No.

I don't believe the engine is smart enough to switch players to a different position mid-game.

Quote: Originally posted by tecwrg on 6/07/2010
I don't believe the engine is smart enough to switch players to a different position mid-game.

The engine is Dusty Baker?

i like jimmy's promotion / budget idea, and kneeneighbor's position flexibility idea. i'd also like to see notifications when trades that you've offered have been rejected or accepted.

Quote: Originally Posted By jimmystick on 6/06/2010

Quote: Originally posted by travisg on 6/04/2010 I'd like if there were some way to save trade chats as unread.

There are times when I've logged on to check my score before bed or on my way out the door to find an unexpected trade chat. Of course, I can never resist reading them, but then I often forget about it once I've woken up the next day or gotten a free moment after I've gotten to work.

Love this idea, this happens to me A LOT

I 3rd this one!

Now that the Hall of Fame has been implemented, and a player's resume is visible and taken into consideration when people vote, it would be nice if the top 6 outfielders were chosen for the All-Star team each season, regardless of position, as opposed to just the 2 best RF, the 2 best CF and the 2 best LF.

The All-Star game is basically a meaningless exhibition game with nothing riding on it, and no one gets hurt, so who cares if a regular season right fielder has to move over to center field for 1 game? If there are 3 right fielders in one league that are having better seasons than any other outfielder in that league, then all 3 deserve to make the All-Star team. The #3 guy shouldn't get shut out in favor of 2 CF and 2 LF who aren't having as good a year, just on a technicality. I've seen a lot of deserving players snubbed over the years, and a few of them are going to struggle in the HoF voting because their resumes look thin as a result. (Especially since, if a guy is also an MVP finalist 4 or 5 times, but never wins one, no permanent record is kept to reflect that either.)

... In this game, OF position is not a technicality. CF requires significantly better range/glove, and right field requires a significantly better arm than the real life version.

I realize that leppy. But that should only make a difference in regular season and post-season play. My point is, the All-Star game is meaningless, but making the All-Star team is NOT (when it comes to a players Hall chances). Who cares if a guy plays out of position for one meaningless game through the whole season. I currently have a RF who has about 34 HR and 85 RBI at the All-Star Break, and is not on the team because 2 other RF are hitting over .300 while my guy is hitting .279. Meanwhile there is a backup CF and a backup LF (who also plays for my team) that made the All-Star team over him.

Come HoF voting, that will be 1 more AS team those players made than my RF, despite the RF having significantly better offensive numbers.

I know you need different defensive attributes to play each position on an every day basis. Give me some credit. But why should that have any bearing on a once-per-year exhibition on which nothing of any importance is riding?

And no, I'm not advocating putting shortstops at catcher due to better offensive numbers, or anything THAT drastic. But when it comes to the outfield (or even just the corner outfield), why not decide like the major leagues do it? Best 6 outfielders go, and if a RF has to move to Center for a meaningless game, what harm can it do? At least a guy with deserving offensive numbers gets a bump on his resume. Its the election that's important in this sim, not the game itself.

(I also don't like that if I was to move a guy from LF to RF 40 games in, out of necessity, he wouldn't get enough at-bats at either position to qualify for the All-Star team, despite being a full-time outfielder.)

What about some kind of league scoreboard where you can see the most recent sims scores all in one spot? Maybe just a simple box score with the inning by inning scoring and the winning and losing pitchers. Seems like it's something easy and would be very convenient.

Quote: Originally posted by travisg on 6/04/2010

Quote: Originally posted by gman981981 on 6/03/2010Correctly reflect Rule 5 eligibilities (if you sign at 18 its 5 years not 4)

I think they've said they plan to keep it in its current, simplified setup because some people have enough trouble as it is protecting their players.

I'm usually against dumbing down the game, but in this case I have to agree with them. The owners who would end up losing players are usually the ones who need all the help they can get.

What is hard about seeing a red diamond with a "5" in it next to your guy's name and deciding, hey, I should protect him before they hold this Rule 5 thingy.

If you are too dumb to understand how that works, you should lose a player.

As far as suggestions, autowaive players on the 40-man that don't make the 25-man opening day roster (exception if they are on the DL, until their injury is up).

This would prevent hoarding, and it's exactly how the majors do it.

Just put another diamond with a "0" in it to show the owners that these guys are out of options and will be waived if they aren't on the opening day roster.

Would give rebuilding teams some useful players to rebuild with and replicate MLB's rule that helps prevent players from being trapped.

I'd also like to see all-star team voting added and post-season award place finishes added to player cards.

I'd love customizable email alerts for new trade chats, new trade props to your team, ect. If not a mobile site/app

Changes to the trade voting process:

1) Once you have voted on a trade, keep the trade listed on your trade page as "waiting to process". This will let you see the specifics of the players and cash involved in the trade if there's discussion in the World Chat.

2) Be allowed to change your vote up until the trade gets processed. Discussion in the World Chat may influence your final vote.

3) For trades that are approved, show the number of vetoes received, but not the vetoing owner ID's. This will give you an idea if the trade was close to crossing the "veto line" of the world.

4) I'm not quite sure about this last one, but I'll throw it out there anyway: for trades that are vetoed, just show the number of vetoes received by not the ID's of the vetoing owners. I'm not sure if that really accomplishes anything.

#4 might not accomplish anything but doesnt really hurt. No owner will really have a problem with someone who vetoes when a bunch of others also vetoed.

Not sure #3 adds anything.

#2 maybe for some so whatever.

#1, yeah sure.