Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 24, 2011 3:55:13 GMT -5
Bump so it's on the front page.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 24, 2011 12:48:07 GMT -5
Ouch. Looks like my rebuild decision is being made for me.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 24, 2011 12:56:47 GMT -5
What?
You're currently well under budget in my eye. In fact, everyone on the list is budget compliant after the next year.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 24, 2011 13:09:22 GMT -5
I won't be for more than a season or two with my current roster and I certainly can't add anything of any consequence and conserve enough money to pay draft bonuses. I've been purposefully keeping my payroll low so that if a significant piece came along I'd have a realistic shot at the signing without crippling the whole team.
I'll live with whatever I'm given, but it's going to make it tough to justify trying to win over the next couple of seasons if my budget is slashed by approximately 40%.
And what is being proposed for Texas is ridiculously out of line with reality. Their real life budget right now, when you factor in things like draft bonuses, is going to be over $100m.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 24, 2011 13:17:47 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 24, 2011 13:22:36 GMT -5
Dude. You just got here. Had we been playing on real life budgets the last three seasons, I'd have made different moves. To put us back on real life budgets all of a sudden would probably screw with more long term plans than just mine.
And perhaps you missed the part where I said I'd live with whatever I got? Save the snark.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 24, 2011 13:22:45 GMT -5
Just to get this straight:
You are conserving budget space to land the big splash free agent when that comes around. At the same time, I can't help but notice Alex Gordon has signed a rather large 5 year-extension with you. You can have one or the other, man, but you can't retain all your youth past arb AND hope to play in the free agent market with the big boys.
I'm assuming a lot of your unhappiness stems from the realization that you won't be able to afford extensions to all your stars and still be able to afford top-tier free agents. Well, that's life in Oakland.
*snip*
That's my take on it though.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 24, 2011 13:27:13 GMT -5
*snippity snip snip*
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 24, 2011 13:28:16 GMT -5
whoa there everyone!
the purpose of Erick's write ups was to consider each team and come up with a fair resolution, without screwing anyone down to the point of them having to completely change their team's outlook. if there's anything to debate here intitially it's over Erick's subjective opinions on the relative positions of teams.
I wasn't aware we were using Nemo's numbers for anything. As was already said in the other thread, they may well be realistic (certainly compared to MLB 2010) but they imo they include some cuts that are just too extreme for many teams.
Let's not start an argument about any team or any number just yet! If anyone has comments on any of Erick's write ups that they think is relevant - make it.
For example 'Sure the Mariner's have done well over the past three years, but how would the ownership and fans feel that they traded away the best bat on the team - a decision which ultimately cost them a playoff spot. At the same time Ichiro just retired. I'm not so sure they're in spend mode right now'.
|
|
|
Post by Rich - Former GM on Feb 24, 2011 13:34:09 GMT -5
This is why I am not in favor of adjusting budgets. We are imposing real life on a presumed future and not the one we all have been planning on in the world of PBL. As unrealistic as budget skyrocketing is, it is a part of the world we have played in the last 3 years. Make changes to level it out gradually, just don't change make abrupt and sudden ones.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 24, 2011 13:38:14 GMT -5
Given we are only 1 season from OOTP12 we really shouldn't be making big, if any, changes.
If we only reduce budgets it will do very little good anyway, revenues will still be sky high and teams can just cut players at will with their massive profits. Teams without budget room can just toss their overpaid busts to a team making massive unusable profits along with a prospect and everything continues as before.
Cutting revenues is far more important than budgets.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 24, 2011 13:47:02 GMT -5
*snip*
The MLB functions on the dynamic relationship between small and large market teams. Small market teams are successful (or not) through the draft and by trading away their stars. Large market teams have the bankrolls to sign star players through multi-year extensions and can spend prospects in order to acquire them.
Look at the recent Adrian Gonzalez trade. The Padres gave 'em up to the BoSox, who promptly attempted to extend his contract. SD got prospects in the trade, Boston got their superstar.
In the PBL, all teams are acting like large market teams, mostly because the budget exists to do so. This means that all teams have been able to resign their stars on contract extensions, and is the underlying cause of the poor free agent class.
The poor ammy drafts have only complicated things. With such low amounts of talent hitting the league, prospects have become premium assets. The unwillingness for teams to part with their coveted prospects means that it is harder to move star players. This combined with the low valuation of compensation picks in the draft, only give incentive to teams to try and extend their stars-- thus, again, depleting free agency.
In my opinion, there are two things that need to happen:
1) Budgets need to be fixed to restore the balance (and difference) between large and small market teams. This will make salary decisions tougher league-wide, and promote fiscal prudence.
2) Draft classes need to be supplemented. Improving the draft class to the 2010 level ease a GM's pain and unwillingness to let a player walk. If you could be reasonably sure that by letting your Type A SP go to Free Agency, you would get back two comp picks that could net you two prospects in the 2.5 to 4 star range, it would be much easier to do than it currently is.
By fixing these two core issues in OOTP gameplay, we will be actively making the league better, and increase the difficulty and challenge of being a GM in the PBL. We certainly have enough manpower to make it happen.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 24, 2011 13:50:38 GMT -5
a big problem with this is that GMs have made decisions based on the scenario they see on their computer screen - with no thought of 'my budget might be radically changed by a 'panel' in a few sims time!'
e.g. nobody can blame A's for extending Gordon's contract - he was just playing within the numbers the game gave him.
As for what should change and what shouldnt - the commish has made a call on this - that the ship has sailed.
|
|
|
Post by Derek _ Red Sox on Feb 24, 2011 13:51:48 GMT -5
Not to take sides for/against anyone here but being new to the league is absolutely irrelevant. I think Florida, new or not, has been one of the biggest contributors to this cause and its very well respected from my end. Just like I value everyone elses opinion as well.
The argument that for 3 seasons a team worked to increase its budget from a small market team is kind of strange to me. How long in real life has Oakland been a small market team? It uses the moneyball approach in order to get players for less money that other teams are not paying much attention to because they can not compete with larger markets. It will surely take more than 3 years to change that.
A budget of $106 million is not close to realistic especially considering its real life comparisions and then factor in the PBL info like the owner is an 'economizer' who is mad about the performance of his club. The market size is small with below average loyalty and only has a 52 fan interest. What justifies this payroll to be in the 80-90-100M range?
|
|
|
Post by Derek _ Red Sox on Feb 24, 2011 13:55:27 GMT -5
To all members of this committee, please refrain from making any more posts right now. This is a discussion that will not get far if we do it on this forum as we will constantly be trying to keep owners happy. If your in the committee, send me a PM and I will send you a link to another forum that I have set up so we can openly discuss issues there.
Then we can post all our information, findings and decisions here and THEN allow teams to argue their points. I think too many teams will be getting worked up over information that is being show which is unfair since its not going to be the ultimate number.
This would be like have a board of directors meetings about cutting jobs and salaries in an open forum for all the workers to hear. Things might be said that will not end up in the final decision and it will only cause animosity. Lets keep it 'behind closed doors' until we can make the right decisions then we will open the floor up for discussion.
Trying to handle this the smoothest way possible..
|
|