Guys that don't play may bump, but are their actual current abilities developing while sitting idol? It doesn't just affect those who choose to have geezers in the low minors, it also affects those who stash actual prospects, who should be playing rookie ball, down in WL and see them not get any playing time.Bumstead wrote:I don't know, I thought I said about the same thing as Marko...maybe not so direct and with a lot longer explanation. I disagree that it affects y'all's prospects and I have had way too many bumpers from guys that barely played to spend much time worrying about AB's for these guys. Marcus can say what he wants, but the "proof" or lack thereof is in pudding. I realize it bothers some of you if some guys have 35 year old pitchers in rookie ball, but it's a disadvantage to the person keeping that player, so I'm confused by the whole annoyance with it.
But, as I have pointed out and as Jacksonville has so eloquently pointed out, I'm not one of the "offenders," but I do encourage everyone to maintain a plethora of 30 somethings in all their minor leagues!
A couple of seasons ago, we cut the roster size of the low minors because it was explained that having fewer non-prospects in the lower minors would be beneficial to the league. How is this any different?? Forcing these old guys to be put at the appropriate level or cut, forces non-prospects (either these old guys or the marginal guys in their upper 20s who will be cut in their place) to be released. The older players will retire more quickly than younger players if they don't latch on to a team, and this will lower the number of players in the overall pool.