Minor demotion refusal

[mgoetze]

I would like an option for the right to refuse demotion to be freely negotiable (rather than the CBA imposing it).

[Cryomaniac]

So you mean having it as a contract clause rather than an automatic thing? Not a bad idea.

[RchW]

Originally Posted by mgoetze

I would like an option for the right to refuse demotion to be freely negotiable (rather than the CBA imposing it).

It was freely negotiated IRL so nothing is imposed. As for OOTP, no worries, you can disable that feature with one mouse click.

League setup/rules.

[mgoetze]

Originally Posted by RchW

It was freely negotiated IRL so nothing is imposed. As for OOTP, no worries, you can disable that feature with one mouse click.

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".

[RchW]

Originally Posted by mgoetze

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.

[mgoetze]

Originally Posted by RchW

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.

Certainly not in an arbitrated contract but it would definitely be interesting to offer an arbitration-eligible player a one-year contract below arbitration estimate which guarantees he will play in the majors, wouldn't it?

[RchW]

Originally Posted by mgoetze

Certainly not in an arbitrated contract but it would definitely be interesting to offer an arbitration-eligible player a one-year contract below arbitration estimate which guarantees he will play in the majors, wouldn't it?

Not really. It's not realistic, Contracts are guaranteed, unless you propose to change that. In real life player agents would counter that strategy by having their clients go for the money, stating quite correctly that the player assumes he will perform well enough to stay in MLB. Teams would quickly learn that an under market contract that forces them to keep a young player on the 25 man roster is just a cheaper millstone. Imagine the outrage when a team can't call up a phenom because he plays the same position or a better performing player has to be sent down (that happens now). From a team perspective you really couldn't have too many such contracts because there would be no waivers to help out.

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by RchW

Contracts are guaranteed, unless you propose to change that...

Not for those still under the reserve clause (in real life). Hence the termination pay provisions in the CBAs. Contracts awarded as a result of an arbitration panel decision are also not guaranteed.

[mgoetze]

Originally Posted by RchW

Not really. It's not realistic, Contracts are guaranteed, unless you propose to change that. In real life player agents would counter that strategy by having their clients go for the money, stating quite correctly that the player assumes he will perform well enough to stay in MLB.

Sure... the player will of course perform well enough to stick in the MLB... if he gets the chance to prove it. But maybe the team later decides to trade for a star veteran at the prospect's position and he'll be back in the minors where noone will notice how great he plays. An option to refuse demotion provides protection against such scenarios.

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by mgoetze

Sure... the player will of course perform well enough to stick in the MLB... if he gets the chance to prove it. But maybe the team later decides to trade for a star veteran at the prospect's position and he'll be back in the minors where noone will notice how great he plays. An option to refuse demotion provides protection against such scenarios.

That's easily handled. Just pay attention to the player's service time count. Make sure you pay attention to any service time deadlines or restrictions which may come into effect. Just like a real GM has to.

[mgoetze]

I just gave a free agent a 1y/$1.4m deal with the intent of starting him at AAA and only bringing him up in case of emergency. OOTP decided to grant him the right to refuse demotion to the minors. That's kind of stupid.

[RchW]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

Not for those still under the reserve clause (in real life). Hence the termination pay provisions in the CBAs. Contracts awarded as a result of an arbitration panel decision are also not guaranteed.

I believe only 3 players went to arbitration prior to the 2013 season. Is it correct to assume the negotiated contracts signed in lieu of arbitration are fully guaranteed?

[jaysdailydose]

Originally Posted by mgoetze

I just gave a free agent a 1y/$1.4m deal with the intent of starting him at AAA and only bringing him up in case of emergency. OOTP decided to grant him the right to refuse demotion to the minors. That's kind of stupid.

Not really... you gave him a major league contract, and he's got the service time.

Doubtful he'd have signed your minor league deal... this is not stupid, its very realistic, actually. That's why they have the three different types of contract in this game (Major League, Minor League, and Minor League with Major League Option.)

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by mgoetze

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".

Being able to refuse a minor league assignment has NEVER been an item subject to negotiation in individual player contracts in real life. It is something which has ALWAYS been handled at the league/collective level. So viewed from that perspective the request is highly unrealistic.

[Fyrestorm3]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

Being able to refuse a minor league assignment has NEVER been an item subject to negotiation in individual player contracts in real life. It is something which has ALWAYS been handled at the league/collective level. So viewed from that perspective the request is highly unrealistic.

That may be, but draft pick trading isn't a part of baseball, either. I would find the option to make demotion refusal a contract option very interesting. I'd probably use it.

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by Fyrestorm3

That may be, but draft pick trading isn't a part of baseball, either.

I would find the option to make demotion refusal a contract option very interesting. I'd probably use it.[/QUOTE]

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by Fyrestorm3

That may be, but draft pick trading isn't a part of baseball, either.

Actually, it is a part of baseball now. Admittedly, in a very limited form, but it is there.

I would find the option to make demotion refusal a contract option very interesting. I'd probably use it.

I can think of other real-life baseball rule elements that I'd rather see implemented first, all of which have an impact on how a GM goes about the job.

If we move to non-baseball things, I'd like to see the NFL's franchise player rule, or the restricted/unrestricted free agent system used in the other sports. Of course, YMMV.