Suggestion: Change Minor League Age Requirements

[aaronweiner]

I'd like to see one of three systems enacted:

Straight up, easy #1: Turn off age requirements for AA. High minors don't need age requirements. I love that the low minors do, but by the time they get to AA it's okay if we have aging guys hanging on down there.

Slightly more complicated #2: In-season, advance the age requirements one year, reverting back after the season is over, except for Rookie League (the hard cap makes more sense there because that's where our raw draft picks and raw international players go). This prevents players from aging out of their league IN-SEASON.

The worst possible outcome of this is that we let a couple good 22 year olds into rookie league ball, which doesn't seem like an overwhelming consequence to me.

#3: Combination of #1 and #2.

[niles08]

I'd like to see one of three systems enacted:

Straight up, easy #1: Turn off age requirements for AA. High minors don't need age requirements. I love that the low minors do, but by the time they get to AA it's okay if we have aging guys hanging on down there.

Slightly more complicated #2: In-season, advance the age requirements one year, reverting back after the season is over, except for Rookie League (the hard cap makes more sense there because that's where our raw draft picks and raw international players go). This prevents players from aging out of their league IN-SEASON.

The worst possible outcome of this is that we let a couple good 22 year olds into rookie league ball, which doesn't seem like an overwhelming consequence to me.

#3: Combination of #1 and #2.

You beat me to it, but I was going to suggest this same thing (or something similar). Something that would prevent issues would be to have the age requirements only be for opening day. After that, the "warning message" could just be ignored by those exporting. The game will not allow you to move someone to a spot where they don't fit the requirements, so people still won't be able to "freely" move a 27-year-old to rookie ball after opening day. However, if they age out of a particular level in season, we could just have Recte ignore the issue after opening day each year.

I know personally, it has been a bit of a headache having guys age out unexpectedly mid-season causing me to move them up, and leaving the team they are coming from short-handed.

[ae37jr]

Just my 2 cents. I like the rule as is. If a player is 28 and still needs to be in AA, that bum needs to be released so you can find some teenager bum who at least has a shot at not being a bum someday.

[BaseClogger]

I like it the way it is now. The age requirements are extremely forgiving and GMs should target to have all players on the roster be a year under the limit so nobody ever ages out. It's not difficult to keep only teenagers in rookie ball or only players 25 and younger in AA, for example.

[trmmilwwi]

Good discussions for sure!

I'll add another note that I don't like the idea of adding more work onto the Governing Board's plate at end of season rollover. It may not be a big deal but if it causes recte or others another headache it may not be worth it.

[aaronweiner]

Just my 2 cents. I like the rule as is. If a player is 28 and still needs to be in AA, that bum needs to be released so you can find some teenager bum who at least has a shot at not being a bum someday.

MLB in practice does it like you (average age in AA is 24 and there are very few players above 27), but given the right performance-enhancing drugs fringe prospects become major leaguers in a hurry.

Because I know some of you love this stuff: https://www.fangraphs.com/leaders/minor ... ?sort=23,1 is where I got my stats on this.

Still, MLB likes to be able to have older players in AA, otherwise they'd have changed the rules, too.

So counterpoint: if a player is 28 and still needs to be in AA, he's a good challenge to see how well my prospects play, which is why I want him there to begin. Also the in-game promotions and demotions are a pain in the ass, so to have a player at a certain age on a certain date seems like less of that.

[BaseClogger]

I'll be more receptive to allowing any age at AA once a final determination is made on what to do with the GBC (seems like we keep making it more irrelevant) and the bloat of players from that league's contraction are brought into check. I don't think we're there yet.

[JimBob2232]

Does this have any impact on rehab assignments?

[JimSlade]

I like the age limits through AA, including aging out midseason. It helps turn over things, keeps things fresh.

[Jwalk100]

Does this have any impact on rehab assignments?

Rehabbing players dont count in minors.

[neugey]

I was thinking that, with the age limits cutting down on your choices for injury replacements in minors, maybe the AAA and AA levels could go to roster size of 30 like A ball.

[Trebro]

I really don't want it to be more complicated than it currently is. I get that we all, myself included, feel a pinch at times, but we're not talking future all stars here.

[Krathan]

I like the idea of relaxing the requirements in AA but I feel like the idea of making age requirements be based on opening day instead of forcing guys to change on their birthdays would be the priority for me. It makes it easier to plan out the minors going into the season and be able to make decisions based on performance/development as opposed to when a guy happens to celebrate a birthday.

[Patrick M]

Just my 2 cents. I like the rule as is. If a player is 28 and still needs to be in AA, that bum needs to be released.

Just my opinion as well, but I like the rule as is. I was really excited when I first came on that the age requirements. The purpose of the minors is for development and the prospects should be playing against opponents of their own level/age. I also despise seeing some 33-year-old winning batter of the year in Double-A, in addition to any extra work for the commissioner.

[jiminyhopkins]

I was thinking that, with the age limits cutting down on your choices for injury replacements in minors, maybe the AAA and AA levels could go to roster size of 30 like A ball.

This.

[DaveB]

I was thinking that, with the age limits cutting down on your choices for injury replacements in minors, maybe the AAA and AA levels could go to roster size of 30 like A ball.

This.

I disagree with this. How many slots do we need for injury replacements and what are the other players doing? You figure 13-14 pitchers, 2 catchers, a SS (who should be able to pick up other infield positions easily), a CF (should be able to learn other positions), now you’ve got 10 extra guys to hoard or develop.

[jiminyhopkins]

I was thinking that, with the age limits cutting down on your choices for injury replacements in minors, maybe the AAA and AA levels could go to roster size of 30 like A ball.

This.

I disagree with this. How many slots do we need for injury replacements and what are the other players doing? You figure 13-14 pitchers, 2 catchers, a SS (who should be able to pick up other infield positions easily), a CF (should be able to learn other positions), now you’ve got 10 extra guys to hoard or develop.

I see I've been ratioed, however, it's only 3 extra guys. AAA from 27 to 30. Planty of 45 POT scrubs out there to fill the slots, eh?

[DaveB]

This.

I disagree with this. How many slots do we need for injury replacements and what are the other players doing? You figure 13-14 pitchers, 2 catchers, a SS (who should be able to pick up other infield positions easily), a CF (should be able to learn other positions), now you’ve got 10 extra guys to hoard or develop.

I see I've been ratioed, however, it's only 3 extra guys. AAA from 27 to 30. Planty of 45 POT scrubs out there to fill the slots, eh?

3 extra guys per team is 90 extra guys for the entire league. That’s essentially 3 extra minor league teams. I’m still not sure why we need an expanded AAA roster. 27 players is more then plenty of room in AAA as it’s set up.

[jiminyhopkins]

I disagree with this. How many slots do we need for injury replacements and what are the other players doing? You figure 13-14 pitchers, 2 catchers, a SS (who should be able to pick up other infield positions easily), a CF (should be able to learn other positions), now you’ve got 10 extra guys to hoard or develop.

I see I've been ratioed, however, it's only 3 extra guys. AAA from 27 to 30. Planty of 45 POT scrubs out there to fill the slots, eh?

3 extra guys per team is 90 extra guys for the entire league. That’s essentially 3 extra minor league teams. I’m still not sure why we need an expanded AAA roster. 27 players is more then plenty of room in AAA as it’s set up.

So... whats the argument here. That there are not enough players in the FA pool for up to 90 extra players? That it's more work on the governing board? That everyone will be forced to carry 30 players? None of those things seem to be true in this hypothetical case that is nowhere close to becoming policy.

[Trebro]

I personally am more concerned about teams not fielding full teams with pitchers and fielders than I am with age limits or roster limits.

That being said, I think there's no harm in going up to 30. we already have major league rosters higher than "real life" and I don't see the harm in adding a few more players per minor league team if a team wants to do it. And it's not hoarding, it's giving weaker teams a way to get some extra innings/at bats to players on the bubble to see who might help them win.