Suggestions

Forum >> Suggestions >> Minor League Games  

Post ID	Date & Time	Game Date	Function
#10281	09/21/2014 11:55:34 am		Ignore
Seca Joined: 05/05/2014 Posts: 5199 Waterloo Dinosaurs Legends	I guess I don't really see the value in that. How is mouseing-over a player and seeing .280 BA, 11 HR giving different information from seeing 13 hitting and 9 power in the player skills? The only value I can see is finding out if the player has the "base-stealing gene". But you can get a sense of that from spring training games.
#10283	09/21/2014 1:41:52 pm		Ignore
Haselrig Joined: 04/13/2014 Posts: 2790 Novi Doubledays III.4	A fully functional Minor League system would be great, but I don't think it'd be worth the effort that would have to go into making it work. I'd have to agree with Seca, the slight insight into your prospects ability isn't likely to be worth that kind of effort.
#10284	09/21/2014 3:30:27 pm		Ignore
Seca Joined: 05/05/2014 Posts: 5199 Waterloo Dinosaurs Legends	I don't mean to sound negative. I enjoy watching my youngsters play, and look forward to spring training each season. The manual talks about possibly implementing barnstorming or "friendly" games at some point. This would be an opportunity for managers to view their youngsters w/o overhauling the current minor league system.
#10287	09/22/2014 6:29:53 am		Ignore
dwindacatcher Joined: 04/03/2014 Posts: 633 Inactive	Friendly games that we could schedule after knocked out of cup would be great.
#10290	09/22/2014 2:49:17 pm		Ignore
Spoonerific Joined: 01/17/2013 Posts: 339 Inactive	My issue with the minors system and not having games is that if we have to manage where in the minors a player is (without any significant issues like too many players at a position) then why do we have to waste our time with it. Players could just be in the Minors, or in the Majors... heck we can't even sign enough players to field a second team.
#10299	09/23/2014 9:14:30 am
admin Joined: 01/27/2010 Posts: 4985 Administrator	My goal was never to have every club field four additional minor league teams (Rookie thru AAA). Teams would be managing 125+ players and I just think that would be utterly tedious. The idea originally was to model the 40-man expanded roster in MLB – but we expanded it to 50 because we needed more big league players with Broken Bat’s more loaded schedule, plus to account for the lack of a disabled list. So basically the minor leagues are about shepherding the “real” prospects through the minor leagues and preparing them for the big leagues. The minor teams would, of course, be filled with a number of non-roster players (players that didn’t have major league contracts in RL) – but like in real life, those are mostly roster fillers. My feeling is part of managing a big league franchise has always been having a good farm team. Hence we wanted to somehow capture that facet of the game without requiring teams to set lineups and pitching roles for every single level of competition. But part of that should be shepherding the prospects through the minor league levels and anticipating when and where they will play in the big leagues. Or if they’re not developing adequately, cutting them and focusing on other prospects. I realize there are a lot of teams that don’t value the minors very much because they just go sign a bunch of free agents and don’t worry about developing talent. And that is mostly my fault because the economics at the upper leagues are such that they can pretty much afford to sign anybody. But I would like to fix that. Steve
#10302	09/23/2014 9:34:36 am
admin Joined: 01/27/2010 Posts: 4985 Administrator	Here's a really good article on how the 40-man roster functions: The 40-Man Roster: How Does It Work? Steve
#10303	09/23/2014 10:23:59 am		Ignore
Haselrig Joined: 04/13/2014 Posts: 2790 Novi Doubledays III.4	I think there will always be two camps for situations like this. Ones that would enjoy all the micromanagement that would go along with a fully functional minor league system and those that would find it tedious. I'd put myself in the first camp, but it's probably wiser to come down on the side that would think it was tedious. That's likely to be the less vocal majority.
#10305	09/23/2014 12:10:46 pm		Ignore
Seca Joined: 05/05/2014 Posts: 5199 Waterloo Dinosaurs Legends	I realize there are a lot of teams that don’t value the minors very much because they just go sign a bunch of free agents and don’t worry about developing talent. And that is mostly my fault because the economics at the upper leagues are such that they can pretty much afford to sign anybody. But I would like to fix that. You obviously have better tools for determining this, but is the above really that common? I wouldn't think teams revolving around free agency would have any consistency or sustainability. New/young teams have little option but to go the free agent route (assuming they have some cash). It takes time to get bodies into and moved through the minor league system. I looked at RH line-ups for the Legends teams. Not very scientific I know. But it was more time consuming than I thought. Anyway, this is what I found. 78 / 108 players were developed in the minors of the club (avg. of 6.5 per line-up, or 72%). 54 / 108 players were actual youth products of the club (avg. of 4.5 per line-up, or 50%).
#10318	09/24/2014 9:57:35 am
admin Joined: 01/27/2010 Posts: 4985 Administrator	Interesting statistics...I'm a little surprised by those numbers. Steve

| |

Reply