Discussion Forum

Forum >> Discussions >> 2035 Training Chatter  

Post ID	Date & Time	Game Date	Function
#57413	03/01/2018 10:16:37 pm	Mar 14th, 2035	Ignore
AssumedPseudonym Joined: 10/26/2016 Posts: 1130 Deerfield Beach Rats V.7	Apparently there’s a new training format, or at least timing on it has changed. Training Update #1 has already happened, and we are now at “Processing halted” before anything else goes through.
#57414	03/01/2018 10:37:03 pm	Mar 14th, 2035	Ignore
Hayseed Joined: 02/20/2018 Posts: 290 Hood River Hawks IV.1	looks like mine went through. One curious change: I have a 21 year old SS that actually had his fielding go down (Kaline). Probably after having so many errors in ST (right?)
#57415	03/02/2018 12:53:55 am	Mar 14th, 2035	Ignore
AssumedPseudonym Joined: 10/26/2016 Posts: 1130 Deerfield Beach Rats V.7	There’s a small margin for error in the numbers displayed. Over the course of a player’s career, they usually get adjusted as the team gets a better feel for just what he’s capable of. It won’t impact the way the player plays, it’s just a more accurate display of what he actually does.  It should be pointed out that this is not cause-and-effect, or at least not as you described; it’s more the other way around. In your player’s case, the errors would not have caused the fielding rating to go down. The fielding was already at the lower number, now it’s just displaying it correctly. The timing is more of a coincidence than anything. …Probably.
#57418	03/02/2018 2:34:17 am	Mar 14th, 2035	Ignore
12twelve Joined: 02/05/2017 Posts: 131 Inactive	One thing that seemed a little odd for this training update is that I didn't have a single player be suggested for promotion at any level. I don't expect one every time but there is usually someone that promotes out of spring training. Anyone else have this happen to them? Or, how many promotion suggestions did you get? Updated Friday, March 2 2018 @ 2:35:08 am PST
#57419	03/02/2018 2:34:27 am	Mar 14th, 2035	Ignore
amalric7 Joined: 01/20/2016 Posts: 2238 New York Lancers V.4	I keep track of my training, so it was interesting to note that update #1 is almost exactly the same as it was last time around. I had one guy miss out on his improvement from last time but also saw at least two guys get an uptick that didn't happen until update #2 last time around. I guess its all been a learning experience.
#57423	03/02/2018 3:39:35 am	Mar 14th, 2035	Ignore
occham Joined: 11/07/2011 Posts: 258 Inactive	Without the 'double training error' this spring, one of my reclamation projects who had a massive bump last year totally struck out in this year's spring training. Instead of catching up and maybe getting to the majors, he's instead on his way to be one of those 13 pot pitchers that never makes it. Rogelio Concepción
#57425	03/02/2018 4:47:47 am	Mar 14th, 2035	Ignore
Shoeless Joe Joined: 10/07/2017 Posts: 17 Inactive	@12twelve. Before today's pick I have three guys in rookie, nine in A, eight in AA, and had 37 total training bumps...zero suggestions to promote. I agree that seems odd.
#57434	03/02/2018 7:05:16 am	Mar 14th, 2035	Ignore
Rock777 Joined: 09/21/2014 Posts: 9605 Haverhill Halflings III.1	zero promotion recommendations for me, but that is pretty common overall. You don't get recommendations every update.
#57437	03/02/2018 7:20:56 am	Mar 14th, 2035	Ignore
lostraven Joined: 07/02/2016 Posts: 1269 Corvallis Ravens II.1	Also noticed that nearly the same pops happened this time around as did with the alternate-universe 2035 Training 1.
#57575	03/08/2018 6:54:25 am	Apr 3rd, 2035	Ignore
Seca Joined: 05/05/2014 Posts: 5202 Waterloo Dinosaurs Legends	Not training chatter. Close enough? Didn't want to start a new thread. Anyone think Barnett is a real prospect? He can't field a position, so he has to DH. Doesn't have an elite hit tool. Doesn't have power scouting. Doesn't use his speed to steal bases. But he hits HRs. Did in the washed out 2035 too. I cut him during a roster crunch last '35. I feel like that might have been a mistake tho. Is his minor league performance enough to overlook the rest?
#57578	03/08/2018 8:44:44 am	Apr 3rd, 2035	Ignore
Rock777 Joined: 09/21/2014 Posts: 9605 Haverhill Halflings III.1	Sometimes Very Good Hitters end up being better than Great Hitters, so I wouldn't begrudge his Hit tool. Defensively I'd be fine using him in LF/1B myself. His power has been great in the low minors, and really 6 Power is pretty good for low minors. The issue is, he is currently flat lining for Power development. Combined with his lack of a Power scout report, makes me think his power isn't going to continue to grow. Did it grow in the last 2035? I think he has some potential has a hitter in general, but I wouldn't count on those power numbers to continue in AAA or the majors.
#57580	03/08/2018 10:45:23 am	Apr 3rd, 2035	Ignore
Deuce Joined: 06/07/2016 Posts: 279 New London Rippers V.3	Wasted speed is a killer for a 12 POT hitter, I'm sure you could replace him with someone who has a better build without any problem at all.
#57581	03/08/2018 11:32:19 am	Apr 3rd, 2035	Ignore
Seca Joined: 05/05/2014 Posts: 5202 Waterloo Dinosaurs Legends	Wow. That's a nice catch on the development graph. I really should have checked that. Good point Deuce. In truth I'd rather not have DHs strewn throughout my minor leagues. And it really doesn't make sense to keep both Barnett and Dolf. (Dolf is likely the opposite of Barnett - underachieve through the minors because of awful starting skills).
#57609	03/09/2018 7:07:03 am	Apr 7th, 2035	Ignore
Seca Joined: 05/05/2014 Posts: 5202 Waterloo Dinosaurs Legends	Hehe. Found Barnett's training update funny given this conversation. (Popped his power).
#57615	03/09/2018 9:16:08 am	Apr 7th, 2035	Ignore
Skoormit Joined: 01/21/2018 Posts: 17 Inactive	Barnett is a righthander without enough arm for C or 3B, without enough range for SS or 2B or CF, and without enough power to justify playing DH or 1B. He has two plus tools: HIT and SPD. If you had to pick two tools to have, you'd probably pick HIT as one of them, but you probably would not pick SPD as the other. I guess the question is: do you want a bad leftfielder with a good AVG, bad SLG, and enough speed to pinch-run late in games? Updated Friday, March 9 2018 @ 9:17:48 am PST
#57618	03/09/2018 10:11:01 am	Apr 7th, 2035	Ignore
Seca Joined: 05/05/2014 Posts: 5202 Waterloo Dinosaurs Legends	Good insight Skoormit. The answer to that question is definitely no, I don't want that guy. Not worth a roster spot. I've noticed more guys around recently who can consistently launch 30+ HRs without much power. Sneaking suspicion Barnett might be one of those guys. But I think its too much of a gamble to be worth the investment developing him to find out.
#57620	03/09/2018 10:12:57 am	Apr 7th, 2035	Ignore
Cactusguy21 Joined: 07/25/2017 Posts: 815 Presque Isle Vikings III.4	I’d keep Barnett around, he seems pretty decent to me as a DH/1B. Keep an eye on his minors performance would be my suggestion, and see if he keeps up the good work.
#57621	03/09/2018 10:16:28 am	Apr 7th, 2035	Ignore
Seca Joined: 05/05/2014 Posts: 5202 Waterloo Dinosaurs Legends	Do you like Barnett better than Arnett? They seem mutually exclusive. Arnett has decent starting skills. He might tear up the lower minors too.
#57622	03/09/2018 10:32:10 am	Apr 7th, 2035	Ignore
Cactusguy21 Joined: 07/25/2017 Posts: 815 Presque Isle Vikings III.4	Oh, I didn’t see Arnett. In that case yeah, Barnett becomes redundnat.
#57625	03/09/2018 11:27:46 am	Apr 7th, 2035	Ignore
Skoormit Joined: 01/21/2018 Posts: 17 Inactive	Arnett's two tools are HIT and POW. He's an atrocious fielder with no range and an arm that could probably break a window, but not much else. That makes him a 1B/DH candidate, and usable only in an emergency at C or 3B. Which means he better have a huge bat to justify a roster spot at all. The question is will he have enough BC and PD to put his HIT and POW to use? If he reaches his minimum scouted HIT and POW, and if he improves the one point in fielding that he possibly can as an atrocious fielder, he's a 18-x-x-17-9-6-9-12. That's 71 points, which leaves 17-24 points for BC+PD (plus any points he gets over his scouted minimums in HIT and POW). If he ends up on the low end of that range, or too many of those remaining points go into HIT/POT, he probably doesn't prove productive enough. If he ends up on the high end of that, he's okay. Maybe you can find some comps among current players. If only he had POT 12, with everything else the same, am I right? Eight more SI to distribute between HIT,BC,PD,and POW would make a big difference. He'd be a near-lock to be useful, and something more than a longshot to be a minor beast. 20-14-14-19-9-6-9-12? Don't mind if I do.
#57626	03/09/2018 12:00:13 pm	Apr 7th, 2035	Ignore
wickersty Joined: 05/11/2017 Posts: 1002 Deadwood Perambulators II.1	I know I bring him up a lot, but here's a major league comp: Flynn Your guy has 20 SI more than Flynn did at your guys age, so he's got a bigger head start, maybe ready for majors sooner? Your guy will theoretically have a few more SI go into POWER than Flynn did. Your guy's twice as fast as Flynn, with roughly the same range, with about twice the arm strength.. so there's like 6-7-ish SI lost there. Your guy will have a lower fielding, so SI saved there.
#57628	03/09/2018 12:46:47 pm	Apr 7th, 2035	Ignore
Seca Joined: 05/05/2014 Posts: 5202 Waterloo Dinosaurs Legends	Great discussion. Thanks guys. For me, the 11 pot increases the chances he's a "low" great or "low" prolific. 16-17 instead of 18-19. Sure, there are guys like Flynn that get to 19 hit with 11 pot. But to me it makes sense that having fewer points overall makes it a little harder for any skills to be elite. BC and PD are nice, but I think its more important how the package comes together. Boyd and Taylor are virtual twins. Have been in my system together for ages. Boyd I consider an excellent prospect. Taylor is likely a cut this week. The difference is how their BC & PD played out. Boyd is PD > BC. His GB:FB favours FB. Taylor is BC > PD. His GB:FB is tilted to GBs. I have much more confidence Boyd will hit with power than Taylor. Back to Barnett. He had 0.8 GB:FB through his first two seasons. He's got an uppercut swing. I think its conceivable he could turn out to be a better power hitter than Arnett (ie., if Arnett were to go BC >> PD). Hit tools could end up quite similar. I find it intriguing. Things like GB:FB can shift as the player develops. You often don't know much until AAA, and by then you have so deeply invested you are compelled to use the player even if you don't really like how he's turned out.
#57639	03/10/2018 4:28:39 am	Apr 10th, 2035	Ignore
Seca Joined: 05/05/2014 Posts: 5202 Waterloo Dinosaurs Legends	Feel I should add that the BC PD GB FB thing is a weak connection. So many exceptions that they aren't really exceptions.
#57641	03/10/2018 9:19:13 am	Apr 10th, 2035	Ignore
amalric7 Joined: 01/20/2016 Posts: 2238 New York Lancers V.4	I like Arnett a lot more than Barnett, and I'm one who basically ignores 11 POT players. Arnett may turn out with an 18-17-8-17 line if he maxes, which despite the poor PD would make him a real asset at DH. I don't really like high speed guys who can't steal bases, as there's only so much difference it can then make on the base paths - scoring from first on a double? From second on a single? Some games almost anyone can do that.
#57747	03/16/2018 8:24:00 am	May 3rd, 2035	Ignore
lostraven Joined: 07/02/2016 Posts: 1269 Corvallis Ravens II.1	This week's training update in Covallis brought to you by Peaties, the breakfast of pitchers. Updated Friday, March 16 2018 @ 8:25:56 am PDT

| |

Reply