Quote: Originally Posted By timf on 1/11/2010
I am not as experienced as alot of guys on here but why do so many people ***** about transferring budget to sign INTL FA's? Of course some guys are going to do it and they will end up with the best prospects but aren't you other guys missing something? The guys that have to do this are not good managers or they would be able to make trades, draft better and sign the cheaper INTL FA's and at the same time they could field a competitive team. There are far better ways to win besides tanking to get INTL FA's and high draft picks. Sign FA's wisely, draft well, manage your team and budget properly and these tankers won't be a problem because they still won't know how to manage a winning team while you will have the experience necessary to do just that.

The problem is that it's an idiot proof way to build a superteam.

Superteams win 130+ games and ruin the fun for most of the other owners.

Quote: Originally Posted By patrickm885 on 1/11/2010We are going to limit the amount of money that is allowed to be transferred to the prospect budget when we release the HOF.

patrick, since you will have created an effective maximum bid for Intls, be very thoughtful about your tiebreakers. If ballpark is a major factor you're going to have people falling all over themselves to move to Burlington and Tacoma to lure dominant Int'l pitchers (I'm already seeing it with the FA tiebreakers).

Quote: Originally posted by patrickm885 on 1/11/2010<snip>

We decided that one way to curb the tanking is to limit the amount of money that can be dumped into the prospect payroll budget. That amount is going to be $30M and max contracts will be handled the same exact way that was outlined in the last update thread.

<snip>

For clarification, is $30M:
1) the absolute cap on prospect budget?
2) the cap on the amount that can be transferred (so, after tax, and assuming max $20 to start, the new max is $35M)?
3) the cap on the additional (beyond the $20M max at budget) money that can be held in prospect (so, you could transfer $60M, which would net $30M after tax)?

Quote: Originally Posted By timf on 1/11/2010
I am not as experienced as alot of guys on here but why do so many people ***** about transferring budget to sign INTL FA's? Of course some guys are going to do it and they will end up with the best prospects but aren't you other guys missing something? The guys that have to do this are not good managers or they would be able to make trades, draft better and sign the cheaper INTL FA's and at the same time they could field a competitive team. There are far better ways to win besides tanking to get INTL FA's and high draft picks. Sign FA's wisely, draft well, manage your team and budget properly and these tankers won't be a problem because they still won't know how to manage a winning team while you will have the experience necessary to do just that.

I think people would generally agree with your points, but the "lazy" approach to "building" is to tank payroll, transfer to IFA, and wait for those IFAs to hit the bigs

often, said owner will never actually find that nirvana for all the reasons you explained, but while the "plan" is being exercised, said owner has no interest in competing at the MLB level ... the limit on prospect transfer is just an attempt to not enable this strategy ... of course, said tanker could just end up with unspent budget rather than IFA budget, but it is a step

zbrent: $30M total, so absolute cap.

Dedelman: keep in mind that coaches play a large part in the negotiation process as well.

I hate it when owners scrimp in budget departments so they can have 130 m payroll to outspend others on FAs. It's unfair. Waaaah. Fix it.

Better yet, get rid of budgets altogether so all teams are equally competitive and we can realize the dream of worlds where every team goes 81-81, open the playoffs to all (why should one team make the playoffs and not another, that's patently unfair), no one can outbid anyone else for anything, and everybody gets the first pick in the draft! Hooray for everything!

Quote: Originally posted by patrickm885 on 1/11/2010zbrent: $30M total, so absolute cap.

Dedelman: keep in mind that coaches play a large part in the negotiation process as well.

Thanks.

That sounds like crying also.

Quote: Originally posted by camden68 on 1/11/2010
I hate it when owners scrimp in budget departments so they can have 130 m payroll to outspend others on FAs. It's unfair. Waaaah. Fix it. Better yet, get rid of budgets altogether so all teams are equally competitive and we can realize the dream of worlds where every team goes 81-81, open the playoffs to all (why should one team make the playoffs and not another, that's patently unfair), no one can outbid anyone else for anything, and everybody gets the first pick in the draft! Hooray for everything! 

The is the cryingest post of them all.

Quote: Originally posted by MikeT23 on 1/11/2010That sounds like crying also.

There's no crying in baseball!

Quote: Originally posted by patrickm885 on 1/11/2010
We also talked about getting rid of the budget transfer page altogether, is that something that you would rather see?

I would not, no. Being able to transfer payroll really makes a difference if your plans or circumstances change during the course of a season, as they do sometimes. The transfer penalty gives a rightful advantage to owners who plan well from the outset.

HBD more than makes up for the lack of crying in baseball.

I like the 30 mil prospect cap. Perhaps a salary cap/floor would be good as well? Something like $25-$110 million would work for me

Not crying, sarcasm. Beyond purposeful sucking, I don't give a crap how another owner budgets or operates their team.

You can still tank, you just can't get past $30 mil in prospect. It's doesn't really do much to stop tanking. Just puts a cap on a budget. Since few teams ever have that amount, as far as I've seen, and you usually get 3-5 standout IFAs per season, it'll still pay to suck.

Also, if you sit on over ML payroll till after the draft and you've spent the $6 mil or so on your picks, can you then transfer enough over to get back up to $30 mil.

I prefer to sit on my prospect budget until after the draft, even if it means passing on a stud. I always hope others will blow their wad on an IFA and/or the draft, leaving me with the best shot if a stud IFA does come along.

I've had that strategy blow up in my face a few times. It's a calculated risk, I guess