 |
View Old Forum Thread
Old Forum Index » Sim Forums » Baseball Enhancements » Salary League Adjustments
dirtdevil
Add Total Team Salary to Depth Chart: in salary leagues cap dollars are important in making trades and trade offers. it's great to have the individual salaries listed beside the players but it's a nuisance to have to open another page to check the team's total cap number. listing it at the bottom of the depth chart beside number of players would make life much easier.
List Final Contract year on the depth chart: by the same token, the number of contract years left affects player values as well. instead of having to open the card of every player you want to look at or check another page entirely, why not list this information on the depth chart beside the player's salary? we already track this so it shouldn't be hard to add.
Adjust the cost of a empty minor league slot back to 0.50mil: As outlined repeatedly [url=http://www.simdynasty.com/oldforum-viewthread.jsp?tid=427671&page=1]in this thread that admin is currently ignoring[/url], the current setup leads to some illogical and damaging optimal playing strategies. there were some cogent reasons why a change was request initially but the decision that was made just is not working. so as step one in a better fix, let's return the cost of an empty slot to something that will incentivize people to have actual minor leaguers.
Salaries of players with options remaining who are in the minors should not count against the cap: this is part two of the fix. returning the empty slot penalty to .5 without doing anything else is just going to return us to the April 1 stampede to the waiver wire for the cheap (read:worst possible) players to fill those spaces, which is dumb. but having players under options not count in the minors removes the major impetus for that stampede. if players with options don't count to the cap in the minor leagues it will incentivize people to stock their minors with the best prospects they can find. isn't that what we really want? teams can then make a decision on which of those guys they want to keep around when their options expire and they start to count against the cap. if they've developed into something decent then they'll get kept. but if cap issues mean that they don't get kept then at least better players will hit the wire for other teams. and teams shouldn't have any difficulty finding waiver wire players with options remaining, so the claiming disadvantage for teams on the west coast will cease to be a major issue. teams will have to make strategic decisions on how much major league cap space they need to keep open to potentially call up minor leaguers with options during the season, but creating more opportunities for strategy decisions is a good thing.
Adjust the 1-year contracts: I don't want to eliminate them, or even reduce the attractiveness of them for the players. there are good sim reasons why it's set up that way. but the huge 1-year offer to buy a leadership bonus is almost as dumb as the .05 empty slot. I propose that any team wishing to resign a player younger than OS34 who is coming off a 1-year deal must bid at least 75% of his expiring contract. so a team who signed a player to a 1-year 16mil deal last season must offer at least 12mil per year to get him to resign again. this would NOT apply to other teams in the league offering contracts. boom, problem solved. teams with space who need a guy can still offer a big contract. teams who think a player is worth 16mil won't have any issue at all. but teams who bid huge dollars just to get guys to sign with them for significantly less the next season now have another strategic decision to make. which is all to the good.
eta- suggestion by timemry
Set Max number of Signees per position in FA: Add a field on bid page: "Sign a maximum of xx" Catchers, SP's, etc. This would avoid the problem of signing 4 OF's in day 1 when you only need one.
[Edited on 6-1-2016 by dirtdevil]
Salary League Adjustments
May 26, 2016 at 05:38PM View BBCode
with Admin steadfastly ignoring [url=http://www.simdynasty.com/oldforum-viewthread.jsp?tid=427671&page=1]this other thread[/url], I thought i'd try another avenue. so here are some ideas, most simple, for improving the playing experience of the salary leagues. we still do that, right?Add Total Team Salary to Depth Chart: in salary leagues cap dollars are important in making trades and trade offers. it's great to have the individual salaries listed beside the players but it's a nuisance to have to open another page to check the team's total cap number. listing it at the bottom of the depth chart beside number of players would make life much easier.
List Final Contract year on the depth chart: by the same token, the number of contract years left affects player values as well. instead of having to open the card of every player you want to look at or check another page entirely, why not list this information on the depth chart beside the player's salary? we already track this so it shouldn't be hard to add.
Adjust the cost of a empty minor league slot back to 0.50mil: As outlined repeatedly [url=http://www.simdynasty.com/oldforum-viewthread.jsp?tid=427671&page=1]in this thread that admin is currently ignoring[/url], the current setup leads to some illogical and damaging optimal playing strategies. there were some cogent reasons why a change was request initially but the decision that was made just is not working. so as step one in a better fix, let's return the cost of an empty slot to something that will incentivize people to have actual minor leaguers.
Salaries of players with options remaining who are in the minors should not count against the cap: this is part two of the fix. returning the empty slot penalty to .5 without doing anything else is just going to return us to the April 1 stampede to the waiver wire for the cheap (read:worst possible) players to fill those spaces, which is dumb. but having players under options not count in the minors removes the major impetus for that stampede. if players with options don't count to the cap in the minor leagues it will incentivize people to stock their minors with the best prospects they can find. isn't that what we really want? teams can then make a decision on which of those guys they want to keep around when their options expire and they start to count against the cap. if they've developed into something decent then they'll get kept. but if cap issues mean that they don't get kept then at least better players will hit the wire for other teams. and teams shouldn't have any difficulty finding waiver wire players with options remaining, so the claiming disadvantage for teams on the west coast will cease to be a major issue. teams will have to make strategic decisions on how much major league cap space they need to keep open to potentially call up minor leaguers with options during the season, but creating more opportunities for strategy decisions is a good thing.
Adjust the 1-year contracts: I don't want to eliminate them, or even reduce the attractiveness of them for the players. there are good sim reasons why it's set up that way. but the huge 1-year offer to buy a leadership bonus is almost as dumb as the .05 empty slot. I propose that any team wishing to resign a player younger than OS34 who is coming off a 1-year deal must bid at least 75% of his expiring contract. so a team who signed a player to a 1-year 16mil deal last season must offer at least 12mil per year to get him to resign again. this would NOT apply to other teams in the league offering contracts. boom, problem solved. teams with space who need a guy can still offer a big contract. teams who think a player is worth 16mil won't have any issue at all. but teams who bid huge dollars just to get guys to sign with them for significantly less the next season now have another strategic decision to make. which is all to the good.
eta- suggestion by timemry
Set Max number of Signees per position in FA: Add a field on bid page: "Sign a maximum of xx" Catchers, SP's, etc. This would avoid the problem of signing 4 OF's in day 1 when you only need one.
[Edited on 6-1-2016 by dirtdevil]
BigMacAttack
I worry about the players with option being free in the minors as far as coding/implementing it goes but then again I'm not a programmer so it may not actually be that difficult. The strategy surrounding having space to bring up players from the minors would definitely be an interesting wrinkle. And it should help to solve the steadily declining talent pool that exists in the AML anyway.
May 26, 2016 at 08:52PM View BBCode
I think they would all have some value as well. I had long thought that putting the final contract year on the pop up portion of the player card would be good but having it on the depth chart makes more sense for sure.I worry about the players with option being free in the minors as far as coding/implementing it goes but then again I'm not a programmer so it may not actually be that difficult. The strategy surrounding having space to bring up players from the minors would definitely be an interesting wrinkle. And it should help to solve the steadily declining talent pool that exists in the AML anyway.
kswetnam
I wouldn't be opposed to changing it back, but the other change would have to go along with it.
May 27, 2016 at 06:41PM View BBCode
I have been pretty successful in the salary leagues, and I maintain a full minor league system nearly every season. I like the flexibility that this new change has given us.I wouldn't be opposed to changing it back, but the other change would have to go along with it.
dirtdevil
the two things would have to be done together for it to be most effective, yes.
May 27, 2016 at 06:53PM View BBCode
Originally posted by kswetnam
I wouldn't be opposed to changing it back, but the other change would have to go along with it.
the two things would have to be done together for it to be most effective, yes.
piper108
My current league has system three. Developing players is one of my favorite parts of the game, and the disincentive to develop players is my biggest complaint with my salary league so far.
May 28, 2016 at 01:48PM View BBCode
Do salary leagues with variable development have the same problem with the minor leagues?My current league has system three. Developing players is one of my favorite parts of the game, and the disincentive to develop players is my biggest complaint with my salary league so far.
dirtdevil
May 28, 2016 at 02:08PM View BBCode
i'm in the AML, which is variable development. I haven't developed a minor leaguer in over a decade. so, yes.
timR
The AML has minor league system 3 too.
The KBL has system 5 and we don't have the same problem because we can concentrate ICs on the most valuable players. But it also doesn't make sense to keep more than about 5 minor league players to improve. So when the penalty was .50 mil we would try to pick up the cheapest, most horrible players to fill out the rest of our slots and save cap space.
Also our salary cap is $85 mil so this may also contribute to minor league players costing proportionally less money.
[Edited on 5-28-2016 by timR]
May 28, 2016 at 06:48PM View BBCode
Originally posted by dirtdevil
i'm in the AML, which is variable development. I haven't developed a minor leaguer in over a decade. so, yes.
The AML has minor league system 3 too.
The KBL has system 5 and we don't have the same problem because we can concentrate ICs on the most valuable players. But it also doesn't make sense to keep more than about 5 minor league players to improve. So when the penalty was .50 mil we would try to pick up the cheapest, most horrible players to fill out the rest of our slots and save cap space.
Also our salary cap is $85 mil so this may also contribute to minor league players costing proportionally less money.
[Edited on 5-28-2016 by timR]
Bonnie_Brae
3. There are better solutions. I've outlined many.
4. Don't options run out mid season sometimes? If so, why not just have the salaries not count (no matter what the option count is) if the player is in the minors? Once they get called up, the salary counts. It will be like MLB: Payroll is what's in the majors. If you need to clear cap space to call a guy up, then a trade needs to happen. Any MLB time=cap hit. This means that if you keep depth in the minors for injuries, you need to budget for it. This solves #3 in a way too.
5. Disagree. The initial bid to land the high leadership score is available to all. Once you land them, then the spoils go to the winner.
--------------------
Regarding #3:
There's other solutions. Say I look at a mid level guy that costs say .25 and prefer him over the empty .5 solution. Next season, I can find a .1 guy instead. I waive the .25 guy and he doesn't get developed any =way. Rinse and repeat. It solves nothing.
The way to solve it it to fix the minimum bids for free agents to .75 or 1. Or, average the cost of an OS 25 B+ player (over 5 sample seasons) and make the minimum free agent .25 or so higher than that. Since most os25 b+ guys make red letter before free agency, they'd be worth keeping being cheaper than all free agents now, and red letter before free agency (thus better than the cheapest free agent).
I also think that salaries should only count once they get majors playing time on the team they're on. That way you can stock your minors with depth at no cost, but have to clear room to promote them.
--------
None of the proposed solutions made by me or DD require much change. My solution requires a sample size and averaging of OS25 or whatever players across 4 leagues for say 5 seasons. That's it.
[Edited on 5-30-2016 by Bonnie_Brae]
May 30, 2016 at 05:54AM View BBCode
1-2 I agree with.3. There are better solutions. I've outlined many.
4. Don't options run out mid season sometimes? If so, why not just have the salaries not count (no matter what the option count is) if the player is in the minors? Once they get called up, the salary counts. It will be like MLB: Payroll is what's in the majors. If you need to clear cap space to call a guy up, then a trade needs to happen. Any MLB time=cap hit. This means that if you keep depth in the minors for injuries, you need to budget for it. This solves #3 in a way too.
5. Disagree. The initial bid to land the high leadership score is available to all. Once you land them, then the spoils go to the winner.
--------------------
Regarding #3:
There's other solutions. Say I look at a mid level guy that costs say .25 and prefer him over the empty .5 solution. Next season, I can find a .1 guy instead. I waive the .25 guy and he doesn't get developed any =way. Rinse and repeat. It solves nothing.
The way to solve it it to fix the minimum bids for free agents to .75 or 1. Or, average the cost of an OS 25 B+ player (over 5 sample seasons) and make the minimum free agent .25 or so higher than that. Since most os25 b+ guys make red letter before free agency, they'd be worth keeping being cheaper than all free agents now, and red letter before free agency (thus better than the cheapest free agent).
I also think that salaries should only count once they get majors playing time on the team they're on. That way you can stock your minors with depth at no cost, but have to clear room to promote them.
--------
None of the proposed solutions made by me or DD require much change. My solution requires a sample size and averaging of OS25 or whatever players across 4 leagues for say 5 seasons. That's it.
[Edited on 5-30-2016 by Bonnie_Brae]
TRINITY731
May 31, 2016 at 10:44PM View BBCode
I am very happy with the first four, and maybe the fifth. I have real problem with a system where a 32 year old player accepts a 1 year 11 Million Dollar contract over a 3 year 10 million contract. I have been told it is because of the no career ending injury status. I guess I am more in favor of true to life managing including career ending injuries. Thank you for a great thread.
timemry
Add a field on bid page:
"Sign a maximum of xx" Catchers, SP's, etc.
This would avoid the problem of signing 4 OF's in day 1 when you only need one.
May 31, 2016 at 11:58PM View BBCode
Also:Add a field on bid page:
"Sign a maximum of xx" Catchers, SP's, etc.
This would avoid the problem of signing 4 OF's in day 1 when you only need one.
ballmark
Code exists for draft classes on this, so should be relatively easy to apply to Salary...?
June 01, 2016 at 12:30AM View BBCode
+1 Tim's idea.Code exists for draft classes on this, so should be relatively easy to apply to Salary...?
dirtdevil
(do I sound exasperated? irritated? frustrated? pissed off? I am.)
June 01, 2016 at 05:57PM View BBCode
I've added tim's suggestion to the top post so that admin can find it more easily. assuming they ever read this thread, of course, which right now seems highly unlikely.(do I sound exasperated? irritated? frustrated? pissed off? I am.)
Minions
June 02, 2016 at 04:33AM View BBCode
I also think the weight of long-term contracts should be considered more than these one-year deals. Players in real life want that long-term security. I know players in sim-world tend to be much more safer than in real life, and you dont get any severe injuries such as Tommy John, but a 33 year old player should like the prospects of a 3 year, 10 million per season deal over a 1 year, 12 million deal just because you dont know how quick the skills will deteriorate, so I think the player would much rather have that contract security. Just ask Albert Pujols about that.
dirtdevil
June 07, 2016 at 05:26PM View BBCode
still waiting on a response from admin. I have no explanation for the refusal to do so, as responses have been made on other issues on this board since this thread was created. I do not understand admin's refusal to even comment on these issues.
dirtdevil
http://www.simdynasty.com/oldforum-viewthread.jsp?tid=430875
http://www.simdynasty.com/oldforum-viewthread.jsp?tid=430893
it is LONG past time to do something. the long-term deliberate silence from admin on this issue is both baffling and extremely frustrating. why do I keep paying for this?
June 15, 2016 at 01:24PM View BBCode
time for another (fruitless) bump. we are now losing owners over this. major, long-term owners who were instrumental in creating the salary league concept, as well as 'regular' ones.http://www.simdynasty.com/oldforum-viewthread.jsp?tid=430875
http://www.simdynasty.com/oldforum-viewthread.jsp?tid=430893
it is LONG past time to do something. the long-term deliberate silence from admin on this issue is both baffling and extremely frustrating. why do I keep paying for this?
mr1313
June 15, 2016 at 01:42PM View BBCode
Maybe you should start posting scantily clad women's photos in this thread. That might get their attention. Seriously it's pretty sad that they haven't even acknowledged a customers complaint let alone tried to fix the problem.
Hamilton2
The answer to that question, for me, became, "I don't know." last week. That's why I'm out.
I wrote most of the calculation used for free agent bidding. I was the first commissioner of a salary league and manually calculated every free agent bid for every team in an excel spreadsheet for over a decade of the league's existence before Admin hard-coded the bidding process.
After that, I oversaw the first conversion from regular league to salary league as the commissioner. I was the commissioner for the AML, BZL, and the CHL (three out of the four league-wide salary leagues) at the time that they became salary leagues.
At the beginning of the entire process, the goal was two-fold: goal # 1, create more player movement and entertainment; goal #1, kill tanking.
For what it's worth, we accomplished those two goals quite well. The salary leagues have very high player movement (to the annoyance of some with the 1-year salary issue) and we have had very few owners find success with severe win/lose/win/lost cycle.
The tanking issue is going to be the next problem in salary leagues. With no incentive for teams to actually develop players, there are two options for team building: don't carry anyone and maximize the impact of the top 25-30 players on your major league roster or tank and accumulate draft picks and then win like crazy from the peak years of OS 26-28, rinse and repeat.
The salary leagues, as currently constructed, are NOT fun. The variety and unpredictability that the format created has been killed by an arbitrary rule change which was made as a knee-jerk reaction to fix a problem against the better advice offered from more experienced players.
So ... why do you keep paying for this, DD?
June 17, 2016 at 03:15AM View BBCode
Originally posted by dirtdevil
time for another (fruitless) bump. we are now losing owners over this. major, long-term owners who were instrumental in creating the salary league concept, as well as 'regular' ones.
http://www.simdynasty.com/oldforum-viewthread.jsp?tid=430875
http://www.simdynasty.com/oldforum-viewthread.jsp?tid=430893
it is LONG past time to do something. the long-term deliberate silence from admin on this issue is both baffling and extremely frustrating. why do I keep paying for this?
The answer to that question, for me, became, "I don't know." last week. That's why I'm out.
I wrote most of the calculation used for free agent bidding. I was the first commissioner of a salary league and manually calculated every free agent bid for every team in an excel spreadsheet for over a decade of the league's existence before Admin hard-coded the bidding process.
After that, I oversaw the first conversion from regular league to salary league as the commissioner. I was the commissioner for the AML, BZL, and the CHL (three out of the four league-wide salary leagues) at the time that they became salary leagues.
At the beginning of the entire process, the goal was two-fold: goal # 1, create more player movement and entertainment; goal #1, kill tanking.
For what it's worth, we accomplished those two goals quite well. The salary leagues have very high player movement (to the annoyance of some with the 1-year salary issue) and we have had very few owners find success with severe win/lose/win/lost cycle.
The tanking issue is going to be the next problem in salary leagues. With no incentive for teams to actually develop players, there are two options for team building: don't carry anyone and maximize the impact of the top 25-30 players on your major league roster or tank and accumulate draft picks and then win like crazy from the peak years of OS 26-28, rinse and repeat.
The salary leagues, as currently constructed, are NOT fun. The variety and unpredictability that the format created has been killed by an arbitrary rule change which was made as a knee-jerk reaction to fix a problem against the better advice offered from more experienced players.
So ... why do you keep paying for this, DD?
paulcaraccio
June 17, 2016 at 03:46AM View BBCode
there are now openings in all 4 salary leagues, never seen that before.
dirtdevil
honestly? because at the moment the AML is the only league I share with my brother and I enjoy the interaction. that's it. it now has nothing whatsoever to do with the gameplay, which has become more frustrating than fun.
June 23, 2016 at 06:04PM View BBCode
Originally posted by Hamilton2
So ... why do you keep paying for this, DD?
honestly? because at the moment the AML is the only league I share with my brother and I enjoy the interaction. that's it. it now has nothing whatsoever to do with the gameplay, which has become more frustrating than fun.
Pages: 1 2