Sunday, August 13, 2017
the need for a new minor league
hi i believe going forward next year we need to add a low A or second Rookie League ..their are too many players who get promoted to A ball but have red arrows pointing down ..these players are not ready mostly 18-20 years old need one more year.........i feel this might also aids in development of players which only adds to better competition at major league level...feel we should vote on this and add a new team (rookie or low A)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
That's a good idea, and I would support it if it came to a vote, but I think we should look to solve the problems we currently have in the Rookie League.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the top problem is that players (especially kids drafted out of high school) aren't ready to be promoted after one season there. Before this season, Zev and I enforced the "only rookie" rule, but we have been lax this year. I think we should make it an under-23 league, which gives teams plenty of time to develop players there.
If we aren't clearing the rookie league rosters each season, then we should reduce the rounds in the draft back to 15-20, instead of 25. Teams are drafting 25 players (give or take), plus getting international signings that have turned 20, on their rookie league teams. If we are allowing players to remain in the rookie league for multiple seasons, then we should reduce the number of players entering the teams each season.
If we reduce the draft by 5 rounds, we should keep the number of players available to be drafted the same. This will create more undrafted free agents for teams to sign if they need to (for example, if you don't draft a catcher).
I can think of other tweaks to the minor leagues, such as the schedule. AAA, AA, and A should have their seasons start on April 2, to avoid <a href="http://sdmbootp.blogspot.com/2017/06/opening-day-is-here.html?showComment=1496927742929#c5015488181525835672>the incidents we had this season</a>. I know there have been suggestions to extend those seasons, especially A and AA (as their seasons ended in the August I sim) -- I'm open to that, as well.
Err, this should be the link in the last paragraph: Link
ReplyDeleteall of those sound good to me -- didn't know the A and AA seasons were over already, but I'd be on board with longer seasons for them. Fewer draft picks to go with longer tenures in Rookie ball makes sense too, as does a low A league.
ReplyDeleteHow about replacing the Rookie league with a low-A league?
ReplyDeleteWould we just rename the rookie league the Low-A league and get rid of the restrictions we have on it? That's a fine short-term solution.
ReplyDeleteMy thought recently has been to put age limits on all of the lower minors. Age 22 for rookie, age 24 for A, 27 for AA, and unlimited for AAA. I think that would better balance things out and help with minor league competitive balance, which is out of whack between computer and human controlled teams.
ReplyDeleteI think age restrictions and low A seem like it should work...and maybe reducing the draft by 5 rounds ...that could be the solution
ReplyDeletePutting my comments on the voting in this thread, as requested.
ReplyDeleteI very strongly support 2 (removing year restrictions on Rookie ball), 4 (age restrictions on the minors), and 6 (increasing the number of minor league games). I've long been in favor of 6, as it seems to me to only help prospects develop faster to have more games for them to play. That's especially true for trying to improve prospects' defensive position ratings. I also support 2 & 4 because the one-year rule in Rookie league is awkward and difficult to implement and because I think age restrictions will help competitive balance in the minors. It's absurd to have 35-year-olds playing in A-ball just because the computer manager set it up that way for an owner.
I voted for 1 (name change for rookie league) and 5 (change start date for minors) although I don't feel very strongly about either. I actually think it's kind of useful to have the major league season and minor league season start at different times, just from a personal workload perspective. But these two elements are loosely tied in to the changes I care about and so I voted yes.
I voted no on 3 (reducing the draft) because I think we've got an overall shortage of great prospects in the minors. Recent drafts have been utterly underwhelming in terms of the talent available. Reducing the incoming talent pool, which is what would happen by reducing the pool from 50 rounds of players to 40, is only going to exacerbate that problem. Plus, there are a lot of teams that will need younger players to replace the over 27 set that are currently occupying spots in A-ball and AA.
That's my two cents.
Tom asked:
ReplyDeleteI can understand if the game is generating too many useless players or something to make the FA pool more manageable. Just want to hear more about the rationale on 3 first before committing an answer. thanks!
As posted in this discussion thread a year or so ago, the sweet spot for the draft, in terms of amount of good players that are available, is a 2:1 ratio in terms of players eligible to be drafted vs players who will be drafted.