Post by Derek _ Red Sox on Oct 28, 2015 13:57:31 GMT -5
STATE OF THE PBL GM JOB SEARCH:
Its time we make a decision on how we want to handle the PBL and start moving forward as I think the worst thing you can do is standstill too long. We had some activity on the GM front in regards to bringing in some new, fresh faces to the league and I'm fairly confident we could have up to 4 new owners by the end of the night.
The following teams were deemed vacant as of this morning:
•Carolina Warhounds
•Chicago White Sox
•Colorado Rockies
•Oakland Athletics
•San Diego Padres
•Tampa Bay Rays
The Athletics have been confirmed and I have commitments for the White Sox and the Rockies (just waiting their introduction/confirmation here on the boards) so that would leave the following left to fill:
•Carolina Warhounds
•San Diego Padres
•Tampa Bay Rays
I have had two GMs interested in joining which would leave one vacancy left to fill the league BUT I am wondering if now is the time to think about the long-term future of the PBL and the health of the OOTP online community with the majority of the people on there looking for new leagues with real players and how that does not fit where we are in the PBL. Would holding 32 GMs at all times be too much?
I do love the structure of the league now, I like the divisions, the rivalries that are forming, the playoff format (even when shitty teams like Oakland make playoffs over me) and everything else but I do believe change is good and I think this could be the best time to make those changes.
HYPOTHETICAL CONTRACTION TEAMS
Its hard for me to figure out which teams would be contracted and how I want to go about selecting those teams. I think PBL history is the biggest component for me followed by MLB history, GM level of commitment, recent success (or lack of) as well as farm systems and a few other variables make this a difficult process to choose and to do so without hurting any feelings.
I put together a list of teams with the lowest winning percentages since 2015 (when we expanded with Carolina & Portland/Montreal) through this past season and it looks like this:
1. Milwaukee - .419
2. LA Angels - .428
3. Montreal - .454
4. Cleveland - .459
5. Philadelphia - .465
6. Houston - .468
7. St. Louis - .468
8. Washington - .469
9. Carolina - .479
Based upon some of the factors (MLB History, recent PBL success and GM activity) I can not see contracting Cleveland, Houston, Los Angeles, Philadelphia or St. Louis so that would essentially bring the options down to four teams:
1. Milwaukee - .419
3. Montreal - .454
8. Washington - .469
9. Carolina - .479
So with that, I do not want to get rid of Carolina, I really like them in our league. I think a team in Carolina works, I love the name and the origin behind it was well thought out and having some recent success has me thinking it would be a shame to pull the plug.
Milwaukee is a historical franchise in MLB but is a disaster in the PBL. If they were to be contracts NOW would be the time seeing its lone GM in the history of the PBL has just resigned, its only iconic player (Rafael Ruiz) who spent entire career in Milwaukee has retired it has a terrible ML lineup who just lost its two best pitchers to free agency without compensation and the farm system is even worse. The only plus to the Brewers right now is that Ron just took them over and it would be fun to see what he does with them. However, Ron has confirmed he would be willing to move back to San Diego and "wait for the owner to die or wait for another bad rebuild is in order." The budget is 30th in the league with an average market size, a minimal fan loyalty and a fan interest of only 48. The owner just dropped the budget by $23m from last year to this season. They ranked 30th in attendance last year with just over 1 million fans which is down from its peak of 1.9 million.
Montreal is a mess and the future is not looking bring. Mac is a young GM who made some mistakes along the way and that is okay but the team is not in position to win now and possesses one of the worst farm systems in the league and a budget that is deteriorating is only going to make the challenge of turning this team around that much more difficult. I am rooting to keep the Expos in Canada as I always like the Expos and like the idea of having two teams in Canada. The Expos were the second expansion franchise for the PBL but they were in Portland at the time so they already been moved once, another move OUT of the PBL is not unrealistic. They are in a small market with average loyalty and a fan interest of (51). They are 31st in budget and seen an attendance drop from 3.5 million in 2028 to 1.4 million this year (which is UP from the 800k last season).
Washington may be the only team in more of a mess than Montreal at this point and with no long tradition in the PBL, a relatively new one in MLB (just considering time in DC), a newer GM to the league who has also made some mistakes and could use a fresh start. Washington is an average market with below average loyalty and dwindling fan interest (46). It ranked dead last in attendance last season and has seen its peak attendance in 2028 go from 3.6 million fans to a paltry 765,000 in 2035. The owner has given up hope with slashing of the budget from $132 million in 2032 to now a budget of $62 million which is also worst in the PBL. His goal this year for the Nationals is and I quote "Do not suck completely". The last 3 seasons have seen the Nationals go 157-327 (.324). Now may be the time to end the suffering!!
If I had to pick the two teams to contract, I would say Washington is the easiest decision for me upon further review and the other team would be a tougher decision if I wanted to base it more on PBl history over MLB history (where Montreal had some success under GM Sam East), MLB history over PBL (Washington has had some success) and of course current GMs and future ability to build (Ron in Milwaukee versus Mac in Montreal).
I'm not fully comfortable with the idea that the Expos can be good any time soon but I like the idea of Montreal being in the league too so I think I would need to leave that decision up to league discussion (or vote).
WHAT HAPPENS IF WE DO CONTRACT
If we contract, we will hold a "Contraction Draft" in which a draft order will be determined and all the players from both franchises will be put into the draft. This will put about 430 players into the draft. With 30 teams left in the league, I'm thinking 5 rounds would be more than enough (that is 150 players to be selection) and the rest of the players would be subject to the Free Agency.
We would do the draft on the boards in a quick, timely manner (I think we would do it like the Rule-V where teams submit a list) so we can continue with the off-season.
Determining the draft order would be up for discussion but Anthony made a suggestion that I think is the best solution and that would be doing an order based on the franchises winning percentage over the last 3 seasons. However, I would make one change to this. The two teams that are contracted, if it has a GM who is still active with the team (Example: Mac in Montreal) the team he takes over will have first pick. I think this is fair for making them move franchises when they may not want to). If its two teams with the same condition then the team with the lowest winning percentage gets the first pick, the next GM gets the second then the remaining order will be determined.
BUDGETS
I'm not too thrilled about some of the budgets and we made changes in the past as well to them but I do not think its a big enough need to make major changes at this time. However, there is one thing that I am thinking about and that is the GMs controlled allowed budget.
I'm looking at budgets and then I took away each teams money allotted to spend on draft picks to see what each GM has to work with. Interestingly, the three teams we are discussion for contraction sit at the bottom but right now there are 8 teams who have less than $73.6 million to work with and after that the 9th team has $86.6 million to work with. This is a pretty dramatic drop and almost puts them at an unfair advantage. I think a floor minimum could be the answer? I don't think it has to be dramatic but what about a bump up to $85-90m minimum for each team? Would that make sense?
I got some more thoughts but don't want to put too much into one thread so I'll leave this alone and wait for some feedback.
Its time we make a decision on how we want to handle the PBL and start moving forward as I think the worst thing you can do is standstill too long. We had some activity on the GM front in regards to bringing in some new, fresh faces to the league and I'm fairly confident we could have up to 4 new owners by the end of the night.
The following teams were deemed vacant as of this morning:
•Carolina Warhounds
•Chicago White Sox
•Colorado Rockies
•Oakland Athletics
•San Diego Padres
•Tampa Bay Rays
The Athletics have been confirmed and I have commitments for the White Sox and the Rockies (just waiting their introduction/confirmation here on the boards) so that would leave the following left to fill:
•Carolina Warhounds
•San Diego Padres
•Tampa Bay Rays
I have had two GMs interested in joining which would leave one vacancy left to fill the league BUT I am wondering if now is the time to think about the long-term future of the PBL and the health of the OOTP online community with the majority of the people on there looking for new leagues with real players and how that does not fit where we are in the PBL. Would holding 32 GMs at all times be too much?
I do love the structure of the league now, I like the divisions, the rivalries that are forming, the playoff format (even when shitty teams like Oakland make playoffs over me) and everything else but I do believe change is good and I think this could be the best time to make those changes.
HYPOTHETICAL CONTRACTION TEAMS
Its hard for me to figure out which teams would be contracted and how I want to go about selecting those teams. I think PBL history is the biggest component for me followed by MLB history, GM level of commitment, recent success (or lack of) as well as farm systems and a few other variables make this a difficult process to choose and to do so without hurting any feelings.
I put together a list of teams with the lowest winning percentages since 2015 (when we expanded with Carolina & Portland/Montreal) through this past season and it looks like this:
1. Milwaukee - .419
2. LA Angels - .428
3. Montreal - .454
4. Cleveland - .459
5. Philadelphia - .465
6. Houston - .468
7. St. Louis - .468
8. Washington - .469
9. Carolina - .479
Based upon some of the factors (MLB History, recent PBL success and GM activity) I can not see contracting Cleveland, Houston, Los Angeles, Philadelphia or St. Louis so that would essentially bring the options down to four teams:
1. Milwaukee - .419
3. Montreal - .454
8. Washington - .469
9. Carolina - .479
So with that, I do not want to get rid of Carolina, I really like them in our league. I think a team in Carolina works, I love the name and the origin behind it was well thought out and having some recent success has me thinking it would be a shame to pull the plug.
Milwaukee is a historical franchise in MLB but is a disaster in the PBL. If they were to be contracts NOW would be the time seeing its lone GM in the history of the PBL has just resigned, its only iconic player (Rafael Ruiz) who spent entire career in Milwaukee has retired it has a terrible ML lineup who just lost its two best pitchers to free agency without compensation and the farm system is even worse. The only plus to the Brewers right now is that Ron just took them over and it would be fun to see what he does with them. However, Ron has confirmed he would be willing to move back to San Diego and "wait for the owner to die or wait for another bad rebuild is in order." The budget is 30th in the league with an average market size, a minimal fan loyalty and a fan interest of only 48. The owner just dropped the budget by $23m from last year to this season. They ranked 30th in attendance last year with just over 1 million fans which is down from its peak of 1.9 million.
Montreal is a mess and the future is not looking bring. Mac is a young GM who made some mistakes along the way and that is okay but the team is not in position to win now and possesses one of the worst farm systems in the league and a budget that is deteriorating is only going to make the challenge of turning this team around that much more difficult. I am rooting to keep the Expos in Canada as I always like the Expos and like the idea of having two teams in Canada. The Expos were the second expansion franchise for the PBL but they were in Portland at the time so they already been moved once, another move OUT of the PBL is not unrealistic. They are in a small market with average loyalty and a fan interest of (51). They are 31st in budget and seen an attendance drop from 3.5 million in 2028 to 1.4 million this year (which is UP from the 800k last season).
Washington may be the only team in more of a mess than Montreal at this point and with no long tradition in the PBL, a relatively new one in MLB (just considering time in DC), a newer GM to the league who has also made some mistakes and could use a fresh start. Washington is an average market with below average loyalty and dwindling fan interest (46). It ranked dead last in attendance last season and has seen its peak attendance in 2028 go from 3.6 million fans to a paltry 765,000 in 2035. The owner has given up hope with slashing of the budget from $132 million in 2032 to now a budget of $62 million which is also worst in the PBL. His goal this year for the Nationals is and I quote "Do not suck completely". The last 3 seasons have seen the Nationals go 157-327 (.324). Now may be the time to end the suffering!!
If I had to pick the two teams to contract, I would say Washington is the easiest decision for me upon further review and the other team would be a tougher decision if I wanted to base it more on PBl history over MLB history (where Montreal had some success under GM Sam East), MLB history over PBL (Washington has had some success) and of course current GMs and future ability to build (Ron in Milwaukee versus Mac in Montreal).
I'm not fully comfortable with the idea that the Expos can be good any time soon but I like the idea of Montreal being in the league too so I think I would need to leave that decision up to league discussion (or vote).
WHAT HAPPENS IF WE DO CONTRACT
If we contract, we will hold a "Contraction Draft" in which a draft order will be determined and all the players from both franchises will be put into the draft. This will put about 430 players into the draft. With 30 teams left in the league, I'm thinking 5 rounds would be more than enough (that is 150 players to be selection) and the rest of the players would be subject to the Free Agency.
We would do the draft on the boards in a quick, timely manner (I think we would do it like the Rule-V where teams submit a list) so we can continue with the off-season.
Determining the draft order would be up for discussion but Anthony made a suggestion that I think is the best solution and that would be doing an order based on the franchises winning percentage over the last 3 seasons. However, I would make one change to this. The two teams that are contracted, if it has a GM who is still active with the team (Example: Mac in Montreal) the team he takes over will have first pick. I think this is fair for making them move franchises when they may not want to). If its two teams with the same condition then the team with the lowest winning percentage gets the first pick, the next GM gets the second then the remaining order will be determined.
BUDGETS
I'm not too thrilled about some of the budgets and we made changes in the past as well to them but I do not think its a big enough need to make major changes at this time. However, there is one thing that I am thinking about and that is the GMs controlled allowed budget.
I'm looking at budgets and then I took away each teams money allotted to spend on draft picks to see what each GM has to work with. Interestingly, the three teams we are discussion for contraction sit at the bottom but right now there are 8 teams who have less than $73.6 million to work with and after that the 9th team has $86.6 million to work with. This is a pretty dramatic drop and almost puts them at an unfair advantage. I think a floor minimum could be the answer? I don't think it has to be dramatic but what about a bump up to $85-90m minimum for each team? Would that make sense?
I got some more thoughts but don't want to put too much into one thread so I'll leave this alone and wait for some feedback.