Posted by MikeT23 on 5/26/2015 3:53:00 PM (view original):
When you budget 0, you shouldn't get any sort of info.

We need a separate thread with all the many ways of saying this simple thing, until it sinks in.

Two things that are important and not addressed:
1.  Attracting new members/owners and keeping them.  Changes fix difficulties and may impact the game, but will that attract more members?
2.  Ergonomics, the UI is cumbersome and redundant at the same time.  An Excel like UI for players so we could choose out own data points.  (e.g. Speed and hitting stats for draft prospect)  There are many more examples.  

They did send out a survey a couple of months ago.    I think we should assume that they're trying to figure out if any of the ideas presented were worth doing.

And yes, this type of information is available. (Baseball America) Here is the prospect money each team has to spend


CLUB SIGNING BONUS POOL
Astros $17,289,200
Rockies $13,989,800
Diamondbacks $12,816,100
Braves $10,684,100
Rangers $9,099,900
Yankees $7,885,000
Dodgers $7,781,700
Reds $7,777,900
Brewers $7,743,800
Giants $7,515,500
Pirates $7,392,200
Twins $7,388,700
Cardinals $7,387,600
Cubs $7,236,100
Indians $7,234,200
Royals $7,206,700
Tigers $7,114,300
Phillies $7,058,500
Orioles $6,850,400
Marlins $6,766,400
Rays $6,591,300
Red Sox $6,223,800
Athletics $5,444,100
Blue Jays $5,411,000
White Sox $5,347,500
Angels $5,050,100
Mariners $4,186,900
Nationals $4,102,700
Padres $3,671,200
Mets $3,587,800

Posted by lakerross on 5/26/2015 3:46:00 PM (view original):
i like the following  ideas:

1. giving commissioner a min/max to set for enforcing "private world rules" (i.e. max prospect budget, min scouting, etc).
2. not showing any budget information at all.  Not that we are trying to be 100% realistic, but no team would ever do that. They let it be known that a player is available for trading or they need a specific player to fit a particular price range.  That teams budget is their budget.  This should also encourage owners to use the tools already available in the game more....trade chat, trade block, etc.
3.  If people want to do trades they can send a" blind offer"  to a team that cant be accepted but wont show budget, and would allow the other team to know that someone is looking to do business.

Just thoughts

I think all points are dead on.

Posted by andyr104 on 5/26/2015 3:57:00 PM (view original):
Two things that are important and not addressed:
1.  Attracting new members/owners and keeping them.  Changes fix difficulties and may impact the game, but will that attract more members?
2.  Ergonomics, the UI is cumbersome and redundant at the same time.  An Excel like UI for players so we could choose out own data points.  (e.g. Speed and hitting stats for draft prospect)  There are many more examples.  

I think anything that creates more balance is always a good thing and has the potential to retain newer owners.

Posted by MikeT23 on 5/26/2015 3:53:00 PM (view original):
When you budget 0, you shouldn't get any sort of info.

The change has been made, so its fine, but basically it works that way today. If you budget 0 in IFA you won't get anything. If you budget very little you get very little for both IFA and HS/Coll prospects in that you completely miss out on many of the best player so that your chances of getting anything useful drop off sharply the further down the draft you pick

I also wish that there were a dropdown menu like there is on the FA screen on EVERY board that shows a bunch of players. Draft screen and player search screen for example.

Player Search page especially.

I also wish it weren't limited to only two categories.

Posted by indy_angels on 5/26/2015 4:07:00 PM (view original):
And yes, this type of information is available. (Baseball America) Here is the prospect money each team has to spend


CLUB SIGNING BONUS POOL
Astros $17,289,200
Rockies $13,989,800
Diamondbacks $12,816,100
Braves $10,684,100
Rangers $9,099,900
Yankees $7,885,000
Dodgers $7,781,700
Reds $7,777,900
Brewers $7,743,800
Giants $7,515,500
Pirates $7,392,200
Twins $7,388,700
Cardinals $7,387,600
Cubs $7,236,100
Indians $7,234,200
Royals $7,206,700
Tigers $7,114,300
Phillies $7,058,500
Orioles $6,850,400
Marlins $6,766,400
Rays $6,591,300
Red Sox $6,223,800
Athletics $5,444,100
Blue Jays $5,411,000
White Sox $5,347,500
Angels $5,050,100
Mariners $4,186,900
Nationals $4,102,700
Padres $3,671,200
Mets $3,587,800

And every team can exceed their budgets! I said this earlier. There is a fine if they do but it is allowed.

Posted by indy_angels on 5/26/2015 4:20:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 5/26/2015 3:53:00 PM (view original):
When you budget 0, you shouldn't get any sort of info.

The change has been made, so its fine, but basically it works that way today. If you budget 0 in IFA you won't get anything. If you budget very little you get very little for both IFA and HS/Coll prospects in that you completely miss out on many of the best player so that your chances of getting anything useful drop off sharply the further down the draft you pick

Well, I already provided an example of a very good HS player that I drafted with a 0 HS budget.    So it didn't really work that way. 

...... I've looked at this update from every angle.... Why would I want to raise my ADV above 0?

Also has international free agents asking for less gone into effect imediatly or is it just for seasons that start after now?

Posted by mongoose_22 on 5/26/2015 2:23:00 PM (view original):
"The downside to that is that he can "tell" you that you need to include some additional cash in order to enable the trade to go through when they in fact have plenty of cap space.  And nobody would have anyway of knowing otherwise."

I don't necessarily have a problem with this either. Though, you could simply make all of the other teams budgets not visible. But on the trade screen, simply show how much salary room the other team has left. Thoughts?

Because anyone going for IFAs will use this info to figure out available prospect budgets.  Simply determine everyone's available payroll and then assume that anyone who doesn't use it up signing free agents also has $20M in prospect budget.

Posted by hockey1984 on 5/26/2015 5:23:00 PM (view original):
...... I've looked at this update from every angle.... Why would I want to raise my ADV above 0?

Also has international free agents asking for less gone into effect imediatly or is it just for seasons that start after now?

re: 2nd question.

After the new season starts.

Posted by rockindock on 5/26/2015 3:47:00 PM (view original):
articlegend, what you described is exactly why I want change. There is no "charm" in gaming the system. What you describe is not competition. I really don't have a problem being out bid for an IFA. I have a problem being out bid by $1.

And here's where I think it comes down to personal opinion. I don't think it's "gaming he system" to use information that is available to all 32 players in my world. But you do. And it appears quite a few others do as well.


That's fine. I don't think there's an absolute right or wrong in this debate. It's not like one way is more morally correct or anything. It basically just comes down to what people think is more fun. I happen to think its more interesting to have the information available. Others see it differently, and that's fine.

I think one way to make the IFA process better is only allowing one bid for an IFA prospect.  If your international scouts see a guy that looks good and you want to bid on him, then enter your max price, the sim evaluates every team's offer and awards him to the highest bid.  This would fix a the monster 30+ million signings; give owners serious pause before bidding on a prospect; but admin would need to address some of the gamesmanship that occurs with looking at player payroll/prospect budgets.