Non-roster invitees

[JTSMOOTH]

To recap them again (for those who don't want to go to the other thread):

1. At the end of spring training, when you trim your roster back, every player who will wind up in the minors should use up an option year. If the player is out of option years, then he must go through irrevocable waivers. (Basically, make it work like 2006 with the waivers loophole fixed.)

2. When a player becomes eligible for minor league free agency, he should be "protected" as long as he is on the team's 40-man roster.

Both of these issues were fixed immediately, and I tested them both. So, I know they work that way now in 2007.

Sweet, thats excellent news!

[Stu]

Originally Posted by JTSMOOTH

Sweet, thats excellent news!

Please note though, that players who are on the 40 man roster, out of options and in the minors, still do not need to pass through waivers at the end of Spring Training.

[Le Grande Orange]

If anyone has some specific questions about waivers or options, post 'em here. I've gotten in touch with someone through SABR who has a copy of the mysterious "Major League Rules" document, so I can relay questions to him and he can look up exactly what the rulebook says.

[Solonor]

Originally Posted by Stu

Please note though, that players who are on the 40 man roster, out of options and in the minors, still do not need to pass through waivers at the end of Spring Training.

You are correct. The entire 40-man roster should automatically be made "active" during Spring Training, rather than allowing the GM to pick and choose. Then, you would have to decide which ones go to the minors and expose the ones out of options to waivers.

I will research this some more to verify that hasn't changed, and I will TT it.

[enuttage]

Originally Posted by Solonor

You are correct. The entire 40-man roster should automatically be made "active" during Spring Training, rather than allowing the GM to pick and choose. Then, you would have to decide which ones go to the minors and expose the ones out of options to waivers.

I will research this some more to verify that hasn't changed, and I will TT it.

Thank you very much, Solonor. JT will be happier'n a truck-drivin' lottery winner if you can get this one fixed in the new release.

He's a fixture around our parts, and he knows his stuff very well.

[mgom27]

In real life teams cut down their Rosters before Spring Training is over by sending the people to the Minors,Minor League Camp and so on and that doesn't happen in this game.

[Assos]

Agreed. Living where I live, i see my fair share of ST baseball and it is interesting to see players with 76, 53, and 91 on the backs of their uniforms. The whole roster should be in play for ST but as for cuts and minor league camp assignments, that is a little too micro managed for some people's tastes. I personally would not mind, but man that could be time consuming!

Bring out Butch Huskey! MVP of Spring Training for 4 years in a row!

[disposableheros]

Originally Posted by mgom27

In real life teams cut down their Rosters before Spring Training is over by sending the people to the Minors,Minor League Camp and so on and that doesn't happen in this game.

that doesnt happen during ST in the game, but rather, at the end. not a big deal, IMO.

[disposableheros]

Originally Posted by Stu

...players who are on the 40 man roster, out of options and in the minors, still do not need to pass through waivers at the end of Spring Training...

IINM, this is high on JT's list of needed fixes and the basis for the previous threads. without this, you can potentially keep a guy forever toiling away in the minor leagues.

[Solonor]

I've probably run out of time to get this into the release, but maybe in a patch. We're down to the wire on what changes can be made to the software before the code is locked and the only thing fixed between then and release are crashes and major bugs. I'll see what I can do, though.

This definitely needs to be worded properly, because if it's not optional, then there will be a lot of irate customers that don't want it to work this way, even if it is the way it happens in real life.

[neojonas]

Originally Posted by Stu

Please note though, that players who are on the 40 man roster, out of options and in the minors, still do not need to pass through waivers at the end of Spring Training.

As long as you didn't put them on your active roster during spring training, right? Anyone on the active roster would have to pass through waivers to be demoted at the end of ST right?

[endgame]

Originally Posted by neojonas

As long as you didn't put them on your active roster during spring training, right? Anyone on the active roster would have to pass through waivers to be demoted at the end of ST right?

Part of the bone of contention. If they have options remaining, no, they should not have to pass through waivers, IMO. It has been stated, in another thread IIRC, that if they are demoted from the active roster AND removed from the 40-man then they would have to clear waivers, but in that respect I'm still inclined to disagree.

[Solonor]

Ugh. I went back and looked at my TT on this, and it's marked "consider for next release". I swear I tested this again.

Anyway, there are competing TT's that want it to work the opposite way. Those have been deferred, too.

Like I said in the earlier thread, if it's not an option, then setting this up to work like it does in real life, while it may make some happy, is going to anger a bunch more. So, I think Markus just punted this time and left it alone.

I will triple confirm how it works in the latest build and let you know.

I also added notes to both my original TT and the competing one letting Markus know that there are opinions both ways (as if he didn't already) and linking these forum threads.

Sorry for the confusion.

[disposableheros]

Originally Posted by Solonor

Ugh. I went back and looked at my TT on this, and it's marked "consider for next release". I swear I tested this again.

Anyway, there are competing TT's that want it to work the opposite way. Those have been deferred, too.

Like I said in the earlier thread, if it's not an option, then setting this up to work like it does in real life, while it may make some happy, is going to anger a bunch more. So, I think Markus just punted this time and left it alone.

I will triple confirm how it works in the latest build and let you know.

I also added notes to both my original TT and the competing one letting Markus know that there are opinions both ways (as if he didn't already) and linking these forum threads.

Sorry for the confusion.

this is exactly what i was saying before...

someone cut and paste directly from wiki info that is not correct and Markus 'fixed' it according to those rules, when in actuality, the wiki is wrong and Markus created a 'bug'. i tried to explain the situation to him, but the wiki cut-and-paster was adamant and Markus dosnt have the time to go fact checking. IINM, you were active in that discussion as well and i thought we had him won over, but....

[disposableheros]

MLB:

out of options, on the 40-man, in the minors at the end of ST = irrevocable waivers
out of options, on the 40-man, sent to the minors at the end of ST = irrevocable waivers
options remain, on the 40-man, sent to the minors at the end of ST = use an option
options remain, removed from the 40-man and sent to the minors at the end of ST = waivers

[CobaltJays]

Originally Posted by Solonor

Like I said in the earlier thread, if it's not an option, then setting this up to work like it does in real life, while it may make some happy, is going to anger a bunch more. So, I think Markus just punted this time and left it alone.

Thanks for your assistance on this one, but this is very disappointing news. I just don't see the point of having options in the game if they don't work properly. Being able to keep players who are out of options indefinitely defeats the whole purpose of having them in the first place. Removing them altogether would be preferable to having them in their presently broken state.

[Stu]

Originally Posted by neojonas

As long as you didn't put them on your active roster during spring training, right? Anyone on the active roster would have to pass through waivers to be demoted at the end of ST right?

Correct, they still have to pass through waivers if they were out of options and on your active roster during ST.

[CobaltJays]

semi-dola

To Markus: Is there any chance that this bug will be corrected prior to the 23rd or in the first patch?

[disposableheros]

Originally Posted by CobaltJays

semi-dola

To Markus: Is there any chance that this bug will be corrected prior to the 23rd or in the first patch?

the TT has been marked to be left until next year and that was early on in beta. there have been a few more discussions about this since then, but still no change. obviously im not the one with the final say, but im 95% confident that this isnt deemed important enough to enough people, to be fixed now that code lock has arrived.

[CobaltJays]

That's very disappointing to hear. This is a known bug and one I consider to be significant. The roster rules included in the game are supposed to add to the realism, but this issue takes away part of that realism. In real life, each year every major league team has to deal with players who are out of options at the end of spring training. It results in tough roster decisions having to be made. Do they keep a good prospect who is out of options on their roster, even though he might not be ready? Do they attempt to send him down to the minors, risking him being claimed by another team? Do they try to trade him instead, getting something for him while they can? How to deal with players who are out of options are some of the toughest roster decisions a team has to make, but this game presently doesn’t replicate that aspect even though it seems to have the means to do so.

Since players who are out of options and on the major league roster during the season have to be waived prior to be sent to the minors, I just can’t see how it would be difficult to make it so that players in spring training who are out of options would have to go through the same process. Quite frankly, I’m baffled as to why it is being ignored like this. It’s unacceptable.

Thank you for your efforts on the beta team trying to get this looked after. I'm just disappointed this issue didn't get the attention it rightfully deserved.