Player improvement

[Jim]

Does a player only get better playing in the minors or can he get better in the majors? For example, say I have someone who's a 40 right now but a potential 60. Will throwing him up in the majors take him longer to get to 60 or possibly screw him up since he might've come up too soon? Also, do you look at just their OVR and POT to decide if they should come up or look at that along with stats?

I'm still learning this and have done some reading but figured some of these answers might be better from those with experience with OOTP.

[Andrew]

It depends. The way I understand it players will improve more if they're suited to the level of competition and do well. So if a player is overmatched and does poorly, he probably won't improve as fast. If he's playing at a level that's way too easy, he probably won't improve as fast.

[robster1225]

Andrew, your right, if a player struggles at any level it can hurt his growth. One of the best things about player development is that it is not an exact science. It is possible to leave someone in the minors for to long, and it is possible to not leave them there long enough. But, results may not always be the same.
What I do is a combination of ratings and stats. Once a player reaches what I deem to be major league level ratings, then I start watching his stats. IF I don't have the luxury of waiting, then I gamble on a player. If your new to the game, you'll just have to experiment and see what works best for you.

[Andrew]

What I do is a combination of ratings and stats. Once a player reaches what I deem to be major league level ratings, then I start watching his stats. IF I don't have the luxury of waiting, then I gamble on a player. If your new to the game, you'll just have to experiment and see what works best for you.

I take pretty much the same approach. Here's a good example of a player I gambled and lost with:

http://ootp.oldredboat.com/news/html...ayer_2011.html

His ratings weren't quite MLB ready but his potential is very good. He had a great year last year so I took a chance and moved him up, hoping it would speed up his development and help out my struggling bullpen at the same time. He struggled in the majors though so I recently sent him back down. Hopefully he regains last years form.

[Jistic]

I don't think ratings tell nearly the whole story anyway. Hell I gotta guy that's been 6 or 7 in contact whos a .200 lifetime hitter.

[robster1225]

Your right about that. They are just a "guide". Although, you will see guys with good ratings struggle for a while or for there entire career but it is rare to see guys with horrible ratings excel for a long period of time. It's a strange dynamic.

[Pat]

I have a bunch of pitchers who aren't rated very high but have a 3.00 ERA.

[robster1225]

When I say a long period of time, I mean a number of seasons. Another thing to remember is that ratings aren't relative. So, theoretically, the best pitcher in the league could have all "5's", but if the players he's pitching against aren't very good either, then he is going to have good stats, most likely. In our league, pitchers with "5"'s are pretty decent middle of the rotation pitchers. (which I love, by the way)

[Jistic]

Another trap we all fall in. Is the "down" year, or conversely the "career" year. We have so little history that it's tough to gain perspective.

I have another single player league that has 11 years of history. Guys with great ratings have bad years. Guys with average ratings have great years. If 1978 just happens to end up being a career best or worst year, our opinoin will be skewed. Just not enough time has passed yet.

[HWessinmouse]

Yeah, that's the ticket! My guys are all having "slump" years. While highly improbable, it's not impossible.

[Jistic]

It's more if you see someone greatly under or over achieving in relation to their ratings.