Minor Leagues

[6leopard6]

Hi. I'm excited to get into this kind of forum. I have a bunch of questions about the minor leagues and the rest of the game that I'm thinking can only be answered by experience (or by asking the experienced), but I'll stick to just one question for now, but, if it's true, then many questions follow:

Does the way I promote players from A through AAA actually affect their rating progression or regression?

If so, how do people think it should work. Do you play anyone over a rating of 80 into AAA; do you do it more by their age; or by their performance (like, two great years in AA gets the guy the nod to AAA)?

(For example, the computer often puts terrible rookie draft picks [44/78] in AAA. I change this and manually put them into R ball, or at least A ball)

Also, can you have too many pitchers in your minors? My main gripe is that too many of my pitchers that were once 86/96 (or the like) in the minors, fell to 77/85 over the last two years. Is it because they were good enough to be in the majors and since I didn't promote them, they got worse? Or would they have gotten worse anyway because of a mostly pre-determined ratings arch. If it's because they wanted promoted and I didn't let them, then I'm angry because players' skills would not decrease this much just because they wish they were in the show. (another example, i got two great prospects from the A's and they both fell drastically, like from 69/96 to 44/81 in one year). If there's nothing I can do about this, then I'll stop fretting, know it's all up to chance, and just enjoy the game. If not, help!! please.

I've looked, but admittedly not very closely, yet, for threads on things like this. I would be extremely appreciative if this has already been discussed, if anyone could direct me to that thread.

thanks

[meacon99]

Yeah, you do control how well your players progress in the minors. What is your funding for your Farm System and Scouting? The more you put for your Farm System, the better the odds your prospects will reach their peak. However, you want to have a good amount in your scouting too. Because the trade you had with the A's, where you thought you were getting 61/96 prospects, if you happened to have low scouting budget, you may have been misled about his potential. I don't think leaving a player in the minors for a year longer than they should hurts their ratings too much but I have noticed a point or two drop from their potential peak. I'm sure the more experienced guys on these forums will give a better explanation but thats what I have gathered in my years of playing Mogul.

[6leopard6]

hey, thanks for the comment. yeah, i meant to put that i make sure to be first in the league for scouting and go above and beyond the rest of league in farm system. the help section told me that there's no sense to go above other teams in scouting because it said that i'd already be getting the best scouts. (this reminds me of a post i just read where people were wondering about how long scouting would take to improve in real life when money was pumped in. anyway, it must be you just get the better scouts and not more scouts because the game tells us that you can't get better than just better than the other teams.) but, in farm system, i like to think that more money = better ratings - even though now i think i might be wrong.

anyway, i'll forget those A's guys as anomalies in my mind. but two other guys who i've had progress well for a couple years just went way down this year. they're both in their fifth year in the minors and beginning their second in AAA. are they mad because there are lower ranked pitchers in the majors do you think? they were the 86/96 that went to 81 and 77 (something like this).

Also, i noticed that in my offensive minors, if i have two or more say, first basemen, that they take each others at bats and so get less each over the year. first, does their production really matter? second, why can 5 relievers in AA each pick up 20 saves? then, does having too many pitchers in AAA matter or not, since they still rack up innings and appearances?

[meacon99]

I don't think having more than one player at a position in the minors matters much, though. If it was happening with just one of your guys I would say maybe he just peaked early, but seeing that you have a few guys that are dropping a lot in a short time, I am at a loss. I do know that out of all my position players, a very few of them ever turn out to be rated exactly what their peak is. Those that do turn out to be as good as their "predicted", don't usually get the call up from me until they are 27 or 28. I don't do it intentionally but a lot of the time, my line up is decent enough that I don't need to call up any of my position players until they are at peak. Sorry, I know that doesn't help. However, as I type this I am playing a game with the Orioles. I drafted Benny Agbayani and he was at 81 predicted peak. I kept him in AA for three years and AAA for three years and now his peak is 92. At one point it had dropped to 76 and I contemplated trading him. So my suggestion would be to just let them hang in there and eventually they will reach their peaks. Sorry if this doesn't help, I do notice I tend to ramble.

[6leopard6]

ah, no, you help very much.

i think maybe i just got too worried too quickly. i finally have a good team and i hope to keep it that way by the minors. but if they were going to drop at young ages just because i didn't get them into the majors, i was going to trade my good prospects for a bunch of even younger ones. and i almost did last night. instead, i'll just give it a few more years and see if i'm just not overreacting.

i liked what you said here: "Those that do turn out to be as good as their "predicted", don't usually get the call up from me until they are 27 or 28."

because the guys i'm talking about are just 23 or so and if you usually let them stay until 27 or so without problems, that's good enough for me. i just very recently got the game, if you hadn't noticed. and so far i'm addicted =)

[meacon99]

Welcome then. I'm newer to the forums but have played this game for as long as I can remember. It's the most addicting game I've ever played. Be sure to download patch 9.45 if you have not already.

[HoustonGM]

Does the way I promote players from A through AAA actually affect their rating progression or regression?

It can. I don't have the exact numbers on hand, but Clay once posted a "breakdown" of ratings by level. It goes something like this, although I could be off a bit:

AAA - 70+
AA - 65-69
A - 60-64
R - below 60

If so, how do people think it should work. Do you play anyone over a rating of 80 into AAA; do you do it more by their age; or by their performance (like, two great years in AA gets the guy the nod to AAA)?

I use a mix of age, rating, and performance. Once a guy hits 25-26, I usually want to make sure he's in AAA, regardless. Or off my team. :P

For example, the computer often puts terrible rookie draft picks [44/78] in AAA. I change this and manually put them into R ball, or at least A ball.

Yeah, what you do is probably best.

Also, can you have too many pitchers in your minors?

Well, there's a maximum of 11 pitchers per level, making a maximum of 44 pitchers total in the minors. However, the amount of pitchers you have has no effect on a player's development. For hitters, if you have two players at the same position and the same level, that could affect development.

My main gripe is that too many of my pitchers that were once 86/96 (or the like) in the minors, fell to 77/85 over the last two years. Is it because they were good enough to be in the majors and since I didn't promote them, they got worse?

This is because the game has randomness in it. If you think about real life examples, it's entirely realistic too. Mark Buerhle and Mike Piazza were low draft picks. Guys have one great year in the majors, and flame out. Etc.

Or would they have gotten worse anyway because of a mostly pre-determined ratings arch.

It's not pre-determined. You could've saved prior to the rating drop, and simmed it over tons of times. One time, he'd reach 96. Another, he'd drop to 77/85. Another time, he'd reach 90 and top out there. The list of possibilities is endless.

If it's because they wanted promoted and I didn't let them, then I'm angry because players' skills would not decrease this much just because they wish they were in the show.

I can assure you that that is not the case here.

(another example, i got two great prospects from the A's and they both fell drastically, like from 69/96 to 44/81 in one year). If there's nothing I can do about this, then I'll stop fretting, know it's all up to chance, and just enjoy the game. If not, help!! please.

Well, it is all up to chance. BUT, there is something you can do about it. In the League Editor, you can raise the Draft Predictability. Raising it to 100% makes it so every player always reaches his listed peak at draft day, barring injury.

hey, thanks for the comment. yeah, i meant to put that i make sure to be first in the league for scouting and go above and beyond the rest of league in farm system. the help section told me that there's no sense to go above other teams in scouting because it said that i'd already be getting the best scouts. (this reminds me of a post i just read where people were wondering about how long scouting would take to improve in real life when money was pumped in. anyway, it must be you just get the better scouts and not more scouts because the game tells us that you can't get better than just better than the other teams.) but, in farm system, i like to think that more money = better ratings - even though now i think i might be wrong.

More money in scouting and the farm system doesn't always mean better. The only thing that matters is your ranking compared to the rest of the league. If you're in first place, you'll be getting the best scouts and the best farm development. It doesn't matter how much more you spend than the second place team. Spending $1 million more is the equivelent of spending $100 million more than the second place team.

Also, i noticed that in my offensive minors, if i have two or more say, first basemen, that they take each others at bats and so get less each over the year. first, does their production really matter?

I touched on this above. If the players are in the same level, their development will be hurt.

second, why can 5 relievers in AA each pick up 20 saves? then, does having too many pitchers in AAA matter or not, since they still rack up innings and appearances?

It doesn't matter for pitchers.

[6leopard6]

awesome. thankyou houston. i knew i'd love this forum. i was hoping it was just randomness. i especially appreciate your point about a pitcher having a great year and then flaming out. while i don't understand how his stats would decrease so much, i now understand that for the computer to simulate a guy doing great one year and then bad the next, his stats would have to decrease to make that scenario more possible.

[FRENCHREDSOX]

Ratings DEFINE future long term stats average so a 68 OR will over time never be better stats wise than an 88 but can occasionally have a better season.

[HoustonGM]

awesome. thankyou houston. i knew i'd love this forum. i was hoping it was just randomness. i especially appreciate your point about a pitcher having a great year and then flaming out. while i don't understand how his stats would decrease so much, i now understand that for the computer to simulate a guy doing great one year and then bad the next, his stats would have to decrease to make that scenario more possible.

I think you mean "ratings" rather than "stats", but nonetheless I get your point. Take a look at Russ Ortiz for a guy who fits the "dropping off the face of the earth" mold. He always had control problems, but he started his career as a fairly middle-of-the-road starter, then posted 3 good years from 2001-2003. 2004 marked the begin of his decline, but he still posted a respectable season. 2005 was bad. He completely lost the ability to strike people out, and for the first time in his career, walked mroe batters than he struck out, not to mention giving up more than a hit per inning for the first time since his rookie year. And 2006, as you all know, was completely disastrous. 0-8...8.14 ERA...a WHIP of 2.00...

[6leopard6]

yeah, that makes sense.

however, earlier, i heard people talking about age. particularly a pitcher's age. and experience as well. almost invaribly, when i promote a young pitcher to the majors, he'll stink it up for a couple seasons even. this makes sense in real life, but how does the computer make it work when the pitcher's ratings are so good? i guess there's a stat thing that we don't see that marks a guy for being able to make the jump easier than other guys?

and also, sometimes scouts say, 'just give him a year' or 'he has a future but not yet' or 'i'd like to see him with a few more years under his belt'

do you guys generally take that to mean the player wouldn't have success if you brought him up to the majors? or are the comments more or less irrelevent when it comes to promoting and actually meant to just say, 'this guy will improve'?

subnote: i'm just finishing Dorian Gray. i had no idea it would be so entertaining!

[6leopard6]

the previous reply was only in response to frenchredsox.

yeah, houston, had i had a few more minutes i was going to mention oliver perez as that kind of guy. changing his windup and mechanics dropped his fastball from 99 to 91. so crazy things like that happen. and to make it more likely to happen, we get the decrease in RATINGS (hah, thanks).

and i forgot, but thanks for info on farm system spending. should save me some otherwise wasted money.

just a thought for next year maybe (unless i missed it), it would be nice to be able to tell individual players how much you want them to steal, instead of setting it as a team strategy. maybe it would be too much hassle for a minor thing, but i hate my 23 sb/19cs guys. -you've lost it old man, quit trying to take second.

[HoustonGM]

however, earlier, i heard people talking about age. particularly a pitcher's age. and experience as well. almost invaribly, when i promote a young pitcher to the majors, he'll stink it up for a couple seasons even. this makes sense in real life, but how does the computer make it work when the pitcher's ratings are so good? i guess there's a stat thing that we don't see that marks a guy for being able to make the jump easier than other guys?

That happens with every type of player, not just pitcher's. I assume the game uses a player's "experience" (a value you can set in the player editor) in conjuction with the player's ratings. Experience is just the number of years played. There's times when rookies do really well though, so it's not a give-in that a rookie will do bad.

do you guys generally take that to mean the player wouldn't have success if you brought him up to the majors? or are the comments more or less irrelevent when it comes to promoting and actually meant to just say, 'this guy will improve'?

I haven't looked into that enough to comment. Interesting point though.

just a thought for next year maybe (unless i missed it), it would be nice to be able to tell individual players how much you want them to steal, instead of setting it as a team strategy. maybe it would be too much hassle for a minor thing, but i hate my 23 sb/19cs guys. -you've lost it old man, quit trying to take second.

It's a commonly requested feature.

[FRENCHREDSOX]

VERY well put.

[SirKodiak]

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

Look at last section

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.