11.25 Arbitration eligibility incorrect

[ohms_law]

In the function that determines if a player is arbitration eligable, there is a check which looks to see if the player has signed a major league contract. To my understanding, this is incorrect. All players are arbitration eligable for their first 6 years of MLB service time (when their contract, whether it be from arbitration or a "regular" contract, actually expires), aren't they?

[HoustonGM]

Yes! This is something I've brought up in the past. This especially needs adjustment because all free agent contracts in BM are major league contracts, and players released prior to 6 years of service time still SHOULD go to arbitration if they sign to new teams, rather than being repeatedly released to free agency.


I think this can be fixed along with bad link (http://sportsmogul.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=172461). The message displayed should, if the contract type is not "Draft Day", be based on service time, not major league or arbitration contract type.

[ohms_law]

Thank you.

This specifically can be fixed by commenting out one line of code. I'd worry about the display issue separately...

[CatKnight]

If it's as easy as commenting out one line of code, then let's definitely do this! :)

[HoustonGM]

If it's as easy as commenting out one line of code, then let's definitely do this! :)
I'd say it'd be worth the effort if it required a bit more than that, too. :P

[Clay Dreslough]

All players are arbitration eligable for their first 6 years of MLB service time (when their contract, whether it be from arbitration or a "regular" contract, actually expires), aren't they?I don't think this is the case. If Evan Longoria signs a five-year deal in his 3rd year in the majors, he is no longer arbitration-eligible. Instead, he is paid according to the terms of that new contract for five years, after which point he becomes a free agent. If players could just go to arbitration to get a raise, what would be the point of "locking in" a player for the long term?

[HoustonGM]

I don't think this is the case. If Evan Longoria signs a five-year deal in his 3rd year in the majors, he is no longer arbitration-eligible. Instead, he is paid according to the terms of that new contract for five years, after which point he becomes a free agent. If players could just go to arbitration to get a raise, what would be the point of "locking in" a player for the long term?
The problem is for players that sign "short term" major league deals.

Before ohms "fixed" this, if I recall correctly, when a team signed a player with 2 years experience to a 2 year deal, for example, the player would then go to free agency after those 2 years were up, when he has 4 years experience, when he should go to arbitration.

Furthermore, say a player with 3 years of service time is released and then signed by another team for one year. Before this was "fixed", that player would be up for free agency again after the season. In real life, the player be eligible for arbitration and only hit free agency if his team non-tendered him.


Does that explain it better? It doesn't affect players that sign long-term deals. If Evan Longoria signs a 5 year deal in his 3rd year, he gets paid as per that, and than at the end of the contract, since his service time is > 6, he's a free agent. But, if at the end of a contract a player's service time is < 6, he should go to arbitration.

[Clay Dreslough]

Before ohms "fixed" this, if I recall correctly, when a team signed a player with 2 years experience to a 2 year deal, for example, the player would then go to free agency after those 2 years were up, when he has 4 years experience, when he should go to arbitration.I believe the current interface doesn't let you sign a player to a contract extension until their last year before free agency, so I don't see how this can happen.


Furthermore, say a player with 3 years of service time is released and then signed by another team for one year. Before this was "fixed", that player would be up for free agency again after the season. In real life, the player be eligible for arbitration and only hit free agency if his team non-tendered him.From my reading of the CBA, the first release has the same effect as the player being non-tendered. Are there real-life examples of current players that have been released (and are thus essentially on "the free agent market") but they are not actually free agents?

I'm happy to fix this if necessary, I just want to properly understand what the bug is. The initial "bug report" at the top of this thread isn't actually reporting an error in the way the game behaves, it's reporting something that Ohm's found in the code that didn't make sense. That can be a good way to find bugs, but only if you make sure there is actually a bug being reported by end-users that the code corresponds to. In this case, commenting out that line of code created bigger problems so it wasn't the right way to go about it.

So if there is a problem in the game, I need it explained exactly in terms of what you experience when playing the game that seems like a bug. As in, tell me what .mog file to open and what buttons to click. Assume I am that stupid.

:)

Thanks!

[Clay Dreslough]

From my reading of the CBA, the first release has the same effect as the player being non-tendered. Are there real-life examples of current players that have been released (and are thus essentially on "the free agent market") but they are not actually free agents?OK. I'm trying to answer my own question.

Carlos Pena (http://www.baseball-reference.com/p/penaca01.shtml) was released by the Tigers in March of 2006. Even though he didn't have 6 years of service, he was signed "as a free agent" by the Yankees. At the end of 2006, Pena still didn't have 6 years of service, but he was "granted free agency" according to Baseball-Reference. This is how I understand the CBA to work. Once you are "turned into" a free agent by being released, you are a free agent forever. The team that drafted you, and all major league teams for that matter, have forfeited their right to employ you at below-market wages.

Clay

[HoustonGM]

I believe the current interface doesn't let you sign a player to a contract extension until their last year before free agency, so I don't see how this can happen.
It allows you to sign a player in any year that they are eligible for arbitration. The "Negotiate" button appears once the player is eligible for arbitration, and from there you can negotatiate an extension. If a player is in his first year of arbitration eligiblity, ie. he's played 3 years and you sign him to a 2 year extension, he'll then be a free agent after 5 years of service time, even though, in real life, he'd still go to arbitration unless non-tendered for that last year.


From my reading of the CBA, the first release has the same effect as the player being non-tendered. Are there real-life examples of current players that have been released (and are thus essentially on "the free agent market") but they are not actually free agents?
I guess minor league free agency in real life complicates things..

At any rate, I'm not saying that the players aren't "actually free agents." They are free agents. The difference is, in real life, players with less than 6 years of service time will automatically go to arbitration unless the team chooses to release them. With more than 6 years of service time, they'll go to arbitration only if the team offers it AND they accept. Otherwise, they become free agents.


if there is a problem in the game, I need it explained exactly in terms of what you experience when playing the game that seems like a bug. As in, tell me what .mog file to open and what buttons to click. Assume I am that stupid.
I don't know how much better I can explain it. It's just simply...at the end of the season, players that have more than 3 but less than 6 years of service time and aren't under a contract for the following season go to arbitration. The players that have 6 or more years of service time, go to free agency unless an extension is negotiated.

In Mogul, players go to arbitration IF AND ONLY IF their contract type is set to "Draft Day" or "Arbitration." Thus, any player signed from the Free Agent screen will NOT go to arbitration, since the contract type is set to Major League. Instead they will be eligible for free agency again...even if it's one of those undrafted free agents that have never played in the majors, even if it's a player that has more than 3 but less than 6 years of service time, or even a player with less than 3 years of service time.

[HoustonGM]

OK. I'm trying to answer my own question.

Carlos Pena (http://www.baseball-reference.com/p/penaca01.shtml) was released by the Tigers in March of 2006. Even though he didn't have 6 years of service, he was signed "as a free agent" by the Yankees. At the end of 2006, Pena still didn't have 6 years of service, but he was "granted free agency" according to Baseball-Reference. This is how I understand the CBA to work. Once you are "turned into" a free agent by being released, you are a free agent forever. The team that drafted you, and all major league teams for that matter, have forfeited their right to employ you at below-market wages.
See, this is why I think minor league free agency complicates things. After 2006, Pena was a minor league free agent if I recall correctly. Mogul doesn't have that.

I can't think of any players off the top of my head that would fit into what I'm trying to say...Let me do some researh.

[HoustonGM]

That was quick. Augie Ojeda (http://www.baseball-reference.com/o/ojedaau01.shtml). He was released a few times and signed with the Diamondbacks after 2006. He spent most of 2007 in the majors and thus was on the 40 man roster. He was eligible for arbitration after 2007, but signed a 1 year deal to avoid arbitration. This year, he's eligible for arbitration again.

Carlos Pena wasn't on the Red Sox 40 man roster (sent outright to AAA 10/06) Thus, he became a minor league free agent.

In real life, if you're on the 40 man roster and have >3 but <6 years of service time, you're eligible for arbitration.

[HoustonGM]

For an in-game example, look at the attached .mog file and find pitcher Pedro Beato on the Washington Nationals.

He has 3 years and 19 days of service time. During the 2014 season, he signed a "2 year extension", which really is just an extension through the following season, 2015. After the 2015 season, he'd have approximately 4 years of service time and should go to arbitration again. However, because he signed an extension, the game sets him with a Major League contract, and thus, as his scouting report indicates, he'll be eligible for free agency after 2015, despite only have 4 years of service time.

If you use Commish mode to set his Contract Type to arbitration, his scouting report now says "Eligible for Arbitration in 2014", even though he is under contract through 2015. Now, if you sim ahead, he WON'T go to arbitration in 2014, as he shouldn't because he's under contract, so that is just a display error, which is the same error that was supposed to be fixed by this change back to the "old way." It's still in there, though, as the display seems to ignore the contract length of players with the Arbitration contract type. It should say "Eligible for Arbitration in 2015".

[Clay Dreslough]

I don't know how much better I can explain it. It's just simply...at the end of the season, players that have more than 3 but less than 6 years of service time and aren't under a contract for the following season go to arbitration. The players that have 6 or more years of service time, go to free agency unless an extension is negotiated.That makes sense.

[HoustonGM]

That makes sense.
That's how the game should work (and it currently doesn't) so long as there isn't 40 man rosters. With 40 man rosters, I think minor league free agency really would be a requirement, and that would cover cases like Carlos Pena and such.

[HoustonGM]

Is this going to be adjusted for 11.26?

[HoustonGM]

Ack. I'm really getting annoyed by all the undrafted 18-21 year olds heading to arbitration the year they got signed :(

[HoustonGM]

Bump..

[HoustonGM]

Not sure if I mentioned this earlier, but this is a real problem with pre-free agency guys that sign in-season extensions. A guy with 3 years of service time signed a 2 year extension in mid-season, which means he's covered through next year. If he doesn't sign another extension, he'll be up for free agency after the following year, despite the fact that he should go to arbitration. This is because signing an extension changes the contract type to "Major League" when it should stay on "Arbitration" for players with less than 6 years of service time.