Adam,

Thanks for the update. Budget change is great. But, we should be allowed to fully change our entire budget without having to only go up or down 4. This rule is especially detrimental to new owners in new leagues. If some team losing a ton of money from Free Agents leaving they should be able to adjust their budget as they see fit. Thanks

haven't read through all this, but just adding a suggestion for the Rule 5 settings: allow drop down options for any P (not just SP and RP) and any Position players (not just broken down by each position).

I forgot about this, but I imagine this would be a super easy fix:

The Rule 5 draft settings default all position weights to 5, except DH which is 0. This means DH’s won’t show up on your draft board unless you manually change the weight. Usually I remember to change, but just realized I forgot to in one league. I don’t really see any reason why DH’s would be 0 and this can be easily missed, especially by newer players.

This is the same for AL & NL teams, I’ve checked multiple leagues over multiple seasons.

Another tweak to the Rule 5 prospect list would be able to see your own players (of course you wouldn't be able to select them). I would like to see where my guys 'rate' compared to the field.

Posted by bripat42 on 1/16/2021 12:13:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Seventy_77 on 1/16/2021 12:49:00 AM (view original):
Adam,

Thanks for the update. Budget change is great. But, we should be allowed to fully change our entire budget without having to only go up or down 4. This rule is especially detrimental to new owners in new leagues. If some team losing a ton of money from Free Agents leaving they should be able to adjust their budget as they see fit. Thanks

That would be a horrible change to make.

Building staffs and associated infrastructures for scouting, medical, and training takes time. It's unrealistic to allow owners to go from the bottom to the top with the simple click of a button. Even tearing something down takes time in real life -- maybe not as much time, but it doesn't happen over night.

As it is, new owners have more flexibility with budgets since they can choose between the outgoing owner's budget or the default settings. That means there is potential for as much as a $14 million swing from the previous season for new owners. For example, if the previous owner had $0 in training, the new owner could choose to go with default settings and immediately bump the spending to $14 million.

I do think new owners should be able to set training to 20 regardless of previous ownership settings. Other than that I wouldn't change budget escalation rules.

Posted by Seventy_77 on 1/16/2021 4:37:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bripat42 on 1/16/2021 12:13:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Seventy_77 on 1/16/2021 12:49:00 AM (view original):
Adam,

Thanks for the update. Budget change is great. But, we should be allowed to fully change our entire budget without having to only go up or down 4. This rule is especially detrimental to new owners in new leagues. If some team losing a ton of money from Free Agents leaving they should be able to adjust their budget as they see fit. Thanks

That would be a horrible change to make.

Building staffs and associated infrastructures for scouting, medical, and training takes time. It's unrealistic to allow owners to go from the bottom to the top with the simple click of a button. Even tearing something down takes time in real life -- maybe not as much time, but it doesn't happen over night.

As it is, new owners have more flexibility with budgets since they can choose between the outgoing owner's budget or the default settings. That means there is potential for as much as a $14 million swing from the previous season for new owners. For example, if the previous owner had $0 in training, the new owner could choose to go with default settings and immediately bump the spending to $14 million.

Its not a terrible idea. You just don't like. Stupid that a team can't set whatever budget they want. It destroys any hope for new people to have any kind of early success. Why should anyone take a crappy team with a top pick but not have a chance at the best player because they can't set their scouting higher than 14. That is the most stupid thing about this game.

Because its not realistic. In the hypothetical, an owner took over a team that is a mess. Like in real life, they need to work with what is in place and build from there, they don't just get to fire all their bad scouts and hire new good ones in a slide of a scale. I would personally hate for teams to just slide their different budgets from one extreme to the other based on where they land in the draft order. Probably another setting that can be added to an easy mode league though.

MLB teams change their budgets every year to suit what they need that year.

I think a new owner taking over a team should be able to set their budget how they see fit. If an owner takes over a team with a high draft pick with a budget from the Previous owner that had 10 million or less in HS/COLL scouting then the most they can make their scouting is 14 million. Then they come in here, ask about guys and we all say 14 million isn’t enough. Even if they know enough to punt the first season 18 million still isn’t max for the second season.

I’d like to see HS/COLL scouting budget be in a combined pool from 0-40 million. Then each season you decide how to split the money.

I agree. Because of the way the game works, it makes sense you can only change so much per year. In hardball, budget = quality, whereas like you said bripat in RL budget doesn't directly equal quality.

Also another small tweak.

Could we get rid of the 20 player roster requirement after Rookie Ball ends? I like to make a lot of promotions, release players, etc. before the next season and really set up my minors. However, I often run into the problem of having too few players left in Rookie ball. When the next season begins you don't have that 20 player requirement until the Rookie Season starts post draft. So it would be nice for that requirement to drop after the Rookie Ball World Series is over so I don't have to end the season with 20 players if that makes sense.

One more lol, sorry guys.

I would love a feature that you could automatically set players primary and secondary positions based off recommendations. I know you can do this by going to edit rosters and clicking on their position, but it would be nice to streamline this by doing it all at once or just having the option for the system to automatically set those when you draft/sign a guy. Would make optimizing lineups/rest/etc. much easier

Really anything to streamline minor league management. I like to manage my minors manually, but it can be death my a million clicks at times. I would love features to help make management easier. Couple ideas:

• Being able to view all levels of minors on one screen. Ie, lineups, pitching staffs, etc.Would be easier to make sure nothings breaking down.
• Multiple selections at once. For example, being able to put all pitchers at 99 rest, or 4 pitchers at 3 call, etc. Being able to insert one player at many positions in PR or Def repl, etc.

Posted by Seventy_77 on 1/16/2021 11:46:00 PM (view original):
MLB teams change their budgets every year to suit what they need that year.

I think it's been covered, but just want to point out that IRL throwing more money at bad scouts doesn't make them significantly better. Yes you can hire more scouts, even better scouts , but there is a finite amount of talent available at any given time and other teams competing with you for those resources.

Its just not realistic that a team that has been horrible at drafting sudenly becomes a one of the best over a single season.

Posted by pray4pro on 1/17/2021 1:34:00 PM (view original):
Also another small tweak.

Could we get rid of the 20 player roster requirement after Rookie Ball ends? I like to make a lot of promotions, release players, etc. before the next season and really set up my minors. However, I often run into the problem of having too few players left in Rookie ball. When the next season begins you don't have that 20 player requirement until the Rookie Season starts post draft. So it would be nice for that requirement to drop after the Rookie Ball World Series is over so I don't have to end the season with 20 players if that makes sense.

+1

Posted by hockey1984 on 1/17/2021 1:37:00 AM (view original):
I think a new owner taking over a team should be able to set their budget how they see fit. If an owner takes over a team with a high draft pick with a budget from the Previous owner that had 10 million or less in HS/COLL scouting then the most they can make their scouting is 14 million. Then they come in here, ask about guys and we all say 14 million isn’t enough. Even if they know enough to punt the first season 18 million still isn’t max for the second season.

I’d like to see HS/COLL scouting budget be in a combined pool from 0-40 million. Then each season you decide how to split the money.

If by new owners you mean owners with say less than 10 seasons under their belt maybe

New franchise owners with 100's of season of experience 1) Know exactly what they are getting into with a fixer upper franchise; 2) Know enough to punt if their budget is not what they would like; and 3) Can usually still get a good draft class with 14/14 budget.

Probably won't be a popular take, but I think the way to make drafts and even IFAs more realistic is to go more towards how we do coaching. Separate the country and even IFA by regions each region and level (HS, JuCo, College) would have scout assigned to them with their own attributes. Some scouts are good at picking up general overall, others are good at scouting the pitch tools, Hit tools, etc... Assigning budgets within those levels might work also.

I guess that is why we are at a balance between making the game more user friendly by taking away some of the more immersive qualities of the game or making it more in-depth and increasing the learning curve. Personally, I joined the game because I wanted a in-depth experience were I felt that the decisions I make matter.