Posted by joekendall on 9/17/2023 4:54:00 PM (view original):

Posted by brianplath on 9/17/2023 10:27:00 AM (view original):
Question for the injury experts. I've never run a Med budget before but finally experimenting with it on one of my teams. I've got a HoF level SP that got elbow tendonitis and took about -4 to his main pitching ratings. He's eligible to come off the 60 day DL soon. Will keeping him on the DL get me much more recovery with that injury or nah?

My experience with that injury is that the pitcher doesn't recover what they lost on the 60-day DL even with $20M in medical. I haven't been keeping track recently, but I don't think anything has changed. I show normally only 1 cycle for recovery. It could have been that all of the pitchers that I tracked were hurt during the season where they could only get 1 recovery cycle. I have seen 1 to 4 points lost in the different categories but the recovery was only 1 point back and not in all of the categories that lost points. Take all of this with a box of salt since someone else may know more than I.

Depends on a lot of things. The big one that I look at if the player isn't recovering how I expected is the makeup. Has a huge effect on DL recovery.

Posted by hockey1984 on 9/18/2023 9:00:00 AM (view original):

Posted by joekendall on 9/17/2023 4:54:00 PM (view original):

Posted by brianplath on 9/17/2023 10:27:00 AM (view original):
Question for the injury experts. I've never run a Med budget before but finally experimenting with it on one of my teams. I've got a HoF level SP that got elbow tendonitis and took about -4 to his main pitching ratings. He's eligible to come off the 60 day DL soon. Will keeping him on the DL get me much more recovery with that injury or nah?

My experience with that injury is that the pitcher doesn't recover what they lost on the 60-day DL even with $20M in medical. I haven't been keeping track recently, but I don't think anything has changed. I show normally only 1 cycle for recovery. It could have been that all of the pitchers that I tracked were hurt during the season where they could only get 1 recovery cycle. I have seen 1 to 4 points lost in the different categories but the recovery was only 1 point back and not in all of the categories that lost points. Take all of this with a box of salt since someone else may know more than I.

Depends on a lot of things. The big one that I look at if the player isn't recovering how I expected is the makeup. Has a huge effect on DL recovery.

Great point about makeup. Do you have a feel for where the makeup needs to land? Obviously a 90 is better than a 60, but do you have a better feel than that for the makeup?

Thanks gentleman! I'm in a wildcard race so he's probably gonna have to come off regardless.

Posted by joekendall on 9/18/2023 9:20:00 AM (view original):

Posted by hockey1984 on 9/18/2023 9:00:00 AM (view original):

Posted by joekendall on 9/17/2023 4:54:00 PM (view original):

Posted by brianplath on 9/17/2023 10:27:00 AM (view original):
Question for the injury experts. I've never run a Med budget before but finally experimenting with it on one of my teams. I've got a HoF level SP that got elbow tendonitis and took about -4 to his main pitching ratings. He's eligible to come off the 60 day DL soon. Will keeping him on the DL get me much more recovery with that injury or nah?

My experience with that injury is that the pitcher doesn't recover what they lost on the 60-day DL even with $20M in medical. I haven't been keeping track recently, but I don't think anything has changed. I show normally only 1 cycle for recovery. It could have been that all of the pitchers that I tracked were hurt during the season where they could only get 1 recovery cycle. I have seen 1 to 4 points lost in the different categories but the recovery was only 1 point back and not in all of the categories that lost points. Take all of this with a box of salt since someone else may know more than I.

Depends on a lot of things. The big one that I look at if the player isn't recovering how I expected is the makeup. Has a huge effect on DL recovery.

Great point about makeup. Do you have a feel for where the makeup needs to land? Obviously a 90 is better than a 60, but do you have a better feel than that for the makeup?

Thats a hard question. From what I have noticed 60 Makeup and higher you tend to get larger bumps from recovery. I think you get the same number of bumps regardless but from a quick look it looks like 60+ will get you 2 points for each recovery cycle give or take while below 60 will get you 1 or 0.

Is it true that minor league guys only get the end-of-season promotion bonus bump if they played in the minor league playoffs?

No. Guys that play in the minor league playoffs should get an additional bump, I've even heard owners saying they have seen it, but I've never seen it. I've heard people say that the end of the season promotion bump is just the game 'rounding up' numbers.

So, when your player gains ratings we only see whole numbers but for the algorithm players are actually gaining part numbers that we can't see. A batter with 67 contact may actually have 67.8 contact but we can't see the .8. I've heard owners say when you promote at the end of the season it rounds that 67.8 up to 68 and gives the impression of a ratings bump.

I have no idea if any of this is true or not. This was all Grandpa MikeT going off on another one of his rants. All I know is anyone I want to make the majors one day I will promote at the end of the season. Sometimes they get bumps, sometimes they don't.

Disclaimer: Although I make sure my minors aren't a team full of 0(0) guys I do not do a good job of taking care of my minors. They rarely make the playoffs and in 100+ seasons I have never won a minor league championship.

Edit: I always forget when I'm logged into my dads account. This is Hockey1984 by the way.

You can always trigger the system event that shows the updated ratings by simply promoting your guys during the ML LCS sim cycles. Whether they get bumps to any of their ratings highly depends on whether or not they played in the playoffs. No playoffs usually means not enough experience gained so their ratings stays the same as the last system ratings update.

I'm inclined to believe what hockey described, about fractional ratings increases. I'm not even convinced you need to promote because IMO there's a decent chance the computer simply remembers the ratings for recording for the first ratings update after ST the following season. But I'm not 100% positive on that so why risk it? Might as well promote during playoffs to lock in the ratings increases just in case.

IF I trade for a AA player who was put on the 40-man (early) in only his 4th pro season, do I have to put him on MY 40 when I acquire him? Or does his status revert to non-40?

Posted by damag on 12/26/2023 11:21:00 AM (view original):
IF I trade for a AA player who was put on the 40-man (early) in only his 4th pro season, do I have to put him on MY 40 when I acquire him? Or does his status revert to non-40?

No, you don't have to put him on your 40-man. This applies to any player that you trade for. If the player was on his 40-man, that doesn't mean you have to put in on your 40-man after you acquire him. Unless, of course, he is out of options. If you trade for a player who is out of options, you have to put him on your ML squad. And thus, he has to be on your 40-man.

Thanks bj!

Posted by bjschumacher on 12/26/2023 11:51:00 AM (view original):

Posted by damag on 12/26/2023 11:21:00 AM (view original):
IF I trade for a AA player who was put on the 40-man (early) in only his 4th pro season, do I have to put him on MY 40 when I acquire him? Or does his status revert to non-40?

No, you don't have to put him on your 40-man. This applies to any player that you trade for. If the player was on his 40-man, that doesn't mean you have to put in on your 40-man after you acquire him. Unless, of course, he is out of options. If you trade for a player who is out of options, you have to put him on your ML squad. And thus, he has to be on your 40-man.

bj is correct here. This is one of the bigger mistakes that inexperienced owners make. You SHOULDN'T put a player on the 40-man roster until you have to. I've seen freshly drafted guys put on the 40 when they are assigned to the minors. Being on the 40-man in the minors will burn an option each spring training.

I'm sure I've asked this more times then I like to remember and I don't know if anyone knows the answer.

Is there a way to prioritize coaches when you do coach hiring?

Offered 3+ million to a 87 rating fielding instructor and 2.5 million to a 80 rating fielding instructor. The 80 rating one decided to sign first. Things could be worse but I was leading on both. Would have really preferred the 87 rating as I budgeted 12 million for coaches this season and the 80 rating guy is 63.

Posted by hockey1984 on 1/4/2024 9:31:00 AM (view original):
I'm sure I've asked this more times then I like to remember and I don't know if anyone knows the answer.

Is there a way to prioritize coaches when you do coach hiring?

Offered 3+ million to a 87 rating fielding instructor and 2.5 million to a 80 rating fielding instructor. The 80 rating one decided to sign first. Things could be worse but I was leading on both. Would have really preferred the 87 rating as I budgeted 12 million for coaches this season and the 80 rating guy is 63.

I would say about the only thing we know about coach signing is when they start to sign.
In your scenario, I spend the second day of coach signing evaluating where I stand with my top choices. If I'm not comfortable with the always possible second choice signing before my first choice, I'll just take #2 off the board and commit to #1.

Posted by damag on 1/4/2024 11:27:00 AM (view original):

Posted by hockey1984 on 1/4/2024 9:31:00 AM (view original):
I'm sure I've asked this more times then I like to remember and I don't know if anyone knows the answer.

Is there a way to prioritize coaches when you do coach hiring?

Offered 3+ million to a 87 rating fielding instructor and 2.5 million to a 80 rating fielding instructor. The 80 rating one decided to sign first. Things could be worse but I was leading on both. Would have really preferred the 87 rating as I budgeted 12 million for coaches this season and the 80 rating guy is 63.

I would say about the only thing we know about coach signing is when they start to sign.
In your scenario, I spend the second day of coach signing evaluating where I stand with my top choices. If I'm not comfortable with the always possible second choice signing before my first choice, I'll just take #2 off the board and commit to #1.

My concern for that is my #1 is always going to be the #1 on the board. So if someone comes in later and blows my offer out of the water with a $6 million dollar offer and my second choice has signed I may be SOL. Thats all part of the game though I suppose.

I personally only target 1 per open coach need. If I need a Low A Bench coach, I only offer to 1 coach. Then I see where it goes from there. I do the same for the ML coaches. I don't go after 3 for each opening but only 1. If I decide it is too much to spend, then I go after the next one I see in line.

I also only do the coach hiring for the ML staff on the last day of coach hiring. It saves at least half of what they are asking. There are always a few good coaches for each need. The only caveat is the FI. I offer those on day 1 and still only offer 1 coach. I usually budget $11 or $12M when I need to hire a FI.