|
Post by Luc_AZdbacks on Feb 10, 2015 18:10:20 GMT -5
I think the best solution is not to have seperate zevins for each league.
Fin (or whoever) and Derek should work as a team on ALL extensions. Therefore we have consistency, and we avoid having conflicts of interest since there are two people in charge of extensions.
|
|
|
Post by Derek _ Red Sox on Feb 10, 2015 18:21:15 GMT -5
What I am thinking is having one more person (Fin offered and I think would be a great help here) join me in negotiating all extensions for both the AL and the NL. Fin would take the lead in all negotiations for the Red Sox, I for the Mets. Together I hope we could have a few private conversations and continue to work on establishing parameters on what type of extensions players should be signed to.
Another thing I want to do is create another system to make it go smoother. We will continue to work hard on the development of Zevin and I think we will see great results for the league.
|
|
|
Post by BlueJaysGM_Fin on Feb 10, 2015 18:31:18 GMT -5
Many valid points above, with the emphasis on the simple approach. Count me in that camp as well...I will help in any way commish and will continue to think about ways we can simplify, streamline and define the process...
Btw, Zevin is taking on his very own personality as the PBL continues to grow..what an awesome concept and imagine the league narrative as we move 5,10 and 15 years down the road with him in the contract extension mix..lol
|
|
|
Post by David_ExposGM on Feb 10, 2015 19:16:11 GMT -5
You have valid points David, however, being in the league for a number of years (10 or 11) i can attest that it is an issue doing extensions through OOTP alone. Believe me, it was hotly contested and much debate about what to do, the fact that (rough estimate) 80% of the league is content with Zevin should speak volumes on how important he is to keeping the league realistic. I mean we were having straight studs at age 23 and 24 on Mike Trout levels taking 5 and 6 year deals for 15 to 20 mil. It was absurd. You may not know the extent of it, but just trust that while you think it is a bit odd the rest of us are in compliance because we know the alternative. I was a proponent of the septemeber window of doing extensions because that's where OOTP seems to take negotiations seriously. It is a hassle, primarily for Zevin (Derek) but as long as he's willing to do it it is for the betterment of the league No problem with staying with Zevin. Please remember I am contemplating a strictly "take it or leave it" policy on extensions. As in, ask for an extension and decide on ONLY whatever the player asks for as a contract. I am well aware that if you "negotiate" an extension with the AI you will pillage them 99.9% of the time. That's not what I am proposing at all. And I am contemplating having Zevin merely double-check that is the offer in-game, that way there is hopefully no chance to game the system. Just wanted to be clear about that. And finally I am really hoping for a quantum leap in this area with version 16! Fingers crossed that someday the AI will think a lot better and this can all be done, realistically, in-game.
|
|
|
Post by David_ExposGM on Feb 10, 2015 19:32:20 GMT -5
also find these real life players who will take really cheap extensions because they like playing for division winners, i know most real life guys will go wherever the money takes them regardless of team prestige. It is usually the veteran guys on their last leg staying with a team for less than market value rather than guys bypassing arbitration to miss a massive payday of a lifetime because their team won the division and was knocked out in the 1st round An excellent point. I wasn't strictly suggesting "cheap extensions", I was suggesting that there may be better deals to be had for teams that are winners, with certain players (depending on their "personality", each one being a little different, which is fine). But I take your point that the AI is still pretty loose in this area. And, only because I just finished Jonah Keri's book "The Extra 2%", I would point to Evan Longoria's contract (15yrs/$144.5mil + Option) as being a cheap outlier. Pretty sure, over the past several years, he could have made a LOT more money had he not locked into a sweetheart deal with Tampa Bay (supposedly for "long term security" for his family on a cheap ball club). In mere mortal terms the numbers are still outrageous, but in baseball terms he's being fleeced! And most OOTP online players would have revolted had it ever been negotiated in-game by "Johnny Fictional Player"! I would have!!! On the other hand, as a fan of the Blue Jays IRL, the Russell Martin contract (5yrs/$82mil) will be a LOT of fun in a few years!!! I think that one would have also lit a fire in OOTP online as being highly unrealistic!?! So there's no "one way" of handling any of this. Just hope the game gets better!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2015 17:37:26 GMT -5
This has nothing to do with a solution for Zevin, but what I do like to see is when a player signs an extension through Zevin, the league should be made aware of it. This could be done by simple and short post in the game thread or with an article (we have some articles on extensions). Every time I see an extension in game, and I can't find anything about it on the boards, I'm asking myself, did this go through Zevin? I'm looking at Tampa's Jimmy Smith who was just made available for trade for example and I'm wondering, did this extension go through Zevin? It looks like such a cheap deal. I don't want to keep putting this out here on the boards every time I see a contract extension that looks 'suspicious'. Maybe I have thrust issues.
|
|
|
Post by Sean_RedsGM on Feb 11, 2015 18:43:00 GMT -5
This has nothing to do with a solution for Zevin, but what I do like to see is when a player signs an extension through Zevin, the league should be made aware of it. This could be done by simple and short post in the game thread or with an article (we have some articles on extensions). Every time I see an extension in game, and I can't find anything about it on the boards, I'm asking myself, did this go through Zevin? I'm looking at Tampa's Jimmy Smith who was just made available for trade for example and I'm wondering, did this extension go through Zevin? It looks like such a cheap deal. I don't want to keep putting this out here on the boards every time I see a contract extension that looks 'suspicious'. Maybe I have thrust issues. I completely agree. I also was looking at SP Smith and wondered how is his contract was so low? Based on my negotiations with Zevin on a SP, that number seemed very low IMO.
|
|
|
Post by Tim_KCRoyalsGM on Feb 11, 2015 19:32:59 GMT -5
My proposal:
NO ONE should be blindsided by Zevin requirement at this point. It's only been mentioned, addressed, discussed on about five threads in the last month. The contracts that have been signed should already, including those mentioned above, should be validated as approved by Zevin. If Zevin approved it--- great, even if its team-friendly. If Zevin did NOT approve it, the contracts should be considered invalid immediately, without any consideration as to whether the AI deal was fair by Zevin standards or not. In other words, they shouldn't get a sweetheart deal JUST BECAUSE its a pain to change it now. Then--- if they want to negotiate with Zevin, so be it. But here's our problem... isn't Derek running a sim TONIGHT for players to declare for FA? Let's get this squared away. Deals not run through Zevin should be invalidated, and if there is a way to do it where the team has the option to get a deal through Zevin BEFORE the FA declaration--- that would be best. To expedite--- maybe Zevin gives a one-time take it or leave it offer (so the league doesn't have to wait for deals to be renegotiated before we can have FA declaration?
And yes, as the White Sox mentioned---- let's get a thread up that is singularly there to validate extensions done through Zevin. All extensions should be validated there by the GM. Write a big story (we love it), or just one sentence to confirm it was done through Zevin.
For your consideration,
Tim / KC
|
|
|
Post by David_ExposGM on Feb 11, 2015 19:50:08 GMT -5
There is a thread here that I was told was the place to report contract extensions as a courtesy to the rest of the league. I freely admit that a couple of earlier, and somewhat minor ones, were missed on my part because I was brand new and did not realize it at that point. My latest and most significant is there however. The Zevin process should also be clearly outlined in the rules (which I know are coming) so that there is even less of an excuse for newcomers. Some may or may not closely follow the threads but it should pretty much be mandatory for a newcomer to read the rules of the league they are joining (and for those rules to be completely up to date at all times)! Personally I read the rules prior to even entertaining the idea to find out if this is a league I'd want to join, but that's me. * And frankly, unless I did a bit of digging in the forums prior to joining (which I did) I would have had no clue about Mr. Zevin until a GM in PBL.And I suppose if the penalty is needed, that too should be spelled out, but null & void is a good start, in my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by Luc_AZdbacks on Feb 11, 2015 21:16:02 GMT -5
I agree with David and Tomas that it should be mandatory to report all contract extensions in that thread (I've failed on this part so far, but will start doing it from now on).
Also, agreed on the Jimmy Smith deal... I don't see any way that could have been done through Zevin.
|
|
|
Post by David_ExposGM on Feb 17, 2015 15:52:18 GMT -5
With the renewed discussion surrounding a sign & trade deal, free agency, extensions and Zevin once again, here's an even more radical idea: Within the game (OOTP15 and, I presume, going forward) you can LIMIT both contract years and also whether EXTENSIONS are even ALLOWED or not. Might one, or the other, or a combination of both, be a consideration - seriously? - If we're trying to encourage free agency, then a maximum allowable contract length of 5, 4 or even 3 years would certainly do that. I kind of like "3" myself!!!
- I can't really imagine why you would want to do a free agent sign and trade as, generally, you would be signing a player as a free agent to benefit your team from the outset, but in the case of "extension" sign & trades, if you eliminate extensions, then that is impossible.
- If a GM does sign a player to a sweetheart deal, he only benefits for a limited time. And if the player becomes a stud in that period of time then his next contract will be massive?
- Conversely, if a GM signs a player to a "massive mistake" then his team will recover a lot quicker! That would actually be a huge plus for an online league where a frustrated GM could leave at any time if saddled with an impossible situation.
- And with a combination of both you could effectively eliminate Zevin (if you wanted to)! Without extensions, no need for Zevin as GM's could ONLY compete among themselves over free agents.
So, in essence, you have players through their initial "auto" renewal years and through any "arb" years (unless you choose to non-tender them, in which case they become free agents). You would see some choice free agents hit the market in their prime once their arbitration years runs out, hopefully demanding big bucks! And this would certainly change (dare I say, increase) the strategy of player signings at free agency. And it would really change player trading dynamics too!
AND, this would still make PBL unique because I'm sure sure many other leagues are doing this - CERTAINLY the prohibiting of extensions entirely.
In a way, it's almost self-regulating too because contracts are on a much tighter time frame. Thoughts???
|
|