sometimes i catch a hot hand without even trying.

Quote: Originally Posted By kingjohndevi on 6/15/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By tecwrg on 6/15/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By sweetsalve on 6/15/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By 98greenc5 on 6/15/2009

the ONLY teams that value getting cash in a trade are the teams that already spent all their budget this year, and now would also like to spend your's too

If you have enough player payroll to be shipping 5 million off to teams at the all star break, I would think you're the one who budgeted poorly

kjd stated that maybe he would budget exactly that way with the intent of buying players for cash at some point during the season.



Saying someone budgeted poorly or well is an opinion, not a fact, and adds nothing to solving the question proposed in this thread.

If somebody spends all but $5k of their remaining player payroll budget on a free agent, and now no longer has enough cash to promote a player to their ML roster to replace an injured player, would you consider that an opinion or a fact?

I would consider that a very valid opinion.

Doesn't sound like poor budgeting, more like overspending.

I would posit that the owner expected to be able to sign the FA for X and by the time the bidding got over that point, his alternatives had been signed.

Decision time. Use up the rest of your player budget, hoping to trade a minor prospect for some cash later (or some other deal that nets some cash); or look for an alternative player on the trade front; or sign another FA to strengthen another area; or dump the remaining money in IFA.

Don't all seem like reasonable solutions? Why does it have to be 'poor budgeting'?

Quote: Originally Posted By jvford on 6/15/2009
Doesn't sound like poor budgeting, more like overspending.

I would posit that the owner expected to be able to sign the FA for X and by the time the bidding got over that point, his alternatives had been signed.

Decision time. Use up the rest of your player budget, hoping to trade a minor prospect for some cash later (or some other deal that nets some cash); or look for an alternative player on the trade front; or sign another FA to strengthen another area; or dump the remaining money in IFA.

Don't all seem like reasonable solutions? Why does it have to be 'poor budgeting'?

How about "Poor managing of your budget"? Is that better?

I don't think it's poor managing if you can easily unload a role playing vet with a $1-2 mill contract, which is usually the case.

The game gives you flexibility to put yourself in a bind that you can dig yourself out of before too long.

Quote: Originally Posted By deanod on 6/15/2009I don't think it's poor managing if you can easily unload a role playing vet with a $1-2 mill contract, which is usually the case.

The game gives you flexibility to put yourself in a bind that you can dig yourself out of before too long

How easily can you do that? Can you do it at will? Can you pick any player on your team and trade him whenever you want to?

Really?

Quote: Originally Posted By tecwrg on 6/15/2009

Quote: Originally Posted By deanod on 6/15/2009
I don't think it's poor managing if you can easily unload a role playing vet with a $1-2 mill contract, which is usually the case.

The game gives you flexibility to put yourself in a bind that you can dig yourself out of before too long.

How easily can you do that? Can you do it at will? Can you pick any player on your team and trade him whenever you want to?

Really?

Quote: Originally Posted By deanod on 6/15/2009
I recently reached the point with one team where after signing 20ish draft picks to $8K contracts, I could no longer afford to promote someone from AA to AAA.

I tried to shop around my vets making $2-3 mill to no avail. I tried to shop some of my SPs, who all have healthy contracts, to no avail. So I dealt with my problem for 20-25 games before I finally found a semi-blockbuster deal where I traded a #2/3 SP for a slugging RF. I would have made the deal under normal circumstances, it just happened to conveniently clear $500K of payroll.

The moral of the story? I guess what I am trying to say is that it is not really poor budgeting if you are willing to deal with the bind for as long as it takes and rectify it without asking for special help. I don't think anyone in the league even noticed that I had such little cap room.

Never mind. I see you answered this question in the "Proper Budgeting" thread.

yeah, i was just going to tell you to check that out.

Quote: Originally Posted By unclevic on 6/15/2009
Ahhh, but I do notice that you have not defined the term "Tard World," merely passed the buck to others who have also not defined it ... certainly made nor even attempted no justification of the use of an offensive phrase ... and made no attempt to make any of it relevant to this thread. All you have done is monkey-see-monkey-do repeat an offensive phrase. Had your mother taken the time or shown the love to wash your mouth out with laundry soap when you were at an impressionable age, you would apparently have been the better for her efforts.

But I'm afraid we digress ...

Who, exactly, is offended by the phrase "Tard World"?

And why, exactly, would laundry soap in my mouth have changed this phrase at all?

Had I been more Muddy/Kahuna-esque, I likely could've parlayed your "mother" card into a more effective and colorful retort, but regrettably, I'm not that creative.

Quote: Originally posted by 98greenc5 on 6/15/2009here's another example of how trading cash *might* (again, because this is only my opinion) cheapen the budgeting process, and be a detriment to the world:I budget a ton for player payroll1) I can use that to bid against the world for FAs before the season, AND (of that doesn't materialize)2) I can wait to see if a stud int'l shows up, then use 50% of that cash to bid on him, AND (if that doesn't materialize)3) If I don't end up using it for either of those, I can just trade it to some other team who has already spent all his budget on 1 and 2 for whatever he's willing to give me for it, since it now has no more value to me

How is that a detriment to the world? From a owners perspective there is no reason to carry cash over to the next season, might as well get something for it. Is it less of a detriment if he uses the extra money to trade for players with salary instead of using the cash to get prospects who make the league minimum?

This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.

This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.

You're missing a fundamental point here. Cash is FIXED for a given year.

32 teams x $185M = $5.92B. That's all the money there is to spend for all teams.

If you trade, say, $5M in cash, you're essentially giving ONE team more than its fair share of cash, handicapping 31 other teams. Now you can say, HGWHD by fleecing some newb or taking advantage of a tanker, but it's a league killer when you allow that kind of stuff since it unbalances a balanced game.

Put it this way, how would YOU feel if your division foes all had $200M to spend, while you had $185M? (Well, you'd feel like the Orioles, and feel like the system was unfair, and you'd likely bail)

This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.