This is BS!!!!

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by Zitofan75

its stupid to blame the unions alone. The unions negotiated the terms of collective bargaining, compensation, free agency, etc. WITH management.

Precisely.

Also, if MLB players have more benefits than the players of the other team sports, it's because Marvin Miller forged the Players Association into a strong, united organization that was willing to go to the wall for its beliefs. Contrast that with the unions of the other sports, particularly the NHLPA and NFLPA, which didn't have anywhere near the cohesiveness and resolve the MLBPA has exhibited over the years.

[webrian]

Nobody likes injuries. I hate 'em. It's true, sometimes you can get through a season relatively unscathed and other times, it feels like your team is under attack by some demonic force. But here's something I'm curious about:

Often when I play, if my team goes into a slump or gets behind 10-0 by the fourth inning of a game, I auto-play the rest of that game, or the rest of a week's worth of games, out of both frustration and also wanting to hurry the team through a rough patch.

Yes, instead of actually coaching my team through the rough patch. Real mature, I know. But stay with me here.

It seems that anytime I auto-play, especially when I do it out of frustration, I get hit by injuries even harder and faster than when I simply grit my teeth and play through the slumps. Has anyone else noticed this?

I swear it happens to me often — so often that I'm now afraid of auto-playing anything. If my starter blows up in the second inning, if volcanoes erupt, the earth cracks open, rivers catch fire and run backwards and my team is down 16-1 in the third inning, I just play through it now. Like any manager in real life. I don't like to do so, but I'm scared that if I resort to auto-play, even for a couple of innings, I'm going to lose a key player for several months.

Hope I didn't make anyone paranoid with this post. But really, this seems to happen to me. Has anyone else experienced this?

[Cole]

Originally Posted by webrian

Nobody likes injuries. I hate 'em. It's true, sometimes you can get through a season relatively unscathed and other times, it feels like your team is under attack by some demonic force. But here's something I'm curious about:

Often when I play, if my team goes into a slump or gets behind 10-0 by the fourth inning of a game, I auto-play the rest of that game, or the rest of a week's worth of games, out of both frustration and also wanting to hurry the team through a rough patch.

Yes, instead of actually coaching my team through the rough patch. Real mature, I know. But stay with me here.

It seems that anytime I auto-play, especially when I do it out of frustration, I get hit by injuries even harder and faster than when I simply grit my teeth and play through the slumps. Has anyone else noticed this?

I swear it happens to me often — so often that I'm now afraid of auto-playing anything. If my starter blows up in the second inning, if volcanoes erupt, the earth cracks open, rivers catch fire and run backwards and my team is down 16-1 in the third inning, I just play through it now. Like any manager in real life. I don't like to do so, but I'm scared that if I resort to auto-play, even for a couple of innings, I'm going to lose a key player for several months.

Hope I didn't make anyone paranoid with this post. But really, this seems to happen to me. Has anyone else experienced this?

This seems like it's likely a case of confirmation bias at work.

I haven't experienced that, anyway.

[Syd Thrift]

That and when you sim 7 days, that's 7 times as many opportunities to get injuries as one game.

[butsam]

Originally Posted by Raidergoo

There are already 6 season ending injuries, and 135 injuries listed.

Sounds like you have the baseball equivalent of this year's Columbus Blue Jackets! Double the number of man-days lost than the NHL average!

By the way, are you also in Dayton?

[Raidergoo]

Originally Posted by butsam

Sounds like you have the baseball equivalent of this year's Columbus Blue Jackets! Double the number of man-days lost than the NHL average!

By the way, are you also in Dayton?

MLB Baseball Injuries - CBSSports.com

140 injuries, 8 (or 10, as 2 still up in the air) season ending.

I live on the north edge of Dayton and work on the south edge of Dayton. Right this second, I am trying to figure out what Dragons games I want to use the company luxury box this season.

[jpeters1734]

Originally Posted by .Cole.

This seems like it's likely a case of confirmation bias at work.

I haven't experienced that, anyway.

Busting out the psychology terms, lol!

[Mancandy]

Originally Posted by frangipard

Uh, no. There is no single way "it works." Every industry and every business has different ways they like to structure their workforce and their employment contracts and compensation. In the case of industries where the workforce is unionized, the options the employer has are limited by collective bargaining.

In the case of baseball, the owners have agreed to take on the risk of playing injured players who cannot perform.

The players in turn have agreed to a system in which they are not free to work for the employer of their choice or earn what a free market commands until they have completed a years-long period of indentured service. They have also agreed to allow their contracts to be sold, creating a situation that can create immense disruption to their personal and family lives. They agree to long and highly irregular work hours.

There is a lot about baseball that is very, very different from the typical workplace. If you don't think most of those differences work to the advantage of the owners, you're out of your gourd.

There's so many replies to the nonsense posted by the OP that deserve to be seconded, but I'm going to pick this one because it's so true and so few people understand this. So many people see the big salaries players get and foolishly think that it makes everything okay. Like our naive little OP here. So quick to look at things from the owner's perspective without ever considering the player's perspective. Why would you agree to a contract that the team could void if you get hurt(on the job, no less)? You wouldn't, you would sign with another team that would guarantee your contract. And if no team agreed to do that, you'd team up with your fellow employees and demand better treatment. That's what unions do. They fight for fair treatment for employees. Because, contrary to popular belief, money doesn't solve everything. Players are still human beings and still deserve to be treated a certain way, regardless of how much they make. And if the OP(or anybody who cries about unions) would take 30 seconds to look at it from the other side, they'd get that.

Originally Posted by rpriske

I was ready to 'thank' this post but then I realized it was written BY you rather than ABOUT you.

Smirk or not, I had the exact same thought. So true. I'm so overwhelmed by the ridiculousness on display, I couldn't even figure out where to start debunking it.

Originally Posted by ravinhood

If it's in real baseball (insurance) then it should be in OOTP

But since we were asked to keep it respectful, I'm not even going to start debunking it. In fact, I'm going to completely ignore almost every single thing the OP said in this entire thread, and highlight the one single solitary sentence that was actually true. This one right here. I would love to see insurance policies in OOTP.

[lejdot]

in 15 I had a young guy I traded for, 22, become an All star and all that, signed him for a massive longer term deal. Next spring, ruins his legs. Half way through the same season, gets another injury.

Never recovered, spent the following year in the minors until I could package him up and trade his contract away. Retired at 25.

**** happens.

When good things happen, do you take the same approach? Nature of the beast my friend.