Happiness

Burgandy · 07-19-2007, 03:17 PM

I know there are some don't like the Morale system, and that's great. But I kind of enjoy the unknown influence that it may or may not have on performance.

Those of you that DO use it, what are your thoughts on your own players' morale? Do you try to NOT satisfy some players' needs to get them to perform?

I have a situation with my fictional team that raised my curiosity about this a bit:

It's the off-season and I have a complete logjam of outfielders on my fictional team. As far as my player evaluation goes, I have 7 guys that I feel totally HAVE to start between the DH, OF and 1B. So, I opted to find one to trade. I settled on a guy to trade named Jeff Pearson. Ratings-wise, I've expected him to start hitting like a Tony Gwynn with more power, but he hasn't, yet. He's got 18 or 19 CON, GAP and EYE, with 10 POW and 20+K's.... (1-20 scale) So he strikes out about once every 40-50 at bats or so. But he's never had a completely full season, as he's hurt somewhat frequently and been less effective than the other OF'ers, so I platoon him against lefties. Plus, he's kind of out of postition in CF... I want a defensive whiz out there.. and he's bit of a liability.

Sooo, I take several different routes to try to find a suitor for him. I even shop him around, which I think I noticed has an impact on his moral. I end up NOT trading him at all, and I continue to start him against RHP and 50% of the time against lefties, but he's not happy about that either.

He's taken a slight hit to his overall morale (which is still not bad) and he's "unhappy" with team transactions and role on team. So how does he start this season? Opening day.. 5 for 5, a HR, 2SB. He follows that up with two more 4 hit games.. starts the season 13 for 16. About 80 at bats in, he gets injured for 3 weeks while hitting around .440. comes back from the DL, first at bat back, homers. He played about 5 or 6 games before breaking a finger and raised his avg a little further.

So what do you think? Does shopping a guy around light a fire under a guy? Or was my guy too "happy" to produce before, and there are certain players who you cannot let them get too content?

MDanbom · 07-19-2007, 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Burgandy

So what do you think? Does shopping a guy around light a fire under a guy?

Worked for Mark Buehrle.<TABLE class=tablehead cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=3><TBODY><TR class=evenrow><TD></TD><TD></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

KingYankee · 07-19-2007, 04:31 PM

I've quickly learned that you should not always try to satisfy a player.
I've had a couple of high prospects that were developing okay but they were basically miserable because they weren't playing at the level they thought they should be. I moved them up the ranks hoping to spark their development but it has backfired. All of the guys that I tried to satisfy had their ability and potential drop. In one instance, I had a 5 star prospect turn into a 1 star prospect in one sim (15 days). He was a 5 star prospect, moved him up from short A to AA, simmed, he became a 1 star prospect.

Terrible. Lesson learned though I guess. You are the manager, don't let players talk you into things that don't necessarily sit right with you.

zukes · 07-19-2007, 04:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KingYankee

I've quickly learned that you should not always try to satisfy a player.
I've had a couple of high prospects that were developing okay but they were basically miserable because they weren't playing at the level they thought they should be. I moved them up the ranks hoping to spark their development but it has backfired. All of the guys that I tried to satisfy had their ability and potential drop. In one instance, I had a 5 star prospect turn into a 1 star prospect in one sim (15 days). He was a 5 star prospect, moved him up from short A to AA, simmed, he became a 1 star prospect.

Terrible. Lesson learned though I guess. You are the manager, don't let players talk you into things that don't necessarily sit right with you.

I had this as well. I drafted a STUD catcher in the 2nd round of a recent draft, I was shocked he was still there, we had him rated in the top 20 and he was around at the late 50's so I nabbed him despite having depth at catcher (the reason that I passed on him in the first place).

So one day I'm looking at the morale of my team and this dude is pissed right off, so I put him as untouchable in the trade market. His mood went up, but only slightly. The guy had been getting ratings bumps and deserved to be in AAA by this point so I moved him there and figured with his meteroic rise, he would be in the bigs by the following season anyway, so I signed him to Major league contract at the minimum. Not two days later, he got a talent drop that put him below his currect ratings.

He is now toiling in AA in my farm system. I only keep him around because he is still only 20. If you happen to catch my dynasty that I just started, maybe he'll get a talent bump and show up sometime. His name is Maxwell Otto.

1998 Yankees · 07-20-2007, 10:44 AM

I have come to like the morale system; it lends an extra challenge to the game.

That said, I have also learned not to overract to crybabies. I do believe that over time a player with a morale problem will suffer in performance, but not necessarily immediately or signficantly.

If it's a "logjam" problem, then I will take action because there's no sense in damaging the player if there is no place to play him. However, if it's one of those "Gee, this team stinks, I wanna play for a winner, trade me now" kind of things and I need the player, too bad! I have seen that kind of attitude clear up as soon as we start winning again, so "desire for a winning team" is a lot lower than "expects starting role" on my list of priorities.

Burgandy · 07-20-2007, 01:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1998 Yankees

I have come to like the morale system; it lends an extra challenge to the game.

I have seen that kind of attitude clear up as soon as we start winning again, so "desire for a winning team" is a lot lower than "expects starting role" on my list of priorities.

I agree completely. The limits of the morale regarding role are higher and lower than all the others combined, so I see where letting a guy sit in an undesired role forever would be a very bad thing.

What's really dumb about the Pearson guy's situation is that he's not happy with his role only because I don't have him in the middle of the order.. I have him batting leadoff, and he's very unhappy about it. IMO, I think there's only so upset someone can get about batting at the top of the order, even a power hitter. (which he's not) It's nothing like sticking them ninth.

lschaef · 07-20-2007, 02:24 PM

I don't mind the morale system, but don't pay a lot of attention to it.

I think it would be better if the players gave me a little more feedback on why they feel the way they do. And sometimes I can't figure out why they are upset.

I had a guy I was using as a utility infielder who probably had slightly below contact and eye ratings and very little power. He was easily the worst hitter of all the infielders on my roster, but he wanted to start.

I wasn't going to start him and let him be unhappy, but eventually traded him for other reasons. A week or so later we played his new team and I noticed they were starting him. I checked his profile and he was still listed as unhappy.

zukes · 07-20-2007, 03:18 PM

I have a 2B who had little to no power that wanted to bat in the middle of the line-up and was unhappy batting 2nd even though he was your typical 2nd place hitter. Howveer, my team got in a slump and I swapped him with my #5 hitter for a few weeks and it made him happy. My #5 hitter didn't get angry, despite wanting to be in the middle of the order, and after a few weeks, I switched them back and never heard a peep out of either of them. I like to think the 2B realized when he didn't hit one HR in the #5 hole that he was where he belonged in the #2 hole.

Burgandy · 07-20-2007, 04:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lschaef

I don't mind the morale system, but don't pay a lot of attention to it.

I think it would be better if the players gave me a little more feedback on why they feel the way they do. And sometimes I can't figure out why they are upset.

I had a guy I was using as a utility infielder who probably had slightly below contact and eye ratings and very little power. He was easily the worst hitter of all the infielders on my roster, but he wanted to start.

I wasn't going to start him and let him be unhappy, but eventually traded him for other reasons. A week or so later we played his new team and I noticed they were starting him. I checked his profile and he was still listed as unhappy.

When they are unhappy with their role, it can take longer to recover, even when the need is satisfied. If they're unhappy with team transactions, that can instantly recover by getting promoted or traded, etc. If they are unhappy with team performance, well obviously, put them on a winner, and they are fine. Player performance can be one that I don't know what to do about. If they are unhappy with how they are performing, the only option I see is to demote them (where they might perform better)... but then they are also unhappy with team transactions, which makes them very unhappy or angry overall.

07-19-2007, 03:17 PM	#1
Burgandy Minors (Single A) Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 85	Happiness I know there are some don't like the Morale system, and that's great. But I kind of enjoy the unknown influence that it may or may not have on performance. Those of you that DO use it, what are your thoughts on your own players' morale? Do you try to NOT satisfy some players' needs to get them to perform? I have a situation with my fictional team that raised my curiosity about this a bit: It's the off-season and I have a complete logjam of outfielders on my fictional team. As far as my player evaluation goes, I have 7 guys that I feel totally HAVE to start between the DH, OF and 1B. So, I opted to find one to trade. I settled on a guy to trade named Jeff Pearson. Ratings-wise, I've expected him to start hitting like a Tony Gwynn with more power, but he hasn't, yet. He's got 18 or 19 CON, GAP and EYE, with 10 POW and 20+K's.... (1-20 scale) So he strikes out about once every 40-50 at bats or so. But he's never had a completely full season, as he's hurt somewhat frequently and been less effective than the other OF'ers, so I platoon him against lefties. Plus, he's kind of out of postition in CF... I want a defensive whiz out there.. and he's bit of a liability. Sooo, I take several different routes to try to find a suitor for him. I even shop him around, which I think I noticed has an impact on his moral. I end up NOT trading him at all, and I continue to start him against RHP and 50% of the time against lefties, but he's not happy about that either. He's taken a slight hit to his overall morale (which is still not bad) and he's "unhappy" with team transactions and role on team. So how does he start this season? Opening day.. 5 for 5, a HR, 2SB. He follows that up with two more 4 hit games.. starts the season 13 for 16. About 80 at bats in, he gets injured for 3 weeks while hitting around .440. comes back from the DL, first at bat back, homers. He played about 5 or 6 games before breaking a finger and raised his avg a little further. So what do you think? Does shopping a guy around light a fire under a guy? Or was my guy too "happy" to produce before, and there are certain players who you cannot let them get too content?

07-19-2007, 04:31 PM	#3
KingYankee Minors (Single A) Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 57	I've quickly learned that you should not always try to satisfy a player. I've had a couple of high prospects that were developing okay but they were basically miserable because they weren't playing at the level they thought they should be. I moved them up the ranks hoping to spark their development but it has backfired. All of the guys that I tried to satisfy had their ability and potential drop. In one instance, I had a 5 star prospect turn into a 1 star prospect in one sim (15 days). He was a 5 star prospect, moved him up from short A to AA, simmed, he became a 1 star prospect. Terrible. Lesson learned though I guess. You are the manager, don't let players talk you into things that don't necessarily sit right with you.

07-20-2007, 10:44 AM	#5
1998 Yankees Hall Of Famer Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Yankee Stadium, back in 1998. Posts: 8,645	I have come to like the morale system; it lends an extra challenge to the game. That said, I have also learned not to overract to crybabies. I do believe that over time a player with a morale problem will suffer in performance, but not necessarily immediately or signficantly. If it's a "logjam" problem, then I will take action because there's no sense in damaging the player if there is no place to play him. However, if it's one of those "Gee, this team stinks, I wanna play for a winner, trade me now" kind of things and I need the player, too bad! I have seen that kind of attitude clear up as soon as we start winning again, so "desire for a winning team" is a lot lower than "expects starting role" on my list of priorities.

07-20-2007, 02:24 PM	#7
lschaef Minors (Triple A) Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Pennsylvania Posts: 242	I don't mind the morale system, but don't pay a lot of attention to it. I think it would be better if the players gave me a little more feedback on why they feel the way they do. And sometimes I can't figure out why they are upset. I had a guy I was using as a utility infielder who probably had slightly below contact and eye ratings and very little power. He was easily the worst hitter of all the infielders on my roster, but he wanted to start. I wasn't going to start him and let him be unhappy, but eventually traded him for other reasons. A week or so later we played his new team and I noticed they were starting him. I checked his profile and he was still listed as unhappy.

07-20-2007, 03:18 PM	#8
zukes All Star Starter Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: London, Ont. Canada Posts: 1,106	I have a 2B who had little to no power that wanted to bat in the middle of the line-up and was unhappy batting 2nd even though he was your typical 2nd place hitter. Howveer, my team got in a slump and I swapped him with my #5 hitter for a few weeks and it made him happy. My #5 hitter didn't get angry, despite wanting to be in the middle of the order, and after a few weeks, I switched them back and never heard a peep out of either of them. I like to think the 2B realized when he didn't hit one HR in the #5 hole that he was where he belonged in the #2 hole.