Do you think all parks and teams play the same?

Do you use the same line-up in every park against any type of pitcher?

Earlier you said that removing demotion penalites would decrease the amount of decision making required.  Now this flurry of seperate posts seems to indicate your argument is now that its would allow to much decision making, in that you could put specialty players in your minors and adjust for each game.  Which is it?

I do beleive there is already a waiting period (10 days isn't it?) after you demote someone before could promote them again, so you again are taking the argument to the extreme.  If you built a team around a strategy of moving players back and forth on a game by game basis, you would not be able to utilize that strategy during the playoffs, so ultimately it is a losing strategy. 

The demotion penalty should be eliminated so as to allow the full utilization of your 40 man roster, just as is done in real life.  For 90% to 100% of teams, this would affect 2 or 3, maybe 4 players in their minor leagues.  It would be some pitchers who aren't good enough to make the ML roster, and come in to give guys rest.  If a pitcher is so good that he makes a difference, he is probably expensive...this is resource allocation decision with costs and benefits that you should have the freedom to manage.  If it is someone you are developing, you have started their clock ticking, which has reprucussions down the road.   If its a great hitter with low durability, you should be able to maximize his ML value as you see fit without penalty.   Specialty players and low dur bashers would have their value in the free agency and trade markets increase, as the market demand would change their value from what it is now. 

The sky is falling scenario you paint would not occur, as building an entire team around moving specialty players into and out of the 25 man roster would not work in the playoffs and would be a losing strategy.

Posted by MikeT23 on 6/1/2012 3:08:00 PM (view original):
tuft, you can call up and send down players all you want.   If that 1-2 point ratings hit deters you from doing it, I'd argue that you're moving 2nd/3rd tier BL players anyway.  

So what's your point?

Demotion penalties can be bigger than that. I've had at least 2 prospects destroyed by demotion penalty.  Obviously I mean backup C, def replacement SS, setup B type prospects.  Not future all-stars. Replaceable players, but I shouldn't have had to replace them.  I drafted them, played them in the MinL, paid for coaching for about 4 season. Then one demotion after a short stay in the ML wipes them out.  I think that should be changed.

Posted by MikeT23 on 6/1/2012 2:32:00 PM (view original):

Your entire argument goes back to what I stated after your first post.    Fatigue becomes an issue at some point in the season for pretty much everyone.  Not in the beginning, which is why no one would start with 40, but eventually.   By allowing the back and forth with no penalty, fatigue is no longer an issue.   Your suggestion eliminates fatigue from the game.   If you're going to eliminate fatigue, why bother with DUR/STM ratings?

Fatigue is an issue in MLB, too. One of the common solutions is it to call up players from AAA in July/August.  If you watched much MLB, you'd probably notice that it's common for a P to start 1 or 2 games in the summer & then go back to AAA. And to see a utility IF or PH who's on the ML club for just 1-2 weeks.  Or if a team has a lot of LH sluggers, for a team to bring up an extra LHP when they have 2 series against them over a 10-14 day period.

Other players are demoted, designated (risking them being waiver claimed), released (maybe to be resigned in a few days) to allow for this.  Those players don't run slower or give up more home runs what they are removed from the ML team. It's part of the game. They know their place in the game. They are paid hundreds of thousands of dollars a year to be a 25th man. Conservatively, likely 10X more than their next best job opportunity.

MinL call ups are one of the ways to rest players in MLB. It doesn't take fatigue out of the game.  It gives GMs a way to deal with it. A way that's not really available in HBD, because of the likely demotion penalty. (We both know there isn't always a demotion penalty.)

As I posted earlier, the MLB model rewards depth.  One more advantage to drafting well & having good coaching.  Grow your own 24-27 men & rotate them up & down for a few years.  After 6 years, if they think they are better than that & the GM is messing with their career, they can go FA.

No matter how many times you type it, the MLB model isn't less strategy than the HBD model.  It does reward a different strategy.

Please take a moment to look at MLB stats from the past few seasons before you reply. See how many players are on the average MLB ML roster over a season compared to how many are on an HBD ML roster.  It's not even close.

Wrong tuft. The 25th man wants three years at $4.9 million a year. Not a few hundred thou.

tufft you are right on.

Mike won't admit it but he's on the wrong side of the fence on this issue.  He is now too deeply entrenched in his position to see any value in counter arguments. 

The funny thing is the argument about removing the demotion penalty "dumbing down the game".  In fact the existance of demotion penalties is what actually "dumbs down the game".    The way it is now, most owners build an 25 man roster, and never make any changes throughout the year, unless there is an injury, bringing up a prospect after a month to get that extra year before arbitration, or bandaid an entire bullpen that is spent.   This requires the minimum amount of work.  Just build a solid 25 man roster and line up against everyone else's 25 man roster.   If you remove the demotion penalties altogether, you make your minor leagues matter.  Having useful tools at AAA matters.   Owners who build from the bottom up, which we all know is the hardest way to build a team, are rewarded.   Making smart FA pickups for AAA to use for special occasions matters.    Demotion penalties as they are now act as an EQUALIZER.   The limitations it imposses brings everyone down to the same level.  Why Mike would be in favor of this baffles me.  Demotion penalties dumb down the game.

Removing demotion penalties WOULD NOT remove the importance of fatigue from the game.  You are still going to have a base ML roster that are your starters.  Their fatigue matters just as much as it ever did.   But like you said, you now have viable options to MANAGE fatigue better, the same way it is done in RL.  

I'll read all that tomorrow but, for now, I notice you have almost 100 games under your belt.   I'm not sure you have a full understanding of HBD.

That's why I asked those questions.   Owners use different line-ups in different parks against different handed pitchers against different opponents.   I think the game is a little deeper than you understand at this point and that was the reason for the questions.    Give a good owner more line-up options from day to day and he'll take full advantage of them.

And I'm not trying to pick a fight or anything, I just feel very strongly about this issue, and would like for everyone to actually consider some of the points I'm making.  We all know you have tremendous influence around here, and I do in fact respect your opinion.  I just don't think you are actually thinking this issue all the way through.

Posted by a_ersberg on 6/1/2012 5:19:00 PM (view original):
Wrong tuft. The 25th man wants three years at $4.9 million a year. Not a few hundred thou.

Arguably a different, completely unrelated flaw in the current game.  Not really the point of this tread. If you want to suggest a change to MinL & boarder line ML players asking for multimillion dollar FA contracts, could you please start a different thread & not corrupt this one.  This one is surprisingly sticking to one topic.

Posted by ranger717 on 6/1/2012 6:47:00 PM (view original):
And I'm not trying to pick a fight or anything, I just feel very strongly about this issue, and would like for everyone to actually consider some of the points I'm making.  We all know you have tremendous influence around here, and I do in fact respect your opinion.  I just don't think you are actually thinking this issue all the way through.

OK, this is short so I can read/answer between innings of the CWS without being distracted.

The problem I have is roster/payroll manipulation and lack of desire to win.  There are a lot of holes in the roster moves section and plenty of payroll manipulation loopholes.   In addition to that, winning doesn't have to be a priority.    As it stands, no one sends down a young stud to "save a year of arb" because of the fear of demotion penalties.    Without a penalty, owners will be sending their best players down in hopes of reducing payroll in the future and/or keeping a player longer if they fall out of the race early.   MLB teams don't do that because they are held accountable by the fans. 

And, again, most good owners would treat the roster like a playoff roster.   That would mean carrying their 8 best pitchers(no one should have 12 they want to pitch in a "big" series).  That leaves a lot of room for specialty players.   

No demotion penalty creates a new game and I don't think it's a better game simply because the owners who know how to work rosters and payroll will have a bigger advantage.   And those prone to tank will have another avenue.

Mike - This will likely be my last post on this topic.   I know there's no changing your mind on this or any other topic. I only bother in hope that somewhere out there there are some programmers working on a MLB simulation & they might factor some of this in.  I've given up on WIS investing in HBD.

I've covered all of your last points.  Doesn't mean I'm right & you're wrong.  Just not worth us retyping them.

Some sort of penalty for demoting players who obviously, without rational debate, belong in the ML is one thing. A penalty for demoting players who are lucky or borderline to be ML is another thing.  I'd rather see players demoted refuse to re-sign than have them take a ratings hit. It would not be hard to change the logic so they won't accept a long-term contact after their arb years are up.  A more realistic penalty than losing eyesight & speed.

I go with 8 or 9 Ps in the playoffs. I am sure that would not work in the regular season for more than a few games. There aren't enough off days. And the downside risk would be really big.  ML Ps, without options or who won't re-sign, stuck at 0 for a few days and a higher risk of injury.  Assuming the fatigue system does not change, carrying too few Ps would be a very big risk.  I don't think is would lead to success most seasons.

I don't think I've ever had a team where there has been a very big difference between my ML 11-12 P and my AAA 1-2 P. There has always been a big difference between my ML 9-10 P and my AAA 1-2 P.  It would be hard to have even average pitching & make those Ps exchangeable parts.

If players have to stay put for about 10 days, it would not be possible to, for example, carry one less SP & bring him up just in time.  Maybe for a few days once during the season, if you had 2 off days close to each other.  And that's exactly how it's done in MLB.

It would be possible to bring up a speedy pinch runner, or an extra LHP, or a strong armed C, or send down a tired Setup B for someone about as good for 10 days, or other moves that are made all the time in MLB.  I doubt I'd do any of that.  But having the option is more realistic than skills declining.  Especially if a player is demoted no more than 1 or 2 times a season.

If the game wants to assume some players who are bounced up & down a lot would have a breakdown, fine. I don't think it would be realistic.  Until some who has played MLB tells me otherwise, I'll believe that borderline guys cherish ever day & every dollar on on ML roster.  They don't stop fielding if they get demoted. Unless they are clearly stars, they probably try harder.  A demotion bonus would be more realistic than a demotion penalty. Not that I'm suggesting that.

OK, I covered most of your posts before I read them at 7:19 last night.

First, pretending that MLB teams bounce players back and forth to rest a starter is disingenuous.    The occassional spot start because of a doubleheader or fatigued staff does happen.    But teams do not bring up legit future prospects to do this.   I'm most familiar with the Yankees so I'll use them in my example.   Hughes and Chamberlain were the best arms in the Yankee systems in the mid 2000s.  They were not bounced between the minors and the majors.  They were called up and, when not injured(which has happened far too often), were with the BL club.   I think Hughes was sent down once to regain his confidence but that was also coming off an injury.   The best arms in the Yankee system now are Banuelos and Betances.   When Rivera went down and the SP struggled, they were not called upon.  The Yanks are using well-known stars Mitchell, Eppley and Phelps.  All are 25-26 y/o and it would not surprise anyone if they were bounced between NY and the minors.   When Bret Gardner went down, the Yanks called upon 34 y/o Dewayne Wise and not hot prospects Williams or Austin.    It should be noted that even the call-ups were INJURY RELATED.    So let's stop the charade that BL teams rotate players up/down all the time.  They don't.   And, when they do because of injury, it is "expendable" players.    Since there's no way to police HBD owners from putting future stars on the rollercoaster, we should be following the lead of MLB teams. 

Second, I think most of us have 18 players who we consider "starters" and fill our roster with 7 others that will be replaced once their salary demands reach a certain level.   And, in the minors, we have another 8-10 who are comparable to the bottom 7.    Without demotion penalties, most of us would rotate those guys up/down(since they will be cheap labor) based on circumstances/performance.   MLB DOES NOT do this.    Realism is out the door.

Third, there is a 10 day waiting period for demotion/promotion.   I'm not suggesting that we'd do "mass" moves.  But there is little doubt that many of us would move a player or two every 3-5 games.    Again, MLB DOES NOT do this.   And, again, realism is out the door.

Fourth, there are no penalties for injury demotion/promotion.  That's when MLB makes their moves.  That's when HBD owners should make their moves.  And, since you can leave players on the DL forever if you like how the call-up is doing, there's one of the roster manipulations I mentioned.  Player gets 2 day injury, you put him on the 15 or 60 and leave him there.

Finally, the decision to sign and/of carry the low DUR/STM players is no longer a decision.  If they're good enough, you sign/carry them.  And, when they're fatigued, you send them down and bring up their replacement.  Perhaps another low DUR/STM player.   Using Ferrer from my previous example, I'd expect him to be good for 55-60 games.    I'd call him up 3-4 times during the season for 8-10 games and after roster expansion.    Again, MLB DOES NOT do this.   And, again, realism is out the door.

I don't really have a problem doing away with demotion penalties IF, and only IF, there was a way to prevent unrealistic roster manipulation that in no way mirrors MLB.    If either of you have a way to prevent that, I'd be interested in hearing it.

I think the demotion penalty should just be tied to make-up.

Something like Makeup:

1-20 = Large Permanent losses,
21-40 Less Large Permanent Loss,
41-60 Moderate Loss, Moderate Recovery
61-80 Moderate Loss, Full Recovery
81-100 Small Loss, Full Recovery

Modified by age / frequency of demotion.