Budgets Topic

travisg
Posts: 2146 (0)
Hall of Famer
11 268
Prospect
Posted by MikeT23 on 6/18/2010 4:52:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tecwrg on 6/18/2010 4:00:00 PM (view original):
Nobody here sees a problem with being given the ability to go from a 20/20 training/medical budget to a 0/0 budget or vice-versa from one season to the next? Or going from 20/20 draft scouting to 0/0?
Not really.  It's just a complete change of strategy.    Maybe I've got an old team with a lot of expiring, high-priced contracts.   Because I had a high payroll, I had to make cuts in scouting.  Those contracts expire and I've got 6/6 in HS/College.   Now I have no BL team and no way to jumpstart my minors.  Should I be stuck in nowhere land for 3-4 seasons while I rebuild my scouting?  That seems dumb.   And a fine reason to throwaway my team and start fresh in another world.

Is that what we want in HBD?
It takes time to build a quality scouting department in real life, and it should in HBD.

The current system forces us to anticipate our future situation and start moving our budgets accordingly. If you remove the incremental limits, then the smart plan is to max out on Type A free agents one season while slashing your scouting budgets and then max out your scouting budgets the following season while slashing payroll. The current system imposes some moderation, promotes competitive balance and more closely resembles real life.
6/18/2010 6:58 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Would you have any proof that it takes time to build a quality scouting department in real life?

It seems to me, if a team chose to, they could hire every available top scout and suddenly have a boffo scouting department.   They could, essentially, go from 0 to 20 by simply hiring everyone available.
6/18/2010 7:13 PM
travisg
Posts: 2146 (0)
Hall of Famer
11 268
Prospect
But we're not hiring individual scouts, the way we do coaches; we're budgeting for a department. It takes time to get quality departments up and running, because there's a lot of moving pieces that have to mesh before it can work properly:
Since Alex Anthopoulos took over as general manager in October, the Jays' scouting staff has grown steadily and Thursday it grew a little more ... The recent hiring surge has given the Jays what Anthopoulos believes is the largest scouting staff in the majors. Where the Jays once had 10 pro scouts, they now employ 21. And where they once had 18 amateur scouts, they now have 33 [...]

Even though the scouting staff has grown quickly, he doesn't think its rapid expansion undermines his other main goal, promoting clear communication.
There may be examples to the contrary, but in my experience it's difficult to change the culture overnight in a corporate department. Too many turf wars, etc., to work through. Scouting departments are no different.
6/18/2010 7:40 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
No, we're not.  But, if I want to change my payroll from 20m to 120m, there are no limitations.   What's the major problem with going 0 to 20m in a season?  As I said, you're hiring a scouting department using the max resources available to you.
6/18/2010 7:45 PM
travisg
Posts: 2146 (0)
Hall of Famer
11 268
Prospect
But our budgetary numbers offer some guarantee of results. In the real world, simply throwing money at a problem does not necessarily solve the problem.
6/18/2010 7:48 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Tell that to the non-Yankee fans who insist a salary cap is the only way to save baseball.
6/18/2010 7:52 PM
nfet
Posts: 204 (0)
Hall of Famer
8 1 44 52
Prospect
I'm not so sure about getting rid of the restrictions.  They add long-term strategic decisions.  Being able to maximize a budget well, and over many seasons as it is now, is an advantage.  Take it away and maybe it just levels things out. 
6/18/2010 7:57 PM
jwelsh1023
Posts: 2831 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 10 121 7 73
Prospect
but an owner in his first season is effed if the starter budgets dont fit his team
6/18/2010 9:04 PM
rebelt
Posts: 61 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 70
Prospect
That fact that a newbie can come into a world and sign some shitbag to a 5-year/120MM contract, but can't change his training from $10M to $20M is just the epitome of irony to me.

"You can't screw up your team for 1 year, but by-god you can screw it up for 5!"
6/19/2010 12:50 AM
dyoungquist
Posts: 866 (0)
Hall of Famer
180
Rookie
I vote for increasing it from a max of 4 to a max of 6 or 7.
6/19/2010 1:13 AM
travisg
Posts: 2146 (0)
Hall of Famer
11 268
Prospect
Posted by jwelsh1023 on 6/18/2010 9:04:00 PM (view original):
but an owner in his first season is effed if the starter budgets dont fit his team
I think owners should be able to base their budget on the previous owner's budget, for better or worse. New owners are nearly forced to immediately dump all their veterans or risk watching them lose their value while the training budget is restricted.
6/19/2010 8:37 AM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
"or worse" is the problem.
6/19/2010 8:47 AM
tecwrg
Posts: 18997 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 1 166 32 129
Prospect
New owners should be given the option of retaining the old adjustable budgets or starting new with the 10 +/- 4 defaults.  That should be a no-brainer.

But existing owners should not be able to drastically change their medical/training from one season to the next, or go from heavy/light in draft/IFA scouting to light/heavy the next season.  Managing your budget in these catagories from one season to the next should be a strategic long-term plan, not a tactical "change it on a whim":
6/19/2010 9:14 AM
nfet
Posts: 204 (0)
Hall of Famer
8 1 44 52
Prospect
maybe just even give new owners to pick their own starting points.  That would make more sense to me.
6/19/2010 9:34 AM
mitchrapp
Posts: 807 (0)
Hall of Famer
106 20 14 109
Prospect
If I can go 14m while others had plenty of opportunity to go 20m over the years I'm at a disadvantage. How is that fair? 1st year owners in an established world get screwed. That needs to change.
6/19/2010 1:18 PM
◂ Prev 12345 Next ▸
Budgets Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2026 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.