Discussion Forum

Forum >> Discussions >> Roster Changes/Chemistry  

Post ID	Date & Time	Game Date	Function
#8204	06/12/2014 10:48:57 am		Ignore
Seca Joined: 05/05/2014 Posts: 5199 Waterloo Dinosaurs Legends	Those building through development are rewarded through lower salaries? I would argue that IRL what leads to good team chemistry is winning, not a stable roster. A positive feedback loop like that wouldn't be good here. Baseball is the least "team" of the team sports. New players don't need to learn a system or plays. There interaction with other players is limited by comparison. When a team improves at a position, they should play better. Better defense, or better hitting, or the guy ahead in the batting order getting better pitches, etc..
#8205	06/12/2014 10:52:24 am		Ignore
Haselrig Joined: 04/13/2014 Posts: 2790 Novi Doubledays III.4	All good points Seca. I see what you're saying.
#8206	06/12/2014 11:39:46 am		Ignore
Seca Joined: 05/05/2014 Posts: 5199 Waterloo Dinosaurs Legends	The fan mood suggestion was interesting, but might be hard to pull off. I could see the "come to the park and don't recognize anyone" depressing fan mood. Then again, if someone is playing badly fans are probably happy to see him go. And if the whole team is playing badly, they might be happy with large scale changes. Another thought is that a significant number of these transactions don't affect the major league roster. Upgrading a AA pitching prospect shouldn't send my 1st baseman into a slump or fans into a tirade. A waiver fee would probably be the best way to reduce superfluous transactions. Something that scaled with division. New teams would be exempt (a la stadium changes).
#8209	06/12/2014 12:36:29 pm		Ignore
Meccanodonte Joined: 04/21/2014 Posts: 370 Inactive	The fact here is not favouring the good guys who focus on development. The fact is that signing dozens of guys and not having to pay a fee when you cut them it's totally unrealistic and feed a vicious cycle. IMHO, there should be a limit, or at least something that discourage a little this behavior.
#8212	06/12/2014 2:02:14 pm
admin Joined: 01/27/2010 Posts: 4985 Administrator	Currently there aren't any on field bonuses or penalties for team chemistry or frequent roster changes. Steve
#8218	06/12/2014 3:53:36 pm		Ignore
Mig2012 Joined: 09/26/2012 Posts: 547 Inactive	Meccano, what you are saying isn't possible with the current claiming system. If someone is signing dozens of free agents they are probably players nobody else wanted anyway. There is no valid reason to penalise this behaviour because it isn't taking anything from any other team. If you want to sign dozen of free agents too you have the choice and the same chances of doing the very same thing. If you don't want to do it, that is also your choice, so you shouldn't complain about it and you shouldn't want those who choose to be more active in free agency to be penalised for doing so.
#8229	06/13/2014 1:08:38 am		Ignore
Meccanodonte Joined: 04/21/2014 Posts: 370 Inactive	I'm playing that way, Mig. And I don't like it, honestly. Are you a fan of a mlb team? If your team should sign (and as a consequence realease) 5 or 6 players a week, you would follow that team with the same enthusiasm? I think that reduce the fan mood when someone signs and realeases so many player it's a good idea, IMHO.
#8230	06/13/2014 6:52:12 am		Ignore
Mig2012 Joined: 09/26/2012 Posts: 547 Inactive	Above all, what fans like is for their teams to win. As someone else already pointed out, fans will be unhappy if you start dismantling a winning team, but they won't care if you do it to a losing team. In fact, fans will be very happy if you bring in great signings. Besides, broken bat doesn't follow mlb to the letter and it shouldn't. Having the possibility to make dozens of signings is fun and it gives the opportunity, especially to new players to try things and figure out more quickly what works and what doesn't work.
#8241	06/13/2014 12:45:25 pm		Ignore
newtman Joined: 11/02/2013 Posts: 3343 Inactive	The teams that take time to develop players are rewarded by seeing them reach their potential. The teams that rely on free agency will always only be able to pick up players that have already been let go (and therefore presumably were not part of the plans for) another team. If teams want to rely on players that are seen as not being good enough for another team to win, then let them. In the short term it may work for a while, but the people who develop a farm system and use free agents in a supporting role will smash them in the end.
#8301	06/16/2014 8:15:05 pm		Ignore
ReekyLeek Joined: 11/19/2013 Posts: 115 Inactive	Honestly, everyone manage their teams in different ways. If someone puts in the time and effort to scout free agents why should they be penalized? If players are underperforming what's the point of keeping him on your roster, other then eating up salary. I myself have stocked my minor league team and I have developed my own talent at most positions but I do have a few fill in players until my younger guys are ready for bigger roles. And yes I do change them around but that being said when I do get lucky on the waiver wire, which is not often, on major league talent. These players are quite often in the twilight of their careers. So the way I see it the system works great. Why screw with it?

| |

Reply