What are the pros and cons of moving down to $0 medical budget?

I know that the obvious con is that a bottom of the MLB roster type of player that gets a major injury is likely no longer an MLB player. But what about those 25 day injuries? If a player gets a 25 day injury, is it even worth putting him on the DL? Does he even get a recovery when placed on the 7, 15, or 60 day DL?

No. If ANY player gets an injury, they are not going to have hardly any recovery at all. You would probably be fine with short term nagging injuries that only drop 1 or 2 OVR points. But if one of your best pitchers goes down with a long term rotator cuff or elbow injury, you are screwed. IMHO, of course. I always put 20 on training, and 16 on med. SOP for many seasons now.

I guess the flip side of this is, if you rely on populating your ML roster with aging free agents and don't care about developing draftees and IFAs, then that might have some merit.

I guess my situation is that I've had some poor injury luck in one World where I've had a major injury to eleven players over the past eleven seasons and all eleven players were significant pieces. None of them were bottom five of the roster type players. I know it's just bad luck and I probably need to just move on, but ten of those eleven players never made it back to full recovery after the injury and I feel like I'm playing with a flawed team in that world. This makes sense because if 10 of the top 20 players on your MLB team had injuries where they never made it back to full recovery, that's quite a bit of lost performance, in the aggregate. In fact, some of them are still 2 to 4 points behind where they were before the injury. All of this is with 20 million in medical and training. I suppose moving the medical budget down to $0 would just make the above situation even worse, but at least I'd have the extra $20 million in budget each season to try to get more players.

One thing I've noticed is that if you have more true prospects in your system, the higher the chance that one of them gets a major injury. So, I guess this just makes me not want to move down the medical budget to zero even more. The more I think about it, the more I want to keep my medical budget at 20 million. This is despite its flaws. It is just so frustrating that it is so uncommon for a player to fully recover from a major injury. I know in real life that players don't fully recover either, but in real life, players fully recover much more frequently than 10 percent of the time. With a full medical budget and a high makeup rating, a player should get really close to full recovery.

I have considered the move as well. My issue is the seasons in between 0 and 20 while the transition is happening.

I would also only consider it with a team that is all in. If I am drafting and developing players I don't think I would want to risk injury without having 20 mil.

I've always go with $0 Medical, $20 Training. To me medical is a waste. Everyone ******* about injuries regardless, mostly from people with $20M in Medical. With $0 I just roll with what happens, extra money to spend on a FA or Int.

I love injuries. The 60 day DL can turn a player around quickly and you can get an extra year out of an aging player with a 60 day DL stint in a 10 day injury.

I would never sacrifice medical below $15-$16MM with $20MM being my preference. I’d rather sacrifice prospect and coaching.

I just hate the long injuries.

Seems like players never fully heal anymore unless you have 20 in medical. The new guys broke the system. Ridiculous that you have to have medical maxed out just to get guy to heal. I've had 16-18 before and Its been a few actual years since I've had a guy fully heal.