In short, none of us go "OH NOES!!! MY FUTURE STUD RF IS HITTING .178 IN HIA!!! I BETTER MOVE HIM TO LOA SO HE CAN GET BETTER!!!!" We just care that he's getting his AB.

So, why on earth would be be sweating our future stud 3B playing SS and booting the hell out of everything? Because he's "overmatched"?

Does anyone really think fielding results matter while hitting results do not?

in the same devo chat they said that playing shortstop will not be detrimental to a player projected as a shortstop but will be for a projected first baseman

i took this to mean that they do not really project for these guys but simply have lower standards for what they mean by overmatched

IOW if you play a potential 3B (say a 50-50-55-55 presently) guy in AA at shortstop he would be overmatched

a 70-70-70-70 guy at AA SS, while he wouldn't post fielding stats that you wouldnt normally like out of your ML SS, would not be so bad he could be called overmatched (or what WIS definition of that would be in this case)

I'm not certain but I would say minor league results in general don't mean much. There are certain cases though such as the 3B playing SS or drafting an 18 y/o pitcher non-prospect and assigning him to AAA only to have him shelled start after start, in these cases i could see minor league performance could matter

Quote: Originally posted by MikeT23 on 4/21/2010In short, none of us go "OH NOES!!!  MY FUTURE STUD RF IS HITTING .178 IN HIA!!!  I BETTER MOVE HIM TO LOA SO HE CAN GET BETTER!!!!" We just care that he's getting his AB.So, why on earth would be be sweating our future stud 3B playing SS and booting the hell out of everything?   Because he's "overmatched"? Does anyone really think fielding results matter while hitting results do not?

in general i think it's very tough for a hitting prospect to be overmatched at the plate at any level

take any legitimate first round position player and assign him to AAA and he'll probably do just fine hitting-wise over the course of a season

but put a 3B at SS and he will not do just fine, he may have 60 errors and scores of minus plays and admin has stated this isn't good for development.

But, if the hitter IS overmatched, are you saying that he won't develop properly even is he's batting?

Because that flies completely in the face of "Go ahead and promote him to the bigs. As long as he plays, he'll develop."

I agree with MikeT.

In my limited experience fielders can play anywhere and the growth is the same. I play players out of position often to get them playing time. Even so, they get close or to fielding projections.

I have not gone as far as to play 1B at SS. 3B rated players have roamed SS though. Even RF rated players in a pinch - and for limited time.

Quote: Originally Posted By MikeT23 on 4/21/2010
You're pretending that we all see the same projections. We don't. Is WifS using some hidden rating to determine "overmatched"? And basing development/lack of development on it. That's silly.

I think most of us agree that minor league results mean nothing in terms of development. Am I right about that?

You know that quarterly email you get from your FI when you are playing guys in positions they're not suited to?

It's idiot-proofing the "overmatched" thing.

Listen to that, and I believe you're fine.... ignore it at your own peril.

So it's your contention that fielding has different development rules than hitting(or pitching, I assume).

Interesting concept. I'm pretty sure you're wrong but to each his own.

And, by the way, many of those "out of position" emails refer to catchers with a limited range. I believe 8 is the "acceptable" number. Does anyone move their 4 range catcher to DH?

Quote: Originally Posted By iain on 4/21/2010You know that quarterly email you get from your FI when you are playing guys in positions they're not suited to
It's idiot-proofing the "overmatched" thing.

Listen to that, and I believe you're fine.... ignore it at your own peril

I thought email was generated based on the postions you select for the guy, not where he actually played

of course, I very rarely play guys at positions I don't have them assigned as being able to play, so I wouldn't notice if the email was based on where they were playing

It is. If their primary position is "wrong", you get the email. I notice it mostly with the catchers and minor leaguers that were drafted at a specific position but aren't really up to playing it.

Quote: Originally Posted By MikeT23 on 4/21/2010
So it's your contention that fielding has different development rules than hitting(or pitching, I assume).

Interesting concept. I'm pretty sure you're wrong but to each his own.

And, by the way, many of those "out of position" emails refer to catchers with a limited range. I believe 8 is the "acceptable" number. Does anyone move their 4 range catcher to DH?

To quote from the movie Snatch:

Sol: I'm not fvcking buying that.
Female Bookie: Well that's handy, 'cause I ain't fvcking selling it. It's a fact.

It's not my contention. It's what we were told in a DevChat.

By repeating it and by alluding to it, you seem to be confirming it.

And, if you're confirming it, I'm asking "How the F can you believe that fielding develops differently that hitting/pitching? Why the F would you believe that?"

Does Iain know the difference between what they say in DevChat and what actually happens?

Oh wait, wrong thread for a question.

I'm not sure why this has your panties quite so wadded up.

All I've done is suggest a way, outside of our respective AS budgets (per your request), that we can all know who shouldn't be playing certain positions, since we've been told that we shouldn't have players playing at positions where they're ill equipped.

If you think I'm wasting my time, where's the harm?

And if others waste their time similarly, then you have several people taking better care of their minors (and specifically key prospects) than perhaps they would have otherwise.

Isn't that a good thing for HBD, in general?

I'm actually just trying to figure out what you believe with regards to fielding development. You seem to be saying "I've heard this" and "It might be this" but you're not saying what you think it is.

I can't say that I know anything "for sure" any more than anyone... but I think that playing their recommended position is best. He might end up being a ML 3B, but if SIMMY says I can play him at SS in the minors, I don't see the harm.