• Registration is disabled due to constant spammers. Email [email protected] and we will temporarily re-enable registration for you.

New League Discussion

Travis7401

Douglass Tagg
Community Liaison
IF we actually get a new player, I think helping them would be nice. Should probably splash Hayvis some cash too, since he didn't understand the tickets and it might have hurt him a bit this year.
 

Orlando

Well-Known Member
Utopia Moderator
@NML what is your optimal gap between the high and low budgets? 50-60% seems reasonable, but maybe people want equal budgets.

From personal observation I’d suggest $35 as a ticket cap. OU, JD and myself seemed to cap there and it was plenty of money. More than that seems unnecessary. You’d probably be 180-185 ish with a 110-115 floor.
 

Travis7401

Douglass Tagg
Community Liaison
I would much rather start all over than give away prospects.

Well, you can choose to be a giant cunt if you want, it would be voluntary to DONATE prospects. I'm glad you're volunteerin to be a villain, we've been in short supply of them lately.

Also, I didn't even say they had to be PROSPECTS, lol, they can be lower case prospects. How many AAAA potential players you want to horde? I just sent like 5 AAAA dudes to Paris and I haven't been paying attention to my minors in YEARS.
 

NML

Well-Known Member
@NML what is your optimal gap between the high and low budgets? 50-60% seems reasonable, but maybe people want equal budgets.

From personal observation I’d suggest $35 as a ticket cap. OU, JD and myself seemed to cap there and it was plenty of money. More than that seems unnecessary. You’d probably be 180-185 ish with a 110-115 floor.

Hard to say, especially with the removal of IFA, which will naturally help control big clubs.

I’d just like to see the ability to succeed at the floor (which you can do over time now, but its almost impossible to be a contender with a small budget) and to struggle at the ceiling (i.e. not have our top budget make the playoffs 23 straight years)

One thing I wish I had tracked is the highest budget to ever not make the playoffs. Maybe you could do some manual research there, but that might be a good judge? On the flip side, the smallest budget to ever win a WS (or even make one).
 

Orlando

Well-Known Member
Utopia Moderator
A lot of that is just GM IQ and how active they are. In other words, doh will find a way.

I don’t want to open the game, but in history you can see payrolls. For example I missed the playoffs with a $156M and $139M and won a ship with $94M.
 

Travis7401

Douglass Tagg
Community Liaison
Hard to say, especially with the removal of IFA, which will naturally help control big clubs.

I’d just like to see the ability to succeed at the floor (which you can do over time now, but its almost impossible to be a contender with a small budget) and to struggle at the ceiling (i.e. not have our top budget make the playoffs 23 straight years)

One thing I wish I had tracked is the highest budget to ever not make the playoffs. Maybe you could do some manual research there, but that might be a good judge? On the flip side, the smallest budget to ever win a WS (or even make one).

I know Buffalo missed the playoffs one year with like 185M budget when Lloyd spent 150M on 3 players lol
 

Travis7401

Douglass Tagg
Community Liaison
So with the other stuff, that’s probably like 120/180? Those seem like good numbers

I wouldn’t even change stuff to create a hard floor, just do helicopter bailouts for new owners or unforeseen legitimate failures. If you tanking, you should deal with 95M
 

Soonerfan09

Well-Known Member
Well, you can choose to be a giant cunt if you want, it would be voluntary to DONATE prospects. I'm glad you're volunteerin to be a villain, we've been in short supply of them lately.

Also, I didn't even say they had to be PROSPECTS, lol, they can be lower case prospects. How many AAAA potential players you want to horde? I just sent like 5 AAAA dudes to Paris and I haven't been paying attention to my minors in YEARS.
If that's the solution to the problem, I would rather restart.
 

Yankee151

Hot Girl Summer
Don't worry, I'll just do the patented ask for everyone's advice then do what I think is right, the true O way
 

Mr. Radpants

Trog Five Standing By
Travis consistent with this UPLIFT SPECIES nonsense. The more loathsome they behave, the more he tries to help! Not sure what the English equivalent of a fish finder is but I'm sure it's in the Amazon wish list right about now.
 

jdlikewhoa

Well-Known Member
Definitely no hard floor me thinks. Or set it at like $90m and we can adjust it in the future down the road if need be. Before acquiring Cliff my payroll was somewhere around $72m and I'm sitting in 2nd place. FWIW
 

TonyGin&Juice

Sucking off Lawn Guy Land hobos.
I would just edit it if/when a new owner takes over. Give them a couple years of HELICOPTER PAYMENTS if they are under 120 so that they can splash some cash on FA!

I also think us HAVES should voluntarily donate AA and AAA players to new owners, because that's often the worst part of the OTTO RAPE... having a depleted system somehow because OTTO is drafting fucking 30 control idiot SP with the 2nd OVR. I will legit donate like 5 decent prospects to a new owner and if others do the same it'd help them build a system. A ball could be handled with compensatory picks in rounds 2-10 would probably help a new player build their own system as well.

You assume some of us that have actually been playing have five decent prospects.
 

doh

THANK YOU Dermott McHeshi
Removing IFA will force big clubs to spend more on big league talent. It's not insane like it was before with the current set up and how quickly guys sign. It's not going to have a huge effect on the budgets like it would have a few seasons ago.

Can you implement two year bans? Or increase tax?

I'm not a huge IFA guy, I just don't see how it helps small budget teams especially when small IFA buys can develop into good players.
 

Yankee151

Hot Girl Summer
Also there are two aspects to IFA:

We can remove Prospect IFAs and we can remove Established IFAs, neither or both or w/e.
 

NML

Well-Known Member
I'm not a huge IFA guy, I just don't see how it helps small budget teams especially when small IFA buys can develop into good players.

That’s like saying FA helps small budget teams because small contracts can be productive players

Sure, they can, but it’s a market driven by who spends the most, which of course means big markets get the best and small markets get what’s left - which, occasionally, contains good players.

Remove IFA and the random pop up players, force prospects through a channel that we can control and give small markets their only chance to get first choice
 

Mr. Radpants

Trog Five Standing By
That’s like saying FA helps small budget teams because small contracts can be productive players

Sure, they can, but it’s a market driven by who spends the most, which of course means big markets get the best and small markets get what’s left - which, occasionally, contains good players.

Remove IFA and the random pop up players, force prospects through a channel that we can control and give small markets their only chance to get first choice

What does this mean? Market sizes are reset every couple of years. What channel?
 

TonyGin&Juice

Sucking off Lawn Guy Land hobos.
Isn't NML just describing the MLB Rule 5 Draft? There are TONS of guys that end up signing Minor League extensions that never hit FA that should.
 

NML

Well-Known Member
What does this mean? Market sizes are reset every couple of years. What channel?

Sorry, by small markets I mean small budgets

Isn't NML just describing the MLB Rule 5 Draft? There are TONS of guys that end up signing Minor League extensions that never hit FA that should.

Nah, although I’m unsure how a Rule 5/Gauntlet Threwn draft would balance things. With the ability to retrospectively retain anybody, I think it wouldn’t have a major effect either way, but maybe filling out rosters with minimum AAAA guys would help small budget teams compete?
 

NML

Well-Known Member
Yes, if you funnel all prospects through the draft, it’s easier to maintain the overall league talent level and easier to balance talent
 

Travis7401

Douglass Tagg
Community Liaison
I typically only monitor rounds 1-3 on my short list. Guys in rounds 1-2 have a good high chance of making the WBL, but part of that is because I started prioritizing college players who are already further along in Dev. Round 3 has been really hit or miss, but I've had a few make the WBL as role players. After that I've made lists of guys my scout likes better than OSA I've drafted a few players who turned out. It's like 1:50 past round 3 that make my MLB team and I've only had 2 ever that turned into legit starters.

I drafted my best batter ever in round 5! Griff Dentwas a trog bat, but I remember my scout had him with 75 power, so he was on my list of HS guys with strange potential that I typically draft in the middle rounds. Dent is definitely the best player I've ever I've had beyond round 3.

and then In the late rounds I typically just make a list of guys with decently balanced ratings and good intangibles, in hopes that they'll be good minor league system players. I drafted this guy in Round 11 and he was a victim of me never paying attention to my minor league system while I was bored, and spent like a decade in AAA before getting the call due to injury part way through the year. I'm actually gonna give him some more reps for the rest of this year and next year and see if he sticks! An 11th round draft pick would make a good story. I believe he's the first guy >round 10 that has made my WBL roster.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NML

Mr. Radpants

Trog Five Standing By
I think IFA can be a great tool for rebuilding teams. Lean years you can minimize budget and time your investments in IFAs. IFAs are a couple years behind, so they join your crop of draftees. I like to go heavy IFA, then in two years target HS, then college to get a big swell of talent at the same time to create a competition window
 

Reel

Off dem Milds and dat Yak
Community Liaison
LMAO at the last 3 pages

so, here's where i think a happy marriage b/t what nml was proposing to do vs the olds

got the idea from Travis btw

but basically, instead of thrusting any new/old members from this board into a team, have a current manager take a prospective one under the wing to help co manage a team currently in use

one season, then let the prospect run one of the non human controlled teams in the next season still keeping the current league in tact while filling in with more human teams. If there still AI teams, then go to OOTP and recruit

thoughts?? be honest, nothing will hurt my feelings if you think its trash
 

Yankee151

Hot Girl Summer
I'm cool with co-managing, Lloyd and I did it briefly and I keep hoping @bruin @bruin228 answer the call one day. That said, all depends on veterans wanting to do said setup.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
 

NML

Well-Known Member
Not against co-owners per se, but the track record of them isn’t great, and we don’t even have a full owners list to be affording multiples on one team
 

hayvis

Will-Gnome Member
I'm happier now I've got some guidance. When I first came into the league the old owners just left me to it, threw insults at me and even tried to steal my credit card details. Since I kung-fu kicked @Travis7401 in the face, he's come around to helping me out a bit.
 

Yankee151

Hot Girl Summer
Right, I wouldn't make it necessary for new owners, but if someone felt more comfortable that way I'm all for it
 

hayvis

Will-Gnome Member
On a serious note, I think if I'd have had/read some tutorials of what could seriously screw me up, I would have been fine. I don't think I would have wanted to co-ride for a whole season.

Things that were difficult - finances, minor leagues and draft.
 

hayvis

Will-Gnome Member
I personally think the main thing to improve accessibility is forum interaction/videos/live events. I've felt 10x more engaged over the last few days from the increased interaction, good and bad. Live events I think would keep everyone realising how fun it can be.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NML

doh

THANK YOU Dermott McHeshi
That’s like saying FA helps small budget teams because small contracts can be productive players

Sure, they can, but it’s a market driven by who spends the most, which of course means big markets get the best and small markets get what’s left - which, occasionally, contains good players.

Remove IFA and the random pop up players, force prospects through a channel that we can control and give small markets their only chance to get first choice
I am really doubting you understand how the economics in this game with posts like this + fixing media contracts.

If you want to "even" things out-- the idea is to make big markets SPEND money. If you eliminate IFA, there will be MORE money for them to spend on ML FAs. So increase the tax, add a 2-year ban, etc. but getting rid of it is not going to help smaller budgets.

The game is about being consistently good and building from there.
 
Last edited:

doh

THANK YOU Dermott McHeshi
Isn't NML just describing the MLB Rule 5 Draft? There are TONS of guys that end up signing Minor League extensions that never hit FA that should.
I don't do minor league extensions anymore but getting rid of them (if possible) would be good.

I would also lower the year in which players become a minor league FA. So they are becoming minor league free agents a year (or even two) sooner.
 

NML

Well-Known Member
I am really doubting you understand how the economics in this game with posts like this + fixing media contracts.

If you want to "even" things out-- the idea is to make big markets SPEND money. If you eliminate IFA, there will be MORE money for them to spend on ML FAs.

That makes no sense. You don’t want big markets to spend money, you want them to have less money.

Any avenue where money rules is an advantage for teams with more of it. I don’t even see how that’s debatable

I see were in the part of the script where our big money teams backtrack and actually don’t want to give up anything
 

Yankee151

Hot Girl Summer
Another factor is removing IFA allows big teams to spend more on player dev and scouting once that money is freed up for them. I think a hard cap of 3-5M is the best to get our feet wet and if it's still a problem we'll revisit in 5 seasons or so
 

doh

THANK YOU Dermott McHeshi
That makes no sense. You don’t want big markets to spend money, you want them to have less money.

Any avenue where money rules is an advantage for teams with more of it. I don’t even see how that’s debatable

I see were in the part of the script where our big money teams backtrack and actually don’t want to give up anything
and I see the part of the script where someone doesn't play for 4-5 seasons, comes back and sees his team sucks and tries to neuter the league.

It's not that hard of a concept but let me spell it out for you: you want big league teams to be lighting money on fire on guys who won't be useful for 5 years vs. spending that money on free agents that will help them now. I have wasted so much on IFAs who suck. I know you haven't played for a long time, but the IFA engine is way less predictable than it was in previous versions of the game.

If you think getting rid of avenues to get players and make decisions/strategy is going to increase immersion, it's not. Now you go from in the off-season teams deciding if they're going to spend in IFA or FA to just FA. How is that good for small budgets?
 

NML

Well-Known Member
and I see the part of the script where someone doesn't play for 4-5 seasons, comes back and sees his team sucks and tries to neuter the league.

It's not that hard of a concept but let me spell it out for you: you want big league teams to be lighting money on fire on guys who won't be useful for 5 years vs. spending that money on free agents that will help them now. I have wasted so much on IFAs who suck. I know you haven't played for a long time, but the IFA engine is way less predictable than it was in previous versions of the game.

If you think getting rid of avenues to get players and make decisions/strategy is going to increase immersion, it's not. Now you go from in the off-season teams deciding if they're going to spend in IFA or FA to just FA. How is that good for small budgets?

lol it has nothing to do with my team. I could make the playoffs next year if I wanted. I just want to make the league full. I won my division like four straight seasons and left because it’s boring and not a challenge to get good and stay there when six teams are on auto

It makes no sense to say that having an area where bigger money gets better players is better for small money teams. Ur argument falls apart there
 
Top