Managers: Personable vs. Easygoing

BennyTheMarlin · 07-28-2018, 12:29 PM

I'm trying to figure out a clear distinction between "personable" and "easygoing" for managers or personnel, but haven't found much. Specifically, which is the more extreme?

jdw31158 · 07-28-2018, 01:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BennyTheMarlin

I'm trying to figure out a clear distinction between "personable" and "easygoing" for managers or personnel, but haven't found much. Specifically, which is the more extreme?

Easygoing managers will try to be friends with everybody instead of leaders, in my experience. They generally don't have much success. I'd go with personable if I had a choice.

NoOne · 07-28-2018, 02:01 PM

just a variation of a player's manager. some will like it more, some less. the only ramification from manual that i recall is that the easygoing/personable guys aren't as good for younger player's development, and if you have an extended losing streak, they don't handle it as well -- i'd assume morale drops faster, which is a minimal effect in the end.

so, if developed in the mlb, no biggie. i believe personable is the 'most' liked of the two. i never looked into the causes, just how many names i saw in relationship tab of a coach and changing it etc. (top one in editor)

as far as success... while i'm sure it can be proven 1 or 2 coach personalities may be best, it's a small piece of the total pie. what they cannot control is the biggest factor -- for whom they work (ai gm / scout behaviour) and size of budget. as far as what they do control, i'd wager their strategy is the biggest concern you should have.

sometimes to match your personnel, sometimes to avoid low percentage choices during a game.

even with a 'bad relationship', if you win games, people stay happy regardless. i've seen 12 names on the 'bad' side and still had ecstatic team chemistry and all happy faces for morale. as long as the player isn't upset (each's morale), it's not a negative effect. i use controlling managers all the time with no problems. i see this stuff often. i've also used whichever gave the best relationships and i cannot tell a difference with similar high-quality teams. maybe at low end it matters more, but who cares if not in playoffs.

07-28-2018, 12:29 PM	#1
BennyTheMarlin Minors (Double A) Join Date: Jun 2013 Location: Hamden, CT Posts: 140	Managers: Personable vs. Easygoing I'm trying to figure out a clear distinction between "personable" and "easygoing" for managers or personnel, but haven't found much. Specifically, which is the more extreme?

07-28-2018, 02:01 PM	#3
NoOne Banned Join Date: Apr 2015 Posts: 7,273 Infractions: 0/1 (3)	just a variation of a player's manager. some will like it more, some less. the only ramification from manual that i recall is that the easygoing/personable guys aren't as good for younger player's development, and if you have an extended losing streak, they don't handle it as well -- i'd assume morale drops faster, which is a minimal effect in the end. so, if developed in the mlb, no biggie. i believe personable is the 'most' liked of the two. i never looked into the causes, just how many names i saw in relationship tab of a coach and changing it etc. (top one in editor) as far as success... while i'm sure it can be proven 1 or 2 coach personalities may be best, it's a small piece of the total pie. what they cannot control is the biggest factor -- for whom they work (ai gm / scout behaviour) and size of budget. as far as what they do control, i'd wager their strategy is the biggest concern you should have. sometimes to match your personnel, sometimes to avoid low percentage choices during a game. even with a 'bad relationship', if you win games, people stay happy regardless. i've seen 12 names on the 'bad' side and still had ecstatic team chemistry and all happy faces for morale. as long as the player isn't upset (each's morale), it's not a negative effect. i use controlling managers all the time with no problems. i see this stuff often. i've also used whichever gave the best relationships and i cannot tell a difference with similar high-quality teams. maybe at low end it matters more, but who cares if not in playoffs. Last edited by NoOne; 07-28-2018 at 02:03 PM.