|
Post by Tim_GiantsGM on Oct 20, 2015 16:14:15 GMT -5
Factoid: Last season 16 teams generated a net profit and 16 teams incurred a net loss.
|
|
|
Post by David_ExposGM on Oct 20, 2015 16:25:42 GMT -5
Factoid: Last season 16 teams generated a net profit and 16 teams incurred a net loss. And I would be interested to know if there a correlation between that fact and how many teams have seen their budget go up, stay same, go down? I would suggest a net profit would probably cause a budget increase. I hope I'll find out next season.
|
|
|
Post by David_ExposGM on Oct 20, 2015 16:48:25 GMT -5
I am lumping these two together because this is the problem. I'm betting we are looking at a 50/50 split or close to it for those who want to add money into the league and those who are against it. I also think both sides of the argument are pretty locked into their opinion and not willing to consider the alternative. I agree 100% that the budget decrease is a result of your performance as General Manager. So yes, gutting your farm system, trading draft picks, taking bad contracts all contribute to poor performance and budget changes. HOWEVER This is simply NOT realistic. I'm going to use Anthony as an example, just because he been with the Braves in the PBL for 25 seasons and nothing else. If he started in 2010 as the GM of the Braves in real life and did a good job by building up a solid farm system, making shrewd trades, great trades and wins a few playoff series and even delivers a World Championship to Atlanta. Then he picks a player with his #1 pick in the draft who suffers a CEI, he misses on a few trades, lost some players to FA signings and the Braves fall into downward spiral. In OOTP what happens is the teams budget is slashed and then next year its slashed again and next year again which makes it tough for Anthony to turn it around OR if he were to leave then making it almost impossible on the next GM to come in and stay engaged in the league. In real life if this scenario were to happen, do you think the GM is going to say to the GM "I'm slashing your budget and you need to start winning?" Then the same thing the year after and the year after and then after that as well so he continues to lose money, attendance starts to tank and his lifelong investment goes to shit ? Absolutely NOT! He simply fires the GM, keeps the budget at or somewhere near where its been and bring in a new guy to turn things around. In the PBL guys don't get fired so teams continue to fall into a dark hole and its impacting the league. Salaries continue to rise AS THEY SHOULD but budgets continue to decline because the owner has no other way of showing displeasure and the game doesn't factor in inflation whatsoever. I mentioned before the Red Sox are an example. The 2035 PBL Red Sox have a budget of $150 million. In real life 2015, the Red Sox PAYROLL (not budget) is $185 million. In PBL the 2035 Sox STILL have a very big market size, very good fan loyalty and a fan interest of 100 yet are to see a budget increase at all. Since 2031 the Sox budget was: $140m $144m $144m $144m $146m $146m The $140m was coming off a World Series victory and we seen a budget increase since then we have reached the playoffs every year except this year where we won 88 games, won 2 more World Series and the year after fell short in the ALCS. We were also seeing an ending balance of about $12m (average) but yet no increase. I'm not sure the correlation is really that accurate to budgets being the deciding factor but I don't know what else it would be the main factors here either. Were you making a profit each one of those years? Just curious. I would beg to differ with the statement that "salaries continue to rise, as they should". In real life that is most likely the case because there are several other factors that come into play that are simply not in OOTP. Inflation being one. In OOTP, in very broad terms, salaries are regulated by how much money is in the league and that depends on many factors. I may be on shaky ground making this next IRL argument, but every team goes through a period where their budget fluctuates. When the LA Dodgers were going through their "divorce" period, their budget was severely curtailed (as I loosely understand it) and they simply kept things going without putting any money into the team. The flipside of that is that new owners came in and pumped money into the team and "then" they started to win (but have yet to go all the way, so the cycle may indeed repeat at some point - like after a sale). The New York Yankees, long known as a bottomless well of CASH, have changed course in recent years and are at least attempting to be fiscally responsible. But better examples of how the owner affects budget may be the Tampa Bay Rays or Miami Marlins or the "Moneyball" Oakland A's. They are certainly not rolling in cash and as a result of that have to "play their IRL game differently than the YANKEES or DODGERS"!
Your example of the Boston Red Sox (if you mean they do not get themselves in trouble, that is) might be a poor example because they consistently have the capacity to WIN, which is a combination of GM and fiscal success. If you mean they do not incrementally increase their budget year after year, that goes to my other point. In OOTP that will never lead to an ever-increasing budget (because OOTP does have limits, as I first mentioned, mainly because of NO inflation and the game balancing itself). Winning, or at least having the capacity to win, will prevent the slash and burn "Owners" some believe they are now experiencing. AN INTERESTING EXERCISE MIGHT BE TO HAVE THE TOP 10 "CONSISTENTLY WINNING TEAM GM'S" TAKE OVER THE BOTTOM 10 CONSISTENTLY POORLY PERFORMING FRANCHISES to level the playing field, instead of contemplating any financial alterations?!? And then make sure we ALL pay attention to what happens! Of course I am only joking...(or am I)?IF, after four or five seasons, the have-nots rise to the TOP (in terms of both Wins/Championships and Financial Stability) and the haves spiral into trouble, that may further prove the point that the GM makes the ultimate difference in the success of the franchises?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 20, 2015 17:12:09 GMT -5
I agree with some parts. I agree with the idea that the more you win then the more money you are going to make, but if the owner keeps lowering your budget and expecting you to get to .500 the next season, and you were 40 games under .500 then your budget is going to be slashed again, and the more it gets slashed the harder it is to win. This makes it so it takes 5-10 seasons to grow your farm. I think if maybe the type of owner for the teams that are having troubles with money is changed, or a random new owner is put in place then maybe if possible could make it so you dont have to manually pump money in. Just an idea.
|
|
|
Post by Sean_RedsGM on Oct 20, 2015 17:27:08 GMT -5
I agree with some parts. I agree with the idea that the more you win then the more money you are going to make, but if the owner keeps lowering your budget and expecting you to get to .500 the next season, and you were 40 games under .500 then your budget is going to be slashed again, and the more it gets slashed the harder it is to win. This makes it so it takes 5-10 seasons to grow your farm. I think if maybe the type of owner for the teams that are having troubles with money is changed, or a random new owner is put in place then maybe if possible could make it so you dont have to manually pump money in. Just an idea. It takes 5-10 years in real baseball though to rebuild a system. Heck, look at the Cubs and Astros right now. Look at the Pirates, the Cardinals, Rays, etc. I personally like having to figure problems out and I realize that building a franchise isn't a one or two season turn around. Yeah, I won my division in my first full year but my division was terrible. We still are struggling to compete with the great teams in the PBL but I like that challenge.
|
|
|
Post by Derek _ Red Sox on Oct 20, 2015 17:48:47 GMT -5
Sean, up until this year we made money each season, we lost this year for our failure to make the playoffs:
|
|
|
Post by Derek _ Red Sox on Oct 20, 2015 18:00:13 GMT -5
I got more to say on this and have some documents to support some arguments I look forward showing the league in hopes that it helps take the thing into the right decision.
Between tonight and tomorrow I should be able to get it all together
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 20, 2015 18:15:07 GMT -5
I would also like to say something about the profit. So last year i had a budget of 86 million, I can work with that, then I loose 5 million dollars in the profit. Not that big of loss. My owner then slashes my budget by close to 20 million. i don't know how a loss of 5 million can make a budget lose 20 million
|
|
|
Post by Sean..Mariners GM on Oct 20, 2015 18:19:57 GMT -5
I would also like to say something about the profit. So last year i had a budget of 86 million, I can work with that, then I loose 5 million dollars in the profit. Not that big of loss. My owner then slashes my budget by close to 20 million. i don't know how a loss of 5 million can make a budget lose 20 million Greedy owner.... Sent from my SM-N900V using proboards
|
|
|
Post by kitchentaco-BoSox on Oct 20, 2015 18:26:30 GMT -5
I've been a lot busier than I'd like to be, so I don't post on the forums nearly enough as I'd like. I do export nearly every sim though.
Once thing I've noticed in this league compared to other leagues though, is that our draft pools are pretty light on talent. Maybe manually go in and edit the top 50 or so to make them better?
As far as Zevin goes... its my favorite part of this league and it's something that sets it apart from every other league out there.
I'll make some recruiting posts over in my simulation football leagues and try to get some fresh blood in here
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 20, 2015 19:47:49 GMT -5
I'm fairly new and I know this may not matter much but...
1) I know I wasn't very active last half of season. I just didn't have a team that was fully, my team. I inherited players and did best I could to mix it up. So hopefully will a full offseason and money to spend I can get the players I want and fall in love with my team.
2) I love this league. I like the fact that I have no emotional connection with anyone. I just get players and hope for the best. Really fun and I plan to be more active with a team I build.
3) I hate hate hate draft pick trading. Too many teams abuse it in my opinion. Some just sell all their picks to win now and other just stack up and create a huge advantage in the future. So in my opinion it shouldn't happen or be very limited.
4) I like Zevin, but it is complicated and needs a team of GMs. It is overwhelming and crazy. Needs to be broken up by two or three others.
5) Let's get rolling! I'm very excited and want to see if I land these FA targets or not.
|
|
|
Post by Commish_Ron on Oct 20, 2015 20:05:11 GMT -5
Not to toot my own horn too much but I think the Padre story is applicable to this conversation. Some of the new people on the boards may not be aware that it has only been 7 seasons since San Diego suffered through their 20th strait losing season. They literally went two decades without an 80 win season.
I took over the Padres in 2023. They had the third to lowest budget in the league. Two seasons later their budget had shrunk even lower and became the smallest in the league at 78 million if I remember right. Despite the legendarily cheap owner, small market and nonexistent fan loyalty I was able to turn it around. It took 5 years, a clear vision and lots of patience.
Priority #1 was getting finances under control. Since I had no budget that meant having no salary. I traded away everyone I could find a taker for and just sat on and suffered through the big contracts no one would take. Every single trade and move I made had to pass one test. Does it make me better in 5 years? Wins did not matter. Of course I was not throwing games, I fielded the best lineups I could with what I had but acquiring win now talent was just not a priority.
Through the draft and trades I acquired several high potential players. I also had a couple of 1/2 star guys bloom into studs (Jason Wilson for example). On this I disagree with David. For a rebuilding team, cutting player development may be required but should be avoided if possible in my opinion.
After 5 seasons of super suckage I was able to put a team with a ton of talent on the field and they were all making the league minimum! In 2028 the Padres broke their losing streak, they took a step back in 2029 and then went on to 5 strait 100 win seasons. The key here is that I was able to win cheaply by having a bunch of really talented guys break in to the majors in the same 2-3 year period. That is how you win cheap. Once the wins come the fans come. As the revenues rise the budget rises.
I look forward to seeing Derek's research but people will be hard pressed to sell me on the case to inject money. I don't think it is a good idea.
I am in on the PBL as long as there is a PBL to be in on. I might entertain the idea of jumping ship to a junked franchise to see if I could do it again.
|
|
|
Post by Nick_BrewersGM on Oct 20, 2015 21:35:51 GMT -5
my optp is all messed up so i haven't been about to export for about a week hoping the next sim works out...as for the budgets i always said salaries were inflating way to fast but not having money is the teams choice, injecting money is a stupid idea. I have +30 Million in budget room with a low market team thats been in win now mode for 8 years theres no reason anyone else can't do it
P.S. Im sticking with Derek where ever we go...Thats my commissioner (T.O. Voice)
|
|
|
Post by Tim_KCRoyalsGM on Oct 20, 2015 23:03:08 GMT -5
A few thoughts:
I'm with Ron and David (and others)... injecting money arbitrary, unnecessary, and harmful to the health of the league.
My story is similar to Padres and others--- bad teams CAN win. Ron's stated plan was excellent advice.
Also... I've said before and I'll say again... I think we are TOO QUICK to characterize the league as non-participatory. Now, I'm sure that some GM's participation level dropped off... but there are SO many factors and I just don't want to see us just jump so quickly into the mindset of "GM's don't care enough" and "Maybe the league has run it's course. Some teams are not exporting because they don't have any money for FA's. Some teams don't use 7 day lineups, so... if there are no injuries... they might download the file and decide to change nothing. I hate to hear talk of shutting down PBL. We've been through worse---we needed like 12 new GM's a couple years ago in the offseason. I think that's the same off season that brought us David, and others. True non-participators will work their way out, and Derek you can help facilitate that by inquiring with them. It's just not realistic to think you are going to have 32 GM's posting on the forum all the time. People have busy lives. And Derek... just as we had to be patient with you when you were dealing with some personal issues, GM's have personal issues at times too and might go through a period where they just can't put in the time as often... be patient is my advice. That GM is the best person to evaluate whether their activity will soon spike again, or if their lack of time to commit to the PBL is more permanent, and a change is needed. All I'm saying--- crappy GM's will work their way out, we have PLENTY of solid GM's and we'll always replace GM's when necessary... let's not overreact.
Finally... Maybe we should consider retiring Zevin. I hated it at first, grew to love it... but frankly, I would NOT miss it if Zevin disappeared. And I don't think that you MUST have Zevin in order to make contracts more fair for the player. You can simply establish parameters that are in the player interest and have a person assigned to monitor all extensions for compliance. I can TOTALLY see how it is easier to sell the Zevin concept to our established crew than to sell it to NEW and PROSPECTIVE GM's. If it's hurting recruiting, that's pretty much all I need to know to be willing to move on. Derek... my impression is that you are ALL-IN on Zevin and wouldn't necessarily be open to canceling him now. Just a perception. But I really think we should consider this. I didn't like the HUMAN element of Zevin and found it tough to swallow... if I was a GM looking into the PBL, I likely would be deterred by this as well because it is WHOLLY dependent on the impartiality of a human (in a league that perhaps I don't know anyone). Not only that--- but that impartiality is coming from a human that is ALSO a league participant. I trust Derek with that balanced responsibility--- but why would I have that trust if the league is new to me? I wouldn't. I would see that the Commish is not only a GM, but is singularly responsible for all contract negotiations for all teams... and that obvious conflict of interest would send me immediately looking for a new league. One last note on this: I hated having Derek on the outside looking in when he ran ONLY ZEVIN... and did not run a team. I am not in favor of that. But new people... they are going to have trouble accepting this.
Just want to see the league continue. Let's stay positive, stay together, and keep this league going another 50 seasons! There is not another league like this one... it would be foolish to create a reason to disband. God forbid, if Derek runs out of passion for his role someday, I would hope that someone would step up and be willing to take charge. PBL Forever!
Tim / KC
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 20, 2015 23:29:01 GMT -5
I agree throwing money at it might be bad. But I think someone said there budget was 50m. That is just way to low. You couldn't get close to maxing player development, put money in scouting (not a lot) and field a team on that even when rebuilding. Maybe there should be a budget for of 75 - 80 mil.
I think there are some major gaps though.
1st - The draft is pretty weak. This year looks better than most but if you can't draft a 5 star player in the top 15 picks I think it's weak. It would be nice to infuse some young talent.
2nd - I know zevin is unique and did help drive up salaries. The process helped the league but if it is limiting new GM's or making GM's leave maybe it's time to move away from it. I think the new financials are pretty good.
Last - trading draft picks - I am torn on this. Not to many leagues allow trading picks. I personally like it but it can hurt teams if GM's trade picks then leave.
|
|