|
Post by Derek _ Red Sox on Jul 22, 2015 8:10:33 GMT -5
Here we go, time to hammer out some of the concerns we had. I'll post each Rule as a separate post and if I miss anything just let me know....
|
|
|
Post by Derek _ Red Sox on Jul 22, 2015 8:12:54 GMT -5
Pretty simple and straightforward and will be changed to allow more control over your roster. I should be able to hammer this out tonight. I think Fin was right when he said the GM & Manager option is set up in new leagues but where we transferred over it wasn't.
|
|
|
Post by Derek _ Red Sox on Jul 22, 2015 10:58:35 GMT -5
I was a little back and forth on how I wanted to go about this ruling because as I been learning more and more about the Zevin process and the work Fin and I have put into this, I just grew more and more disdain for the team option clause.
I still feel its a way for teams to manipulate the player into thinking he is going to get more money. The common strategy as of late has been to offer a team option AFTER a player option. This is in my mind is a work around where a team can control the player option and make sure specific incentives are not which then voids the final two years of a deal. The AI is not smart enough to work around this yet.
My opinion on what is best for the league is to do what I have been focusing on in contract extension talks and that is to make options incentive based. There is no guaranteed way to prevent teams from working around this (in game or in real life for that matter) but its presents more challenged in my opinion.
example: You have a starting pitcher who is doing decent but not good enough to pick up his $10+ million player option next year which is based on 30 starts or 180 innings, etc... Your pitcher has been hot lately and he's your best option to start to get you into post-season but another start locks him into his vesting option. YOU as a GM have a major decision to make because its very hard to win in this league so do you go for it or do you play for next year.
That is just one example. However, back to the main issue and that is team buyout percentages. I feel as though I want to get to a point where we simplify rules and so I my thinking right now is to make all buyouts 50% from this point forward regardless of length. Why not just simplify it.
You want to add a team option which I think are too easy to manipulate then you should be willing to prove it to the 'player' that you are more likely than not willing to pick up that option. Now if you hold a $15m team option you have to decide what's better keeping him for $15m OR paying him $7.5m and then spending money elsewhere to as well to replace player. Maybe you get someone cheaper or you end up spending more money. I think the 25% is too low for such a manipulative clause.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 22, 2015 12:04:28 GMT -5
On the team option - what about eliminating multiple options. You can only have one option year (team option, player option or vesting) at the end of the contract.
Keep it at 25% buyout but stop the multiple options to stop the manipulation of the last 2 years. From experience I know that having a team option followed by a player option does not work.
You do get the salary break from a team option for the 1st year but the player picks up his option in the last year. That's why I have 24+ mil in misc player expenses this year. I took the team option last year for a bad 24m contract and it had one more year with a player option and the player took that option for 24m this year. I did not do this contract I inherited it but I thought if I took the team option it would void the player option. Nope he took it and that was the major reason I decided to rebuild and sale everything because no matter what I did I could not meet budget this year without losing a major piece and still not being able to replace players leaving in free agency.
|
|
|
Post by Derek _ Red Sox on Jul 22, 2015 14:24:55 GMT -5
I know there are two camps on this one. I was trying to move the Rule-V draft after free agency instead of the start because I felt like teams just listed an endless number of players and said give me as many as you can only to see them released quickly after back to their old teams and then OOTP messes up and puts them into free agency.
I did not account for playing time, etc. The goal is to do what is right while keeping it simple. This is why I think its best to skip the Rule-V this year and return the Rule-V date back to December 11th.
The Rule will be amended to be much more simplified, another goal this off-season.
|
|
|
Post by Derek _ Red Sox on Jul 22, 2015 14:28:42 GMT -5
The Lottery will now be held for the teams with the 10 worst records from the season before, a change from the 14 we have been doing.
|
|
|
Post by Sean_RedsGM on Jul 22, 2015 14:40:25 GMT -5
The Lottery will now be held for the teams with the 10 worst records from the season before, a change from the 14 we have been doing. Can we set an in-game date for this?
|
|
|
Post by craigWhiteSox on Jul 22, 2015 16:37:20 GMT -5
On the team option - what about eliminating multiple options. You can only have one option year (team option, player option or vesting) at the end of the contract. Keep it at 25% buyout but stop the multiple options to stop the manipulation of the last 2 years. From experience I know that having a team option followed by a player option does not work. You do get the salary break from a team option for the 1st year but the player picks up his option in the last year. That's why I have 24+ mil in misc player expenses this year. I took the team option last year for a bad 24m contract and it had one more year with a player option and the player took that option for 24m this year. I did not do this contract I inherited it but I thought if I took the team option it would void the player option. Nope he took it and that was the major reason I decided to rebuild and sale everything because no matter what I did I could not meet budget this year without losing a major piece and still not being able to replace players leaving in free agency. Who's this player you speak of that had a 24 mil player option this year?
|
|
|
Post by David_ExposGM on Jul 22, 2015 18:29:53 GMT -5
The Lottery will now be held for the teams with the 10 worst records from the season before, a change from the 14 we have been doing. Can we set an in-game date for this? The original wording of the rule does say it will be conducted when the draft pool is released. And then later in that same text (not seen above, but in the rules) it says that the "draft reports" (which I assume is the pool, but will stand corrected) is released 30-days prior to the draft date. So it would appear the lottery would be in the area of May 15th? The 2033 (the one in which I dropped back to #5, but I digress) was conducted on calendar Mar 4th, 2015. I won't go as far to pin down the exact date on the schedule in the game, but my game summary on that same calendar date referenced our going a 9-15 April, so that would put the lottery in May of last season by deduction. So that would correspond with the wording of the rule?
|
|
|
Post by Sean_RedsGM on Jul 22, 2015 18:34:57 GMT -5
Can we set an in-game date for this? The original wording of the rule does say it will be conducted when the draft pool is released. And then later in that same text (not seen above, but in the rules) it says that the "draft reports" (which I assume is the pool, but will stand corrected) is released 30-days prior to the draft date. So it would appear the lottery would be in the area of May 15th? The 2033 (the one in which I dropped back to #5, but I digress) was conducted on calendar Mar 4th, 2015. I won't go as far to pin down the exact date on the schedule in the game, but my game summary on that same calendar date referenced our going a 9-15 April, so that would put the lottery in May of last season by deduction. So that would correspond with the wording of the rule? Thanks for clarifying David. I thought that it normally happened a month or so in season and this confirms that, thank you!
|
|
|
Post by David_ExposGM on Jul 22, 2015 18:37:14 GMT -5
Honestly could not remember at all when it happened last year, so had to go back through the archived stuff Derek keeps at the bottom of the forum.
|
|
|
Post by Dustin Ackley on Jul 22, 2015 20:00:56 GMT -5
Personally I would love to see the lottery done early in the off-season...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 22, 2015 20:10:21 GMT -5
I personally like it as it is, you get everyone to make bets trade for a pick that could change, that if they want to deal them, it brings a new element maybe trade for a lower pick could become a steal if the pick goes higher is just exciting
|
|
|
Post by BlueJaysGM_Fin on Jul 22, 2015 20:17:52 GMT -5
I personally think the Commish is awesome for finding the time to put this altogether in one thread!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 22, 2015 20:20:22 GMT -5
I personally agree with you Fin the Commish is awesome thumbs up to him lol, certainly better then Rob Manfred and Bud Selig together
|
|