View Single Post
Old 06-18-2013, 09:56 AM   #5
RchW
Hall Of Famer
 
RchW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto ON by way of Glasgow UK
Posts: 15,629
Quote:
Originally Posted by mgoetze View Post
I don't want to disable it, I want my players in extension negotiations to say, "look here buddy, either you give me the right to refuse demotion or you throw in an extra million".
I get that. The problem when asking for a structural change in player handling logic is the interconnectedness (word?) of all the different parameters. Transferring that right to player negotiation means you have to come up with a player logic for who would ask and when they would ask for it. If the threshold is too low it might cause a flood of unsigned FA. If the threshold is too high it may appear not to work at all.

Given the current structure ie a typical MLB type league Would you limit this to FA or allow draft picks to demand it in their first contract and later in arbitration? The latter may not work at all as you cant really have an impasse in arbitration.

For non-traditional structures ie no player control this would work better. It remains to be seen how one would establish what % of players would demand it. I'd probably want the AI to have the choice to adjust team logic to always offer no demotion contracts so as to take advantage of signing more FA.

Interesting puzzle.
__________________
Cheers

RichW

If you’re looking for a good cause to donate money to please consider a Donation to Parkinson’s Canada. It may help me have a better future and if not me, someone else. Thanks.

“Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition …There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.” Frank Wilhoit
RchW is offline   Reply With Quote