In a world I'm in we have a prospect budget cap of $30M. It has become a more frequent occurrence that the top International Free Agents get the max amount of $30M. There has been discussion about Free agent logic being used where the HC/PC and their primary ratings are used. Others have suggested that previous season record might make a difference or the exact time that the first max offer was made. We are unable to come to a definitive answer on this as it seems the answers are conflicting with the actual facts of the situation in all scenarios.

Can anyone provide a definitive answer on this situation? It would be nice to know so that moving forward everyone can best prepare for future scenarios like this.

Thanks.

Not a definitive answer, but a guess:

The free agent logic you describe is for Major League FAs. And you say you don't have evidence that confirms one way or another.
So what if the system treats IFAs the way it does Minor League FAs? ie; it evaluates the teams' Depth Charts and sends the player to the weakest one where he has the "best opportunity" to succeed.
I hope not, or everyone in your world is going to start manipulating their player positions.

I can confirm that this is not the case. I won a tie breaker situation last season and I signed a 2B. My depth chart at 2B consists of an MVP still in arbitration, and two highly rated prospects. I ventured a guess at the time that my previous season record may have been the tie breaker because that was the on my criteria I would have won. There is a possibility that I won the tie breaker based on giving the offer before the other teams who also offered the max a short while later.

Still no closer to solving this question.

Thanks for the response.

It's the first maximum offer.

First equal offer in would offer the simplest-to-program solution.

Quite the dilemma, I contend that there may not be game code for an IFA tie breaker rule cause in essence a tie breaker rule would never be needed cause someone could always offer more and the reason in this league (that I am also in) that has a private rule of a 30 mil prospect cap creates a stalemate that no onecanup the ante therefore it may not be resolved until the current highest bidder is either beaten or other offer(s) withdrawn.

TimF how long have you been leading on this IFA if you don't mind me asking as my offer was near the top of the max budget and I was leading the bid over 4 days ago.

My guess is there is no rule because there is no propect bonus cap like there is a FA contract cap, thoughts?

I've been leading for four days. The only cycle I was not leading was the very first cycle.

I've been leading for four days. The only cycle I was not leading was the very first cycle.

How long will this situation typically play out?

Posted by damag on 3/5/2025 3:34:00 PM (view original):
First equal offer in would offer the simplest-to-program solution.

This is the leading assumption at this point.

Thanks

First owner to make the max offer with a ST invite. Learned that lesson the hard way. Also, always check the player payroll screen of the winning bidder to make sure they didn't game the system and offer the max offer +$1. Have been on the receiving end of one of those too, lol

Posted by brianplath on 3/9/2025 6:52:00 PM (view original):
First owner to make the max offer with a ST invite. Learned that lesson the hard way. Also, always check the player payroll screen of the winning bidder to make sure they didn't game the system and offer the max offer +$1. Have been on the receiving end of one of those too, lol

I always worry about the +1 offers so others drop out and then they go back to max without the +1. I know that happens.

Yeah, but that should be easy enough to navigate. If you offer max and are in the lead for at least one cycle and someone bumps you then you know there was shenanigans so you just gotta keep that initial offer on and force them to violate the rule by signing over the max allowed if they want the guy. At which point the commish/WiS have to get involved to straighten things out. Sucks, but it does happen which is why owners need to be informed and understand the system's decision logic to tamp down on stuff like that.