A few issues I'd like to see fixed. - Page 5 - Suggestions

Posts: 959 (0)

Hall of Famer

65

Prospect

Mike - First, there are a lot of reasons we shouldn't use coach hiring as an example player FA. FI are pretty much only good for one role (maybe OK BC). There is pretty much one rating that ranks them (PAT & others factor in, but mostly it's about one number). Players aren't anything like that. We all need 5 SPs, not 1. A player can play 2B on season, 3B the next, and CF the next and be above average at all of them. There are a lot of ratings that come into play. Better fielding vs more power vs. more speed. Making direct comparisons between coach bidding & player bidding is going probably going to have a lot of problems. They're just different.

What you described has nothing to do with my proposal. No matter how biding works, if there are 3 good CF and 4 GMs want a good CF, at least one GM isn't going to get one. You can make up endless if someone does this or that, but, in the end, there will always be at least one loser, no matter how bidding works. So, sorry, but you don't have a relevant point there.

Reread what you wrote. >> You bid your max on the top 3 << >> Meanwhile, the other 12 owners HAVE to seek other options because all they know is that they can't get to #1 on those 3. << --- Not true. YOUR max bid is not THE max bid (unless you bid the max). So the other owners to not HAVE to seek other options. They can raise their bid. Or they can hold at the max they are willing to pay, because they know (at least I know) that the the person who is top bid on the FI I want is probably also top bid on my other 2 options. So if I hold at my max on them, I might get one. To reduce all-or-nothing risk, I can make other bids on lesser FIs so I have an option between 1,2,3 and 31.

6/23/2012 5:52 PM

tufft

Posts: 959 (0)

Hall of Famer

65

Prospect

Posted by jtrinsey on 6/23/2012 10:13:00 AM (view original):
While I wouldn't go with tuft's suggestion, I think Mike is being creating deliberately dumb strawmen in his sample scenarios.

What would happen with unlimited bidding is that you would just offer what you feel is an appropriate bid to all of your players, A high bid on a player would never scare anybody off, they would just leave their bid out there because there is no cost to it.

However, I think the unlimited bidding would create a less strategic and less skilled game. Right now, I like the fact that, during the FA process, I really only have the ability to pursue one or two players at a time, and you have to understand your league and the market for each player. If I have 14M available and I want that stud CF, I have to look at the cap space other teams have and if it's likely that he will go for more than that. With unlimited bidding, I could just throw my max bid out there with no real repercussions, and still pursue other guys.

I think the way the system is currently constructed rewards owners who:
(a) Log in a lot to see the activity from cycle to cycle to be able to change bids or player targets in response to what is happening
(b) Are good at pricing the market ahead of time to know if they have a shot at getting a certain player.

I completely agree with you on (a). I don't agree on (b). I think rather than skill at pricing the market, it's more about random luck. Yes, there is some skill, but it's more luck.

If there are 3 really good SPs, and I want one & am willing to pay the big money I think it will take, I have to pick one to bid on and can't make an offer to the other 2. Unless I'm at a computer 16-20 hours a day, every day, for about a week, making & dropping offers, hoping that in the 1/2 cycle I drop an offer that player doesn't sign. Success is a mix of dumb luck (because once the bidding starts, I know about how the market is going) and being able & willing to put in a lot of time. I really don't like that the game hurts GMs who happen to have finals, work double shifts, travel, etc. during a critical period of time. If you're playing to win, missing FA or coach hiring can really hurt your team. I assume a lot of people decide to punt the game, or at least on that team, when that happens. If you could make all of your bets at one time, and then check back less than every 4 hours, it would be a game more people could play.

In your example, if you've got the $14M and want that stud CF, right now you either have to go all in on him or not. And if you do go all in, you can't try any other way to improve your team. You either win big, or lose big. IMO, there's not a whole of strategy there. More like picking a random number & hope it comes up on the wheel.

IMO, there would be more strategy if you could bid $14M on that CF, and at the same time, without 24/7 interaction, act on your Plan B, which might be that the 3rd or 4th best CF would be OK, and they will probably only cost $4-5M, bid that on them, and then be able to spend $9-10M on a 1B that is better than yours, plus an good RP that would also help, plus maybe a 4th-5th SP that's an upgrade. I see more strategy, not less, in having more good options & being able to act on all of them. You can sort-of do that now, but it takes a lot of time in front of a computer.

Also, I think it's a bad thing we can see other teams budgets & spending during that season. Great that we can see prior seasons, because that's a good way for people to learn. I think one area Mike & I agree is that current season budgets & spending should be hidden form other teams.

Just my opinion. Hope I don't come across like I'm sure I'm right & you're wrong.

6/23/2012 7:28 PM

MikeT23

Posts: 58012 (0)

Hall of Famer

87 1 47 1 189

Prospect

Too long.

Do people nap off when you speak to them? Be brief and get to the point. I'm not reading any of that.

6/23/2012 8:33 PM

jtrinsey

Posts: 237 (0)

All Star

1 4 2 30

Rookie

On one hand you say it is luck, and on the other you say it benefits people who can check every half-cycle to make sure they are bidding correctly. Those statements don't really match up, even if I think the reliance on constantly checking your team is not nearly as important as assert.

I wouldn't really care if it was done your way, to be honest, but it just hasn't ever seemed like something I've wanted to change. I can think of two specific instances where I chased a specific FA thinking I could land him and missed, and when I did, I was stuck with 10M+ with nothing other than a couple of leftovers to show for it. That sucked, but in both cases, I could see retroactively how I should have looked at the budgets of other owners, their needs, and their historical FA bidding strategies to see that my chances of landing that guy was low. The system didn't screw me over, my lack of skill did.

6/23/2012 8:39 PM

tufft

Posts: 959 (0)

Hall of Famer

65

Prospect

jtrinsey - That we can see the current budgets of other teams is another flaw in the game, IMO. I think I'd disagree with any point that defends the current system using that reasoning.

In the current system, first you have to get lucky to pick the right FA to bid on, then you have to be in front of a computer a lot of hours. Luck & time don't contradict.

6/25/2012 4:18 PM

tufft

Posts: 959 (0)

Hall of Famer

65

Prospect

Posted by MikeT23 on 6/23/2012 8:33:00 PM (view original):
Too long.

Do people nap off when you speak to them? Be brief and get to the point. I'm not reading any of that.

There were so many things inaccurate, irrelevant, & silly in your posts it took me more than a sentence to cover them all.

6/25/2012 4:20 PM

jtrinsey

Posts: 237 (0)

All Star

1 4 2 30

Rookie

Posted by tufft on 6/25/2012 4:18:00 PM (view original):
jtrinsey - That we can see the current budgets of other teams is another flaw in the game, IMO. I think I'd disagree with any point that defends the current system using that reasoning.

In the current system, first you have to get lucky to pick the right FA to bid on, then you have to be in front of a computer a lot of hours. Luck & time don't contradict.

Why is seeing the budgets a flaw in the game? In the NFL and NBA (which have salary caps, although not quite as "hard cap" as what we have in HBD), the salaries are publically disclosed and everybody knows what the salary constraints other teams are operating at- at least to a pretty reasonable degree. I can maybe see hiding some scouting information, etc, as that may not be disclosed, but in a salary-cap league, it seems reasonable to be able to see the budgets of other teams. For example, in the NBA this year when Deron Williams becomes a free agent, everybody knows who the few teams (Dallas, New Jersey, and maybe LA or NYC in a sign-and-trade deal) are who can offer him the "max money" it will take to land him.

Every real-life league that has a salary cap has "public budgets" that everybody can see.

6/25/2012 6:19 PM

jtrinsey

Posts: 237 (0)

All Star

1 4 2 30

Rookie

Also, I don't get why you think there is some luck in choosing which FAs to bid on.

The coach hiring process is a perfect analogy. I always see guys complaining that they got stuck with a 55-rated fielding instructor. Well, if they had realized that the 2M they had to spend wasn't going to land one of the 85-rated guys when there were 5 teams with 4M+ to spend, they could have gone after the 70-rated guy and maybe landed him and not been screwed.

Likewise, if you have 10M to spend and the pitcher you were bidding on goes for 14M, you didn't get unlucky, you didn't have enough money in your budget and you priced the market poorly. That isn't bad luck, it's lack of skill.

6/25/2012 6:22 PM

irondawg

Posts: 20 (0)

Hall of Famer

88

Prospect

Jtinsley - it's not always lack of skill. Let's say you do your research - you've seen what similar players go for and the recent market has proven that pitcher you mention in your example is worth $9-$10M. Let's say you lead until the next to last cycle. You've felt good all this time - now somebody else missed on a hitter in the last cycle and throws $14M at the guy and you lose him in the last cycle.

That has nothing to do with lack of skill - it's bad luck. Now all the other P's are gone. Now if you had the chance to bid on another pitcher as well and chose not too - then yeah, lack of skill. But i think you should be able to make multiple offers. I agree unlimited could cause some problems, but you should be able to bid in excess of your budget by some %.

Yes there is some skill involved, but there is a lot of luck still in the FA system.

6/26/2012 12:11 PM

MikeT23

Posts: 58012 (0)

Hall of Famer

87 1 47 1 189

Prospect

The people who say it's luck usually lack the skill to understand why it's not luck.

6/26/2012 1:11 PM

MikeT23

Posts: 58012 (0)

Hall of Famer

87 1 47 1 189

Prospect

But I will admit that there can be some timing issues and no one can account for the owner who suddenly bids 15m on a player you've held for 6 cycles at 6m because "I had the money to spend."

6/26/2012 1:15 PM

tufft

Posts: 959 (0)

Hall of Famer

65

Prospect

Posted by jtrinsey on 6/25/2012 6:19:00 PM (view original):
Posted by tufft on 6/25/2012 4:18:00 PM (view original):
jtrinsey - That we can see the current budgets of other teams is another flaw in the game, IMO. I think I'd disagree with any point that defends the current system using that reasoning.

In the current system, first you have to get lucky to pick the right FA to bid on, then you have to be in front of a computer a lot of hours. Luck & time don't contradict.

Why is seeing the budgets a flaw in the game? In the NFL and NBA (which have salary caps, although not quite as "hard cap" as what we have in HBD), the salaries are publically disclosed and everybody knows what the salary constraints other teams are operating at- at least to a pretty reasonable degree. I can maybe see hiding some scouting information, etc, as that may not be disclosed, but in a salary-cap league, it seems reasonable to be able to see the budgets of other teams. For example, in the NBA this year when Deron Williams becomes a free agent, everybody knows who the few teams (Dallas, New Jersey, and maybe LA or NYC in a sign-and-trade deal) are who can offer him the "max money" it will take to land him.

Every real-life league that has a salary cap has "public budgets" that everybody can see.

Very good point. The ability to see budgets is at or outside the edge of my suggestions about the FA process. Seeing budgets or not doesn't really change why the current FA bidding system is silly & my suggestions would make it easier & more realistic.

6/26/2012 2:21 PM

tufft

Posts: 959 (0)

Hall of Famer

65

Prospect

Posted by jtrinsey on 6/25/2012 6:22:00 PM (view original):
Also, I don't get why you think there is some luck in choosing which FAs to bid on.

The coach hiring process is a perfect analogy. I always see guys complaining that they got stuck with a 55-rated fielding instructor. Well, if they had realized that the 2M they had to spend wasn't going to land one of the 85-rated guys when there were 5 teams with 4M+ to spend, they could have gone after the 70-rated guy and maybe landed him and not been screwed.

Likewise, if you have 10M to spend and the pitcher you were bidding on goes for 14M, you didn't get unlucky, you didn't have enough money in your budget and you priced the market poorly. That isn't bad luck, it's lack of skill.

Good points. They have nothing to do with anything I'm trying to present, but they are still good points.

If you have $10M to spend and the FAs you want sign for $14M+, you're not going to get them. Nothing in what I'm proposing is going to change that.

One more time, I'll go back to the most simple issue & example. Maybe this will stop folks from going down paths that have nothing to do with the issue.

If there are 3 very good SP FAs I like, and I have $15M to spend, right now I have to pick one to go after. I have to get lucky to pick the right one, or else I'll get none. Or I have to be in front of a PC a lot to make & pull bids and get lucky with my timing.

If they all end up getting more than $15M, nothing I'm proposing comes into play. I'm not getting any of them.

If I pick the wrong on, the other 2 might sign for $10M and $11M while I've got the only bid I can have out there on the 3rd SP.

I should be able to make offers of $15M for SP1, $13M for SP2, $11M for SP3 all at the same time. If I get overbid on any of them, I can up my bid or hold where I am. No reason I should have to pull any bids to free up that money to make other bids. At the same time, I should be able to offer $7M to an OK SP that would be good enough. If he signs, I don't have the money to pay my top 3, so if I don't want to risk that, I won't offer $7M to the good enough SP. My risk. More strategy in the decision making.

This is how it works in the rest of the world. You can put 3 offers on 3 cars or 3 houses. The total of your offers can be more than you have to spend. First offer that's accepted takes the other 2 off the table. This has worked for many hundreds of years. It has not collapsed the world economy or cause any of the the problems Mike is sure it will. It has proven to work without anyone having to make bids every 4 hours 24/7 for a week or pick just one car or house to pursue at a time. Why should HBD have a bidding system that doesn't exist anywhere else in the world? One system has worked for thousands of years, all over the world, for all kinds of products. One system exists only in HBD and has several problems that I've pointed out.

The HBD system has advantage. It's better for more experienced owners, as they've had more time to learn the timing of making / pulling offers. It keeps FAs contracts lower, which is completely the opposite of MLB FA & any other free market. It rewards people who can be on a computer 24/7 over people with other interests & responsibilities. If you like those things, fine. Those are all opinions & everyone can have their own opinions.

6/26/2012 2:40 PM

MikeT23

Posts: 58012 (0)

Hall of Famer

87 1 47 1 189

Prospect

Too long.

But who puts out offers for three houses or cars? You see a house, you make an offer. They accept, decline or counter. If you can't come to an agreement, you move on to house #2. As for cars, you go to dealership. They have a price, you counter, they counter, you counter and maybe you come to a deal. If you don't, you move on. No one says "OK, here's my offer. I'm on my way to the Toyota place down the street to make them an offer."

6/27/2012 12:39 PM

Crump123

Posts: 361 (0)

Hall of Famer

238 132

Prospect

You dont need to make 4 bids every 24 hours. You only need to do that if you increment your bids in marginal amounts, which is pointless.
Initial bid, bid what you think someone is worth, find out where you stand, at the next half cycle, you're either #1 or not.
If you#re not #1, decide how much more you're willing to pay, make a second bid.
Second bid, your top offer, if you're not #1 at the next cycle, move on to someone else.

This works for FA, and Coach hiring, it saves you mental anguish, and not wasting your time bidding contracts up in dumb 500k/yr increments, which is infuriating to bid against. Since i reside 4H+ of EST, i'm always asleep, at the first FA/Coach signing cycles. If i can manage when i'm asleep, i dont know what anyone else is whining about.

6/27/2012 4:19 PM

Forums

A few issues I'd like to see fixed. Topic

Search Criteria