Player cards after dropped

Dude, Dude, Dude when did I say I was going to impose this rule on everyone? I gave my OPINION just as yours is an OPINION, Dude. I don't see it written that it matters what you or I think, Dude. Did you take a survey of all the managers so you know "MOST MANAGERS DO" "FEAR" dropping someone, I bet you didn't. I don't believe most managers "FEAR" or are as "paralyzed" as you are by the process, Dude. You are taking this a bit too seriously if you are "afraid" when you release a guy, Dude.

Our argument (3 that like the idea and only you do not of those who expressed an opinion) is no more flawed than yours. Actually I think you do not have an argument, you merely state, as if it is fact, that this would be detrimental. Like all rules some would benefit (those who do their research) and some would not (those who release players with little info).

The rules are as they are now and that's fine. Someone, not me, suggested a change and I agreed with it. This is a discussion forum correct? So we discuss.

Dude, Dude, Dude when did I say I was going to impose this rule on everyone? I gave my OPINION just as yours is an OPINION, Dude. I don't see it written that it matters what you or I think, Dude. Did you take a survey of all the managers so you know "MOST MANAGERS DO" "FEAR" dropping someone, I bet you didn't. I don't believe most managers "FEAR" or are as "paralyzed" as you are by the process, Dude. You are taking this a bit too seriously if you are "afraid" when you release a guy, Dude.

Our argument (3 that like the idea and only you do not of those who expressed an opinion) is no more flawed than yours. Actually I think you do not have an argument, you merely state, as if it is fact, that this would be detrimental. Like all rules some would benefit (those who do their research) and some would not (those who release players with little info).

The rules are as they are now and that's fine. Someone, not me, suggested a change and I agreed with it. This is a discussion forum correct? So we discuss.

I thought you were starting to get upset... You make seven uses of the word "dude" because I used it twice in my four paragraph post...really?...and then you frenetically use capitals for emphasis four times? You, sir are the one who is taking this "a bit too seriously." I get it that you are having a particularly hard time making your flawed argument (which you still haven't made), but there is no reason for you to get so frazzled.

First of all, you know very well that I didn't just "state" that your unfortunate proposal would be detrimental. I made detailed arguments in three different posts showing exactly why it would be detrimental, why it would make the game easier for players considering picking up released players and more difficult for players considering releasing them. If you need me to re-post one of those posts for you, I will happily do so for you to directly counter their arguments. Considering you have previously either failed to do so or avoided addressing them altogether, I would welcome the request to do so.

And, of course I haven't polled other managers about their views on the matter. However, I have read managers express such apprehension and it is common sense to believe that most managers would share it since no manager wants their opponents to improve their teams. But, since you doubt this--based on your personal experience--you should start your own forum thread, share your proposal with the rest of the "league," and poll them on whether they give any thought to opponents picking up players before they release them. If you do that, and a solid majority approve of your proposal and shares your views about managers' fears (or lack thereof), then that would do a lot to settle this argument, no?

Gentleman, this is baseball. In the words of Rodney King, "can't we all get along?"

I think I did first suggest the revaluation of released players. Just something I thought about once and it seemed to fit the original post. I don't think it is a big deal either way. I can see myself trying some guys early but, I don't think I would pick up a $10M guy late in the season even with a 20% discount. It can be hard to free up that much money if you are winning. And if your not winning than it does not really matter, I think. I would say every case would be different.

I don't think it would end strat as we know it.

Good Luck all.

Gentleman, this is baseball. In the words of Rodney King, "can't we all get along?"

I think I did first suggest the revaluation of released players. Just something I thought about once and it seemed to fit the original post. I don't think it is a big deal either way. I can see myself trying some guys early but, I don't think I would pick up a $10M guy late in the season even with a 20% discount. It can be hard to free up that much money if you are winning. And if your not winning than it does not really matter, I think. I would say every case would be different.

I don't think it would end strat as we know it.

Good Luck all.

Actually, it would end the Mystery Games as we know it, but that's not really the issue of debate. The issue of debate is "how much would it alter the Mystery Games as we know it" and " would that alteration be beneficial or detrimental."
I have no intentions on repeating any arguments on the matter, but as I mentioned above, this would all be "settled" if Jmb presented his proposal to the league and asked them whether or not they liked it and whether or not they thought managers feared other managers picking up the players they released.

... I would be very curious to read the responses.

I get the fact everyone says the dropped player keeps the same year...but how can I drop Lou Brock whose batting average was .163, OBP .217, SLG .209, and OPS .427 through 12 games.
He gets picked up immediately and now is hitting .333, OBP .403, SLG .432 and OPS of .835 through 42 games. Is it just the fact he went from Memorial Stadium to Yankee Stadium. Is 12 games not enough time to get a good look at a player?

On the other side of things I picked up Hank Aaron who had the following stats before I picked him up:
.255 BA, .296 OBP, .353 SLG and .649 OPS through 12 games at Fulton County Stadium (a huge hitters ball park).
He now has the following stats after 48 games at Memorial Stadium (not a hitters ballpark):
.283 BA, .392 OBP, .671 SLG and 1.062 OPS

Or is it just a fresh start, new scenery, different club house that causes these players to turn around their game?

12 games is usually just too soon. I (and many others) have made the mistake of releasing a player after 18 games who was hitting 180-190, only to see that that player was actually on a good card, as he got picked up by an opposing player and flourished.

There is no magic formula to when to release a player, and if there is, I'd love to hear it. However, I can say that I usually wait to about 25 games with a premium player and 15-18 games with lesser players if no data--such as injuries or HBP's--have indicated that the player is actually on a bad card. If that data does so, then I throw waiting times out the window and usually replace the player right away.

Another factor you should consider is the quality of replacement players out there. Sometimes, you can have a player stinking it up early (9-18 games), and you're not sure if he's actually on a bad card, but there's an excellent replacement player out there for him who's almost as good as your player. In that case, you sometimes need to jump at the chance at that excellent replacement player, as an opposing player could very well pick him up before your player has actually shown he's on a bad card. I rarely do this with premium players, but I've done it with lesser players with a solid rate of success.

Anyway, the more you play the Mystery Game, the more you'll develop a "sense" of when and when not to replace a player, which will accompany--and at time surpass--whatever principles you decide on to guide your decisions.