Minimum win rules are good...in all of their forms.

Payroll is on this rise.   Terribly small sample size but it seems to have jumped from low 80s to upper 80s.    And Coop/MG are the upper 80s while the random sampling of worlds I checked are upper 70s/low 80s.  

As for how they're spending money, I'm not sure.   I know, during the first season of Coop, that decent waived players were getting snapped up by the bottom teams.  From that I assumed the 23rd-25th men became legit BL players as opposed to complete crap.

Which do people prefer? A single season rule (such as 55 wins each year or you are out) or a multi-season rule (such as 130 wins over any two years or you are out)? I personally prefer a multi-year rule.

Posted by csherwood on 10/13/2010 3:18:00 PM (view original):
Which do people prefer? A single season rule (such as 55 wins each year or you are out) or a multi-season rule (such as 130 wins over any two years or you are out)? I personally prefer a multi-year rule.

Both.  A single-season floor to allow for "worst-acceptable" season, and a multi-year floor with a higher threshold to discourage owners from trying to game the one season floor by hovering just above it.

I had 55 for the longest time.   Yet, as people are apt to do, that number became obsolete as a few began winning 56, 59, 57, 61.   That's why my worlds changed to 55/125/195/280.   Have a bad season.  Don't have 3-4 in a row.

From my experience minimum win rules increase the average payroll of the world.

My problem with minimum win rules is the teams that have to worry about minimum wins are the teams that are not very good. What I was noticing is these teams would trade their prospects to the better teams for their aging players, all in a attempt to stay above the minimum win rule. Now these top teams are able to keep payroll low because they are recycling age for youth. This allows the status quo to continue. Since the average payroll of the world is high, the teams that are able to compete with a lower payroll are also able to be better competitive in the International market.

With that said I do understand the reasoning behind a minimum win rule, I am just pointing out that there is negatives to a minimum win rule.

If people don't know what they're doing, minimum win requirements will expose them very quickly.

In worlds with good owners, top to bottom, you don't see issues like the ones you describe.

I haven't noticed the bottom dwellers evacuating their minor league system for overpaid veterans in MG or Coop.  I have noticed the bottom dwellers making waiver claims, increasing payroll and signing a FA every now and then.  I also notice, after losing a few in Coop to the win requirements, that we didn't lose any last season. 

The first season that it was brought to my attention was in Moneyball with Iain's team. I don't remember his exact wording since that was almost 2 years ago but it was along the lines of looking for a veteran pitcher, prospects won't help me if I am fired. Shortly after he made this trade. Crash Shirley for Al Reyes, Taylor Barfield, Will Hunter, I don't think he makes that trade if it was not for the minimum win rule.

It's the same reason why payrolls tend to be higher in minimum win rule leagues. Prospects don't help you if your fired, they help the next coach.

Valid point.  I wouldn't have made that trade without fear of losing my team, but I was able to because I had acquired enough assets I could afford to burn some.

Worth nothing: I'm about to rip off my 5th division title in the 6 seasons since that trade, and set a franchise record for wins while taking home the #1 seed.

It helped me stay in Season 6, and my team is the best team in Moneyball in Season 11.  Ultimate win-win.

EDIT: My point is that that trade didn't take me from 61 wins to 70 wins (i.e.: just enough to let me stay) ... it took me to 91 wins, a division title, and a WS appearance.  Not exactly what you were talking about.

One example isn't proving your point.  Although I do find it hard to disagree about prospects only helping the next guy.  The key is not to get to the point where you have to make decision like that.   55/125/195/280 requires that you average 70 wins over 4 seasons, 65 over 3 seasons and 62.5 over two seasons.   In other words, you can't lose 100 games in consecutive seasons or average 97+ losses over three seasons or 92+ losses over 4 seasons.   That's not a whole lot to ask of an owner. 

Iain-I did not mean it was a bad trade or you made a bad move. It was not a personal attack. It;s just coincidence that it was your team and world chat that brought this to my attention. It's logical that people would think this way in a minimum win world, just like it's logical that if someone is going to quit a world at the end of the season he will tend to trade his not ready for major league prospects for veterans. While that does not always happen, on average a person quitting a world will trade for veterans over prospects.

Mike-I am not arguing that the minimum win rule is a bad idea. It has its good points, I am just pointing out that it has its side effects. Its similar to regulations in real life, regulations while having their good points usually create other unintended negative effects. In the case of minimum win rules owners tailor their teams with the idea that they must win now, which means teams tend to have higher payrolls,  and teams that are bottom dwellers tend to do what it takes to stay above the minimum wins which means they tend to trade prospects for veterans, it's logical. Owners who are doing well don't have to worry about minimum wins so they can afford to recycle veterans for prospects.

Iain-My point was never the outcome, it was the intent. You made that trade because you figured  if you did not win enough games you would be fired. That you won 91 games and made the WS was not the point, the point was you traded youth for veterans to avoid getting fired, a move I believe you don't make if it was not for the minimum win rule. I am  not saying it's a bad rule,  but the mentality of I need to do what it takes to not get fired is what goes through the minds of many in a minimum win rule league, and that centers mainly around high player payroll to compete for free agents and bottom dwellers trading prospects for veterans.