WBL Rule Change Thread

[TonyGin&Juice]

If you care to be competitive, it just takes consistency to build a strong financial base for your team. Once you have that base, you've got the flexibility to keep winning unless you act like a mongoloid and do stupid shit with ur money.

You left out having to be lucky too. Even when my budget was sky high there wasn't a pipe line of talent to replace the guys I extended because 1st, 2nd, and 3rd round guys were busts and I didn't have money (at the time) to sign more than scraps in IFA. When I had the money I extended guys (some foolishly) but I also spent in DEV and IFA, which worked out well but is a boom-and-bust cycle unless I get lucky and can find cheap replacements for the current crop in the next 3-5 years of drafts and IFA.

 

[osick87]

I haven't spent a massive amount in IFA. I'll hit my limit the odd time but it's usually on a group. I try to be like @doh and pick up some cheap guys and hope my Dev works out.

Also my scout has been good at discovering some talent that looks good. Lots of those guys haven't hot max potential but they usually end up being useful.

Generally the guys who do well are the people who don't take long hiatuses from OOTP.

 

[Travis7401]

The only way to make it more FAIR is to lobotomize the good owners in hopes that they will also do stupid shit with their sim money! Maybe have an export limit for the good owners! 1 export per week to make it more FAIR for the bad owners?

 

[TonyGin&Juice]

The only way to make it more FAIR is to lobotomize the good owners in hopes that they will also do stupid shit with their sim money! Maybe have an export limit for the good owners! 1 export per week to make it more FAIR for the bad owners?

No flags, no WS appearances, nothing but a lot of trash talking over orange slices. Kill urself.

 

[Travis7401]

Says the guy with no flags

Biggest IFA spender in the league with NO FLAGS. POINT MADE!

 

[doh]

Here is what I think and maybe I'm wrong but...

I think the most underrated part of the game is not signing stupid contracts and just letting guys go via FA. I let Fernandez go after he led the league in HRs, Klerk after he had another 2.50 or ERA last off-season alone... year before Terry Morgan had a 4.7 WAR year as a SP and I let him go, etc.

I just think teams overpay and screw themselves by wanting to hold onto talent vs. having financial flexibility. The game as it currently is IMO is all about having financial flexibility. I think non-tendering guys who aren't for sure starters helps too amongst other things.

You can get lots of quality players on cheap one-year or 1+1 contracts. If you have budget space, you can grab those guys, win more games and build your budget up.

 

[Travis7401]

Look at Tony assume I put myself in the Good owner category. SMDH.

That's what happens when you ASSUME... it makes an ASS out of U and ME!

 

[Travis7401]

Fuck me for liking a DOH post, but he's exactly right. Letting Terry Morgan walk and have a great year for LV killed my soul, but the dude wanted like 25M to stay a rigger.

 

[Orlando]

Here is what I think and maybe I'm wrong but...

I think the most underrated part of the game is not signing stupid contracts and just letting guys go via FA. I let Fernandez go after he led the league in HRs, Klerk after he had another 2.50 or ERA last off-season alone... year before Terry Morgan had a 4.7 WAR year as a SP and I let him go, etc.

I just think teams overpay and screw themselves by wanting to hold onto talent vs. having financial flexibility. The game as it currently is IMO is all about having financial flexibility. I think non-tendering guys who aren't for sure starters helps too amongst other things.

You can get lots of quality players on cheap one-year or 1+1 contracts. If you have budget space, you can grab those guys, win more games and build your budget up.

I dunno. I keep a ton of legacy players and we have done ok.

 

[doh]

I dunno. I keep a ton of legacy players and we have done ok.

I'm about to find out what that's like once my core gets bad/I gave Kang a moronic extension because of legacy.

 

[TonyGin&Juice]

Here is what I think and maybe I'm wrong but...

I think the most underrated part of the game is not signing stupid contracts and just letting guys go via FA. I let Fernandez go after he led the league in HRs, Klerk after he had another 2.50 or ERA last off-season alone... year before Terry Morgan had a 4.7 WAR year as a SP and I let him go, etc.

I just think teams overpay and screw themselves by wanting to hold onto talent vs. having financial flexibility. The game as it currently is IMO is all about having financial flexibility. I think non-tendering guys who aren't for sure starters helps too amongst other things.

You can get lots of quality players on cheap one-year or 1+1 contracts. If you have budget space, you can grab those guys, win more games and build your budget up.

I was talking to QUAL about this earlier but that method works GREAT if you have seriously high FAN LOYALTY and have a steady pipeline of talent (read: pull an inside straight flush). Fan Interest you can alter in your favor for a season or two by extending "popular" guys or signing FA popular bums but after a while (i.e. when they start dying) the interest decreases as does the budget. Unless you've sustained a long period of competitiveness you can't non-tender guys or let them walk without seeing your budget drop with fan interest. Even when the fan loyalty is extremely high it's difficult to keep the budget high (over $150M) without having "popular" players that produce, a winning squad, or both. The one year deals help but can teams with middling budgets really afford $20M for a DH/not-even-a-LFer that might get hurt and miss 100+ games?

 

[Orlando]

We talked about that?

 

[doh]

I was talking to QUAL about this earlier but that method works GREAT if you have seriously high FAN LOYALTY and have a steady pipeline of talent (read: pull an inside straight flush). Fan Interest you can alter in your favor for a season or two by extending "popular" guys or signing FA popular bums but after a while (i.e. when they start dying) the interest decreases as does the budget. Unless you've sustained a long period of competitiveness you can't non-tender guys or let them walk without seeing your budget drop with fan interest. Even when the fan loyalty is extremely high it's difficult to keep the budget high (over $150M) without having "popular" players that produce, a winning squad, or both. The one year deals help but can teams with middling budgets really afford $20M for a DH/not-even-a-LFer that might get hurt and miss 100+ games?

Well if you non-tender middling guys about to make $3-4m, I don't think your FI will go down.

Getting competitive isn't sexy but that's how you build a budget and FI. You just have to win games.

There are tons of guys in FA every year that will be solid 2.5 or so WAR guys that aren't expensive or you can put together a nice platoon worth 3-4 WAR for $5m. It's not that hard but teams think they need to spend all in IFA or only want the 5+ WAR superstaRrRrZ vs. the solid player who doesn't kill you at a position like 2B or 3B or whatever.

I think too many teams have subscribed to the NBA either you are in the top 3 or bottom 3 and being in the middle sucks theory. In baseball, I just don't think it works.

 

[Yankee151]

There definitely is a wide variance in GM skill level, which is why I refused to name names but named them anyways. JD and I have never had trouble tanking in the long term (in either league, iirc, at least once I figured out how to play) because it's viable if you know how to do it, but others don't see the fine art to it and end up with the 1-7 and nothing to show for their sub .500 record. Others have tanked starting from a huge budget (DAM, VGS, HEL, IST have all done this recently) through IFA, though some got back quicker than others (Note to self: don't trade everyone!).

I can't imagine it's fun over time watching the Top 3 slots in the draft constantly occupied by teams who were in the playoffs a few years prior and then watching them rebound in a year when you're on year 9 of sub .500 ball. If I was taking over one of those teams (thankfully, Otto did a little better in Buffalo) I wouldn't know what to do. The good teams won't take their players because all of them are garbage, and they can't buy more players because they don't have prospects. Well, I do know what I'd do, which would be to fully commit to tanking, but not every team is willing to do that so

As I said this was never about me. Istanbul will compete again so I proved the tanking method still works, and Buffalo will be fine for the future too. If we want to leave it as is I can live with it.

 

[doh]

Over the last 12 seasons there have been 9 different teams win a ship. I don't think there's a "competitive balance" or whatever you want to call it problem.

The issue IMO is there aren't enough owners or teams who believe that having a team that wins 85-90 games is good enough. Too many teams are attempting to avoid that area. I keep using UK as an example but they've been in that in or almost in the playoffs level for a long time without a huge budget, payroll, etc. by loading up in FA. They won a ship and almost won another.

My main point is there are lots of ways to win and get talent and be good. That's the beauty of baseball - IFA, draft, FA, trade, waivers, MLFAs, International Pro FA, Indy players... you can gather up lots of different ways. I think the idea of tanking is the way if you're in the middle is incorrect.

 

[TonyGin&Juice]

Well if you non-tender middling guys about to make $3-4m, I don't think your FI will go down.

Getting competitive isn't sexy but that's how you build a budget and FI. You just have to win games.

There are tons of guys in FA every year that will be solid 2.5 or so WAR guys that aren't expensive or you can put together a nice platoon worth 3-4 WAR for $5m. It's not that hard but teams think they need to spend all in IFA or only want the 5+ WAR superstaRrRrZ vs. the solid player who doesn't kill you at a position like 2B or 3B or whatever.

I think too many teams have subscribed to the NBA either you are in the top 3 or bottom 3 and being in the middle sucks theory. In baseball, I just don't think it works.

I don't disagree with you but I think you're seriously underselling the difficulty in "getting competitive". Even in recently MLB history there are teams that spent years (decades?) being middling to bad before pulling the trigger and going for it (Royals and Indians immediately come to mind). There are also teams that have spent the past decade spending as much money as possible in IFA/FA with varying results (Dodgers and their zero WS appearances, Boston and their IFA/FA busts but WS wins, Cubs). The teams in the bottom of budgetville have had moments of being competitive (Pittsburgh's short WC run, Brewers this year, Rockies) followed by rebuilds and fan base decimations.

The team that's probably had the best run over the past 10 years is easily the Giants and they've been in the top 10 in MLB payroll since 2011 with plenty of FA busts (Barry Zito anyone). And, ignoring the malfeasance and bad luck of the Marlins, one of the worst has been the Padres but they've spent big in IFA and worked magic via trades to acquire a good pipeline of talent. Unfortunately they have no fans, were forced to extend Wil Myers to meet the payroll floor, and have no chance of competing against the Dodgers for FA talent. They aren't the Cubs who, despite half a decade of being bad still sell out Wrigley, have tons of money and likely will for a long time.

Right now the only team that looks like they *might* have figured out the best way to be competitive for a long time without a rebuild is the Houston Astros and in looking at their contracts they're going to have a lot of holes to fill very soon unless they extend Dallas Keuchel, Collin McHugh, and George Springer. Correa they have under cheap team control until 2019 but there's not much left that's cheap for them after 2018, especially with Altuve a FA in 2020. I haven't kept up with their farm system but I seriously doubt they have any talent close to the level of Correa (1-1), Altuve, or Keuchel on the farm.

 

[Travis7401]

good thing we aren't talking about fucking real life baseball.

 

[Yankee151]

Playoff appearances is probably a better metric to go by, but that's too hard of a thing to search. I also think the middle of the road avoidance thing hurts the trade market for really bad teams, but that's whatever. I suppose we are done here

 

[Yankee151]

Tony the Astros invented tanking mate, they had like 5 1-1s in a row

 

[Travis7401]

In summary, more than half the league has won a ship in the last 12 seasons and that doesn't include several teams who are regular playoff contenders who suck in the post season. The only way there could be more parity in the league is if we made everyone operate on the orange slices model!

 

[TonyGin&Juice]

good thing we aren't talking about fucking real life baseball.

My point is what happens in OOTP isn't that dissimilar from what happens in MLB. I mean, ur pretty much the early '00s Barves (minus the WS ass poundings) at this point so feel free to keep getting bounced. Things aren't that bad here in the land of the Marlins.

 

[doh]

In summary, more than half the league has won a ship in the last 12 seasons and that doesn't include several teams who are regular playoff contenders who suck in the post season. The only way there could be more parity in the league is if we made everyone operate on the orange slices model!

Yep-- 9 different teams have won the ship in the last 12 years and that doesn't include 2 of the top 5 teams over that span (FAX and NDR)... but we have a competitive balance issue

 

[TonyGin&Juice]

Yep-- 9 different teams have won the ship in the last 12 years and that doesn't include 2 of the top 5 teams over that span (FAX and NDR)... but we have a competitive balance issue

I wouldn't say it's competitive balance, I'd say it's just not as fun now.

 

[Yankee151]

There's also multiple teams who have made the playoffs 2 or less times in the past 12 years, so...

 

[Travis7401]

It's not as fun now that I've hamstrung myself with long term bad contracts! SAVE ME FROM MA'SELF!

 

[Travis7401]

There's also multiple teams who have made the playoffs 2 or less times in the past 12 years, so...

How many of those owners are actively trying to be good? (ie exporting daily for multiple seasons in a row)

 

[TonyGin&Juice]

It's not as fun now that I've hamstrung myself with long term bad contracts! SAVE ME FROM MA'SELF!

You must not have seen the $75M I just shipped out of town...

 

[Yankee151]

I suppose you're right in that regard. I can't really find a good metric for this, maybe "How many teams have finished 5th through 7th 10 times in the past 12 years" would be better or something.

Or perhaps how much time the big budget tankers missed the playoffs compared to those teams. I don't think anyone cares tho, so I'll drop it and you can all argue with Tony instead

 

[Travis7401]

Or perhaps everything is fine and we don't need new ham-fisted rules because Tony had some injuries last season and now he's MAD.

Ya'll a bunch of Chicken Little Motherfuckers.

 

[Yankee151]

I am indeed known for making mountains out of molehills

 

[TonyGin&Juice]

Or perhaps everything is fine and we don't need new ham-fisted rules because Tony had some injuries last season and now he's MAD.

Ya'll a bunch of Chicken Little Motherfuckers.

I will literally eat asbestos tiles if a non-top five budget team wins a WS in the next five years.

 

[Travis7401]

Like non top 5 as of now?

[xtable=cellpadding:0|cellspacing:0|316x@]
{thead}
{tr}
{th=38x@}Rank{/th}
{th=148x@}Team{/th}
{th}Current Budget{/th}
{/tr}
{/thead}
{tbody}
{tr}
{td}1{/td}
{td}Las Vegas Pac Men{/td}
{td}$198,000,000{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td}2{/td}
{td}Halifax Maritimes{/td}
{td}$196,000,000{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td}3{/td}
{td}Kabul Bulls{/td}
{td}$190,000,000{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td}4{/td}
{td}Helsingborg Hammers{/td}
{td}$180,000,000{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td}5{/td}
{td}North Dakota Riggers{/td}
{td}$172,000,000{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td}6{/td}
{td}Moscow Mules{/td}
{td}$162,000,000{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td}7{/td}
{td}United Kingdom Kings{/td}
{td}$150,000,000{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td}8{/td}
{td}Miami Manatees{/td}
{td}$140,000,000{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td}9{/td}
{td}Buenos Aires Gauchos{/td}
{td}$138,000,000{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td}10{/td}
{td}Seoul Glow{/td}
{td}$134,000,000{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td}11{/td}
{td}Dublin Distillers{/td}
{td}$130,000,000{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td}12{/td}
{td}Cairo Tutankhamuns{/td}
{td}$112,000,000{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td}13{/td}
{td}Amsterdam Tulips{/td}
{td}$110,000,000{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td}14{/td}
{td}False Bay Flying Whites{/td}
{td}$110,000,000{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td}15{/td}
{td}Istanbul Ottomans{/td}
{td}$95,000,000{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td}16{/td}
{td}Buffalo Murricans{/td}
{td}$94,000,000{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td}17{/td}
{td}Lisbon Conquistadors{/td}
{td}$89,000,000{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td}18{/td}
{td}Little Rock Miners{/td}
{td}$89,000,000{/td}
{/tr}
{/tbody}
[/xtable]

Two of the top 5 are NDR and FAX, they ain't winning shit, son.

 

[Yankee151]

I'm gonna have an embolism if you'll continue to state that WS titles = the best team in the league. I won my WS as the 6th best record in the playoffs.

 

[Yankee151]

I'd bet that one of the bottom 7 wins one in the next 5

 

[Travis7401]

Oh you don't have to explain that to me!

 

[Yankee151]

Maybe this is Travis' way of eliminating me for my sins without getting blood on his hands! His riling up of Tony is working and one more "competitive balance" will send part of my brain flying out of my nostril

 

[TonyGin&Juice]

Like non top 5 as of now?

[xtable=skin1|cellpadding:0|cellspacing:0|316x@]
{thead}
{tr}
{th=38x@}Rank{/th}
{th=148x@}Team{/th}
{th}Current Budget{/th}
{/tr}
{/thead}
{tbody}
{tr}
{td}1{/td}
{td}Las Vegas Pac Men{/td}
{td}$198,000,000{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td}2{/td}
{td}Halifax Maritimes{/td}
{td}$196,000,000{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td}3{/td}
{td}Kabul Bulls{/td}
{td}$190,000,000{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td}4{/td}
{td}Helsingborg Hammers{/td}
{td}$180,000,000{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td}5{/td}
{td}North Dakota Riggers{/td}
{td}$172,000,000{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td}6{/td}
{td}Moscow Mules{/td}
{td}$162,000,000{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td}7{/td}
{td}United Kingdom Kings{/td}
{td}$150,000,000{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td}8{/td}
{td}Miami Manatees{/td}
{td}$140,000,000{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td}9{/td}
{td}Buenos Aires Gauchos{/td}
{td}$138,000,000{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td}10{/td}
{td}Seoul Glow{/td}
{td}$134,000,000{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td}11{/td}
{td}Dublin Distillers{/td}
{td}$130,000,000{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td}12{/td}
{td}Cairo Tutankhamuns{/td}
{td}$112,000,000{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td}13{/td}
{td}Amsterdam Tulips{/td}
{td}$110,000,000{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td}14{/td}
{td}False Bay Flying Whites{/td}
{td}$110,000,000{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td}15{/td}
{td}Istanbul Ottomans{/td}
{td}$95,000,000{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td}16{/td}
{td}Buffalo Murricans{/td}
{td}$94,000,000{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td}17{/td}
{td}Lisbon Conquistadors{/td}
{td}$89,000,000{/td}
{/tr}
{tr}
{td}18{/td}
{td}Little Rock Miners{/td}
{td}$89,000,000{/td}
{/tr}
{/tbody}
[/xtable]
Two of the top 5 are NDR and FAX, they ain't winning shit, son.

Top 5 at the time.

 

[Yankee151]

I'd still take the field I think. Assuming that list is relatively close to last year, that leaves UK, Moscow, BA, Cairo who all had a chance. Over 5 years it'll definitely happen.

 

[Mr. Radpants]

Mongolloyd contracts are one of the most fun things to do in this game. Running your team like a personal budget is my personal sim nightmare. @Travis7401 must have zero immersion, treating his team like an Excel file. DO YOU EVEN SCIFI FANFIC BRO?

 

[Yankee151]

He does, he's just two steps ahead of the game, only getting attached to players willing to play for 1M a season over 20 seasons!

 

[Travis7401]

Everyone has a way they handicap themselves for narrative purposes.

I like to force prospects to play their way through my entire minor league system, helping each team win orange slices on the way up. By the time they reach the WBL, they are 35 years old! Some people might think BUTRUS BUTRUS NURI was ready for the WBL when he came out of college, but to me he's still got a couple seasons left in AAA before he gets his cup of coffee.

It's even more profound when I draft 17 year old HS players like SANSA STARK JARA. 8 years in the minor league system building that rigger mentality before I let him be a backup catcher. He could have been a doctor! (except for that LOW intelligence)

 

[Wooly]

Everyone has a way they handicap themselves for narrative purposes.

I like to force prospects to play their way through my entire minor league system, helping each team win orange slices on the way up. By the time they reach the WBL, they are 35 years old! Some people might think BUTRUS BUTRUS NURI was ready for the WBL when he came out of college, but to me he's still got a couple seasons left in AAA before he gets his cup of coffee.

It's even more profound when I draft 17 year old HS players like SANSA STARK JARA. 8 years in the minor league system building that rigger mentality before I let him be a backup catcher. He could have been a doctor! (except for that LOW intelligence)

Well said. I just like them to make a few stops in A ball, on the way up...and again on the way down at age 30.

 

[Wooly]

Moscow and Cairo have both made major turnarounds in only a few years. Their budgets are getting better and better too. It basically comes down to being active. It seems like the league is divided into thirds: actively trying to win, actively trying to tank, and simply not active. Try to actively win and you can be in the playoffs in 3-5 years.

This is simulation baseball, so being in the playoffs is the goal. Whatever happens after is a crapshoot anyway.

 

[doh]

Were we able to go to 10-day DLs?

 

[OU11]

Yeah

 

[Mr. Radpants]

Were we able to ban 10-5s and DOH'S awful rule?

 

[doh]

No

 

[Orlando]

@Mr. Radpants life happens, so I must have forgot, but

Proposal is:

Pre-arbitration extensions must wait until the player has one year of service time and must at least be equal to the arbitration estimate. Pre-arbitration contracts have a maximum length of 5 years.

I think this was going to be the rule as long as 18 functioned like 17. It's a compromise, but we can discuss it further if you want.

 

[Mr. Radpants]

Suck it @doh

I'm signing a lifetime contract in Dublin

 

[Yankee151]

I prefer lifting the length clause after a year, but life is all about compromise

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk