At the end of coach hiring, allow a "grace period" where unused coaching budget can be transferred to player payroll without the 50% penalty.  The grace period can last between the end of coach hiring through the end of spring training.  It does not need to conform to the $2m increments.  It would be an "all remaining unused budget" transfer.

I understand the reasoning behind the 50% transfer penalty, and for the most part fully agree with it.  But under the current format, I think that it can lead to some stupid and unrealistic decisions during coach hiring when, once you realize that you will have less than $2m in unspent coaching budget, you get into a "use it or lose it" mentality and start offering unreasonably high offers to fill those last few coaching vacancies that you may have.

If you know that that last bit of unspent money can be transferred rather than just lost at the end of the coach hiring phase, then you might make some more realisitic decisions rather than blowing that last $1.5m on a Low A bench coach.

Finally, this "no penalty grace period" can only be used to transfer unused coaching budget into player payroll after coach hiring (and by defauly, after free agency) has concluded.  It cannot be transferred into prospect budget, and it cannot be transferred during free agency.  Those transfers would still need to adhere to the current restrictions ($2m increments with 50% penalty).

Partially disagree.

Agree with the "transfer remaining budget" aspect, but the 50% has to stay.

Otherwise, let's just drop 20M in coaching, and whatever I don't use, I'll just move it to salary after.

OK, that works too.

Posted by deathinahole on 10/17/2011 9:56:00 AM (view original):
Partially disagree.

Agree with the "transfer remaining budget" aspect, but the 50% has to stay.

Otherwise, let's just drop 20M in coaching, and whatever I don't use, I'll just move it to salary after.

But you still wouldn't have it available for free agency, all it would be useful for is promotions, FA mopup, and trades.  I think the penalty of not having it for FA is sufficed. 

And you'd be wrong.

Not a bad a idea.   I can't think of a reason why not.

I'm actually leaning more and more towards coach, player and prospect money being fluid.   After all, it's just "cash" being used to buy individuals.     You'd still have the budgeting process for scouting, medical, training.

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/18/2011 10:01:00 AM (view original):
I'm actually leaning more and more towards coach, player and prospect money being fluid.   After all, it's just "cash" being used to buy individuals.     You'd still have the budgeting process for scouting, medical, training.

This would be amazing.

Mostly because I know owners would screw this up a ton, because they would have to budget themselves.

The transfer penalty between player salary, coaching, & prospects is one of the worst features of the game. Completely unrealistic if this is supposed to be an MLB simulation. Reduces flexibility, which reduces options, which reduces competition. Would help the game if they just get rid of it in the next release.

Hiring individual coaches is another part of the games that should go. It's no fun. Do you know the names of any of your coaches? If you can't get online for the wrong 2 days, there's a good chance your team is messed up for several seasons. It encourges gaming the system by doing things like putting all prospects in 2 levels and tanking the others.

It's complicated, illogical, and probably causes more new owners to quit the first 2 weeks than anything else.

Coaching should be a budget. Or a few budgets (hitting, pitching, fielding, etc).

I don't want the game to be easy. But it shouldn't be needlessly hard either.

Posted by tufft on 10/18/2011 12:18:00 PM (view original):
Hiring individual coaches is another part of the games that should go. It's no fun. Do you know the names of any of your coaches? If you can't get online for the wrong 2 days, there's a good chance your team is messed up for several seasons. It encourges gaming the system by doing things like putting all prospects in 2 levels and tanking the others.

It's complicated, illogical, and probably causes more new owners to quit the first 2 weeks than anything else.

Coaching should be a budget. Or a few budgets (hitting, pitching, fielding, etc).

I don't want the game to be easy. But it shouldn't be needlessly hard either.

I like it! a coaching budget! 

HBD for dummies. 

Will someone please explain that HBD isn't MLB? Please and thanks.

No.  And what I suggest doesn't imply that it is.  

Think of it like this.  You send me a $185 GC from WifS to stop making fun of you.   You stipulte, however, that I must use x-amount on SLB, GD and HD.  I purchase those games.   I'm left with $100 to use at a later date.  Even if I say "I'll spend the rest evenly on HBD/SLH", I'm not locked into $50 HBD, $50 simhockey until I purchase them.  So, if I change my mind after buying my first SLH team, I can put the rest into HBD without penalty.