Anyone else find this bug?

[nyy26wc]

Originally Posted by hefalumps

oh yeah I do remember reading that change in the latest patch, now that you mention it. Well good then - that makes sense.

I honestly didn't know that was a rule in MLB. I've always liked the fact that if I saw a player on waivers and wanted to claim him, but wanted to get some payroll relief by sending a player back to the other team, I'd make a trade for him. Or, if someone else claimed him and I really wanted him, I'd try to make a trade. Guess I can't use that strategy anymore, but if it's more in line with what happens in real life, I'm on board.

Thanks nyy26wc for getting me cleared up.

This is actually the opposite of the real rule. In real life, when teams designated a player for assignment, or just place on waivers, they can trade him. I don't know why this change was made in OOTP.

[hefalumps]

Originally Posted by nyy26wc

This is actually the opposite of the real rule. In real life, when teams designated a player for assignment, or just place on waivers, they can trade him. I don't know why this change was made in OOTP.

Oh. Well in that case, yeah why? I just read a bunch of stuff online and it sounds like in real life MLB, irrevocable waivers are definitely used for a different purpose, and typically no one on irrevocable waivers gets traded, but I didn't see anywhere that they COULDN'T be traded when on irrevocable waivers. I get that trades are usually associated with revocable waivers, but why disable trades on irrevocable waivers altogether if that's not the real life rule?

Definitely confusing. Hopefully Markus can comment.