Has anyone signed a 6-yr MLFA (likely age 24 or 25) and had substantial ratings growth afterward?

I signed a solid 24-yo MR prospect, with a 58 OVR/65 proj. OVR. The guy has 80 makeup.

He had a little bump after spring training -- 1 pt. each for control and his #2 and #3 pitches -- but no increases in the three cycles since. He's getting a decent number of IP at AAA, and there's a very good pitching coach.

There's time for this guy to improve, of course. But I'm wondering whether the fact that he was a 6-yr MLFA dampens his potential for hitting his ratings ceiling. If he hits it or comes close, he should be a solid major-leaguer. As is, he's a AAA guy only.

http://www.whatifsports.com/HBD/Pages/Popups/PlayerProfile.aspx?pid=216159

I doubt you'll see "substantial" but this guy probably follows the pattern you're seeking. I picked him up for S7(at 24 if my math is right). He got playing time and coaching that he'd never rec'd. Improved a good bit but nothing spectacular.

He was already a major-leaguer when you got him. It'd be better if someone could show an example of a guy at AA or AAA when he became a FA.

Do you think it matters at what level he gets the P/T and coaching?

I do, because I've had several guys age 21-24 who reach the majors, and then see no improvement, or next to no improvement, as they get to age 27.

OK, you keep believing that.

I know for a fact that several of my prospects reached the majors between 21 and 24 and essentially stop improving. Those guys may not have improved if they had stayed at AAA, but that doesn't change what happened once they got to the majors.

But regardless, this is off topic. As I asked originally, I'm hoping to find examples of 6-yr MLFAs, still at AA or AAA, who showed improvement with their new teams. I'm concerned that my guy may not improve much because of his prior 6-yr MLFA status.

Do any players improve after 4 years? Maybe a point here or a point there, but after that 4th year, there is nothing significant.

This may come as a surprise to you but players with great potential don't toil in AA for 6 seasons.

jonas has it...the vast majority of development happens in the player's first 4 pro seasons

My guy didn't spend six years in AA, Mike. And it may come as a surprise to you, but continual and unnecessary sarcasm doesn't make you sound smarter.

In truth, this guy spent one year apiece at Rookie ball, Low-A and High-A. He spent 1.5 years at AA and has spent two years at AAA (one full season and two half seasons). He improved 3-5 points in his OVR in his previous seasons. This season, though, his OVR hasn't improved, although he has had one-point increases in three categories.

My question, again, is whether the 6-yr MLFA status will stunt his growth in any way. It would be constructive if anyone had an example of a 6-yr MLFA who continued to improve at AA or AAA, at age 24, 25 or 26.

If such an example doesn't exist, then that's my answer.

Doesn't exist.

Because "This may come as a surprise to you but players with great potential don't toil in AA(or below) for 6 seasons."

Mike, I guess you don't know how to read. Or your desire for snark trumps your ability to read.

Player spent three seasons below AA, 1.5 seasons at AA and 1.5 seasons at AAA. He did not spend six seasons at AA, or at AA or below.

I guess you have a severe lack of understanding. In 24 hours, I'm the only person who has even bothered to provide you with an example. My example wasn't good enough for you. No one else has one that fits your requirements. Here's why:

"This may come as a surprise to you but players with great potential don't toil in AAA(or below) for 6 seasons."*



*changed to reflect your desired example

Or other people aren't respondng because you've hijacked the thread, and they don't want to get involved. Whatever.