Eliminate Prospect Budget Topic

MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
So no one really like my idea of capping offers with ties going to the better 3-year team?

That seems brilliant to me.
1/22/2010 3:10 PM
tecwrg
Posts: 18997 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 1 166 32 129
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By e_mandat on 1/22/2010quick question. do you guys not think the best IFA/draft picks should go to the worst teams
The draft, which is the primary source of new high-end talent into each HBD world, is already structured this way.
1/22/2010 3:10 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By tedwmoore on 1/22/2010

Quote: Originally Posted By MikeT23 on 1/22/2010
As I understand it, there are several ways to rebuild a team without participating in the IFA market.
True. But IFAs can be an important part of re-building for some. And completely cutting off that avenue for those taking over a run-down franchise will decrease the incentive to take on teams, your ability to win WS titles notwithstanding.

I do agree with ian though, top IFAs should not automatically go to the worst teams. High draft picks are the compensation for sucking, but the IFA market should be competetive. Which is why I do not think that top IFAs should automatically go to the best teams. I assume that with your suggestion, Mike, that even a 100-game winner would lose the tie to a 102-game winner?

I just want a competitive IFA market that doesn't require a $60 million ante to get into.




Well, it would be based on 3 year records but, yes, that's the correct assumption.

I don't think all top teams chase IFA. And they may not even budget for them. There is no guarantee.
1/22/2010 3:14 PM
e_mandat
Posts: 161 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 4 37 49
Prospect
good answer. i wasnt aware of that
1/22/2010 3:17 PM
gjello10
Posts: 164 (0)
All Star
6 26
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By MikeT23 on 1/22/2010
So no one really like my idea of capping offers with ties going to the better 3-year team?

That seems brilliant to me.

The problem is, after the draft, an exact tie will be rare, so I don't think you can make changes using tiebreaks.
1/22/2010 3:17 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
It might be more rare than you think if the number is 10m-15m.
1/22/2010 3:18 PM
e_mandat
Posts: 161 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 4 37 49
Prospect
Quote: Originally posted by MikeT23 on 1/22/2010It might be more rare than you think if the number is 10m-15m. 

Wouldnt that lock up the best teams getting the best IFA's? If crappy teams have to sign their draft pick, then how can they compete?
1/22/2010 3:20 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Some of the best teams have high payrolls. How is it a lock that they'll get the best IFA?
1/22/2010 3:21 PM
e_mandat
Posts: 161 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 4 37 49
Prospect
id budget 15 million every year in prospect and none in draft since i pick in the late 20's or 30's. only teams that dont sign a draft pick could compete with my offer
1/22/2010 3:22 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
So you'd get one. And you better hope the guys picking later than you don't use the same strategy.
1/22/2010 3:24 PM
iain
Posts: 1864 (0)
Hall of Famer
35 1 1 18 1 278
Prospect
How would you replenish your minors year-to-year?
1/22/2010 3:24 PM
da6nz6ig6
Posts: 14 (0)
Hall of Famer
7 2 45
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By tedwmoore on 1/22/2010

Quote: Originally Posted By MikeT23 on 1/22/2010
As I understand it, there are several ways to rebuild a team without participating in the IFA market.
True. But IFAs can be an important part of re-building for some. And completely cutting off that avenue for those taking over a run-down franchise will decrease the incentive to take on teams, your ability to win WS titles notwithstanding.

I do agree with ian though, top IFAs should not automatically go to the worst teams. High draft picks are the compensation for sucking, but the IFA market should be competetive. Which is why I do not think that top IFAs should automatically go to the best teams. I assume that with your suggestion, Mike, that even a 100-game winner would lose the tie to a 102-game winner?

I just want a competitive IFA market that doesn't require a $60 million ante to get into.

Agree on not wanting to take over a run down franchise. I just recently finally decided to take on a second team and had I known these new plans I would never have bothered doing so. It is very possible to stay competitive with a super low payroll. All this does is punish those who are able to stay competitive while building up their minor leagues with future big leaguers. Once again, the actions of the irresponsible are paid for by the responsible. Oh well, I guess that is the New American Way.
1/22/2010 3:25 PM
e_mandat
Posts: 161 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 4 37 49
Prospect
That one is a hell of a lot better than the zero i get now, or the 30th pick, which is borderline ML because my scouting sucks.
1/22/2010 3:25 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Again, the only guarantee you have is if you have the top record over a 3 year period. And you're still not guaranteed to see the top IFA.
1/22/2010 3:27 PM
e_mandat
Posts: 161 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 4 37 49
Prospect
im guaranteed to have the most money....unbeatable
1/22/2010 3:28 PM
◂ Prev 1...21|22|23|24|25...34 Next ▸
Eliminate Prospect Budget Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2026 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.