Broken Bat - Help: Is training on pace?

Forum >> Help >> Is training on pace?

Post ID	Date & Time	Game Date	Function

#48572	05/01/2017 6:50:38 am
jdar25 Joined: 11/14/2016 Posts: 52 Inactive	How do my minors look I have a gaggle of 15 POT but idk if Im managing them correctly.

#48618	05/01/2017 6:32:16 pm
Rock777 Joined: 09/21/2014 Posts: 9599 Haverhill Halflings III.1	As long as you are following the AIs advice I don't think you will have problems. They look like they are training fine. That is certainly some obnoxiously good luck. I haven't drafted a single POT 15 in 12 seasons playing this game. You lucked out on 4. 3 in just the last two season. Sometimes its better to be lucky than good, LOL.

#48630	05/01/2017 9:52:15 pm
MukilteoMike Joined: 08/09/2014 Posts: 3294 Inactive	As you know, overall potential doesn't always translate to much. I was thrilled when I saw my only higher-than-14, which even managed to be a 16 potential. Now I'm not sure he's going to be anything more than a run of the mill average player. However, he does have the added benefit of being able to be an emergency backup backstop. I do think the scouts might have recommended him to the Bigs too early, though. It's quite possible that I'll stick him back down in AAA for at least half a season next year. I think the idea of keeping guys in AAA at least 4 or 5 weeks past their recommendation might end up being a good idea. Updated Monday, May 1 2017 @ 10:01:34 pm PDT

#48643	05/02/2017 7:13:53 am
Seca Joined: 05/05/2014 Posts: 5199 Waterloo Dinosaurs Legends	I don't see a reason to expect Naranjo to miss badly. Maybe a point or two. I'm not against giving him a little extra minors time, but the dude badly needs some playing time.

#48650	05/02/2017 10:12:48 am
MukilteoMike Joined: 08/09/2014 Posts: 3294 Inactive	When you're fighting relegation, it's hard playing a guy with a sub-500 OPS. 😲 Besides, he's only 24. My issue with him isn't SI; it's FALSE SI. I don't think he can possibly be as good as the numbers say. He hasn't shown anything at any level. My point about him, though, was that it might be advantageous for some players to be left in AAA longer than suggested. Actually, now that I think about it, if that's true it seems logical to think that may be the case for every level. Hmm. I've always gone strictly by recommendations until promoting to the majors. I'm going to have to re-think that.

#48653	05/02/2017 12:55:29 pm
Seca Joined: 05/05/2014 Posts: 5199 Waterloo Dinosaurs Legends	Hehe. Fair comment about relegation. Tho at some point his potential should obligate you to bite the bullet and give him 500 ABs regardless of the context. I think its dangerous using minor league stats in a predictive way (other than base-stealing behaviour). IMO it is more an indicator of the player's current development than a sign of what the player is capable of. Schuler has been great in the minors b/c he was drafted with like 9 hitting. I don't expect him to be an offensive dynamo in ML. The most meaningful minor results would be AAA. Naranjo's AAA was pretty good. Definitely in line with a McCarty. Not sure how much experience you have with these big pot guys - I've only had a couple. But they can add obscene amounts of SI in a season. He should fatten up. With 25 points on the table he could be a gross offensive player. Would expect 15 hitting despite the "good" scouting. 15-19-17-19 should get it done. (That don't look like false SI to me ). My point about him, though, was that it might be advantageous for some players to be left in AAA longer than suggested. There are some. Guys that don't get recommended and are going to fall 10 SI short due to lack of/poor training definitely. Guys that get recommended ... not as clear. Most recommended guys make their target. A few come up a point or two short. The number that miss by more than that is very small. I know I'm begging for a Byrd link here. (I'm sure that guy is the 2nd most linked player in BrokenBat behind a certain prehistoric RH starting pitcher ). I get it. Byrd didn't make it. He's the minority. Missing by a point or two does drive some managers crazy. This type of game appeals to optimizers. Having a 13 pot with 103 SI screams failure. Its really not a big deal. A player comes up at 24. Maxed at 26. Starts losing SI at 30. Forgets how to play at 32. That's a 6 season career. If you tuck him in AAA for an extra season, now its a 5 season career. 17% reduction. And the gain? A small amount of SI. Does this SI make him a noticeably better player? Questionable. Butler is one of these guys. I might have had another point of BC or PD if I'd left him in AAA another 0.5-1 season. I doubt that would make him tangibly better. And I would have lost that much of his prime. (He's potentially on pace for 2k hits. Wouldn't be if he'd stayed down). Its natural to be cautious and pessimistic about your own prospects. I think Naranjo is fine. More than fine. I would understand if you gave him some minors time next season. Personally I would have him in the majors getting 500+ ABs. Actually, now that I think about it, if that's true it seems logical to think that may be the case for every level. This seems like a bad idea to me. We've been told training is optimal at the recommended level. Extra time in rookie ball is sub-optimal training. Especially considering SI gains generally increase with minor league level. If a guy gets to the end of his minor league career and looks like he could use more training, fine - more AAA. But trying to increase training by holding him back at lower levels is almost certainly counter-productive. Phew. Long post is long.