|
Post by sansterre - Milwaukee Brewers on Mar 1, 2019 10:32:50 GMT -5
Proposal 2: Find a way to 'live sim' the IAFA process.
Pro: The fact that right now it plays like a blind auction is kind of a pain, and goes against the premise of a free-market bidding system.
Con: It will give a considerable advantage to the teams able to be logged in for the process.
Con: It may be a pain to implement.
Con: If even when simulating one day at a time, players don't give notice when making decisions ("Seattle has given me a better offer, go above $8 million if you want my services") then this idea isn't even possible.
But I thought I'd throw it out there.
|
|
|
Post by MetDaMeats on Mar 1, 2019 10:44:00 GMT -5
Proposal 2: Find a way to 'live sim' the IAFA process. Pro: The fact that right now it plays like a blind auction is kind of a pain, and goes against the premise of a free-market bidding system. Con: It will give a considerable advantage to the teams able to be logged in for the process. Con: It may be a pain to implement. Con: If even when simulating one day at a time, players don't give notice when making decisions ("Seattle has given me a better offer, go above $8 million if you want my services") then this idea isn't even possible. But I thought I'd throw it out there. I'd like to second this one. I have no idea what tools we have available to try to do this, but you've got to admit that right now the International Free Agents violate the cardinal (congrats by the way) rule of OOTP leagues, that is, it's boring. There's got to be a more exciting way to implement this. I wish I had more specific ideas on methods. I hope someone out there has some thoughts.
|
|
|
Post by sansterre - Milwaukee Brewers on Mar 1, 2019 11:30:14 GMT -5
Proposal 2: Find a way to 'live sim' the IAFA process. Con: If even when simulating one day at a time, players don't give notice when making decisions ("Seattle has given me a better offer, go above $8 million if you want my services") then this idea isn't even possible. Just performed a test. Of the seven players I offered contracts to, only one accepted the offer in two days. The other six came back at me with new demands (which I met, to keep the test going). After two days four of those six came at me with new demands. Summarized version: After at D+6 (the theoretical end of the sim) two of the players had signed and the other five were still going back and forth with offers, driving the price up. tl;dr It only looks like an instant blind auction for us because the GMs never get to make a second bid. These players will wait for a new bid, but they' won't wait for a week. So the premise will work. Now it's just the execution that's the challenge.
|
|
|
Post by Sean_RedsGM on Mar 1, 2019 15:54:52 GMT -5
I don't see a problem with giving your best offer up front instead of low balling and then hoping to get another chance at a player.
|
|
|
Post by sansterre - Milwaukee Brewers on Mar 1, 2019 16:03:50 GMT -5
I don't see a problem with giving your best offer up front instead of low balling and then hoping to get another chance at a player. There is no problem; if that's the way it works then it's fine. But it's obviously a deviation both from reality and a regular OOTP league. Only in a sim-a-week format does the 'best offer up front' system become a thing. The question is whether or not the cost of implementing it is worth a more realistic experience.
|
|
|
Post by Wilson_DodgersGM on Mar 1, 2019 16:03:52 GMT -5
I don't see a problem with giving your best offer up front instead of low balling and then hoping to get another chance at a player. I strongly agree
|
|
|
Post by sansterre - Milwaukee Brewers on Mar 1, 2019 16:06:19 GMT -5
I don't see a problem with giving your best offer up front instead of low balling and then hoping to get another chance at a player. I strongly agree But whether or not there's a problem is not actually the issue. If I say "right now we're getting $5, but we could be getting $10, I'm just not sure if it's worth it" there are only two questions: 1) Is it actually a choice between $5 and $10 (in which case $10 is obviously better) and if so 2) Is it worth it? None of the viable points are "I don't see a problem with $5."
|
|
|
Post by Sean_RedsGM on Mar 1, 2019 16:13:35 GMT -5
But whether or not there's a problem is not actually the issue. If I say "right now we're getting $5, but we could be getting $10, I'm just not sure if it's worth it" there are only two questions: 1) Is it actually a choice between $5 and $10 (in which case $10 is obviously better) and if so 2) Is it worth it? None of the viable points are "I don't see a problem with $5." I can make this same argument for bidding on free agents. Do we really want to open that door?
|
|
|
Post by NickP_Marlins GM on Mar 1, 2019 16:48:35 GMT -5
I don't see a problem with giving your best offer up front instead of low balling and then hoping to get another chance at a player. I strongly agree In this camp as well.
|
|
|
Post by Sean_RedsGM on Mar 1, 2019 17:30:34 GMT -5
I don't see a problem with giving your best offer up front instead of low balling and then hoping to get another chance at a player. There is no problem; if that's the way it works then it's fine. But it's obviously a deviation both from reality and a regular OOTP league. Only in a sim-a-week format does the 'best offer up front' system become a thing. The question is whether or not the cost of implementing it is worth a more realistic experience. If realism is your focus, then the current system ootp uses isn't realistic to begin with. MLB has international signing pool money, and teams can't go over that amount. Our current system rewards players far more than if we followed the current MLB structure. Also, most international amateurs sign the first day they are able to. Obviously teams have sent in there best offer, and those players then choose. That portion of the process seems to mirror what we have now.
|
|
|
Post by MetDaMeats on Mar 1, 2019 17:51:14 GMT -5
There is no problem; if that's the way it works then it's fine. But it's obviously a deviation both from reality and a regular OOTP league. Only in a sim-a-week format does the 'best offer up front' system become a thing. The question is whether or not the cost of implementing it is worth a more realistic experience. If realism is your focus, then the current system ootp uses isn't realistic to begin with. MLB has international signing pool money, and teams can't go over that amount. Our current system rewards players far more than if we followed the current MLB structure. Also, most international amateurs sign the first day they are able to. Obviously teams have sent in there best offer, and those players then choose. That portion of the process seems to mirror what we have now. To my mind realism has nothing to do with it. John is much more practically minded than I am, so he thinks in terms of maximizing bids and value. For me it's a matter of whether or not the system is any fun. And as it's set up now it's boring as hell. No bidding or tension. It's one shot and then you're done. I hate it because it's no fun, period.
|
|
|
Post by Commish_Ron on Mar 3, 2019 12:50:12 GMT -5
I meant to weigh in on this earlier. I agree that the process kind of flies under the radar and does not have much excitement. I definitely believe that it would be better for the league if IFA was an auction instead of a blind bid. I simply do not know how this can be accomplished outside of reducing sim length to a day or two for the IFA bidding period. I think that would be a very bad idea. It would greatly extend our season length and would definitely cause teams not in the bidding process to disengage.
The only notification for bidding updates is in the in game messages. This is the one area I do not have access to for all teams. I cannot see you all's messages.
Maybe I can try to add excitement by drawing more attention to the upcoming bidding. I could post day by day signings in Slack as I am simming. Maybe throw some shout outs to big signings on Slack. <shrug>
Again, the only real opportunity I see here is to add some flare which I will try to do. I do not see any opportunity in changing our process.
|
|
|
Post by NickP_Marlins GM on Mar 3, 2019 18:11:52 GMT -5
The only notification for bidding updates is in the in game messages. This is the one area I do not have access to for all teams. I cannot see you all's messages. Please know that as a southerner even while reading this, I turn “you all’s” into “yall’s” Carry on.....😂
|
|
|
Post by Commish_Ron on Mar 3, 2019 18:28:08 GMT -5
The only notification for bidding updates is in the in game messages. This is the one area I do not have access to for all teams. I cannot see you all's messages. Please know that as a southerner even while reading this, I turn “you all’s” into “yall’s” Carry on.....😂 You all are not.. Ya'all aren't ya'all ain't yain't
|
|