right, people don't need to sign their draft picks.  whoever picks first CAN forgo his pick so that he too can have the full $20M, but that's ridiculous.  if everyone signed his draft pick, the team picking last in the first round would have an advantage on IFAs. 

i don't think good teams OR bad teams should get preferential treatment for IFAs (just as they shouldn't when assigning draft picks when a team signs multiple type As).

Posted by schedule1 on 7/15/2010 3:29:00 PM (view original):
right, people don't need to sign their draft picks.  whoever picks first CAN forgo his pick so that he too can have the full $20M, but that's ridiculous.  if everyone signed his draft pick, the team picking last in the first round would have an advantage on IFAs. 

i don't think good teams OR bad teams should get preferential treatment for IFAs (just as they shouldn't when assigning draft picks when a team signs multiple type As).

That's just NOT TRUE.

There were a handful of IFAs who got "the max" in BR (once actually giving up TWO 1st rounders to do it)... and there were several chicken little-types like yourself that assured everyone that the best IFAs would always go to the best teams, but that just didn't happen.

I agree that it sounds like it will, but the world *also* has a minimum win rule, so people weren't inclined to run superlow payrolls, anyway. Only a handful ever approached the $20M max in 3 seasons .

EDIT: Having a competitive world where the same teams don't win 100+ year in and year out helps with this model, too.

BR is not representative of what would happen anywhere else, for obvious reasons.

I'll concede there may be flaws if you were to apply prospects payroll caps in 'tard worlds where teams with $38M payrolls are going 140-22.

I don't play in those worlds, and they're already fuct, anyway, so I tend not to consider them.

uh... BR had a unique set of rules that would allow teams to get to $20M in prospect money easily.  it has nothing to do with being a competitive world and everything to do with being a world with unique,m bizarre rules.

Not sure if it was mentioned earlier in the thread, but signing IFA's is a lot easier since they changed the initial demands.  Even if your INTL budget is less than 6 you can still know who to bid on because they are asking for 4 million +.  Even if your projections are wack you can pretty much bet on them being awesome.  If you are willing to risk it you can transfer more money to the prospect budget because of this. 

Posted by schedule1 on 7/15/2010 5:37:00 PM (view original):
uh... BR had a unique set of rules that would allow teams to get to $20M in prospect money easily.  it has nothing to do with being a competitive world and everything to do with being a world with unique,m bizarre rules.

Branch Rickey. Not the former Braggin' Rights.

Branch Rickey has minimum win rules, and a $20M cap on prospect money.

Posted by FW_Kekionga on 7/15/2010 5:43:00 PM (view original):
Not sure if it was mentioned earlier in the thread, but signing IFA's is a lot easier since they changed the initial demands.  Even if your INTL budget is less than 6 you can still know who to bid on because they are asking for 4 million +.  Even if your projections are wack you can pretty much bet on them being awesome.  If you are willing to risk it you can transfer more money to the prospect budget because of this. 

"Even if your projections are wack you can pretty much bet on them being awesome."

Therein lies the crux of the problem, IMHO.  Knowing an 18 year old is guaranteed to be a stud results in "wack" bonuses that are rational in HBD.  Yes, this is not a issue unique to IFAs.  However, the game controls for amateur draft picks, since they don't demand/require $40MM.  Imagine if you could be drafting Pujols in the 13th round, or that your first rounder may not be good enough for the big league club (even without injury).  That would be more realistic.