staff in scouting and/or development.

Micromanagement does not make for a fun game