Broken Bat - Discussion Forum: Do some players just not develop?

Forum >> Discussions >> Do some players just not develop?

Post ID	Date & Time	Game Date

#39186	09/10/2016 7:18:48 am
BrianV Joined: 02/08/2016 Posts: 125 Inactive	I have a player, Saavedra, who was one of my first draft picks when I started in 2026. At that time he was our middle infielder of the future. 19 years old, 14-POT and 70SI. Now, after three seasons, he's 21, and has only gained 8 SI - one in his first season, 4 in his second, and three in this past season. At this rate, despite giving him every opportunity in the world, I don't think he's going to develop to anywhere near his full potential. I hope he does develope, because my number 5 pick from this year (Archuleta) is coming up just behind him, and they are going to make a fantastic middle infield duo. Updated Saturday, September 10 2016 @ 7:19:46 am PDT

#39189	09/10/2016 8:25:12 am
Seca Joined: 05/05/2014 Posts: 5201 Waterloo Dinosaurs Legends	Short answer: yes. Some don't turn out. Long answer: I used to track seasonal SI gains fairly closely. Still do, scribbling down all the numbers in my big binder of BrokenBat goodness. But I don't put much credence in it. I have found time spent per minor league level is the best indicator. There are a couple of problems with seasonal SI. We don't see the decimal places on the skill values. A player that comes into a season at 11.9 may appear to train better than a player who starts at 11.1. Another problem is that some players have "dead" skills that are close to their maximums early on. Check my catcher Schneider. His BC and PD are both dead, so he only has an opportunity to improve 3 skills. If he adds 6 SI in a season, he has done better than another player that adds 8, but has 5 "live" skills. The player you linked probably doesn't have much room to grow in his hitting skill. If, say his BC is also close to its maximum, then his seasonal progression is never going to be very impressive. (The other thing I might add is that gains at the lower minor league levels are often kind of low). So I wouldn't let this player's seasonal SI gains worry me. What would concern me is 1.6 seasons in rookie ball. I have found that players generally take the same amount of time to move levels after rookie ball. (This is not a rule or a fundamental truth, but a trend. Please don't feel the need to link a player who is an exception to this observation.) Some players cruise along at 1.5 seasons per level. Others take ~2. Slow pokes can take 2.5 or 3. You can't use rookie --> A as a guide b/c new draftees start somewhere through that level. A new draftee could move to A in 2 weeks b/c he was "born" further along the advancement timeline. That takes me to the concern about your lad. 1.6 seasons in rookie ball suggests he's at best a 2 season per level guy. He could be worse. Given he is going to be 22 with at least a full season of A ball ahead of him. He is not likely to "graduate" from the minors (ie., get promotion from AAA to the majors). This puts him into a higher risk category. Players who graduate seem to be assured sufficient SI acquisition through training and experience to cap out. Players who don't graduate may still be fine, but there is no guarantee. Lots of managers gamble on these players. Some bring them up at 25 and hope they have enough experience available to become a good player. Some managers leave players like this in AAA for another season or two, allowing them to get more training. They bring them up at age 26-27. In either of these cases it is a gamble. The player may still come up short. And even if they pan out, their playing careers are noticeably shorter than a player who moves along the proper pathway. Return on investment is poorer. I don't know if your guy is going to work out or not. IMO he has a red flag on him. I didn't look at the rest of your assets. Depending on what else you have, he could be a good risk-reward gamble. But if you have other comparable prospects at this position without red flags, or if you already have a lot of red flags in your system (it's good to take some gambles, but don't bet the farm) you may decide not to make this investment.

#39194	09/10/2016 3:52:44 pm
amalric7 Joined: 01/20/2016 Posts: 2238 New York Lancers V.4	You can thank me for Archuleta - I passed on him in the 5th round, even though he was exactly what I was looking for. But he was only a good potential, and I had a very good potential on my board - also called Archuleta. Yeah, that didn't work so well for me. I almost picked Agustin but took another look, and even though he had the better report I believe in most cases a "very good" potential has the likelihood of being the better player. I've drafted great hitters who turned out to be 11 pots but yeah, I'd dearly like to have that one back!

#39411	09/14/2016 7:18:21 pm
BrianV Joined: 02/08/2016 Posts: 125 Inactive	@seca - thanks for the observations about the minors system. You've now given me cause to review my entire minors system with an eye to rate of progression. @amalric - I'm typically an early morning drafter. I don't know about that morning specifically, but I'm impressed! Getting a 'Very Good' 12-POT is a tough break. I would have rolled the dice the same way.

#39422	09/15/2016 7:30:04 am
GrizzlyDan Joined: 06/30/2016 Posts: 199 Atlanta Braves IV.2	Ariel Collazo I feel your pain. I didn't draft him, he was there when I took the team. He has glaring weaknesses in exactly the same stats that I will be emphasizing in training, needs to be in the outfield but isn't, and has just enough bat that I can't get rid of him yet. He may have already flattened out if you look at his development curve, and I will be training a weak-armed catcher at 2B to try to replace him. But he's "very good" potentially. Gack.

#39423	09/15/2016 8:37:01 am
mikkoredsox Joined: 03/29/2015 Posts: 116 Inactive	@GrizzlyDan- Acutally being he is a 12 Potential player, his max SI is 96-103. So he actually has reached his highest possible SI, barring a rare bump to being a 13 Potential. There's not much to wait for there, he is what he is at this point. So, in other words, he did fulfill his "Very Good Potential" for being a 12 Potential player. Updated Thursday, September 15 2016 @ 9:41:15 am PDT

#39433	09/15/2016 1:51:16 pm
AD24 Joined: 09/04/2015 Posts: 112 Inactive	Yeah, some guys don't develop like Hector which sucks, because I think he could've been really good.

#39438	09/15/2016 2:32:37 pm
newtman Joined: 11/02/2013 Posts: 3343 Inactive	@AD24, Hector isn't doing too badly considering when and where he started. He won't be ready at 25 though.

#39447	09/15/2016 3:46:49 pm
Rock777 Joined: 09/21/2014 Posts: 9603 Haverhill Halflings III.1	Collazo looks like a good player. Would have been better at LF than 2B, but should still be serviceable and it looks like he has some potential as a hitter; .800 OPS is good. Updated Thursday, September 15 2016 @ 3:47:35 pm PDT

#83773	08/13/2021 2:05:57 pm	Jun 26th, 2051
timothy Joined: 03/18/2020 Posts: 202 West Fargo Turtles II.1	Drafted this possibly odd case over a season ago. 13 POT out of high school where he only had 34 AB (!), but had OPS of 1.351. 400 minor league AB plus 59 in spring training, over a year in, and his SI has increased by one point. Updated Friday, August 13 2021 @ 2:07:00 pm PDT

#83774	08/13/2021 3:34:13 pm	Jun 26th, 2051
Jwrose Joined: 07/07/2016 Posts: 95 Parma Dodgers V.10	Ok, why did all the above links go to retired players?

#83775	08/13/2021 3:47:29 pm	Jun 26th, 2051
Rock777 Joined: 09/21/2014 Posts: 9603 Haverhill Halflings III.1	@Jwrose - super old necro @timothy - wouldn't stress too much. Very young players tend to develop slowly at first, then pick up a bit when they get older.

#83776	08/13/2021 4:32:13 pm	Jun 27th, 2051
timothy Joined: 03/18/2020 Posts: 202 West Fargo Turtles II.1	OK thanks, Rock, lol!