Historical Transaction (with modified league)

[DaBears]

I want to start a league in the late 1990s or early 2000s, but modify the setup to be as if there had never been expansion in the 1990s (AL/NL, 2 divisions each, no wild cards). I also want to use historical transactions.

My assumption is this will still work, I simply won't have the stats within my game for players during the years they played for ARI, COL, TB or MIA. In other words, if you took a player that was with, say, the Tigers in 2000 but he went to the Marlins in real life for 2001 before landing back with the Tigers for 2002 - the game would have him on the Tigers for 2000, he would just not be a part of the game in 2001, and then he'd show up in Detroit at the start of the 2002 season, with no stats from 2001.

Anyone know enough to confirm this?

[thehef]

Originally Posted by DaBears

I want to start a league in the late 1990s or early 2000s, but modify the setup to be as if there had never been expansion in the 1990s (AL/NL, 2 divisions each, no wild cards). I also want to use historical transactions.

My assumption is this will still work, I simply won't have the stats within my game for players during the years they played for ARI, COL, TB or MIA. In other words, if you took a player that was with, say, the Tigers in 2000 but he went to the Marlins in real life for 2001 before landing back with the Tigers for 2002 - the game would have him on the Tigers for 2000, he would just not be a part of the game in 2001, and then he'd show up in Detroit at the start of the 2002 season, with no stats from 2001.

Anyone know enough to confirm this?

So I created a historical league for the 1967 season, with automatic league expansion (which encompasses more than just expansion; should be labeled "Automatic League Evolution"), and historical transactions. I ran it until the day the 1968 World Series ends, because the day after the final game of the WS is the 1st day of the offseason, which is also the day that first year players (for, in this case, 1969) import to their historical teams, and any league structure changes (in this case, the introduction of the expansion teams in Kansas City, Seattle, Montreal, and San Diego) occur.

Before advancing to the offseason, I unchecked the Automatic League Expansion button. Then I advanced to the offseason. Here's what happened & didn't happen:

- The four expansion franchises (in KC, Sea, Mont, SD) did not appear
- The leagues did not split into two division each
- The 1968 OOTP schedule remained in place for 1969
- 1969-debut players imported to their historically-correct teams, with the exception of those who in real life were rookies with the expansion teams
- Players who made their debut with the expansion teams instead imported as free agents
- Players who were acquired by the expansion teams (like, for example via trade or in the expansion draft) instead became free agents

I progressed through the 1969 and 1970 seasons with the Automatic League Expansion button still unchecked:

- The players who IRL debuted with the 1969 expansion franchises remained free agents (since there are no historical transactions to put them on a team). Exceptions were any players who moved from an expansion franchise to a non-expansion franchise (the hist txns file moved them).
- Players who debuted in 1970 with Milwaukee (IRL the 1969 Seattle expansion franchise moved to Milwaukee for 1970; in my test it did not yet exist) imported as free agents
- Otherwise, the 1969 and 1970 seasons played out just fine, with the same structure that was in place for the 1968 season

On the day that the 1970 World Series ended, I re-checked the Automatic League Expansion button, and then moved forward a day:

- The 1971 structure took effect, meaning the Royals and Brewers appeared in the AL West, the Expos in the NL East, and the Padres in the NL West
- These four teams, however, had only between 8 and 13 players on their roster (their rosters being limited to the players who debuted with them in 1971 and any players acquired after the 1970 World Series)

At that point I stopped the test because Montreal did not have enough players (8) to play a game and I would've had to manually add players.

So, based upon this test, I'd think you can generally do what you would like to do. Minor correction, though, for the part in bold. In that example, the player would be a free agent for the 2001 season. That's probably what you meant by "not part of the game," but just be clear, he'd be in the game and available as a free agent (should you decide to assign him to a team or whatever).

Good luck!

[DaBears]

Thanks for the in-depth reply. What you explained is pretty much exactly what I expected, and hoped for.

[thehef]

Originally Posted by DaBears

Thanks for the in-depth reply. What you explained is pretty much exactly what I expected, and hoped for.

Cool! Have fun