Recently I've noticed the number of people with huge player salary budgets increasing dramatically. When you add this to the huge amounts being spent on IFA bonuses, it would appear that people are not using some of the budget items and loading up on only a few. There are many worlds that have no rules or turn a blind eye to any and all methods of gaming the game. So, what about a world with rules that challenge your ability to navigate through a more level playing field?

So, my question is:

Would you like to join a world with a $120M Player Salary Budget and no more than $25 in Prospect Budget?

"Gaming the system", "level playing field", and "fair" are subjective terms that mean different things to different owners. HBD provides some bare bones rules and private world rules allow for some additional guard rails. Outside of those, it really comes down to the tone the commish sets and the tone the rest of the owners set in determining if a world is "fair". You're always going to have min/max players, casual players, and those who fall in between. Ideally, the try-hards play in the same worlds and the more casual players bunch together in theirs because each of those groups tend to have different expectations of what "fairness" is or of how the game "is supposed to be played".

As to your question, I already play in ULB which has a $25M prospect budget cap and only 3 or 4 teams go slightly over that $120M player budget. I joined because it was a unique twist and forced me to play a slightly different style than I usually do. But here again, the $25M prospect cap has an unintended consequence - a handful of title contenders punt the draft and spend the entire $25M on the top IFA's, which can keep them perpetually contending if the other owners are reluctant to also punt the draft. And then it turns into a game of who is watching the IFA scouting emails closest because tied $25M offers go to whoever makes the offer first.

There will always be ways to "game" the system. It's a lot less headache finding a league with a competent comish and relatively reasonable owners
than trying to create a utopian league that tries to account for every game the system tactic.

Yeah, you need to add a $15 mil cap on any single IFA in addition to the $25 mil prospect cap, and it would be a utopian world. at least to me, ha.

There are too many worlds now that take forever to fill.

Posted by brianplath on 5/9/2024 8:11:00 PM (view original):
"Gaming the system", "level playing field", and "fair" are subjective terms that mean different things to different owners. HBD provides some bare bones rules and private world rules allow for some additional guard rails. Outside of those, it really comes down to the tone the commish sets and the tone the rest of the owners set in determining if a world is "fair". You're always going to have min/max players, casual players, and those who fall in between. Ideally, the try-hards play in the same worlds and the more casual players bunch together in theirs because each of those groups tend to have different expectations of what "fairness" is or of how the game "is supposed to be played".

As to your question, I already play in ULB which has a $25M prospect budget cap and only 3 or 4 teams go slightly over that $120M player budget. I joined because it was a unique twist and forced me to play a slightly different style than I usually do. But here again, the $25M prospect cap has an unintended consequence - a handful of title contenders punt the draft and spend the entire $25M on the top IFA's, which can keep them perpetually contending if the other owners are reluctant to also punt the draft. And then it turns into a game of who is watching the IFA scouting emails closest because tied $25M offers go to whoever makes the offer first.

There will always be ways to "game" the system. It's a lot less headache finding a league with a competent comish and relatively reasonable owners
than trying to create a utopian league that tries to account for every game the system tactic.

++++++

Dumb question, but how do you prevent someone from spending $25,000,100 on a prospect? I suppose when they sign, if it gets posted in the headlines you'd see it; otherwise it gets rounded down to $25M everywhere else right? Would $100 even sway where the person signs? What about $300 or anything else that still round down?
Also, what happens when someone breaks one of those rules, are they removed from the league? Given a verbal warning to not do it again?
Just curious and thanks!

Posted by minihouston on 5/10/2024 5:03:00 PM (view original):
Dumb question, but how do you prevent someone from spending $25,000,100 on a prospect? I suppose when they sign, if it gets posted in the headlines you'd see it; otherwise it gets rounded down to $25M everywhere else right? Would $100 even sway where the person signs? What about $300 or anything else that still round down?
Also, what happens when someone breaks one of those rules, are they removed from the league? Given a verbal warning to not do it again?
Just curious and thanks!

World-Finances-Franchise Payroll Analysis shows the exact amount. Get a team and check it out.

Posted by minihouston on 5/10/2024 5:03:00 PM (view original):
Dumb question, but how do you prevent someone from spending $25,000,100 on a prospect? I suppose when they sign, if it gets posted in the headlines you'd see it; otherwise it gets rounded down to $25M everywhere else right? Would $100 even sway where the person signs? What about $300 or anything else that still round down?
Also, what happens when someone breaks one of those rules, are they removed from the league? Given a verbal warning to not do it again?
Just curious and thanks!

Like alog mentioned, you can see exact prospect bonuses on the payroll screen.

This happened a couple seasons ago actually. Owner was called out and encouraged by the league to release the IFA to waivers so the other owner who bid $25M even could claim him (since you can't trade a 1st season player). They did and everyone moved on, no drama.

Limiting the salary and the prospect budget would at least force people to use their money in other areas. People are now playing with $140M+ player budgets, add in the $6M for prospects and what I would guess would be a token amount for coaches and most of the other budgetary items are ignored or have minimal investment. Worlds are having issues with filling MiL teams and this might aid in creating less of a shortage.

alogman comes up with an additional twist that would be interesting.

longballwins is obviously not interested.

If you're going to max the amount offered to an IFA I would max the budget line at $20M. In fact I would say you have two IFA contract slots, a $10M and a $5M, that's it, you can only offer 2 contracts, after that you use it for the amateur draft. Keeps the draft from being totally punted.

So, you're suggesting, $20M prospect max & only 2 IFA signings? Very interesting, it would keep the IFA market under control and allow more to benefit.

In your utopian world I hope you limit medical to 19 so nobody can work that bonus system.

Posted by grissom97 on 5/14/2024 11:22:00 PM (view original):
So, you're suggesting, $20M prospect max & only 2 IFA signings? Very interesting, it would keep the IFA market under control and allow more to benefit.

Yeah, think about it, you have 3 sections out of the $20.
1) A $10M contract slot
2) A $5M contract slot
3) The remaining $5M to use for the amateur draft
The caveats being you don't have to use the slotted money for IFAs, you just cannot go over the 2 slotted offer maximums. Think of it as an A and B. IFA might come through, you offer the $10M (the A), and get him. Draft comes up, you have the #3 pick and a supplemental, plus your others you want to sign, costs you another $8M. You have $2M left to bottom feed in IFA because you won't compete against the remaining A or B's. So you can offer up to one $10M contract, one $5M contract if you go $15 to $20 in prospect. Might push people into the amateur draft more heavily, more into FA market, etc.
Just a thought.

as to the original question.... Would you like to join a world with a $120M Player Salary Budget and no more than $25 in Prospect Budget?

Nope! I usually don't go to the extremes that this thread is trying to avoid but I do want to have the freedom to build my dynasty any way I want to.

Just my opinion here, but each owner's behavior adds a plus or minus to the economy and/or reputation of the World. Some examples are below. This is not an exhaustive list, but one would hope that each owner is a net positive on the World. When that occurs, it usually means it is a healthy World.

+ for simply participating in a World;
+ for simply participating in the amateur draft (not punting; actually drafting players to play milb or mlb ball)
+ for developing players that will progress to higher level minors or mlb;
+ for participating in IFA and signing players that will play in high minors or mlb;
+ for participating in free agency

- for punting the draft;
- for paying no attention to minor leagues;
- for transacting lopsided trades that the World needs to police;
- for overpaying aged free agents;
- for spending less than four sseasons in a World;