Minor Leagues

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SirKodiak

http://www.sportsmogul.com/baseballcd/help/Lineup.htm

Look at last section

Code:

---

Overall Rating Minor League Level
70 or higher        AAA
63 - 69        AA
57 - 62        A
Below 57        R

---

I usually go
75+ in AAA
70-75 AA
60-70 A
59- R
but I can't give a reason why, except it 'feels' right. I do take in account how close their Overall is to their Predicted, though.

---

For AAA I like to juggle porspects between the two - MLB & AAA to "see" if they cut the "mustard"

Right, I agree that your idea 'feels' more right, Sir Kodiak. I even have some 80s in AA, but I think I'll change that. It's just that I like the players to have success. It makes me feel like they'll progress better if they hit 30hrs in AA instead of batting .250 in AAA. (And I generally juggled between the two as well, FrenchRedSox. It also felt right. But read below and see what you think.) (although you may have already read the farm system link).

Anyway, the links you sent me were extremely helpful. At one point I read the answer to my next question which the answer was that players develop better at the minor league level than on the bench. It seems obvious, but I didn't know if the game took that into account and so I didn't want to spend money on veterans. But now I will.

I copied this about the Farm System from the link you gave me:

"The money you put into your farm system increases both the number and quality of recruited minor leaguers. Extra money in your farm system is usually a good investment.

The number of new minor leaguers appearing each year at the AAA level is also affected by the number of players already being groomed at the AAA level. The more prospects using up resources at the AAA level, the fewer prospects that will be able move up from the lower minor leagues. A good rule of thumb is to keep no more than your best 12 minor league batters and 9 minor league pitchers within your system. Any more players than that can be traded or released."

I noticed that unlike in the scouting department section, it doesn't mention that being in first place in farm spending is enough (although it does say "usually a good investment"). I know someone mentioned that they felt it was. Do other people agree? This quote above makes me think more money will always help groom more and better minor leaguers.

Also, boy do I have more than 9 pitchers in my system. That could be a reason for some of my pitchers' decline? I know we've touched on this, but anyway, I easily have 20+ minor league pitchers. When I bought the game, it raved about how many minor leaguers I could keep and so I never thought it would be a liability.:)

more you spend the better the results - generally speaking - the numbers for line up is due to duplication factor 2SS at the same level cannot 'play' all the time.Its a guideline but pitching wise it is best not to have more than 5 players per level but also take into consideration (its nor gospel) what you quoted.

Quote:

---

the numbers for line up is due to duplication factor 2SS at the same level cannot 'play' all the time.

---

you need to prove this. I'm fairly certain that anything like this was removed.

Quote:

---

Its a guideline but pitching wise it is best not to have more than 5 players per level but also take into consideration (its nor gospel) what you quoted.

---

This I know for a fact was disproven, about a month ago. I'm sure that I could dig up the thread if you'd like.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ohms_law

you need to prove this. I'm fairly certain that anything like this was removed.


This I know for a fact was disproven, about a month ago. I'm sure that I could dig up the thread if you'd like.

---

The thread was with GM ... but that was 1 example not a certainty neither that it was consistent through out the game...

i replicated the test, and HGM wasn't the one that started the thread, he just verified what the OP posted. The point is proven to me, so can you prove us wrong?

non-pitchers was left as an open question though. the situation with pitchers being what it is, I don't see why position players would be any different. honestly, I think that I have the player development thing down pretty deacently now though, after doing those Anatomy of a Season and Anatomy of a Career threads. I don't see this aspect (more then x players at the same level at the same time) as being a problem. The game simply doesn't actually simulate minor league play. All that the game aparently does is generate appropriate stats based on the players ratings, on specific dates.

I prefer all my MLB guys to be 80 or higher, though I do have a few upper 70's occasionally. Prospects with a 75-80 overall, and higher peak values, will get a MLB test drive to see how they do. Typically around 73+ is AAA, 65-72 is AA, 60-65 is A, and below 60 is rookie ball for me. Sometimes I run out of room in rookie ball and have to bump up a couple of below 60 players to A or get rid of them. Age also plays into it. I'm a little more lenient for pitchers, but position players who are 23 or older and still in R or A ball need to hit the ball or hit the road pretty quick. Same for AA players 25 and older. AAA for me is usually a mixture of prospects and older players that I acquire for depth, so it's a mixed bag.

I believe Clay has said himself that the two position players at the same level effects development. I'm with Ohms on the pitcher thing though.

Also, "The money you put into your farm system increases both the number and quality of recruited minor leaguers. Extra money in your farm system is usually a good investment." is horribly outdated. The number of recruited minor leaguers now is always the same - 6 per year. Before the amateur draft was introduced, rookies were placed on teams at the beginning of the offseason, and your farm system spending increased the number of rookies you got, as well as the quality of them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ohms_law

i replicated the test, and HGM wasn't the one that started the thread, he just verified what the OP posted. The point is proven to me, so can you prove us wrong?

non-pitchers was left as an open question though. the situation with pitchers being what it is, I don't see why position players would be any different. .

---

reply:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoustonGM

I believe Clay has said himself that the two position players at the same level effects development. .

---

Pitching - I will bow to the consensus....

Quote:

---

I think that I have the player development thing down pretty deacently now though, after doing those Anatomy of a Season and Anatomy of a Career threads.

---

Hmmm, sounds like I need to read those. Got a link handy, ohms?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by beerchaser

Hmmm, sounds like I need to read those. Got a link handy, ohms?

---

You can use search but here :

http://forum.sportsmogul.com/showthr...hlight=anatomy

And the other thread:

http://forum.sportsmogul.com/showthr...hlight=anatomy

Thanks FRS, I was too lazy to look for it. :)

ah, that's disappointing that the computer doesn't take into account minor league stats. i thought it could have been simulated stats that don't effect development but i'd rather not know that it's a fact.

hmm, thanks for those links. i hope they'll answer all of my questions.

and houston, hah, i wondered what in the world that meant about recruiting or spawning new players. i just ignored it. thanks for the update

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 6leopard6

ah, that's disappointing that the computer doesn't take into account minor league stats. i thought it could have been simulated stats that don't effect development but i'd rather not know that it's a fact.

hmm, thanks for those links. i hope they'll answer all of my questions.

and houston, hah, i wondered what in the world that meant about recruiting or spawning new players. i just ignored it. thanks for the update

---

The computer doesn't take into account major league stats either. Evaluation of players is based strictly on rating.