real life teams in playoff contention aren't going to quibble over a few thousand dollars if it'll increase their chances of winning...the travel cost, lodging expenses aren't really a factor for RL teams...

so the question is why don't teams do this more in real life? it's possible players don't react well to the jumping back and forth (particularly the one who feels he's earned a spot on the big club and then is temporarily demoted and takes a temporary pay cut), if so then our HBD demotion penalty is very appropriate...

I think there should be some type of penalty, but any ratings hit should be only temporary.

I wasn't talking about the fake players when I mentioned professional athletes being upset over a demotion. I was talking about real professional athletes. I don't think in RL being demoted from ML to AAA would permanently cost a hitter 3 "ratings points" on his ability to hit handed pitching.

Maybe if I heard WIS's official response to why there is a demotion ratings hit I could see where they're coming from. But without an explanation, it just doesn't make any sense to me at all.

You say teams don't worry over a few thousand dollars but I disagree. Everyone can account for their big expenditures(house payment/16m for a starting pitcher) but lose track of the small things($7.99 for a pair of shades at the gas station because you can't find your Ray-bans/a few thousand bucks to call a guy up). When you control your small expenses, or at least account for them, you'll suddenly have money you didn't know you spent.

As for why teams don't do it more frequently in RL, I suspect there is a resentment that goes with being sent down. Older players can refuse(and owners/GMs hate to admit they made a mistake by signing a Kei Igawa) and younger guys can tell you to F-off when FA time comes.

I've already told you why. WifS is attempting to discourage owners from using their 40 man roster as their 25 man roster by bouncing players up/down from/to AAA.

The part that seems kind of silly to me is that a guy can take 3, 4, 5 demotion hits in a single season. I would think that at some point (maybe by the second time he's sent down in a year), he'll get the hint that he's the yo-yo guy (always going up and down) on this team for this season, and mentally adjust to it. I certainly can see why demotion penalties need to be permanent rather than temporary. But I'd like to see it become a little more practical to see a marginal player bounce up and down a dozen times in his 3 option seasons (as will often happen with RL marginal Big Leaguers) without going from a 71 OVR to a 65.

By the way, the reason teams don't do this more in RL is because the guy's salary will adjust downward when he's sent down, and guys really don't like that when they're established Major Leaguers.

Anyone who moves the same player up/down three times in a season really needs to look at his managerial style. I can't think of any reason that should be necessary.

Quote: Originally Posted By MikeT23 on 3/03/2010Anyone who moves the same player up/down three times in a season really needs to look at his managerial style. I can't think of any reason that should be necessary

Really? (1) He starts in the BL but quickly gets demoted because a rookie is getting a 20-day callup. (2) He gets called back up when depth ahead of him is traded away to strengthen other positions. (3) He gets sent back down when you decide to change your position player/pitcher mix by 1 for a time (due to fatigue, a 7-day injury to a star where you don't want to 15-day DL him, whatever). (4) Called back up when you switch your pp/pitcher mix back. (5) Demoted for ineffectiveness. (6) Called up at roster expansion.

Stuff happens.

Yeah, like I said, re-evaluate your managerial style. There's no reason to demote a player 3 times in a season. Probably no reason to demote a player three times in his career.

Anyway, if you don't run the risk of a demotion hit, the player becomes a 26th man on a 25 man roster. Same problem as before.

Straw man. Did I say no risk of demotion hit? Or did I say there should certainly be a risk of a demotion hit, at least the first time in a season, and maybe some risk the second, but 3, 4, 5 is a little unrealistic?

Also, a demoted player must do a 10-day stint in the minors before coming back up, so it's not really like a minor league inactive list (where, if you wanted to, you could cycle your rotation onto inactive between starts, for instance) or having a 26-man roster.

i could see bringing a player up and down 3 times in a season under certain circumstances...gjello laid out one set of circumstances...

Once you say "There will be no more demotion hits for Player X", regardless of circumstance, he becomes a 26th man on your BL roster. Surely you understand what I'm saying.

If you run a player down to 97-98%, he probably needs 10 days. You just start cycling them down and back up. No risk. Be much easier to build a team full of 70 DUR position players.

Bad idea.

Quote: Originally Posted By MikeT23 on 3/03/2010
Once you say "There will be no more demotion hits for Player X", regardless of circumstance, he becomes a 26th man on your BL roster. Surely you understand what I'm saying.

If you run a player down to 97-98%, he probably needs 10 days. You just start cycling them down and back up. No risk. Be much easier to build a team full of 70 DUR position players.

Bad idea.

If you want your star players taking up to 2 demotion hits a season, go right ahead. Also, none of them can be out of options, which means you have to cycle your entire roster every 3 seasons, unless you want to be constantly exposing your players to waivers. By all means.

All players don't take demotion hits. I just checked. I've demoted 5 with my two current teams. Only 1 took a hit.

But, anyway, it doesn't have to be "star" players. It can be those 31/10 DUR/STM pitchers. Or one of those LF who come a dime a dozen. Nonetheless, the point remains. Once you say "There will be no more demotion hits for Player X", regardless of circumstance, he becomes a 26th man on your BL roster.

Straw man, again. I never said anything remotely like "all demoted players take a demotion penalty." I said you risk up to 2 penalties, which is true.

Further, the 10-day stint in the minors means that, while your very low dur/sta guys might become a bit more useful, it's not like you can just grab 2 of these guys and swap then out every 3 days.

Additionally, it's not like "having a 26th man" until you have two guys who have both been exposed to up to 2 demotion penalties, both of whom still have options. And even then, you can only swap them out for each other, and they can never both be in the bigs at the same time.

And you've yet to deal with the fact that it's something that requires options.

Your statement that this is basically a Major League inactive list or a 26th roster spot is one of those ideas that sounds true, until you spend 15 seconds thinking through the ramifications. Functionally, this is much less useful than a 26th roster spot or a BL inactive list. It's also only slightly more useful than what we have now, where you can make all of the same roster moves, you just risk more than 2 demotion penalties in a season.

Then again, that was long so you probably didn't read it.