Are charts bad?

One game my family has loved for quite some time is The Farming Game. This game utilizes charts quite a bit. Never once did I think they were a hindrance. As long as the charts are easy to read, easy to use, and are well explained/useful, they will add to the gaming experience

The charts that you have posted are easy to read and small (if not, this is the smallest possible, a left and right).
It reminds me a bit of Monopoly. Where each street is a chart on itself. Telling how much you get with the number of houses.
Eventually, players will remember the charts. And only look on a chart if needed.
Your charts are good.
If you find a way, get them all on the same piece of paper instead.
Players do intend to hate to be searching in a manual.

To be honest, I think that you could skip three of the charts in your game (although, I admit, I haven't played your game before). However, if I understand right, this game is about the whole baseball season, not about an individual game. If that's the case, hear me out and see if you could reduce the burden a little bit:

Charts 2 and 3 are intertwined, and could probably use a rules simplification. Perhaps a team's "rating" could be a sum of the players' skill totals (perhaps separated into "batting" and "defense", but more on that later), and a matchup against another team is a comparison of skill values (subtracting anything that may be related to fatigue, player injuries, etc.), and then turning it over to probability with a dice roll. Sometimes the big teams lose to the little teams for no apparent reason, and straight-up probability wouldn't be too bad to simulate that. The total of your players' offensive skill plus the dice roll minus the defensive value of their team could indicate the total number of points scored for that team, so you roll for both to decide each game. If they tie, we call it overtime, and they re-roll (perhaps increasing the stakes by generating more fans or something, just to keep things interesting).

Table 3 seems to be an interesting way to show different values that relate to player "value", and although simplifying it down to 4 classifications of players might make it simpler, I think that associating each class of players with some arbitrary value might make it difficult on someone new to the game. As such, I suggest creating a set of stats for each player, like cost, batting, and defense, and having the cost numbers relate to a monetary worth wherewith an owner could use players like currency in trades. This simplifies the system a bit when it comes to trades. A player's value is a composite number of all of their stats, plus whatever special abilities they may have, meaning that a smart manager will have to weight costs and benefits to determine what is and what isn't a smart trade. Abilities could include causing injuries to a target player, bonuses/penalties in overtime, team-based bonuses/penalties, abilities triggered by getting stomped by another team, etc.

Player retirement can also be relatively easy to incorporate if you create a player stats system like I talked about in table 3. Player age can play an important role after each "season" of X games, wherein the owner might roll a dice for "at-risk" players to determine whether they retire or not. If they choose to retire, you can trade them off at half their value, but that's the cost of having gone after an older, lower-value player in order to get their "experienced" stats: you could lose your investment.

Also, I was thinking that trade impact seemed a bit harsh, but it provides a way for trading to not be overpowered. Perhaps instead, however, because a team is uncoordinated or unpracticed (at least together), the roll could show an impact as a penalty to point generation in games, essentially meaning that it could take a while for your trade to provide the benefit that you were hoping for.

Anyways, those were my thoughts on how I would organize the game a little differently to avoid three of those charts. Hope it helped :)

Realistically, having a single double sided reference sheet that you can share is probably your best option that won't require changes.
- - -

One thing to keep in mind though... charts increase complexity, reduce the speed of play and aren't natural to MOST boardgamers. Wargamers wouldn't think twice before using a chart... but board gamers just might.

This may be acceptable situation depending on your goals but you may want to consider simplifying the game a bit. If you are going to spend money to get this manufactured, it can be risky to alienate the casuals.

If a chart is used once per game, then it's not that bad. If a chart is used every game round, it could be more problematic.

Normally you want to use a chart if you have a really unusual number distribution. But if it could be calculated by a simple math formula, then the chart becomes only a player aid.

A bit like 5tOck t!ck3r (sorry for the leet speak), everything can be calculated using math, but if you cannot do it the chart is there to help.

I consider charts to be unelegant in general, this is a reason I would minimise it's use. I know bloodbowl used a lot of chart but many of them were once per game, or even after match chart. So they were not annoying to use in that situation.

Victory Point Games and other companies publish games with charts

Does anyone know if this is true or not? What if the charts are simple? Like, say you are comparing the accuracy of your weapon to the agility of your enemy to see what you have to roll to hit like in a Warhammer type of style?