Restarting/Increasing Immersion

[TonyGin&Juice]

Nah the main point of the league has always been don't light money on fire and keep financial flexibility.

So I tried something this season I'd never tried before but the always fair-and-balanced @osick87 recommended - I maxed out my DEV and scouting budgets. Since I was dealing all of the good "cheap" guys that had less than two years of team control I knew I was going to take a budget hit and I did - a $30M drop. Next season I'm in negative money because I pulled a RAJ and tried to keep the team together with bloated, bad contracts.

I'll have to cut my dev and scouting budgets next season to sign a couple of one year deals to fill out the 25 man but that's where I'm going to spend money going forward. There's really no way to be successful long term tanking and I've never had a deep enough farm to do what HELS, KAB, FAX, and NDR do each season so it's build a pipeline of cheap talent and hope the DEV money helps turn them into 2+ WAR players.

Is it exciting? No. Is it the complete antithesis of what I would do if I were the GM of an actual MLB team? Hell no. But in this league you can't have more than one overpaid BUM and have the flexibility to spend in IFA, FA, and the draft. The only way that works though is if you win consistently.

 

[TonyGin&Juice]

What about making the untaxed limit higher and the tax higher?

One league I was in for a while had a $5M max each year without penalties and you got penalized 150% over $5M until you maxed out at $15.5M. That worked really well because the max one player could get is a little less than $11M.

 

[doh]

What about making the untaxed limit higher and the tax higher?

IF the idea is to limit what big teams can spend-- I think tax is way more effective because you want to increase "dead" money.

If you cap IFA then the amount rich teams spend in FA or to extend guys increases. It might help smaller teams in IFA but hurts them in FA.

 

[TonyGin&Juice]

IFA cap is dumb because then the rich team will just flood FA/their own team with money.

Higher tax is smarter because that increases the amount of money that is just dead doing nothing.

Let them overpay homegrown bums like that moron that runs Miami.

 

[Brick]

 

[Travis7401]

It's not that it needs to be socialist - but maybe 2.5 times the budget size is too big of a gap

The only reason the gap is this large is because teams are actively tanking (or just not really playing). If you decrease that gap, it provides an even bigger incentive for teams to tank, since they won't lose as much. Besides, the REAL spread is never more than about 2x anyway, as any team can be above 100M with one season of an attempt at actually winning. I could get LRM above 100M next year and have them at 130-140M in 5 years.

If you look at how much CAP SPACE the teams have, I think you'll find that there is less difference than you think between the top and bottom. A team like Buffalo actually has more free money than FAX, and could theoretically afford to pay more in IFA. (Fax has $25M between budget and payroll, Buffalo has almost $45M difference between budget and payroll). This is why I said that the teams who can REALLY hit IFA hard (like I did in the 2050s) are rebuilding/young teams that have young players on cheap contracts, rather than older/established players on expensive contracts. The amount you have available for IFA has less to do with your budget and more to do with how you are managing your money.

If anything, the "mid market" teams (like you, BA) have the hardest road in IFA, since they typically have the least amount of cap space when they are actively competing for that 4th place spot, a relatively high player payroll compared to the budget leaves less room for maneuvers.

 

[Orlando]

IF the idea is to limit what big teams can spend-- I think tax is way more effective because you want to increase "dead" money.

If you cap IFA then the amount rich teams spend in FA or to extend guys increases. It might help smaller teams in IFA but hurts them in FA.

Right, but what if we up the limit before tax to say, $8m and then tax above that at a higher rate?

 

[Orlando]

Unless I'm missing something, we can only change the cap amount and/or make it a hard cap.

 

[Yankee151]

That's what I thought, damn indy devs

 

[doh]

Right, but what if we up the limit before tax to say, $8m and then tax above that at a higher rate?

I'm not sure if the game allows but you could even do what NBA does 4m-8m taxed at 100%, anything above 8m is at 200%.

 

[NML]

Right, but what if we up the limit before tax to say, $8m and then tax above that at a higher rate?

How does that help?

Edit: never mind I see what you mean. Irrelevant anyways

 

[doh]

How does that help?

You increase the amount of "dead" money for bigger teams.

A cap on IFA just reassigns money from IFA to FA/keeping their own players/devo-scouting budgets.

 

[NML]

I think the large market teams spending their money in FA/resigning is better.

A IFA is basically a one year contract for seven years of a player being cost controlled. That's not going to hurt big market teams.

But if they sign their players to extension like Ploeg or Felix Alvarado's contract, they'll feel it.

And ultimately the big markets bid against each other in FA anyways. Look at that reliever from last off season as a perfect example.

 

[TonyGin&Juice]

You increase the amount of "dead" money for bigger teams.

A cap on IFA just reassigns money from IFA to FA/keeping their own players/devo-scouting budgets.

There are maxes on DEV and scouting though so that forces them to spend in FA. The only way I see that as being a good thing is if we don't allow cum dumps of bad contracts. See: Kiene

 

[TonyGin&Juice]

I think the large market teams spending their money in FA/resigning is better.

A IFA is basically a one year contract for seven years of a player being cost controlled. That's not going to hurt big market teams.

But if they sign their players to extension like Ploeg or Felix Alvarado's contract, they'll feel it.

I could embrace being the fool paying Ploeg to sit on the DL if I hadn't foolishly given Randy Gadd $55M in guaranteed money right before Osick187 killed him. Dude went from three time batting champ to broken down bum in a season.

 

[Orlando]

I think the large market teams spending their money in FA/resigning is better.

A IFA is basically a one year contract for seven years of a player being cost controlled. That's not going to hurt big market teams.

But if they sign their players to extension like Ploeg or Felix Alvarado's contract, they'll feel it.

And ultimately the big markets bid against each other in FA anyways. Look at that reliever from last off season as a perfect example.

I think IFA is a far riskier way to spend money though.

 

[NML]

What risk is $10m to you next season? That's one player. That's not the difference between you making or missing the playoffs.

But it's going to get you a top prospect in IFA (or multiple good prospects)

 

[Orlando]

They rarely remain top prospects.

 

[Yankee151]

And I think we're already past the original topic but I got my immersion back by switching teams, so maybe find someone to trade squads with

 

[OU11]

It's not that it needs to be socialist - but maybe 2.5 times the budget size is too big of a gap

so model a league where it's not that way without putting barriers up for poors to move up economically. until you model that and test it enough to make sure it holds, that's not worth talking about. if you start these threads with solutions to the problem you think the league has it goes better

 

[NML]

They rarely remain top prospects.

But again, there's no risk for you. Who cares if they don't pan out? Take away $10m and ur budget is still double that of a handful of teams.

I went from 8th to nearly making the playoffs because I had an extra $10m in space that I used to snag some guys for cheap. That kinda money is huge to the middle teams.

 

[NML]

so model a league where it's not that way without putting barriers up for poors to move up economically. until you model that and test it enough to make sure it holds, that's not worth talking about. if you start these threads with solutions to the problem you think the league has it goes better

There was no point in presenting solutions unless people felt there was a problem. And they don't.

 

[OU11]

they might if you presented a better solution. most people didnt want to form the wbl until i threwn 50 sims at them showing better base economic universes

 

[Orlando]

Also, in regards to the contract rule trump-like executive decision I apparently made - this was on the table for a season+. From what I could tell most were for it with a few exceptions and they were at least somewhat addressed. Wooly signs the first 10 year deal and everyone loses their shit, led by NML who I don't think even spoke up the first time. Then you use figs and tony quoted out of context to say I signed an executive order no one wanted. Just fuck off with that.

If we want to change it, fine. Get a proposal out there that isn't super convoluted and requires a ton of policing. The easiest thing we can do in game is lower the max-contract years.

 

[OU11]

I thought it was just quale and I that were apprehensive about that, I was going back and forth for a few pages on why it could be a bad idea a month or so ago. Maybe some joined on my side but I don't remember many.

 

[OU11]

I do approve of equating Quale to Trump though. I died before I became the villain

 

[TonyGin&Juice]

Also, in regards to the contract rule trump-like executive decision I apparently made - this was on the table for a season+. From what I could tell most were for it with a few exceptions and they were at least somewhat addressed. Wooly signs the first 10 year deal and everyone loses their shit, led by NML who I don't think even spoke up the first time. Then you use figs and tony quoted out of context to say I signed an executive order no one wanted. Just fuck off with that.

If we want to change it, fine. Get a proposal out there that isn't super convoluted and requires a ton of policing. The easiest thing we can do in game is lower the max-contract years.

Like I told you in chat - the length is fine, not getting more in future years than last ARB is not fine. Here's an example of what would be a fine 10 year pre-ARB contract:

ARB estimates: $5/5/7

10 year contract: 5/5/7/7/9/9/11/11/11/11

AAV: $8.6M

That's a steal even if those last four seasobs are 0 WAR and the player is always getting at least the ARB estimate. If teams can pay less than ARB in extensions why even have it?

 

[OU11]

Rule change proposition from Tony
- eliminate arbitration

 

[Orlando]

I thought it was just quale and I that were apprehensive about that, I was going back and forth for a few pages on why it could be a bad idea a month or so ago. Maybe some joined on my side but I don't remember many.

You and Travis had some argument about it. I started testing a bunch of players and I thought it was decided that it looked like the AI figured things out after a year. I really don't think the deal is that bad. We don't know yet. Bucky doesn't have some huge track record of success. A similar situation in my mind is tambourine and he signed for a lot of money I don't think he is worth.

If we decide it was a mistake, so be it. And you know what? All you'll hate on wooly, but if we decided ok 7 years max contracts, he'd probably change it without whining.

 

[Orlando]

Like I told you in chat - the length is fine, not getting more in future years than last ARB is not fine. Here's an example of what would be a fine 10 year pre-ARB contract:

ARB estimates: $5/5/7

10 year contract: 5/5/7/7/9/9/11/11/11/11

AAV: $8.6M

That's a steal even if those last four seasobs are 0 WAR and the player is always getting at least the ARB estimate. If teams can pay less than ARB in extensions why even have it?

Because, like I told you, the point of those extensions is to save some money. This happens in real life too.

 

[Karl Hungus]

How about Bucky just dies in this next sim?

 

[Yankee151]

I decided we would accept the rule before we even did with the Braves deal I'm just as guilty as Orlando.

It's not surprising we may have missed something the last two go arounds, which is why we can change the rules again if needed. Still think the current rule is better than the previous one.

 

[OU11]

Tell @osick87 to sim

 

[OU11]

I didn't even know the rule was changed, what is the new one? Is it a free for all? Please let it be a free for all so I can forget to take advantage and let all my players go through arb

 

[Yankee151]

Free for all after 1 year of service time right now

 

[OU11]

have people tried not being upset?

 

[fignuts]

No thoughts on extending the season to 180 games? Or maybe use random.org and draw teams for new Norf/Souf divisions in order to help increase immersion?

 

[Wolfman21]

I know how we can increase immersion


COMMENCE THE PLAYOFFS

 

[Yankee151]

Meh

 

[Wolfman21]

I didn't say it'd work for everyone

 

[doh]

They rarely remain top prospects.

Just from my A-team:

Including tax, I spent $16m in Fiersole. He is a AA guy.
$3.2m on Annlar-- AA at best guy
$4.4m on Kuypers-- another AA
$3.5m on Velez-- AAA filler

 

[doh]

No thoughts on extending the season to 180 games? Or maybe use random.org and draw teams for new Norf/Souf divisions in order to help increase immersion?

Extending the season = decreased immersion.

If you want to increase randomness and that's your idea of immersion, IMO:
-- Increase injuries. Barely any injuries = best teams will always be at the top
-- Shorten season. Less games is more randomness.
-- Start a lux tax on payroll. More DEAD money is the way to even things out.

 

[fignuts]

I would like to see a balanced schedule ultimately. 180 was too high. It'd be 170 if I'm thinking this through correctly. 5H/5A x 17.
Plus it's been 5 or so years since we began the WBL. These divisions have become rather stale, imo. It'd be nice to face the other 9 clubs more than once per year for a 3 game set.

 

[Karl Hungus]

I'd be ok with randomizing the divisions and renaming them. Maybe the Nebraska and Orlando divisions?

 

[TonyGin&Juice]

Extending the season = decreased immersion.

If you want to increase randomness and that's your idea of immersion, IMO:
-- Increase injuries. Barely any injuries = best teams will always be at the top
-- Shorten season. Less games is more randomness.
-- Start a lux tax on payroll. More DEAD money is the way to even things out.

Please no increase in injuries.

 

[Soonerfan09]

I'd be ok with geographical east/west divisions.

 

[Orlando]

Extending the season = decreased immersion.

If you want to increase randomness and that's your idea of immersion, IMO:
-- Increase injuries. Barely any injuries = best teams will always be at the top
-- Shorten season. Less games is more randomness.
-- Start a lux tax on payroll. More DEAD money is the way to even things out.

Injuries will be a no-go with this group.

Short season might impact dev.

Lux tax is an interesting idea and doable I believe.


We can change divisions or eliminate, but if we want to mess with the schedule we will have to find one. I personally like divisions and an unbalanced schedule that features more games vs division rivals. It makes the H2H series within your divisions more impactful and fun late in the year.

 

[OU11]

I would like to see a balanced schedule ultimately. 180 was too high. It'd be 170 if I'm thinking this through correctly. 5H/5A x 17.
Plus it's been 5 or so years since we began the WBL. These divisions have become rather stale, imo. It'd be nice to face the other 9 clubs more than once per year for a 3 game set.

There is a master list of custom schedules, there might be more 18 team schedules now so if you find one let one of us know and we'll add it.

 

[doh]

Injuries will be a no-go with this group.

Short season might impact dev.

Lux tax is an interesting idea and doable I believe.


We can change divisions or eliminate, but if we want to mess with the schedule we will have to find one. I personally like divisions and an unbalanced schedule that features more games vs division rivals. It makes the H2H series within your divisions more impactful and fun late in the year.

Yep-- people constantly complain about the best teams always win then don't want more injuries...

Lux tax to me makes way more sense than IFA cap in terms of evening out the league if that's your goal.

 

[osick87]

Would it help if I made an imgur album of all the options we Os can change so people can focus on what we are able to change?


I can do it when I get home.