For development of young players, is the playing time factor based on IP/AB, Games played, or a combination of the two? (joshkvt - Hall of Famer - 2:02 PM)

Games played.

So, I would read that to mean that the best way to develop a SP is to set him as a Setup A with a pitch count of 10 to get him into as many games as possible.  Honestly, that seems like a poor system just from the standpoint of realism.  I have always tried to maximize ABs and IPs, as that seems much closer to reality.

That's what I thought too. Odd.

And batters either keep them in the entire season regardless of their health or have them subbed out after the first 2 innings.

I was thinking the reverse.    Sit your true position prospects and set your d-rep/rest to 1/1/1 in the 8th.   Then your PP come in, play a couple of innings in the field, maybe get an AB and remain at 100% all season while minimizing injury risk. 

It makes no sense to program like that. 

Someone should send a ticket outlining the strategy dakar and I just posted for clarification.   I'd do it but CS and I aren't on good terms right now.   Not sure I'd trust my answer.

I have received the "games played" response before but specifically in the context of Spring Training, where I think it makes more sense. Maybe that was their context as well?

That wasn't the question. 

No, but sometimes CS answers the question that's not being asked. 

I can open a ticket.  They like me.

Thanks,

Tec

Tec is the man.

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/6/2016 9:50:00 AM (view original):
I was thinking the reverse.    Sit your true position prospects and set your d-rep/rest to 1/1/1 in the 8th.   Then your PP come in, play a couple of innings in the field, maybe get an AB and remain at 100% all season while minimizing injury risk. 

It makes no sense to program like that. 

This is why I come to the forums. Mike and a few others always catching that extra nuance that evades newer players like myself.

Well, don't start doing that yet.    I think tzent misspoke in the DC.   As I said, it would make no sense to program the game that way.   That said, CS has never retracted that a player should play in the most demanding position he can handle for max development.   That makes no sense because I'd shove my 1B prospects at SS to max their development. 

Posted by MikeT23 on 2/6/2016 9:50:00 AM (view original):
I was thinking the reverse.    Sit your true position prospects and set your d-rep/rest to 1/1/1 in the 8th.   Then your PP come in, play a couple of innings in the field, maybe get an AB and remain at 100% all season while minimizing injury risk. 

It makes no sense to program like that. 

I asked because that's pretty much what I've usually done in ST, based on the possibility that it's strictly games. It ends up getting the starters roughly the same total AB/IP as the more-common setup of playing them in a handful of games and then resting them, so I don't see a downside risk. I set it up more aggressively than 1/1/1 in the 8th, using the 1/1/1 earlier and getting three rotations of 8 players each 1-2 ABs per game. I put every current ML pitcher and prospective pitcher at minimum pitch counts with a 4-man rotation and everyone else set to SUA, with a non-prospect at mop-up.

Obviously that's not a terribly logical way to program it, but it wouldn't make much sense to create a separate development system just for ST either.

"This message is a follow-up to inform you that your ticket #135838 submitted on 2/6/2016 10:15 AM (ET) has been upgraded to the appropriate department for further review.  Resolving your issues are important to us but due to the high volume of support tickets, it may take up to 5 business days to receive a response.  Time sensitive issues are handled much quicker."

So... We should set 1B prospects as SS only, and run MikeT's idea of letting them come off the bench. And not only will they get max games, but they'll also get max games at the most challenging defensive position... That's how the DBacks developed Goldschmidt right?? :)