I have been watching the Lookouts for some time now and I have come to the conclusion that status matters.  Unless you completely tank, status matters.  I want the opinion of posters.  Should we promote the higher ranked prospects first because of investment and promise or promote because of mastery?  Then again, what is mastery?  I have seen certain prospects get promoted over the years who have not truly mastered anything, while others have dominated and remained in Chattanooga.  What is your definition for earning a promotion (hitters & pitchers)?

 

IMO how do you affect game outcomes on a regular basis?

 

Do you walk all the time but never get to second base?

Do you walk all the time but can't seem to hit?

Do you walk all the time and affect outcomes with your base stealing?

Etc. Etc.

 

I promote prospects based on their ability to....................?

Edited July 7, 201511 yr by TNLooky2015

... impress the coaches with their approach as well as their results, particularly when facing the best the current league has to offer.

 

Stats in the minors are useful but can disguise a lot if the player is fattening up against competitors he won't ever see again at the next level.

AA is different than the lower levels. There are plenty of players who may "deserve" promotions, but their, skill set, lack of position, lack of speed, overall athleticism or other precluding factor means they will never play at the MLB level. As there is only one possible stop between AA and the MLB level, many of these guys won't get promoted simply because it wouldn't make organizational sense.