Can popularity mean more?

[Jestor]

Meaning, can a 6/6 player who, even though he's 38 and in clearly in his last year both in terms of playing ability and contract, not be cut by the team he's spent his entire career with?

Especially when said player dominates the career leader boards?

It's probably the most extremely frustrating thing about 6.51, to see these popular, successful players have to spend their last year or two in some other team's minor league system because the game decides "Oh, look at those ratings! Time to cut them and to hell with everything they've done and been for us!"

[lewis31lewis52]

I agree with this, I just don't know how possible something like this would be.

[marc]

I agree with this as well!

[dankrzyz]

Originally Posted by lewis31lewis52

I agree with this, I just don't know how possible something like this would be.

Ditto.

I do recall in past versions that a number of all-time greats have a year or two of minor league play tacked onto their career numbers. I don't know if there is anything that could be easily done to avoid this, however. One thing is that with popularity comes negative effects if they leave the team - I wonder if they AI will avoid taking this hit and hold onto popular guys, even at the end of their careers.

[Jestor]

Originally Posted by dankrzyz

Ditto.

I do recall in past versions that a number of all-time greats have a year or two of minor league play tacked onto their career numbers. I don't know if there is anything that could be easily done to avoid this, however. One thing is that with popularity comes negative effects if they leave the team - I wonder if they AI will avoid taking this hit and hold onto popular guys, even at the end of their careers.

I know in 6.51 teams take the popularity hit if they don't re-sign players before they hit free agency or if said players are traded away.

However, I'm not sure if they take the hit for releasing them.

[ms2002]

I definitely agree. The game should definitely recognize the older players who had amazing careers and make them more appealing to teams - especially for those they've played for.

This would be an amazing feature to include. I hope the popularity feature won't just be limited to attendance.

[DreamTeams]

It would be great if individual teams could develop traditions of loyalty to stars or a reputation of out with the old and in with the new. For example, the Yankees are notorious for dispensing of the services of their stars that are clearly on the downside of their careers. Even the great Babe Ruth was let go by the Yanks. Meanwhile, the Cardinals seem to have done right by their old grizzled stars for the most part. I think of Stan 'The Man' as an example. It would be nice if the game supported both scenarios.

[The Wolf]

Agree. This would be an excellent use for the popularity variables.

"We can't cut Charlie! I don't care if his ratings suck and he's pushing 41, he's still the most popular guy on the team and a national icon to boot!"

[endgame]

Maybe the "Untouchable" designation could be enhanced to include management's treatment of the player when coupled with high popularity.

[Muzamba]

I'm wondering if a star player's "expected role" will at least keep them from playing in the minors at the end of their career. IOW, will a veteran who has been a starter for many years react negatively to a demotion and choose to retire instead of finishing his career in the minors? That would at least be more realistic.

[CobaltJays]

Originally Posted by Muzamba

I'm wondering if a star player's "expected role" will at least keep them from playing in the minors at the end of their career. IOW, will a veteran who has been a starter for many years react negatively to a demotion and choose to retire instead of finishing his career in the minors? That would at least be more realistic.

I'd like to second this suggestion. While there is in real life the occasional long-time major leaguer who will accept a minor league assignment or sign with an independent league team (Rickey Henderson being one example), the vast majority will either just sit at home waiting for the phone to ring or simply retire. There aren't even that many who will accept the role of a bench player or middle reliever.

Too often in previous versions of OOTP, formerly great players would bounce around in their final year from organization to organization, frequently winding up being a seldom-used player in someone's minor league system.

[Raidergoo]

Originally Posted by The Wolf

Agree. This would be an excellent use for the popularity variables.

"We can't cut Charlie! I don't care if his ratings suck and he's pushing 41, he's still the most popular guy on the team and a national icon to boot!"

If they cut a guy like that, you may see a double digit drop in fan interest, and they will quit going to games.

[Mister Bogart]

*cough* Jeff Bagwell *cough*

[swampdragon]

Originally Posted by dankrzyz

Ditto.

I do recall in past versions that a number of all-time greats have a year or two of minor league play tacked onto their career numbers.

That's realistic through baseball history. See Henderson, Rickey. Nap Lajoie won the International League batting title in 1917, hitting .380. I would say over half the deadball stars finished their careers in the minors.

[zukes]

Originally Posted by Raidergoo

If they cut a guy like that, you may see a double digit drop in fan interest, and they will quit going to games.

Will the AI care enough about that aspect of the game to factor that into their decision?

[dankrzyz]

Originally Posted by Muzamba

I'm wondering if a star player's "expected role" will at least keep them from playing in the minors at the end of their career. IOW, will a veteran who has been a starter for many years react negatively to a demotion and choose to retire instead of finishing his career in the minors? That would at least be more realistic.

Excellent point... conceptually that should play a factor, let's see if the game reacts that way.

[The Wolf]

Originally Posted by zukes

Will the AI care enough about that aspect of the game to factor that into their decision?

I think the point is that for the sake of realism here the AI should care enough about that.

[silvam14]

Originally Posted by Muzamba

I'm wondering if a star player's "expected role" will at least keep them from playing in the minors at the end of their career. IOW, will a veteran who has been a starter for many years react negatively to a demotion and choose to retire instead of finishing his career in the minors? That would at least be more realistic.

This would be the ideal situation in my opinion. What would it say about the AI if it didn't want to bring up that can't miss prospect because some old declining star is taking up a spot on the roster and they feel loyal to him?

I say offer the old star a coaching job or something in the system a la Mike Stanley.

Perhaps I have been brainwashed by the Bill Bellichick system of player valuation.....perhaps...

[Solonor]

There's a new feature where you can "lock" the popularity of a player in place, too. So, even if the old guy's ratings start to sag, you could manually fix it so that he remains super popular. (You can also lock a player with great numbers into poor popularity.)

[zukes]

Originally Posted by silvam14

Perhaps I have been brainwashed by the Bill Bellichick system of player valuation.....perhaps...

That would be release outright.

Or

Ask a guy to play out of position, then release him, then re-sign at bargain basement cost, ask to play out of position, release again, sign him for even less.... and we'll see what happens this off-season.