I just drafted 2 beast SPs. Both are 18 and both look like legit #1s. What do I do to make sure I develop them right? Is there some sort of "blue print" for making sure your players reach their projections?

http://whatifsports.com/HBD/Pages/Popups/PlayerProfile.aspx?pid=4936709

http://whatifsports.com/HBD/Pages/Popups/PlayerProfile.aspx?pid=4936716

1. sign them
2. assign to rookie ball
3. place their pitch count at 40/40 to limit their chances of getting injured
4. promote to low A after your rookie season is done (if you dont make playoffs promote then, if you do, promote post-playoffs.
5. only promote once a season at the end of the season, let pitchers do a full year at each level and the post- season promotion will add one more development cycle to each player. WIS says players improve even if its not shown on the player card, I do not believe this but maybe its true. I promote like this anyways. I promote all players with future MLB potential after the minor league seasons are complete.

I don't agree with anything steve said at all.

As far as I know playing time is a large portion of what makes guys get better.  Limiting a SP to 40 pitches would limit his innings and stunt his growth under that principle.

Coaching is also important to player growth.  The better Pitching coach's you can sign the more progression you will see from your players skill ratings.

Training budget is extremely important for physical tools such as stamina, durability, and velocity.  Training needs to be jacked up to 20 million for maximum effect so get it as close as you can.

Medical budget is important so that if your guys do get hurt the severity of the injury is lessened, and the recovery from injury is greater.  Get this budget a close to 20 million as possible as well.

Promotion seems to depend more on skill level than age.  If a player is good enough to play and succeed in a level that is where they should be.  The reason I say this is because normally the higher level in the minors will have better coaches which will lead to higher growth.  The caveat I have read in the dev chats is that the guy needs to play well.  So if you promote them too far too early and they struggle that may hurt development.  Because both of these guys are OVR close to 60 at draft time I would find where your best coach is and start both of these guys in Low A or High A this year, and have them in AA with as good a PC as you can find next season.  This would give them their first 3 seasons (the biggest jumps in progression for players) under the best coaches in your system, and it shouldn't be too fast for them to perform well.

To each their own. I am under the impression that players improve based on games played and not at bats or innings pitched. 1 game with 1 IP is the same as 1 game with 10 IPs. I based this on developed chats where they state that its games played in the preseason and not at bats or IPs that dictate development. I also think by starting at a higher level than rookie or LOW A for my college draftees, you are stunting growth by losing out on that end of season promotion because eventually your guys will be in AAA and not be able to get that promo without going to the majors.

I also put my extremely good hitting prospects as DHs in order to limit the time on the field and the chance for injury and their defensive growth continues even though they are not seeing the field.

I do agree with you on training budget and coaches having an impact however I think the coaches impact is minimal and I have recently been scaling back on coaching budgets.

I won't argue about the games played vs innings pitched here, just wanted to chime in on where I start my prospects. For me, it is when do I forecast their need on my BL roster. If the players truly are legit #1's, I would think about starting them in HighA this year. So their progression is half a season in HiA, 1 in AA, 1 in AAA. By then they are probably BL capable, and will still continue to progress at the ML level to their final potential. 

If I am set at the ML level at the position, and it is an 18 year old, I may start them at rookie and let them progress 1 level at a time just because there is no rush.

Context always matters.  I've started guys as high as AA and AAA and had no issues when they're good.  The best developer to me is coaching, followed by training.  If a guy is ready for the Bigs at 20, and he's better than the guys I have, he plays.  Even if his performance isn't as great that season (subjective), he gets the benefit of the best coaches.  Plus he helps me win games.

If a player is on your 40 and not in AAA, at the very least, you've done something wrong.

RL/LoA
HiA
AA
AAA

If I have crap coaches at RL/LoA, I have no problem starting a prospect in HiA.   If I think I'd like to have him on my BL roster by year 3, I'd start in AA.   That's assuming the AA coach is better than the lower levels.

Mike,

Im assuming this is with the exception of IFAs you sign to a big league deal and are thus placed on the 40.

I like to surprise my guys and promote/demote on whims in the middle of the year.  Being shocked can really boost progression. Or degression, depending on which direction I shoot them.

IFA signed to BL deals can be designated, without waivers, and removed from the 40. 

Here's a follow up question, I got a few guys that are still in High A because I didn't promote them at the end of last season. It's now the All Star break, should I promote them now?

Posted by stevehoggett on 5/13/2012 2:18:00 AM (view original):
To each their own. I am under the impression that players improve based on games played and not at bats or innings pitched. 1 game with 1 IP is the same as 1 game with 10 IPs. I based this on developed chats where they state that its games played in the preseason and not at bats or IPs that dictate development. I also think by starting at a higher level than rookie or LOW A for my college draftees, you are stunting growth by losing out on that end of season promotion because eventually your guys will be in AAA and not be able to get that promo without going to the majors.

I also put my extremely good hitting prospects as DHs in order to limit the time on the field and the chance for injury and their defensive growth continues even though they are not seeing the field.

I do agree with you on training budget and coaches having an impact however I think the coaches impact is minimal and I have recently been scaling back on coaching budgets.

Lots of people stunt the growth of their pitchers by not pitching them to their max innings. I'm not sure if the spring traing thing is accurate, but it for sure is not accurate for the reg. season. I trade for misused guys all the time. Here is one example.  Hardball Dynasty – Fantasy Baseball Sim Games - Player Profile: Brian Cunningham

Booger thats a completely different story than what I am talking about though. You are talking about a reliever who a team had pitching 20 games a year, which isnt enough appearances for a reliever. Im talking about a pitcher who relieves 75 games but only 1 IP each time, or a starter who goes every 4 days, 3-4 IPs at a time. There is no stunt. I have pitchers gain 7-10 points a category just like most others do. I simply don't think its worth the risk.

Nah, its the same. I traded for a starter that had 30Dur and 45Stam. The previous team had him pitching 1IP in relief. I used him as a starter. Fewer appearance. More innings. More developement. I'll try to find him later when I have time...

Couple things.  
If you pitch a guy at 40/40, do you bring him back early?   If so, it shouldn't matter if he's going 40/40 every 3 days or 80/80 every 6 days.  He's getting the same amount of innings.    
Also, if you believe appearances is the key, why not 5/10 in SuA?   Set your TC pitcher at SP with 40/40 and you true prospects in SuA.   Most SP-types could get into 100-110 games like that.