Quote:
Originally Posted by PSUColonel
I think it might be a good idea to require a GM to either trade or release a player once their time on the DFA list has expired. Currently you can DFA a player, and seven days later re-assign them to a minor league roster, only to immediately DFA them again.
This essentially means you never need to actually make a decision on a player(s) and can build up an almost endless "reserve list" of minor league players.
This just does not seem right or sit well with me. I know people here are going to say "just don't do it", but I still feel the need to close holes in the game where I see them. This is obviously an exploit and a great example of a way to "game" the AI...but it's also a great example of a simply ways to close some of these types of loopholes.
|
Maybe I'm a bit confused but why would you need to DFA them again? You just took them off the 40 man when you did the DFA. I mean, unless you are recycling them back onto the 40 man? IE using DFA as a cheat to manipulate your roster by rotating Joe Baseball and Kirby Bagofballs in a continual loop? Damn, that sounds like a lot of grunt work to me.
Note to self: "make sure every 7 days to get Joe back on the 40 man and DFA Kirby. Then rinse and repeat". If that's the way it's done all I can say is "I wouldn't waste my time".
If it's something else please explain as I'm just trying to wrap my mind around the subject at hand.
I do think the AI does this to some degree but, not as a cheat. The AI does a fairly good job of keeping some 40 man spots open but can get caught with it being full. I think this has resulted in some DFA looping in my game but, it's not a big issue overall. It's normally one team with a roster management issue. This could be tightened up and, frankly, when I read the thread title was expecting to find as the premise.
Back to the OP..
To require trade or release defeats the purpose of DFA and hurts a player that plays within the spirit of the rule. The idea is to clear a 40 man spot and give the player the option of keeping his contract or voiding it and becoming a FA. If we require trade or release we just as well take DFA out of the game and do the release after running a "shop player"
I'm not sure what Markus or Matt can do to take it away if you are using it as a cheat without making it unrealistic for other players? IE me for sure, and many others, I hope.
IOW I DFA a player because I need the spot. He doesn't go back on the 40 man unless I need him and, him being a player I DFA'd, means he's a marginal filler and not much more.
Does this "exploit" work if you are DFA-ing players that have MLB skill sets? More on that below as we move onto Bobfather's suggestion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobfather
I would like to see eligible DFA'd players choose to become free agents.
|
This would be preferable and in line with the real world. The trouble is how many players actually do this? They've passed through waivers for seven days and nobody jumped at getting them and their current contract. Now they're going to void their contract and hope to catch on with one of the teams that already passed?
If they are a min-sal guy anybody could have already had them at that price. "As is" they at least have a contract and are in an organization. If they void it they take the risk of not catching on with anybody and being out of baseball. I think most marginal players take the demotion.
If they have a contract that pays more they are losing money by going FA. I believe once they are above min-sal, even if they take demotion, they still receive their MLB salary. IOW their contract is guaranteed. I think OOTP does that too and only uses the "OOTP MiLB salary" for those with min-sal contracts.
What about if you try to "stack your minors" by using the exploit with "good" players that have MLB skill sets? How does OOTP handle that? I have no idea since I've never taken the chance of throwing guys like that out there on 7 day DFA waivers. Here is a case where OOTP should be having the player evaluate themselves compared to the league and, yes, if they have the skills to play at the MLB level they could\should be declaring FA. But they also need to code in said player was passed on during the DFA period and should not be looking for a payday but rather a MLB job. Again, this would(?) or should(?) be limited to guys on min-sal contracts for the reasons listed above. IE once you're making above min-sal voiding your contract is a huge risk. And I can still go back to even min-sal guys are taking a huge risk, arguably a bigger risk as they could end up out of the game.
IRL DFA is designed to give a player a chance to move on if he has MLB talent and is stuck on a team that doesn't need him. IE it's in the CBA for the players to benefit from. They are on waivers for 7 days so all teams have plenty of time to make a decision. After 7 days I believe anyone not claimed is fairly secure in thinking there isn't another job out their for them, all teams had a chance and passed. In the real world, I think, this player takes the demotion most of the time though I have no data to back it up.
Could OOTP be more aggressive in taking players off the DFA list (or even normal waivers for that matter?) and more importantly do we want that? Would AI teams be making claims just to make claims and then follow up by either DFAing the player themselves or starting an even bigger claim\release loop? Food for thought