Minimum win rules - Page 5 - Hardball Dynasty

Posts: 58012 (0)

Hall of Famer

87 1 47 1 189

Prospect

My "in jeopardy" number gets an owner booted from a world I commish. Your "in jeopardy" number is for your own amusement. Surely you see the difference.

Nonetheless, if your extensive study is going to involve one of the worlds I commish, it will only be accurate if you use the number that will get an owner removed from said world. If you want to use an abitrary number of your choosing, I suggest not wasting your time because whatever you find will be invalid.

10/14/2010 3:56 PM

MikeT23

Posts: 58012 (0)

Hall of Famer

87 1 47 1 189

Prospect

"In jeopardy" numbers for MG S17:

eblake - 60
cretins - 60
njohnson78 - 56
fletchkd - 81
danmam - 62
mike1184 - 59

Now, if you want to check trades involving those owners, you might "prove" something. Otherwise, you're just making noise.

10/14/2010 4:04 PM

deanod

Posts: 3152 (0)

Hall of Famer

115 18 1 118 1 52

Prospect

55/125/195/280 are all arbitrary landmarks to hit.

If a guy wins 55 in S1, it is not arbitrary for Mike to say he needs to win 70 in S2 once the aforementioned landmarks are set in stone. This is because it is based on pre-set requirements. Hope that helps.

10/14/2010 4:09 PM

MikeT23

Posts: 58012 (0)

Hall of Famer

87 1 47 1 189

Prospect

OK, give yourself a reacharound. Thanks.

10/14/2010 4:11 PM

genghisxcon

Posts: 5894 (0)

Hall of Famer

176 11

Prospect

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/14/2010 12:13:00 PM (view original):
Posted by genghisxcon on 10/14/2010 6:24:00 AM (view original):
A related issue is that marginal teams, the ones that should probably focus on rebuilding, are the teams under the most pressure to sign free agents. This drives the market up, sticking these teams with large contracts for old players who, instead of putting them over the hump into the playoffs, just raise them up to mediocrity.
Marginal teams are not the ones suffering under minimum win rules. A marginal team, in my mind, is the team winning 70-75 games every year. They're in no danger of failing to make the minimum wins. The teams that struggle with MWR are the teams winning 60-65 games every year. If you're doing that year in/year out, you're not rebuilding. You're stinking up the place. You either need to step up your game, in whatever manner works, or move on to a world that doesn't have MWR.

I meant teams in the 60-65 range on paper. And it isn't really an issue of whether they make the MWR, it is whether the agressive strategy they are strongly encouraged to adopt in free agency/trades is detrimental to the long-term project of building a good team.

10/14/2010 4:18 PM

MikeT23

Posts: 58012 (0)

Hall of Famer

87 1 47 1 189

Prospect

I don't really think you have to adopt an aggressive strategy. I've been "on the edge" for a few seasons in Coop

Cooperstown	CHR Charge	10	$85.6M	65-97 (.401)	3	-
Cooperstown	CHR Charge	11	$85.1M	80-82 (.494)	3	-
Cooperstown	CHR Charge	12	$81.0M	78-84 (.481)	3	-
Cooperstown	CHR Charge	13	$62.5M	73-89 (.451)	3	-
Cooperstown	CHR Charge	14	$74.0M	66-96 (.407)	4	-
Cooperstown	CHR Charge	15	$68.5M	76-86 (.469)	4	-

Contrary to plague's theory, I haven't traded away my prospects, I've only added one expensive FA(9m per year). As you can see, my payroll has been moderate at best. It's not fun being "in jeopardy" but, despite the very competitive nature of Coop, you don't have to mortgage your future to stay in the game.

10/14/2010 4:30 PM

csherwood

Posts: 533 (0)

Hall of Famer

12 116

Prospect

Speaking as an owner who has had a lot of success in various worlds, including some of the more elite ones, and is now being thrown out of the world that I commish for failing to make the win requirements, I can absolutely say that I changed my strategy in building my team because of the rules. I won my division each ofteh first 5 seasons (I think) in Moneyball, and each season I tried to upgrade my team to make a playoff run and try to win a title, normally by trading propsects for vets and signing Type A free agents - a process that left me with an old team with no farm system. Once I started to fall off, I did begin moving the remaining talent for prospects, but I tended to do so only later than I would with other franchises. I also continued to invest heavier in player payroll to try to land a free agent or two, knowing that my team was declining but yet I needed to win as many games as I could. I started appraoching seasons with the idea of "let me hit free agency, try to get 75-80 wins this season, and then hit the farm hard the following year because I will have a solid season banked and can afford a bad one next year". When the years I was shooting for 75-80 wins ended up with 65 or so wins (and I needed 130 over two years to return), the next year I had to go into free agency again, was once again unable to spend what I would have otherwise done on draft and internationals, and just barely stayed above the required wins for a couple seasons. It was a bad cycle and finally my team completely fell apart and now I am not only being removed from the world but am leaving behind a franchise that needs to be rebuilt from the ground up.

I did manage this team differently than I would have without the win requirements and it ended up backfiring on me. Looking back, I would have done things a lot differently, and I take it as a learning experience. If I had managed teh way I do other teams, I would probably have never been in this spot..so my point: Managing to save your job will do nothing but destroy your team -- but there is no reason you acnt make most win requirements if you simply manage the way you always do (if you are good at it), and let the chips fall.

10/14/2010 4:36 PM

deathinahole

Posts: 4139 (0)

Hall of Famer

76 2 1 42 1 75

Prospect

I know everyone is waiting for my opinion, so here it is;

No min win requirement seems to = complete tank jobs or completely loaded teams without much in the middle.
Single season win requirement seems to = a more normalized version of above (tank to 54 wins)
Multiple season win requirement seems to = irrational judgments from those near the bubble

That's a generalization. I can unload a turd contract in a multiple season league more readily than a single season one, but I also see less "transfer 50M to prospect" in the multiple season league.

Which I can tolerate better seems to depend on the mood I'm in. No min is completely out.

10/14/2010 4:47 PM

disaacs

Posts: 223 (0)

Hall of Famer

18 88 94

Prospect

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/14/2010 12:13:00 PM (view original):
Posted by genghisxcon on 10/14/2010 6:24:00 AM (view original):
A related issue is that marginal teams, the ones that should probably focus on rebuilding, are the teams under the most pressure to sign free agents. This drives the market up, sticking these teams with large contracts for old players who, instead of putting them over the hump into the playoffs, just raise them up to mediocrity.
Marginal teams are not the ones suffering under minimum win rules. A marginal team, in my mind, is the team winning 70-75 games every year. They're in no danger of failing to make the minimum wins. The teams that struggle with MWR are the teams winning 60-65 games every year. If you're doing that year in/year out, you're not rebuilding. You're stinking up the place. You either need to step up your game, in whatever manner works, or move on to a world that doesn't have MWR.

I'm one of the people who is "struggling" in Moneyball to maintain competitive and rebuild at the same time. With the MWR, I agree that it's difficult, but it can be done. I did some prospect for veteran trading, but not enough to sacrifice the future. In fact, I probably actually did a little more veteran for prospect trading, because I was left several high-priced veterans by the previous owner (thaceo) that didn't fit in with my plans. I decided to unload some of them for prospects, and over the next few seasons, signed free agents to fill in the gaps until my newly drafted youngsters come up. However, having to sign those free agents has kept my payroll somewhat higher than I'd like (around $85M-$90M), just because I have to remain competitive. So, I am unable to put a lot of money into the Int'l market where that extra payroll would go. As a result, it takes longer to rebuild completely to begin competing for playoff spots. But, after a few seasons of hovering around the MWR marker, over the next season or 2, I should be able to begin my rise out of the doldrums, as my high draft picks are starting to make their way onto the ML roster to replace some of those veteran free agents.

Anyway, I actually enjoy the challenge. If I had not survived (especially last season where it came down to the last 2-3 games before I made it), then I would have been okay with that. I did what I thought was best for the future of the franchise.

10/14/2010 4:54 PM (edited)

usfbully

Posts: 905 (0)

Hall of Famer

10 30 41

Prospect

Posted by deathinahole on 10/14/2010 4:47:00 PM (view original):
I know everyone is waiting for my opinion, so here it is;

No min win requirement seems to = complete tank jobs or completely loaded teams without much in the middle.
Single season win requirement seems to = a more normalized version of above (tank to 54 wins)
Multiple season win requirement seems to = irrational judgments from those near the bubble

That's a generalization. I can unload a turd contract in a multiple season league more readily than a single season one, but I also see less "transfer 50M to prospect" in the multiple season league.

Which I can tolerate better seems to depend on the mood I'm in. No min is completely out.

But every world has a minimum of 41 wins by WIFS standards!

10/14/2010 5:06 PM

tropicana

Posts: 980 (0)

Hall of Famer

184 13 588 202 293

Prospect

Posted by plague on 10/14/2010 3:47:00 PM (view original):
I am not picking a new one each season. I picked 63 and I am establishing that number I will use that number every season. Now how does my number differ from your number?.

Well...for starters it isn't the same.

I'm good at this game!

10/14/2010 6:54 PM

plague

Posts: 2330 (0)

Hall of Famer

18 1 201 602 203

Prospect

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/14/2010 4:04:00 PM (view original):
"In jeopardy" numbers for MG S17:

eblake - 60
cretins - 60
njohnson78 - 56
fletchkd - 81
danmam - 62
mike1184 - 59

Now, if you want to check trades involving those owners, you might "prove" something. Otherwise, you're just making noise.

Make it simple. What dictates that those owners are in jeopardy and not other owners. Is there no other owner in your world that could be fired if they went 0-162. While that is a unrealistic result, you dictated that the above owners is in jeopardy by some mathematical formula based on arbitrary numbers that you assigned, making it a arbitrary number

Your minimum win rule is not a arbitrary number, as that is a rule, and if you do not meet that goal then you will be cut from the world. The number you choose to decide which players will be in jeopardy is a arbitrary number. You have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to back up your formula, since you do not then it is a arbitrary number.

10/14/2010 7:00 PM

plague

Posts: 2330 (0)

Hall of Famer

18 1 201 602 203

Prospect

Posted by tropicana on 10/14/2010 6:54:00 PM (view original):
Posted by plague on 10/14/2010 3:47:00 PM (view original):
I am not picking a new one each season. I picked 63 and I am establishing that number I will use that number every season. Now how does my number differ from your number?.
Well...for starters it isn't the same.

I'm good at this game!

It is exactly the same. He chose a number or mathematical formula to decide what is in jeopardy. His formula has no more meaning than my formula. The same exact amount of people will be fired from his world with my formula as his formula. His formula is based on arbitrary numbers that he assigned to his formula.

10/14/2010 7:24 PM (edited)

MikeT23

Posts: 58012 (0)

Hall of Famer

87 1 47 1 189

Prospect

Yeah, I gave up on you after deano posted. He said exactly what I'd been saying. You seem to be the only one who doesn't understand. Carry on.

10/14/2010 7:24 PM

plague

Posts: 2330 (0)

Hall of Famer

18 1 201 602 203

Prospect

I understand, you guys are 100% wrong. Majority belief does not make it true. My formula for in jeopardy has just as much meaning in your league as your formula for in jeopardy. Its simple prove me wrong. Show me how your formula has more meaning. No one gets removed from the league for being in jeopardy. Just because you chose those 6 owners as being in jeopardy does not mean other owners are not in jeopardy from being fired, or that the ones you chose are in jeopardy. It is all your opinion whether its a number you pulled out of the air or arbitrary numbers you assigned to a formula.

10/14/2010 7:29 PM

Forums

Minimum win rules Topic

Search Criteria