All Forums > Hardball Dynasty Baseball > Suggestions > Transfer budget in odd numbered increments
5/13/2013 1:59 PM
Sure there is.   Training, medical and scouting. 

And as for IFA vs. FA, it's a poor comparison.   Spending 40m on an IFA is a one season proposition.   And that owner will definitely be playing with that IFA.   Giving out a max contract means another owner may have 4 seasons of 20m that he does not want. 

As for fun/strategic, I don't think budgeting is fun.   There is a strategy involved but I don't think the "pool" idea would change the strategy much.   Right now you have people budgeting 20m in prospect while have 30m in payroll.    They're almost always planning to transfer the leftover to prospect.    Have you ever seen anyone basically sit out FA and then add 40m-50m in payroll thru trades during the season? 
5/13/2013 2:14 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 5/13/2013 1:49:00 PM (view original):
I'll come at it from another angle.

Two owners have 40m in cap space and both covet a 36 y/o pitcher.   Bidding gets crazy, as it often does, and Owner A offers the max deal.   So, at 40, you have a pitcher making 20m.   Owner B says "That's bullshit.  I'm not giving him 20m at 40."     So Owner B, when FA is done, has 40m in leftover payroll.   IMO, he did the "right" thing.   But, because of that, he's going to get a 20m penalty, thus playing the season with 165m, when he transfers that money to prospect. 

As a commish, I want the owners to do the "right" thing.   If Owner A misses the MWR, or just has to give up HBD, I've got a team to fill that's holding a bad contract.
While I don't think I have problem waiving the penalty, one could easily say here "have a plan B."  If you know you're going hard at a high-priced FA, understand the risks that are involved.  Or get to your max point a little earlier so you can still bid on other FAs if your bid gets passed.
5/13/2013 2:20 PM
Yeah, I knew I shouldn't have said "So Owner B, when FA is done, has 40m in leftover payroll".   When I've been caught in the FA bidding I mentioned, I usually find a way to spend a signficant portion of that 40m.    When I realized the 23m I had in FA wasn't going to get the player I coveted, I spent 10m on 3 different players.  So I've got 13m left now.   In all probability, that will turn into 6m in prospect. 

But I don't know if that holds true for all owners.
5/13/2013 2:25 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 5/13/2013 1:59:00 PM (view original):
Sure there is.   Training, medical and scouting. 

And as for IFA vs. FA, it's a poor comparison.   Spending 40m on an IFA is a one season proposition.   And that owner will definitely be playing with that IFA.   Giving out a max contract means another owner may have 4 seasons of 20m that he does not want. 

As for fun/strategic, I don't think budgeting is fun.   There is a strategy involved but I don't think the "pool" idea would change the strategy much.   Right now you have people budgeting 20m in prospect while have 30m in payroll.    They're almost always planning to transfer the leftover to prospect.    Have you ever seen anyone basically sit out FA and then add 40m-50m in payroll thru trades during the season? 
No, not really, you're just switching the MWR flirting to being up front (ie. tanking) vs back end (FA done at the end of his contract).

When you look at who's got the boot in Coop and MG...and some of those have been good overall owners...it's split pretty equal.
5/13/2013 2:37 PM
Again, from a commissioner's viewpoint, the low payroll/little BL talent/couple of really good IFA prospects is a much easier sell than bloated payroll/declining BL talent team.
5/13/2013 2:49 PM
And again, you aren't solving that.

Penalty free budget pool increases the ability to do either.
5/13/2013 2:52 PM
26 Team X deathinahole 185 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5/13/2013 2:53 PM
There's my allocation of the one big pool.

I'm going to sign 3 max contracts. By season 5 of that contract, your problem is not solved, it's exacerbated.
5/13/2013 2:57 PM
Well, you have to have 6m for coaching.   And I already proposed a floor on prospect.    But, if one wants to sign 3 max contracts now, they can.  It's only 90m.   I've got 122m payroll in Mantle.   That would have left me 32m to fill out my team.   That's about 1.4m for each of the 22 players.  
5/13/2013 2:59 PM
And, again, I think the owner who doesn't give that extra year to get that big FA is doing the right thing.   Yet, because he'll be left with x-amount of payroll, he's punished by the transfer penalty.    Being punished for doing the right thing seems wrong. 
5/13/2013 3:00 PM

6 for coaching.
6 for prospect.
173 for salary.

3 max contracts, and 83 left to fill the team. No problem Mr Commish? THERE'S NO MEDICAL OR TRAINING!!!! This team becomes a clown show year 5.
 

5/13/2013 3:01 PM
BAD IDEA!!!!!!!!!
5/13/2013 3:05 PM
Can you play with no medical or training now?   I think you can. 
5/13/2013 3:06 PM
Posted by deathinahole on 5/13/2013 3:00:00 PM (view original):

6 for coaching.
6 for prospect.
173 for salary.

3 max contracts, and 83 left to fill the team. No problem Mr Commish? THERE'S NO MEDICAL OR TRAINING!!!! This team becomes a clown show year 5.
 

What part of this scenario couldn't play out right now?
5/13/2013 3:09 PM
Posted by AlCheez on 5/13/2013 3:06:00 PM (view original):
Posted by deathinahole on 5/13/2013 3:00:00 PM (view original):

6 for coaching.
6 for prospect.
173 for salary.

3 max contracts, and 83 left to fill the team. No problem Mr Commish? THERE'S NO MEDICAL OR TRAINING!!!! This team becomes a clown show year 5.
 

What part of this scenario couldn't play out right now?
It could, I was counter arguing his "well, it's more responsible" argument.

What you couldn't do right now is this;
6 for coaching.
173 for prospect.
6 for salary.

And, if you're ok with it, you're ok with it. But with all this hand wringing about tanking, seems like an illogical counter scenario.

In the end, I like that you have to think up front a little.
of 4
All Forums > Hardball Dynasty Baseball > Suggestions > Transfer budget in odd numbered increments

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 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.