Matrix Games Forums

In 1947, I had a pitcher named Joe Hatten, who went 24-8 and won the NL Cy Young Award. His potential was very low, so I knew he'd played beyond himself and could never do it again. I traded him in April 1948, and after checking his stats in mid-May (4-2, 4.07), I felt I made the right move.

This year (1948), I have a 36-year-old part-time 3B named Cookie Lavagetto. In limited use, he's batting .429, with 1 HR and 6 RBI. This will no doubt be his last year as a Dodger, but he still has value on the roster.

There's another guy, Pete Reiser, who's just 29 but worn out. He's done well as a part-time CF and pinch-hitter, but his days in Dodger blue will soon be over.

You might love these guys, but there comes a point when you must part with them, even after they've performed spectacularly for you. It's indeed tough, and you know it will make the fans unhappy, but this is part of the business.

Yeah, it's just a game, but I dislike having to be a cold-hearted bastard and letting these players go. I'm not alone in this, am I?

I had a similiar experience with a fictional league. I renamed four players after my dad, son, grandson and myself. Had a great time, five championships in 13 seasons. My dad won the CY twice, I grabbed 2 mvps.
 
Then came the day that my fictional 34 catcher grandson wanted 12M a year and I had to say no! I was really torn! Told my wife and she said, "You can't cut your GRANDSON!"....but I did.[:(]
 
The true Freudian moment came next season when I had to cut myself.[8|] I was in therapy for weeks.[:'(]
 
This game does seem to evoke a more emotional reaction than most games.