World Baseball Association

WBA Official Business => Season and Off-Season Threads => Topic started by: Huckleberry on April 20, 2017, 07:26:02 AM

Title: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: Huckleberry on April 20, 2017, 07:26:02 AM

This is the thread for all discussion of offseason activities during the 2106-2107 offseason.  This first post will be updated throughout the offseason and will also include links to other threads or amendment votes that come up during this time. Keep in mind that the 2108 WBA Cup will take place during this offseason and that we are also updating to OOTP 18, so it's going to be a busy one.

Sim to 4/2/2108 is complete. Next sim is Sunday 5/21. NEXT SIM IS THE FIRST REGULAR SEASON SIM - YOU MUST HAVE ALL ROSTERS IN YOUR ORGANIZATION SET PROPERLY.

OFFSEASON SIM SCHEDULE: (Free agency happens during every sim once free agents file, of course, but I left that out if other stuff was happening during a sim)

Sim Date - Sim to Date In-Game - Events/activities

Sunday 5/21 - 4/9/2108 - FIRST REGULAR SEASON SIM, must have rosters set up appropriately prior to this sim. First sim back on the Su-Th regular season schedule.

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: Huckleberry on April 20, 2017, 08:07:23 AM

Game is importing to OOTP 18 now. I will run another sim update, meaning I won't actually sim any days but will run another league file export so you may get another email if you get those.

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: Huckleberry on April 20, 2017, 09:33:43 AM

Okay, we should be good to go. League file exported from OOTP 18, HTML pages updated as well. Make sure you're running OOTP 18.4.45 and you should be ready.

As of now I think our first offseason sim will likely be either Sunday night or Monday if we find a Seoul owner. Hopefully everyone can be up and running on OOTP 18 by then.

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: Karachi_GM on April 20, 2017, 10:22:19 PM

Have converted to 18, got latest file, and exported.

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: Huckleberry on April 28, 2017, 08:25:52 PM

I'm more excited about the WBA Cup rosters being announced tomorrow night than I probably should be.

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: Huckleberry on May 02, 2017, 10:58:32 AM

So in the chat box we've discovered that someone is offering Ivo Cantinho somewhere in the neighborhood of $20M per year. Depending on the length of the contact I figure that's actually defensible.

Let's say it's a 3 year contract (he's 35 so that's the most I would personally offer him). He's averaged 4.3 WAR over the past three seasons but he's old so let's say you're expecting 4 WAR per year from him. That's roughly $12M per year in market value based on the numbers I ran last offseason. That means that if you pay him $20M/yr for three years you are "overpaying" him by $24M. But what if you're a team with a low payroll and at or near the maximum cash amount? In that case there's very little downside to a high value shorter contract. So now I've got my suspects. One of these teams is about to set up Ivo Cantinho and his descendants for a few generations:

Florida
London
New York City
Puerto Rico

Black Forest and Singapore are other slight possibilities but they're a little too tight on their budget, IMO. Just my quick analysis, prompted by the fact that the OOTP dialog had him tell me that "another team" made him the great offer instead of telling me the team.  >:(

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: APMP on May 02, 2017, 11:35:58 AM

The ghost of Scott Boras has found its way into the WBA.

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: AndyHustle on May 02, 2017, 01:52:35 PM

 :-X

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: Claybor on May 02, 2017, 01:54:47 PM

You guys have seen how I spend $$$$. $20M would be almost half my payroll.

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: Huckleberry on May 02, 2017, 02:01:40 PM

Also, just a reminder that tonight's sim takes longer than most. I have to upload the history pages, move teams (which means adding logos, etc.), then load the draft into the utilities.

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: claphamsa on May 02, 2017, 02:35:09 PM

ill be at the nats game... take all the time you want :)

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: Echo127 on May 02, 2017, 03:59:33 PM

Why am I not a suspect? I feel left out.

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: Huckleberry on May 02, 2017, 09:00:40 PM

See what I mean? Scoops just extended with Mumbai for only $7.25M per year. I mean that's a great deal for Mumbai but he would have fetched $15M per year on the open market.

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: CaseyBlakeDeWitt on May 02, 2017, 09:08:33 PM

Maybe we should consider some alterations to the free agency system. Some sort of draft pick compensation could be a start? Might encourage people to let players reach free agency

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: APMP on May 02, 2017, 10:00:10 PM

So are we going to set Karachi to auto pick so that the IBL can draft before Thursday?

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: Huckleberry on May 02, 2017, 10:22:02 PM

I've actually thought a bit about this and the best solution I've come up with would actually involve coding an out-of-game offseason free agency bidding module via the website. If I were to do that that then we could tweak the rules on extensions and free agency and there are a lot of options.

• No extensions allowed - free agency bonus for being the player's current team. The bonus could vary based on number of years with the team, if it's the only major league level team he's ever been on, and/or other factors. So the player's current team's contract offer is given a certain percentage bonus when the free agent module evaluates all the player's offers.
• Extensions allowed but with amount requirements. One possibility is a calculation similar to the NFL's franchise player calculation. Because we have fewer teams (20 instead of 32), perhaps if you want to extend a player and keep him from free agency he must be given a contract with an average salary at least equal to the average of the 3 highest paid players at his position (or we could combine positions like make it the average of the five highest paid OF or C/IF), or 120% of his previous average salary, whichever is greater. The specific values and formulas would obviously be open to league discussion. Or we could tie it in to the player's age, WAR production over the past 3 years, etc. Lots of possibilities.
• Along the lines of #2 we could instead have tiered offer levels for the player's current team. At the highest and most expensive level would be the automatic extension amount. A second level would be a lower cost offer which would not trigger the player to sign the extension but would instead trigger the bonuses from #1. The third level, no qualifying offer, would mean that the player is a free agent and the former team gets no bonuses for contract offers. The team's decision would then revolve around how much his current owner thinks he could get on the open market.

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: Huckleberry on May 02, 2017, 10:23:46 PM

Quote from: APMP on May 02, 2017, 10:00:10 PM

So are we going to set Karachi to auto pick so that the IBL can draft before Thursday?

Yes, I'm probably going to put them on auto in the morning. Hoping against hope to find an owner.

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: Coop on May 03, 2017, 07:49:07 AM

Huck, it's great that you're considering changes that will make free agency relevant again.  I was about to post a long diatribe about that same issue, but you beat me to it.

A couple of things I want to point out, in support of the idea that we need to revitalize free agency:

(1)  At present, we have at least 7 owners who have maxed out on cash at $50 million.  I'm one of them.  Do you know why so many owners have so much cash?  Because we can't find a way to spend it.  There are virtually no decent free agent players to sign (the only one at present is still holding out, even after being offered more than $20 million a year).  Nobody is selling good players or draft choices.  Basically, there's nothing to do with your money except sit on it.  And that's a ridiculous situation.  In the real world, money ALWAYS has value; if you've got a bunch of money, there's always some way you can put it to use to improve your team.  But in the WBA at present, you can have the maximum amount of money allowed (like I do), and yet there's no way to use that money to improve your team.  That's absurd.

(2)  The way things stand in the WBA at present, if you've got a bad team, there's absolutely nothing you can do about it except to lose all year while waiting for the draft.  You can't speed up the rebuilding process by signing free agents, since there are none of any real value, and you can't use your cash to buy players or draft choices, since no one will sell.  So there's only one door open to you, the draft, and that's a long, slow way of building your team, since most kids you draft won't really be able to help you at the big-league level for 3-4 years.  And then some of them flop, pitchers blow out their arms, etc., and suddenly the rebuild has gone from 3 years to who knows how long.  There ought to be more than one option available to those GMs who are saddled with bad teams.  A revitalized free agent market would definitely help.  Besides, more options means more potential strategies, and more strategies mean more fun.  Right now if you've got a bad team you get to choose between Door Number 1 (the draft) or ... uh ... Door Number 1 (the draft).  Not much fun to be had in making that decision.

Bottom line, I'm in full agreement that we need to take steps to make money useful in the WBA.  Right now, there's no way to use your money to improve your team, so your money is essentially worthless.

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: Huckleberry on May 03, 2017, 07:52:20 AM

One minor note, it appears that whoever offered Cantinho the exorbitant contract withdrew that offer. He's asking me for somewhere around $11M/yr after last night's sim.

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: Coop on May 03, 2017, 08:01:44 AM

Must be some kind of glitch.  I personally offered him $20 million a year last night (trying to find SOME way to use my cash to improve my team), and today he's asking for $21 million.

But I think he'll stop when he hits $100 million.

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: Huckleberry on May 03, 2017, 08:45:13 AM

Weird. I hope that doesn't screw up his signing somehow.

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: claphamsa on May 03, 2017, 10:14:49 AM

not saying we shouldn't make a change...but on the flip side, in the IBL 5 teams are over 50M payroll (which i believe is the league target), and one in the ABL. which is more teams than have maxed out cash. so while i would like FA to be better....I have no money to spend so dont fix it too fast :)

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: claphamsa on May 03, 2017, 10:17:07 AM

dola,

just eyeballing it, looks like the IBL managers spend much more than the ABL managers, and players have higher salaries in the IBL.

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: Claybor on May 03, 2017, 10:17:19 AM

I have and have had tons and tons of cash in every ootp league I have ever been in. (Since 2003) I personally believe that it's in the coding. Capping cash at a much lower amount is the only thing I could see working easily.

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: Txhorns on May 03, 2017, 10:20:07 AM

Honestly I think the solution is simply, but the execution may be problematic.  Currently we get players for 5 years at 200k a year.  You can have an absolute stud in his 5th year making 200k.  IRL that player is in the middle of arbitration making millions.  I feel like there should be some kind of arbitration in the league. 

Maybe the first two years are the minimum 200k.  Then the next three years the players salary is based off his WAR from the previous year.  Say a negative WAR stays at 200k.  War up to 1.0 and salary is 750k.  Up to 2.5 is 1.5 million salary.  Up to 4.0 is 3 million salary.  Over 4.0 is 5 million salary. 

This would prevent teams from having 15+ players in their first 5 years all making 200k.  More players would hit free agency because there would be less money to go around.

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: Claybor on May 03, 2017, 10:21:31 AM

Sounds pretty good, but also like a LOT of work.

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: Txhorns on May 03, 2017, 10:23:57 AM

Thats why I say execution may be a problem.  Also, whatever we do cannot be an instant change.  It has to be eased into the league.

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: Huckleberry on May 03, 2017, 10:38:57 AM

Yes, that's definitely an interesting idea. I'll have to think about it a bit more.

Obviously a big part of the situation is that people simply aren't spending money even though they have it. So we need to figure out why they're not spending it and how we can remove that motivation. And I agree that the 5 years at $200K may be a huge contributor to that situation. I mean seriously, I have this guy for 3 more years at league minimum. That does seem like more than a bit too long. OOTP gods willing he's going to have around 1,000 hits and 700 RBI before he sees a real salary.

Perhaps it's a combination of the 5 years at $200K and the ease of OOTP extensions that has created our current situation. I definitely want to make rebuilding easier than real life in our online league because we obviously all want everyone to feel like they have a chance to turn around a bad team quickly or to be competitive without having to put in a real life year of waiting.

Something else just popped in my head. We have the league minimum time set for 5 years but the financial system calculates budgets and revenues based only on the last 2 years. Do y'all think that might contribute to the issue? A team can turn it around with a bunch of young players and in years 3-5 they are making maximum revenue but paying minimum salary. So their cash bloats to the maximum without even really trying. Just a thought, one which kind of supports Txhorns' idea of limiting the minimum salary to 2 years before implementing some sort of arbitration system for years 3-5.

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: squaredrive on May 03, 2017, 10:57:10 AM

Lots of good ideas here - slightly wary about the more complex solutions relative to the amount of work on Huck and possible confusion it could cause. i would be in favor of finding a less complex combination of ideas as:

-Reduce seasons at min salary before players hit FA market
-Higher league min salary
-Rather than eliminate extensions, just limit them to 1 per team per season or 1 extension every 2 seasons (to retain the possibility of having franchise players)

With the last rule alone, i can see that 3 and 4 seasons from now some real talent from my team would be hitting the market. 

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: Txhorns on May 03, 2017, 11:27:32 AM

I am having a problem seeing how it's a good idea to limit a team from being able to resign their own players.  The only thing that should limit a team on who they can resign or sign in free agency is their budget.

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: claphamsa on May 03, 2017, 11:36:23 AM

Quote from: Claybor on May 03, 2017, 10:17:19 AM

I have and have had tons and tons of cash in every ootp league I have ever been in. (Since 2003) I personally believe that it's in the coding. Capping cash at a much lower amount is the only thing I could see working easily.

funny, im broke in every league :)

at some point you just need to pay market value, even if its 20M a season for a mediocre pitcher.

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: Huckleberry on May 03, 2017, 11:49:04 AM

Quote from: Txhorns on May 03, 2017, 11:27:32 AM

I am having a problem seeing how it's a good idea to limit a team from being able to resign their own players.  The only thing that should limit a team on who they can resign or sign in free agency is their budget.

Agreed, I think the issue we are discussing is whether or not they're allowed to sign their players to extensions in-game using the OOTP engine.

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: Huckleberry on May 03, 2017, 12:12:11 PM

One thing I'm wondering is if the idea to "arbitrate" salaries for Years 3-5 helps not only with available cash in the league but also causes extensions after Year 5 to be more reasonably priced. Basically maybe Scoops doesn't sign for $7.25M per year on his extension if he just finished making $6M for the last season based on his 7.2 WAR in his 4th year (or whatever the formula ends up making the Year 5 salary). I would think their demands may be higher if they weren't coming off the $200K salary.

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: AndyHustle on May 03, 2017, 12:16:16 PM

I was the one leading the offers for Cantinho at $19m. My hope was that everyone would withdraw their offers (which I believe they did) and then I withdrew mine and offered him at around $10m. It worked (he favored the offer) until we talked about it on the chat and people looked into it more.

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: Coop on May 03, 2017, 12:21:44 PM

Andy, something's out of synch with Cantinho.  I made him an offer on Day 1 of free agency, and have continued to make offers to him every day since then.  I've never withdrawn an offer.  I offered him $20 million a year last night.  If he went back to asking for $10 million, something is fouled up.  I've been offering him more than that for the past several sims.  (Not that he seems to care ...)

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: Huckleberry on May 03, 2017, 12:22:21 PM

Quote from: AndyHustle on May 03, 2017, 12:16:16 PM

I was the one leading the offers for Cantinho at $19m. My hope was that everyone would withdraw their offers (which I believe they did) and then I withdrew mine and offered him at around $10m. It worked (he favored the offer) until we talked about it on the chat and people looked into it more.

Ha. I had you in my suspect lineup!  ;)

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: AndyHustle on May 03, 2017, 12:23:50 PM

Quote from: Coop on May 03, 2017, 12:21:44 PM

Andy, something's out of synch with Cantinho.  I made him an offer on Day 1 of free agency, and have continued to make offers to him every day since then.  I've never withdrawn an offer.  I offered him $20 million a year last night.  If he went back to asking for $10 million, something is fouled up.  I've been offering him more than that for the past several sims.  (Not that he seems to care ...)

I had heard his wife didn't want to leave the country...

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: Huckleberry on May 03, 2017, 12:24:39 PM

Quote from: Coop on May 03, 2017, 12:21:44 PM

Andy, something's out of synch with Cantinho.  I made him an offer on Day 1 of free agency, and have continued to make offers to him every day since then.  I've never withdrawn an offer.  I offered him $20 million a year last night.  If he went back to asking for $10 million, something is fouled up.  I've been offering him more than that for the past several sims.  (Not that he seems to care ...)

Yes, I'm going to watch him carefully in tonight's sim as soon as I import team files. Full disclosure I am not participating in the Cantinho sweepstakes so as soon as I import team files tonight I will start watching him to make sure he doesn't sign for a lowball offer compared to his highest current offer. If he does we can discuss here but I may release him back into free agency to start over if it seems like the higher offers simply didn't register due to a glitch with Andy's withdrawal. It appears based on your posts here that he is currently favoring an offer that is much lower than at least one other offer he has.

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: Coop on May 03, 2017, 12:29:42 PM

In one of the emails I received from Cantinho it said something about not wanting to leave the ABL, so maybe he'll take less from an ABL team than from an IBL team?

And free agency now becomes even MORE of a problem ...

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: capn81 on May 03, 2017, 12:53:11 PM

I have always spent a lot less, because I feel like I can get close to the same talent for less money.  Not to mention, less money, but less years for the cheaper player.  This allows my younger guys to develop. 

I can admit that in my first few years, I knew I was going to lose.  So, I just worked options in the draft as much as possible. 

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: CaseyBlakeDeWitt on May 03, 2017, 12:59:38 PM

Finding a way to get more players to free agency seems like the ultimate goal to me, no?

It seems to me that the biggest problem lies in the extensions. I like Huck's idea of incorporating an arbitration system of sorts. Makes sense to me that players would be more willing to take a cheap extension coming off the league minimum salary.

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: claphamsa on May 03, 2017, 01:00:39 PM

Quote from: Huckleberry on May 03, 2017, 12:12:11 PM

One thing I'm wondering is if the idea to "arbitrate" salaries for Years 3-5 helps not only with available cash in the league but also causes extensions after Year 5 to be more reasonably priced. Basically maybe Scoops doesn't sign for $7.25M per year on his extension if he just finished making $6M for the last season based on his 7.2 WAR in his 4th year (or whatever the formula ends up making the Year 5 salary). I would think their demands may be higher if they weren't coming off the $200K salary.

argente was no where near as good and no matter what i did...wouldn't come under 70M

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: AndyHustle on May 03, 2017, 01:09:10 PM

What about give up a draft pick to extend a star? If they end up above a certain WAR, then a certain rd draft pick would be lost.

This is just an example, not actual values

4 WAR and up - 1st rd
3 WAR - 2nd rd
2 WAR - 3rd rd

we could play with the values

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: claphamsa on May 03, 2017, 01:39:20 PM

could also ratchet up the league wide greed factors. you can afford 2 guys on 15M contracts....so make them demand it.

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: Txhorns on May 03, 2017, 01:47:28 PM

I really think the arbitration idea is the best if doable.  I think it does fix the problems with players extending for less than they are actually worth.  I actually think it will make free agents cheaper as there will be less money in the league.  It's kind of ridiculous that we get players for 5 years at league minimum of 200k.  I really hate the idea of limiting who we can resign or taking away draft picks.  This next year I could have 15 or more players in the their first 5 years of service time.  So 15 players, mostly my best players since I'm rebuilding, would cost me a total of $3 million.  That leaves me with $47 million in budget room for 10 other players.  Unless I vastly overpay free agents who aren't close to worth it I cannot use my whole budget.  Still leaving me with $50 million cash at the end of the season.

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: Coop on May 03, 2017, 01:50:37 PM

I agree that reinvigorating free agency is the ultimate goal here, because until we devise a system where a reasonable number of decent players reach free agency, money is worthless in this league --- there's nothing to buy.

The two main ideas seem to be --- either shorten the period in which a young player is playing for the league minimum ($200K), or make it harder to sign players to contract extensions.  Of the two, I prefer the latter.  Rebuilding a team with young guys is already extremely hard in this league; if you end up not even being able to hold onto your young players for long, it becomes even harder.  Besides, it makes more sense for teams to find it difficult to re-sign all of their stars; in real life, not many veterans approaching their "walk" year are inclined to give their current team a sweetheart deal.  The fact that it happens routinely in our league indicates that it's a flaw we need to fix.  I'm not saying we should make it IMPOSSIBLE to sign an extension with a veteran player who is entering his "walk" year ... I'm saying that it should require paying him at or near his true market value.  These sweetheart extension deals, which are turning free agency into a desolate desert, need to be eliminated.

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: Txhorns on May 03, 2017, 01:58:22 PM

I once again think that these sweetheart extension deals are mostly a result of signing a player who is currently on a 200k salary.  I would think they would be less likely to sign a $7 million/year deal if they are currently making $5 million.

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: AndyHustle on May 03, 2017, 02:38:36 PM

There is a feature in the settings where you can play with how much different levels of players should expect in their deals. I don't know how much effect it actually has, but I guess that would be another idea to fix it.

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: Huckleberry on May 03, 2017, 03:02:12 PM

Quote from: AndyHustle on May 03, 2017, 02:38:36 PM

There is a feature in the settings where you can play with how much different levels of players should expect in their deals. I don't know how much effect it actually has, but I guess that would be another idea to fix it.

That's another possibility. I'll investigate and report later on what those settings are right now.

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: Huckleberry on May 03, 2017, 03:40:52 PM

Here are the current settings:

(http://i.imgur.com/Pt4jgiH.png)

I think Andy has a good point. I've got the upper end set too low, and looking at these it starts to make Scoops' $7.25M/yr demand look reasonable. I think I'm leaning toward a combination of the arbitration idea and tweaking these settings. My first suggestion for tweaking these settings is:

Super Star - $11,500,000
Star - $9,000,000
Good - $6,750,000
Above Avg - $4,375,000
Average - $2,000,000
Below Avg - $1,500,000
Fair - $1,000,000
Poor - $650,000
Minimum - $200,000

Those were based on a sliding scale using 8 WAR as superstar level and then using the leaguewide $1.4M/WAR rule of thumb from there.

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: APMP on May 03, 2017, 04:27:06 PM

Quote from: claphamsa on May 03, 2017, 01:00:39 PM

argente was no where near as good and no matter what i did...wouldn't come under 70M

Scoops is just an Indian superstar giving this home country team a discount :)

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: Bob_Meteors on May 03, 2017, 05:04:06 PM

I would also suggest moving the minimum up to maybe 300 or 400k. 200 just seems like way too little.

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: Echo127 on May 03, 2017, 06:35:29 PM

Quote from: APMP on May 03, 2017, 04:27:06 PM

Scoops is just an Indian superstar giving this home country team a discount :)

I've found that *when* you try to negotiate with your players makes a huge difference, sometimes. Particularly earlier in the season they seem to ask for less money. And then sometimes you can get a guy to sign a ridiculously cheap contract when coming off of one bad year... See SP Bob Turner giving me 5 years at $380k/yr :-)

http://www.worldbaseballassociation.com/reports/news/html/players/player_224.html

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: Huckleberry on May 03, 2017, 07:24:55 PM

Absolutely, timing is important. I will usually check what they're asking for each sim. Sometimes it's affected by their performance during the season, so while it may help if they hit a slump, it could also hurt if they go on a hot streak.

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: Huckleberry on May 04, 2017, 10:23:12 AM

Quote from: Bob_Meteors on May 03, 2017, 05:04:06 PM

I would also suggest moving the minimum up to maybe 300 or 400k. 200 just seems like way too little.

That may be a future change but as of now I'd like to stick with $200K. I decided on that just out of proportionality with modern day baseball where MLB minimum was around $500K and MLB average was over $4M when the WBA started.

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: Coop on May 18, 2017, 10:58:22 AM

Looking forward to the annual preseason predictions.  I'm curious as to how badly I'm going to get zapped for trading Serhat Karpat.  (If I was a real life GM, I'd probably be tarred and feathered by now.)

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: Havana_Jake on May 18, 2017, 01:55:17 PM

Quote from: Bob_Meteors on May 03, 2017, 05:04:06 PM

I would also suggest moving the minimum up to maybe 300 or 400k. 200 just seems like way too little.

I also think that moving to the MLB model for rookie contracts might help our economy. 3 years of auto-renew + 3 years of arbitration. Signing bonuses for draft picks might help our economy too. It just seems like we have way too much cash right now. People are spending money on free agents just so they don't have to burn it. I think things might be better if we created more things one has to spend money on, like arb years and draft bonuses for example. Just a thought though.

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: Txhorns on May 18, 2017, 02:05:26 PM

I have actually been looking into that pretty considerably today and talking to Huck about it.  I still feel like some kind of arbitration would be good.  It would need to be a controlled arbitration though.  I will write up a new thread when I get a chance.  I think the biggest problem is that we either have to let the OOTP system run real arbitration or someone in the league has to put in some work each league year to manage arbitration.

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: Coop on May 18, 2017, 02:20:55 PM

I agree that we need options for using our cash.  I'm sitting on the league maximum of $50 million, not because I enjoy hoarding imaginary money, but because I can't find a way to spend it.  I tried to sign free agents, but they all went elsewhere, even the guy whom I offered $20 million a year.  I'd like to use the money to improve my team.  Right now there's no way to do that, but maybe some of the changes that are being discussed will open some doors.

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: Huckleberry on May 18, 2017, 02:21:33 PM

The good news is I think I may have found a way to make the work necessary to run WBA arbitration manageable for me. I will test tonight if I get time.

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: Huckleberry on May 18, 2017, 10:32:42 PM

Okay, the website appears to be looking good so I'm about to run the last offseason sim.

That being said, please take a look at this page:

http://www.worldbaseballassociation.com/arbitrationsalaries.php

(HTML link in case the change to the 2108 regular season messes up the output - http://www.worldbaseballassociation.com/WBA%20Arbitration%20Salaries.html)

This page shows what arbitration would be for the 2108 season if the following rules were implemented:

1. Minimum salary for all players with less than 2 years accumulated major league service time.
2. Players with at least 5 years of service time go into free agency as always.
3. For players with at least 2 years of major league service time but fewer than 5 years receive an arbitrated salary calculated as follows:

$200,000 + $700,000 * (Maximum WAR in any of the last 3 seasons)

For the maximum WAR calculation negative values are of course treated as zero as no player can have a salary below $200K.

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: Huckleberry on May 19, 2017, 07:10:53 AM

Any thoughts? While I think this may be a good solution, I also think we may need to phase it in. This would add an average of $16.3M in salary per team in the WBA for the 2108 season. It would also increase the overall average WBA payroll from $41.5M to $57.8M, keeping in mind that the target is around $50M.

At the same time, though, most of our teams are cash-heavy and additionally some of the free cash has caused a few exorbitant contracts during our first 8 seasons. So maybe it wouldn't be that bad in the long run. Anyway, I imagine the process to end up being something like this:

• First day of the offseason the arbitration salaries script page is copied to HTML format. Everyone then sees how much their arbitration eligible players would receive in salary for the next season.
• Each team posts any players they wish to release (which should be at no financial penalty to the team I believe but we will need to investigate this) instead of paying their arbitration salary. The deadline for this will be determined by OOTP's rules. It could be anywhere from the first offseason sim to the sim when free agents announce.
• Players released by teams then become free agents like normal. It's possible that you could release a player instead of paying his arbitration salary and then sign him for less than that amount during free agency, that would be the risk each owner would run. This is the part we would have to monitor as a league to see if we need to adjust the arbitration salary calculation.
• Players who are not announced as releases by their owner are then assigned the stated salary for the following season.

Just as a thought exercise, on my list of players I know I would release Dave Mendoza and would have to consider releasing Sancho Cervantes and maybe even former prospect Bambang Ananas.

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: claphamsa on May 19, 2017, 07:31:04 AM

i like the idea of being able to release guys if you dont like their arb award!

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: Huckleberry on May 19, 2017, 08:01:11 AM

Quote from: claphamsa on May 19, 2017, 07:31:04 AM

i like the idea of being able to release guys if you dont like their arb award!

Yeah, I actually think that is kind of key for what we're trying to accomplish. One of our biggest issues the past two seasons has been a really shallow and boring free agency period in the offseason. The ability to relinquish your rights to a player if you don't like his arbitration salary will help populate the free agent pool. It will also make for some tough decisions for owners and allow rebuilding owners the leeway to shape their roster a bit more once arbitration starts.

Not to mention if you don't like their arbitration award you might be able to find someone who thinks it's more reasonable or who has the budget room to accommodate it, which should help spur more trade activity in the offseason. I hope we can make the arbitration decision deadline be the sim before free agency filings to give owners more time for that one.

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: APMP on May 19, 2017, 08:39:59 AM

I like the sign-and-trade possibilities this could bring up.

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: Huckleberry on May 19, 2017, 10:31:03 AM

My system's ABL predictions for next year. North American division needs to step up, yo. Two-time defending world champions predicted to miss the playoffs despite a strong squad.

NORTH AMERICAN DIVISION

Team W L PCT GB Mexico City Aztecs 82 74 0.526 - Los Angeles Stars 72 84 0.462 10 Washington Senators 71 85 0.455 11 Northwest Emeralds 67 89 0.429 15 New York City Empires 64 92 0.410 18 LATIN AMERICAN DIVISION Team W L PCT GB Buenos Aires Dolphins 97 59 0.622 - Sao Paulo Toucans 92 64 0.590 5 Rio de Janeiro Jaguars 89 67 0.571 8 Santo Domingo Palmchats 87 69 0.558 10 Puerto Rico Coqui 59 97 0.378 38

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: Echo127 on May 19, 2017, 10:42:25 AM

How do your predictions deal with the fact that our rosters still have more than 25 players on them?

Also, I like the arbitration idea. We need to get an economist in here to tell us what the long-term effects will be, though :-)

Title: Re: 2107-08 Offseason Thread
Post by: Huckleberry on May 19, 2017, 11:27:13 AM

Number of players on the active roster right now doesn't matter, it's based on players in the organization. It doesn't take into account injuries at all, though.