Illegal Extension

[niles08]

I have no horse in this race but something does seem off here if my couch math is right.

If I had to guesstimate this I am guessing he spent approximately:

15 days In 2059 in the minors since he had 11 games down there. Best case that would give him 167 in MLB(gives him full year)
2060--182 days
2061-182 days
2062- 182 days

Total in majors would be 713 days divided by 167(season) =4.26 years of service

I dont believe postseason count as service time?

[Lane]

The maximum service time that can be earned in one season is 1 year 0 days.

If a player is on the roster for 167 days (or whatever our number is) they earn one year 0 days.

[Lane]

They cannot earn more than 1 year 0 days in a season.

SO

When a player crosses this threshold they will show as 1 year 0 days until the next season.

THEREFORE

If a player shows 5 years 0 days that does not mean that they *just* reached that mark today.

[Lane]

This is a big nothing burger and not a bug and definitely NOT CHEATING. This is about understanding service time.

[niles08]

I have no horse in this race but something does seem off here if my couch math is right.

If I had to guesstimate this I am guessing he spent approximately:

15 days In 2059 in the minors since he had 11 games down there. Best case that would give him 167 in MLB(gives him full year)
2060--182 days
2061-182 days
2062- 182 days

Total in majors would be 713 days divided by 167(season) =4.26 years of service

I dont believe postseason count as service time?

I missed that he's hurt right now...and that were in 2063....so he would get a year of service time in 2063...

2059--167 days= 1 yr
2060 182 days= 1 yr
2061 182 days= 1 yr
2062- 182 days= 1 yr
2063- on IR all year but still 182 days= 1 yr

Gives him 5 years.

[recte44]

Ootp changed it

[ae37jr]

Problem is that the service time is jacked up. I looked at a rule 5 pick on my team and he already has 1 year of service time. Once a player hits 167, he doesn't accumulate any more service time for the year. As seen with the screenshot of Martinez having hit 5 years a sim or 2 ago yet he still says 5 years now.

So you can start a player in BBA on opening day or keep them down for a few weeks and they accumulate same service time for that season.

[RonCo]

Right. A service year is 167 days, and is credited immediately upon hitting that mark. We changed it--and announced it a year or two back--to make it a little more painful to manipulate service time. You can see it in rookies who are currently showing 1.0 service years despite the season not being over.

If the game is presenting a player as having 5.0 years of service, he's eligible for a longer extension.

There is no cheating here. It would be helpful if one at least understood the rule before accusing someone of breaking it.

[RonCo]

Problem is that the service time is jacked up. I looked at a rule 5 pick on my team and he already has 1 year of service time. Once a player hits 167, he doesn't accumulate any more service time for the year. As seen with the screenshot of Martinez having hit 5 years a sim or 2 ago yet he still says 5 years now.

So you can start a player in BBA on opening day or keep them down for a few weeks and they accumulate same service time for that season.

Correct. To avoid a full service year, you have to keep him in the minors for at least three weeks.

[RonCo]

Welcome to how the MLB works, too, though their #days required is more.

[RonCo]

Service days in the MLB is 172 days in a season that is something like 185 or 190 days long. Once you hit 172 in the MLB, you have a service year, regardless of whether the season is over or not.

[Lane]

Problem is that the service time is jacked up. I looked at a rule 5 pick on my team and he already has 1 year of service time. Once a player hits 167, he doesn't accumulate any more service time for the year. As seen with the screenshot of Martinez having hit 5 years a sim or 2 ago yet he still says 5 years now.

So you can start a player in BBA on opening day or keep them down for a few weeks and they accumulate same service time for that season.

It's a feature not a bug, sir.

[RonCo]

A player in the MLB (and the BBA) will never accumulate more than 1.0 service years in a single season, either. So if a BBA player is on the active roster in 2063 for between 167 days and whatever the total calendar days are in the season, he will be credited with exactly 1.0 service years.

[ae37jr]

Alright. I apologize to Nathan, Woody and Matt. I'm wrong. It just didn't seem right that Natta was held back in year one and year 5 isn't over. I guess Nathan had them planned to the day.

[recte44]

That's right this was one of the rule changes we announced last year

[recte44]

Alright. I apologize to Nathan, Woody and Matt. I'm wrong. It just didn't seem right that Natta was held back in year one and year 5 isn't over. I guess Nathan had them planned to the day.

I know, per Nathan, that he was waiting for the year to flip to 5 to offer this extension.

[woods]

I know this matter is resolved now, but, come on, people. I even posted a screenshot of Octavio's service time in Discord (thanks Recte for sharing), and stated my intentions to extend him. Nathan and I were only playing by the rules.

By the way, for the record: Martínez was asking for the exact same salary before hitting 5 years as he was after. So this whole go-to argument of "let’s see if the guy takes the same deal after hitting 5 years" might be irrelevant now anyway.

[aaronweiner]

I know this matter is resolved now, but, come on, people. I even posted a screenshot of Octavio's service time in Discord (thanks Recte for sharing), and stated my intentions to extend him. Nathan and I were only playing by the rules.

By the way, for the record: Martínez was asking for the exact same salary before hitting 5 years as he was after. So this whole go-to argument of "let’s see if the guy takes the same deal after hitting 5 years" might be irrelevant now anyway.

Well, this is why I thought that if we were to change this rule at all, something I did not support, moving it to four years didn’t seem like a disruption. (Less than that would be.) Thanks for the data though.

And I can tell you I didn’t know about this change. I suspect now everyone does.

[RT60]

I wonder if OOTP will ever give us the ability to have a different max extension length for players with less than 5 years (or whatever cutoff we want) like it currently allows us to set the max length of extensions generally. That would be awesome and help to avoid pistol duels between GMs.

[aaronweiner]

I wonder if OOTP will ever give us the ability to have a different max extension length for players with less than 5 years (or whatever cutoff we want) like it currently allows us to set the max length of extensions generally. That would be awesome and help to avoid pistol duels between GMs.

Pretty sure we used to have longer ones. I seem to recall 10 year deals. Or maybe that was the GBC - I don't remember.