Does everyone deal away clubhouse cancers?

ShaneCarson · 05-25-2016, 02:20 PM

So every morale thread I go in, people seem to be ditching their clubhouse cancers. I get if you had more than one or maybe one that was a bad player.

However, how would you treat it if that player were a star player? I have this instance with Julio Barajas, my star first baseman. Through June 1st he is hitting close to .400 with 12 home runs and leading the all start vote. He is my sole clubhouse cancer. I not only cannot justify trading this player but I have signed him to an extension.

Am I the only one on this board willing to live with a clubhouse cancer on my team?

BIG17EASY · 05-25-2016, 02:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShaneCarson

So every morale thread I go in, people seem to be ditching their clubhouse cancers. I get if you had more than one or maybe one that was a bad player.

However, how would you treat it if that player were a star player? I have this instance with Julio Barajas, my star first baseman. Through June 1st he is hitting close to .400 with 12 home runs and leading the all start vote. He is my sole clubhouse cancer. I not only cannot justify trading this player but I have signed him to an extension.

Am I the only one on this board willing to live with a clubhouse cancer on my team?

I think you're fine if he's the only problem in the clubhouse. Surround him with good clubhouse guys and that should outweigh his negatives.

NoOne · 05-25-2016, 02:27 PM

with those numbers he can spit on the fans for all i care.

Rizon · 05-25-2016, 02:34 PM

I have an In-House rule to not pick up or draft a player with Very Low in Leadership, Work Ethic or Intelligence.

jpeters1734 · 05-25-2016, 02:37 PM

i do think some people are far too wary of bad personalities.

JMGC · 05-25-2016, 02:44 PM

For me, if the team is winning, I would keep a club house cancer. If he is hitting close to .400 in June with 12 homers, I would definitely keep him. Its hard enough to find talent, I am not trading that away just because of a bad attitude. I am more likely to trade away cancers if they are replaceable.

Ty Cobb · 05-25-2016, 03:10 PM

and I do mean everyone. A happy locker room wins when they shouldn't.

The Yurpman · 05-25-2016, 03:12 PM

I agree with JMGC. If the team is winning you can afford to have a couple of bad apples. Especially if those apples are producing. If the team is bad I tend to try to dump the problem players if they aren't super young.

ShaneCarson · 05-25-2016, 03:23 PM

We aren't winning but we aren't expected to right now. Last place in the division and honestly have won more games than I anticipated. I think I'd take the trade off of his production on a winning or a losing team over having to play against him.

JMGC · 05-25-2016, 03:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ty Cobb

and I do mean everyone. A happy locker room wins when they shouldn't.

I have only had a happy clubhouse when the team is winning. Even when I have had teams with no obvious clubhouse cancers, the clubhouse goes downhill when the team loses a lot. When the team is winning, the problems don't seem to matter, and everyone seems to have high morale.

Padreman · 05-25-2016, 03:53 PM

It's the slackers I'm note concern with since they at least to me seem to decline faster

Number4 · 05-25-2016, 04:24 PM

I only take them if they have exeptional talent, balanced by good characters in marginal spots on my roster.

aquapong · 05-25-2016, 04:40 PM

I've never really been clear on how the team chemistry affects your team other than some whiny players sending you messages. You can turn the personality system off if you wish.

I try to avoid them unless they are a real impact maker and I can cancel them out with at least two captain personalities.

Highly rated International prospects I'll sign anyway because they always make good trade bait.

NoOne · 05-25-2016, 05:38 PM

talent is the single most important factor to success... above personality, above your manager, above everything.

can personality and other factors in very certain situations trump talent? i don't doubt it, but it's not a common situation.

if the guy is too old to contribute when you expect your current team to start winning more, then you should think about trading for value before you lose him to FA - but that has nothing to do with his personality. if he is going to be around for a while, definitely keep a talented player.

if you continue to sign or accumulate cancers with supreme talent, it might not be wise to overload the roster with them... even then i wouldn't sacrifice much talent for personality. i doubt the situation would even come up, but i would start to consider other factors if i signed a 5th, 6th, or 7th cancer... but only maybe.

---------

i'd love to make an "average team" with excellent manager, morale, personalities blah blah blha and play them 100times versus a team with excellent talent, a crap manager and cancer personalities... my money is on the unhappy, more talented team.

even if they technically underperform due to morale or coaches, their starting baseline is that much higher it simply won't matter. and since winning keeps people happy, as long as you avoid major bumps in the road (losing streaks, whatever other factors set off personality issues), they probably will be fine morale-wise, too.

MrBojangles · 05-25-2016, 08:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ty Cobb

and I do mean everyone. A happy locker room wins when they shouldn't.

Here here!!

Hammercraft · 05-25-2016, 09:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jpeters1734

i do think some people are far too wary of bad personalities.

I am for sure. I know I should just put up with some guys but I can't help it. It just saps the enjoyment of my success to know that it was built on the backs of asshats.

oriolesmeep · 05-25-2016, 10:03 PM

I keep cancers if they can justify it. Take the following two cases. In my long-term sim as GM of the Rockies, I had a 3B with 70 power (20-80). He was a cancer, but also very good and a perfect fit in Coors. Kept him on the team for 4 years, won a ring in his 3rd year, before trading him away as he neared his 5th season in Colorado. I had an up and coming third baseman I had acquired the off-season prior, and I had an established first baseman.

As the third baseman neared the end of his time in Colorado, my top prospect was in AA, starting to near time for his debut. He played RF/1B, and all his potential was in his bat. No DH and I had an established first baseman, so he was going to cause a problem in a few years. He also was a clubhouse cancer. Normally, what I would have done would be to look to trade my first baseman, but with the cancerous personality I traded the prospect for a slightly lesser rated OF prospect and a 4th starter.

The prospect won ROY and made the all-star game his first season, but due to his personality he ended up bouncing around the league and never quite fulfilled his potential.

Lesson of the story: Cancers can be managed, but only do it for proven players.

05-25-2016, 02:20 PM	#1
ShaneCarson All Star Reserve Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 728	Does everyone deal away clubhouse cancers? So every morale thread I go in, people seem to be ditching their clubhouse cancers. I get if you had more than one or maybe one that was a bad player. However, how would you treat it if that player were a star player? I have this instance with Julio Barajas, my star first baseman. Through June 1st he is hitting close to .400 with 12 home runs and leading the all start vote. He is my sole clubhouse cancer. I not only cannot justify trading this player but I have signed him to an extension. Am I the only one on this board willing to live with a clubhouse cancer on my team?

05-25-2016, 02:34 PM	#4
Rizon Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: SF Area, California Total Posts: 531,691 Posts: 2,370	I have an In-House rule to not pick up or draft a player with Very Low in Leadership, Work Ethic or Intelligence. __________________ JML MILKSHAKES

05-25-2016, 02:37 PM	#5
jpeters1734 Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jun 2014 Location: Juust a bit outside... Posts: 6,315	i do think some people are far too wary of bad personalities. __________________ "Cannonball Coming!" Go Bucs!! Founder and League Caretaker of the Professional Baseball Circuit, www.probaseballcircuit.com An Un-Official Guide to Minor League Management in OOTP 21 Ratings Scale Conversion Cross-Reference Cheat Sheet

05-25-2016, 03:10 PM	#7
Ty Cobb Hall Of Famer Join Date: Mar 2013 Location: Grayling, MI Posts: 4,625	Everyone is replaceable... and I do mean everyone. A happy locker room wins when they shouldn't. __________________ "You could not live with your own failure. Where did that bring you? Back to me." Thanos

05-25-2016, 03:53 PM	#11
Padreman Hall Of Famer Join Date: May 2013 Location: Tijuana, Baja California, Mexico (formally San Diego, CA.) Posts: 4,131	It's the slackers I'm note concern with since they at least to me seem to decline faster __________________ Chargers= Despicable Traitors

05-25-2016, 02:27 PM	#3
NoOne Banned Join Date: Apr 2015 Posts: 7,273 Infractions: 0/1 (3)	with those numbers he can spit on the fans for all i care.

05-25-2016, 02:44 PM	#6
JMGC Minors (Single A) Join Date: Mar 2015 Posts: 69	For me, if the team is winning, I would keep a club house cancer. If he is hitting close to .400 in June with 12 homers, I would definitely keep him. Its hard enough to find talent, I am not trading that away just because of a bad attitude. I am more likely to trade away cancers if they are replaceable.

05-25-2016, 03:12 PM	#8
The Yurpman Major Leagues Join Date: Jul 2012 Posts: 320	I agree with JMGC. If the team is winning you can afford to have a couple of bad apples. Especially if those apples are producing. If the team is bad I tend to try to dump the problem players if they aren't super young.

05-25-2016, 03:23 PM	#9
ShaneCarson All Star Reserve Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 728	We aren't winning but we aren't expected to right now. Last place in the division and honestly have won more games than I anticipated. I think I'd take the trade off of his production on a winning or a losing team over having to play against him.

05-25-2016, 04:24 PM	#12
Number4 Major Leagues Join Date: Sep 2014 Posts: 460	I only take them if they have exeptional talent, balanced by good characters in marginal spots on my roster. __________________ "Odor is now 2 for 5 today" (Commentator, after Rougned Odor, up to then 1 for 4, punched Jose Bautista square in the face.)

05-25-2016, 04:40 PM	#13
aquapong Major Leagues Join Date: Jun 2013 Posts: 378	I've never really been clear on how the team chemistry affects your team other than some whiny players sending you messages. You can turn the personality system off if you wish. I try to avoid them unless they are a real impact maker and I can cancel them out with at least two captain personalities. Highly rated International prospects I'll sign anyway because they always make good trade bait.

05-25-2016, 05:38 PM	#14
NoOne Banned Join Date: Apr 2015 Posts: 7,273 Infractions: 0/1 (3)	talent is the single most important factor to success... above personality, above your manager, above everything. can personality and other factors in very certain situations trump talent? i don't doubt it, but it's not a common situation. if the guy is too old to contribute when you expect your current team to start winning more, then you should think about trading for value before you lose him to FA - but that has nothing to do with his personality. if he is going to be around for a while, definitely keep a talented player. if you continue to sign or accumulate cancers with supreme talent, it might not be wise to overload the roster with them... even then i wouldn't sacrifice much talent for personality. i doubt the situation would even come up, but i would start to consider other factors if i signed a 5th, 6th, or 7th cancer... but only maybe. --------- i'd love to make an "average team" with excellent manager, morale, personalities blah blah blha and play them 100times versus a team with excellent talent, a crap manager and cancer personalities... my money is on the unhappy, more talented team. even if they technically underperform due to morale or coaches, their starting baseline is that much higher it simply won't matter. and since winning keeps people happy, as long as you avoid major bumps in the road (losing streaks, whatever other factors set off personality issues), they probably will be fine morale-wise, too. Last edited by NoOne; 05-25-2016 at 05:44 PM.

05-25-2016, 10:03 PM	#17
oriolesmeep Minors (Double A) Join Date: Oct 2015 Posts: 103	I keep cancers if they can justify it. Take the following two cases. In my long-term sim as GM of the Rockies, I had a 3B with 70 power (20-80). He was a cancer, but also very good and a perfect fit in Coors. Kept him on the team for 4 years, won a ring in his 3rd year, before trading him away as he neared his 5th season in Colorado. I had an up and coming third baseman I had acquired the off-season prior, and I had an established first baseman. As the third baseman neared the end of his time in Colorado, my top prospect was in AA, starting to near time for his debut. He played RF/1B, and all his potential was in his bat. No DH and I had an established first baseman, so he was going to cause a problem in a few years. He also was a clubhouse cancer. Normally, what I would have done would be to look to trade my first baseman, but with the cancerous personality I traded the prospect for a slightly lesser rated OF prospect and a 4th starter. The prospect won ROY and made the all-star game his first season, but due to his personality he ended up bouncing around the league and never quite fulfilled his potential. Lesson of the story: Cancers can be managed, but only do it for proven players.