Development time for stud prospects?

[Thunder]

How fast have you run guys through the minors?
And did I go too slow with this guy?

#1 Draft pick out of HS one day before his 18th birthday. He was runner-up MVP in his 24-team HS league (I use feeders).

Rookie ball season was good (no awards), so I sent him to short-A where he turned 19. He was runner-up MVP in a 12-team league.

In his third season, I ran him from A through AAA and he's going to the majors on Aug. 31, just in time for post-season eligibility.

I'm a "Stats Mostly" player with POT only turned on, so I don't know exactly where he's at ratings-wise; I have to use stats.

He's going to the majors at 20 years, 86 days, so it's not like I lollygagged, but I'm thinking it could have been sooner.

[Thunder]

2-8 scale, pretty nice upside

[NoOne]

I'd say you did fine. move them as fast as they can go. it's more difficult in a stats only league. so you see no ratings whatsoever? (potential doesn't help, but rather contact or control and the like are the ones that help in promotions). edit: brain fart, never mind. i have 36% ratings i believe, and the strategy below still works well. not sure if minors use stats eh?

if i had to rely on stats only, i'd probably make use of the arrows more often. mostly if i saw a red one after promoting. without seeing a scouting report it would be tough.

if you only are interested in my 2 examples, discovery and draftee, skip down below between the dotted line

my general process:
i purely use ratings for promotions. i invest more than most teams in my league into minor league scouting for accurate info. i promote all top-end prospects (shortlisted) in the offseason, right before the season starts and following the draft. when additional attention is required i will deviate from that routine maybe someone was borderline and i need to check back in a month as just one example. if they are rated below ~35-40/80, they simmer 1 year at a time at any tier no matter what. players move off and on the shortlist for my top prospects. i usually know how many 40to50+ prospects are in my minors and notice a new or lost player quickly.

this is more difficult with a stats only type league. i'd probably have to reconsider all promotions after a month to verify. maybe be slightly more conservative in promotions, but probably would be stubborn about that until thoroughly proven worng, lol.

at the end of their minor league careers a more important factor for me is how they fit the long-term plans. i will let them simmer in AAA if there is no room in the majors and not willing to trade or release anyone, if the fit my plans. i'm more willing to get rid of a currently better player if the prospect is going to be a potential Hall of Famer.

if they don't fit into my plans, i keep them until i can trade them for a useful piece when it is needed. if this costs them a potential year or two in the league for me to wait for that need, i am willing, yet hesitant, to do that when needed. the greater good of my leagues is a serious concern, though. being a bench player for a year is better for the more highly rated ones (current ability, not potential). i won't let them rot in the minors.

------------------------------
So, i've seen a player be ready in 1/2 a minor league AAA season. he was a college kid draftee. i let him simmer the rest of the year only because i didn't have room on a WS-quality team. otherwise he would have been in the mlb in less than a year.

<removed due to mistake>

so, 1 year or less than a year is possible, but you can never force anything. it should all be reactive to development in order to be the most efficient.

These are only recent examples. i may even have more on this team. it's never a goal, i just let the player's development determine promotions. it works very well.

------------------------------

<removed because no longer relavent>

[jpeters1734]

I think you did fine. I probably would have had him skip Short A. Since he did well in rookie, I would have wanted him to start full season baseball instead of short season. Two level I tend to skip are SA and AAA.

If he was rocking A in '51 instead of SA, you probably could have gotten him up to AA in '51. You may have found him to be ready for the bigs at the start of '52.

[Thunder]

Originally Posted by NoOne

I'd say you did fine. move them as fast as they can go. it's more difficult in a stats only league. so you see no ratings whatsoever? (potential doesn't help, but rather contact or control and the like are the ones that help in promotions). edit: brain fart, never mind. i have 36% ratings i believe, and the strategy below still works well. not sure if minors use stats eh?

I use no current ratings. The 36% you are referring to may be AI Evaluation? See my pic.

So ya, potential doesn't give you help to know if a player is ready . . they change very little in a player's career. But that's kind of the point.

Thanks for the feedback.

[Thunder]

Originally Posted by jpeters1734

I think you did fine. I probably would have had him skip Short A. Since he did well in rookie, I would have wanted him to start full season baseball instead of short season. Two level I tend to skip are SA and AAA.

If he was rocking A in '51 instead of SA, you probably could have gotten him up to AA in '51. You may have found him to be ready for the bigs at the start of '52.

Ya, good call. My rookie and Short-A teams were pretty much in last place annually for decades and I realized it was because I was moving guys too quickly. I would automatically start college guys at Short-A no matter and sometimes really good HS players.

Once I started putting everyone at Rookie (at least for half of a season), my low-level teams started winning. I know the idea is to win in the majors, but I had to change things a little.

This guy probably got caught in a little over-compensating.

[jpeters1734]

Originally Posted by Thunder

Ya, good call. My rookie and Short-A teams were pretty much in last place annually for decades and I realized it was because I was moving guys too quickly. I would automatically start college guys at Short-A no matter and sometimes really good HS players.

Once I started putting everyone at Rookie (at least for half of a season), my low-level teams started winning. I know the idea is to win in the majors, but I had to change things a little.

This guy probably got caught in a little over-compensating.

I do think that the ai keeps players in rookie and SA for far too long. I wouldn't worry much about keeping a competitive team at those levels.

[NoOne]

Originally Posted by Thunder

I use no current ratings. The 36% you are referring to may be AI Evaluation? See my pic.

So ya, potential doesn't give you help to know if a player is ready . . they change very little in a player's career. But that's kind of the point.

Thanks for the feedback.

i only mentioned the 36% ai eval becuase i mistakenly thought it provided context for the ratings, which ties in with my brainfart about how ratings work with 100% stats eval... i was having a slow moment. i was thinking they'd be absent for some odd reason or created/calculated differently. so, they are rated as always, but just don't figure into overall potential? well then that setting should only affect the AI. i only use overall / potential are only useful as a filter for long lists.

---- more general response to various recent posts:

The manual mentions that minor league development only requires playing time and their performance doesn't directly affect development. so, stop worrying about performance, unless they are outmatched or overqualified. you don't have to promote them the exact moment they are capable, but sooner rather than later is better for their development. the important factor is to match ability to minor league to maximize rate of development.