Please login. You must be logged in for full member access.

An OOTP17 Baseball Sim League

The next sim is: TBD upgrading to ootp17
The current game date is: 10/25/2031...
Congrats to the Las Vegas Blackjacks on winning the 2031 World Series!
The NABL league is currently full
We are starting the 2031-2032 off season....

Latest topics

» NABL OOTP16 Rules (2015 - 2017)
June 21st 2017, 10:43 pm by Rich

» 2031 Regular season Schedule
May 25th 2016, 11:41 am by Rich

» 2030-2031 Off Season Schedule
May 23rd 2016, 10:11 am by Rich

» 2030 Regular Season Sims
April 26th 2016, 9:04 am by Rich

» Form to Join League: Please fill out
March 24th 2016, 3:33 pm by Guest

» Draft update
March 18th 2016, 9:11 am by Rich

» League Website
March 13th 2016, 11:59 pm by WhoDat

» Draft Pool
March 12th 2016, 1:04 am by Rich

» Charming seeks SP
March 10th 2016, 10:02 am by bigrevkev55

Twitter

Who is online?

In total there are 2 users online :: 0 Registered, 0 Hidden and 2 Guests

None


Most users ever online was 53 on October 7th 2015, 4:46 pm


Cash in Trades?

Share

Guest
Guest

Re: Cash in Trades?

Post by Guest on June 5th 2014, 2:15 pm

That was last season in that league. Fought tooth and nail for first until after the all star break and then my star SS goes down followed by my CF. Dropped to the bottom of the division for a bit until they came back late and we managed to fight back up to second but way out of first and a couple shy of the wild card.
avatar
Rich
Commish

Posts : 5625
Join date : 2012-10-12
Location : Long Island NY

Re: Cash in Trades?

Post by Rich on June 5th 2014, 1:57 pm

Snarf054 wrote:I only tend to trade based on a couple specific needs.

A. I have prospects I don't need and have one glaring weakness on my big league squad to fill.

B. I've made a mess of my minors and really need some fresh blood to add to it. (This happens more than I care to admit)

Emergency case...

C. I spent the off season with the intention of putting together a team that can win it all and then 5 players go on the DL in the first 3 weeks (My other online league, and yes, I am bitter)
the injury situation in C happens a lot.  Its even more annoying when you get a few big injuries right before the playoffs.


_________________
Richard J. Rutkowski
North Shore Honu
2020-Present
.556(900-720)
2027 NABL Champs!
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.][You must be registered and logged in to see this link.][You must be registered and logged in to see this link.][You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Guest
Guest

Re: Cash in Trades?

Post by Guest on June 5th 2014, 1:55 pm

I only tend to trade based on a couple specific needs.

A. I have prospects I don't need and have one glaring weakness on my big league squad to fill.

B. I've made a mess of my minors and really need some fresh blood to add to it. (This happens more than I care to admit)

Emergency case...

C. I spent the off season with the intention of putting together a team that can win it all and then 5 players go on the DL in the first 3 weeks (My other online league, and yes, I am bitter)

Guest
Guest

Re: Cash in Trades?

Post by Guest on June 4th 2014, 11:03 pm

Hey guys.. some great opinions on a topic that has been on my mind, as well. Here's a summary of my thoughts: I think there is an intrinsic problem with having a capped online league because of how the financial engine is built in OOTP. You can control and tweak it **a lot**, but it doesn't make it perfect. The fact of the matter is, talented veterans will continue to ask for more money, and if someone gives it to him, the league averages will go up. I certainly don't have the time to test this stuff, but when I was reading through the OOTP boards trying to learn about a completely different aspect of the financial engine, I came across the following article (pasted into the 4th comment) noted as "OOTP economy - The FED as seen thru Marcus's eyes". After browsing through it, I came across this section, towards the end:

"Also, it was obvious from the historical tests that the engine does not look at the player salary averages entered during league creation. The tests were run requiring the engine to use the next season’s data in the financial txt file for the coming season. Even though these values were frequently less than what the existing player’s salary was, there was no evidence that the season’s re-negotiations were based on the new settings but only on the current average. Thus in on-line leagues when someone establishes a high contract value for a player type that becomes the new bar for future negotiations. Salaries will not come down. This means that on-line leagues that have lots of cash are encouraging owners to actively bid on players, thus causing salaries to rise. You don’t see this in solo leagues because the AI doesn’t do bidding wars, it is managing solely for profit. This is also why salary cap in online league won’t work. Since the engine isn’t looking at expenses, it will continue to generate profits and increase budgets. The editing of these values back down has no influence on the economy. So cash exists, teams negotiate large contracts, raising the bar on salaries. The salary cap will limit the number of players that can be signed and the rest of your talented free agents will sit on the sidelines, because no one can exceed the cap to bid on them, further increasing profits and thus the league inflationary economy."

In any event, its an interesting read and good perspective on how to maintain stability in an online league. If I had to pick, I would opt to remove the salary cap. However, if we keep it, I will continue to build my dynasty in the Keys despite it!! Smile beavis&Butthead
avatar
Michael42371
T Ball'er
T Ball'er

Posts : 123
Join date : 2012-10-12
Age : 47
Location : Port Jefferson Station, NY

Re: Cash in Trades?

Post by Michael42371 on June 4th 2014, 5:44 pm

I think the cap should remain in place, no raising it based on cash received or trading cap space.  I have no issue have cash included in a trade.  The cash can be spent on scouting or even used to offset releasing a player.
avatar
Rich
Commish

Posts : 5625
Join date : 2012-10-12
Location : Long Island NY

Re: Cash in Trades?

Post by Rich on June 4th 2014, 1:01 pm

WhoDat wrote:Truly rebuilding takes a ton of patience and time.  In the DDB I went 7 seasons at the bottom of the league, no FA spending and few trades, to rebuild but now have been one of the top teams.  It isn't for everyone but it can be done in any league and I actually quite enjoy it.  That said I also like reaping the benefits of my efforts Smile

A lot of people get into OOTP leagues and want to wheel'n'deal like Monty Hall.  That is fine as long as that fits in with the league.  But not everyone plays the game just to continually make changes.  I will trade a lot when I take over but I don't often trade players I specifically went out an acquired, I tend to get attached to them little digital buggers.
I used to trade more myself but found it easier for me to rebuild through the draft.  When I had more time I would constantly contact owners with offers.  Now I kind of like drafting the players and watching them move up and make the majors.  

I had to rebuild North Shore and it took me a while.  I drafted top young pitching but wasn't able to sign any of them.  I couldn't trade them either so i basically had to start from scratch.


_________________
Richard J. Rutkowski
North Shore Honu
2020-Present
.556(900-720)
2027 NABL Champs!
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.][You must be registered and logged in to see this link.][You must be registered and logged in to see this link.][You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
avatar
WhoDat
T Ball'er
T Ball'er

Posts : 283
Join date : 2012-10-13
Location : Ewing, NJ

Re: Cash in Trades?

Post by WhoDat on June 4th 2014, 12:50 pm

Truly rebuilding takes a ton of patience and time.  In the DDB I went 7 seasons at the bottom of the league, no FA spending and few trades, to rebuild but now have been one of the top teams.  It isn't for everyone but it can be done in any league and I actually quite enjoy it.  That said I also like reaping the benefits of my efforts Smile

A lot of people get into OOTP leagues and want to wheel'n'deal like Monty Hall.  That is fine as long as that fits in with the league.  But not everyone plays the game just to continually make changes.  I will trade a lot when I take over but I don't often trade players I specifically went out an acquired, I tend to get attached to them little digital buggers.
avatar
Rich
Commish

Posts : 5625
Join date : 2012-10-12
Location : Long Island NY

Re: Cash in Trades?

Post by Rich on June 4th 2014, 12:23 pm

WhoDat wrote:
Bumstead wrote:I agree with Mark here...sorry Mark, you may have to reconsider your stance now.  Cash has value, but the cap should remain the cap IMHO.

And Karl, I don't mind volunteering me to act as a trade partner.  I would love to make some trades.  I can't find anybody willing to give anything up for a player that is paid close to market value despite the fact that said player would improve their team.  But, alas, this is an issue in many of these leagues with caps.  As I ponder my OOTP "career," er fantasy life, I am starting to come around to the realization that this game operates much better without a hard cap, or most likely without a cap at all.  Seems like revenue sharing and luxury tax may actually allow for a more active league as far as trading goes.  Dynasties will exist in these games regardless, as some owners not only are a bit more savvy, but some owners also spend a lot more time than others working on their teams.  This is not a shot at those that spend that time; I have spent that time in the past and was rewarded with really good teams and results.  Recent events over the last year or two have led me to be a bit more laid back with this league.  I wish my team was better, but it's not and that ball lies in my court.  I still think a no salary cap league would be an interesting way to go in an online league; the activity level would have to be higher, especially if you had similar to the quality of owners that we either have in this league now or back when we started this league.  I don't know many of you like I did when we started, so I have no real way to judge at this point.  We do still have quite a few originals.

hmmm...what the heck just happened...I just broke out in randomness, but I think it is useful so I will leave it.  study 

Bum   yay

This discussion may all me moot since obviously the world is about to come to an end what with Jeff and I agreeing Shocked 

The cap significantly changes how teams must operate, it takes away a lot of flexibility.  It also takes away a lot of the responsibility on the GMs part because they don't have to manage their finances as well as they would if there was no cap.  Without a cap a GM has to work harder, and show more restraint, so as to not put their team in a bad financial situation by overspending.  I have been in no cap leagues and it is nearly a forgone conclusion that one or more GMs will run their team into a financial graveyard by overspending.  Then one of two things happens; 1) the GM says he can't compete because is financials are a mess and he wants the league to help him out of his self created hole, or 2) he quits the league and we have an open team that some poor smuck has to come in and try to resurrect.

Another thing I've seen in nocap leagues is that the disparity between the haves and have nots can grow very big.  As a team wins his owner gives him a bigger budget, he fan loyalty increases, his market size increases (if allowed) and he has more money to spend while the team that struggles goes in the opposite direction.  Eventually enough people in the league think that the situation is no longer manageable and the league balances the league finances.  This is unfair to the teams who built a successful, profitable team within the rules and it bails out teams who did a poor job.  A nocap league is a capitalist league.  The successful teams thrive and the rest sit at the bottom.

At least a luxury tax would mitigate that a bit.  You could also freeze market sizes to limit financial growth.  If you go nocap you have to build in controls from the beginning or ultimately the league finances are going to get to a point where a lot of teams would be unhappy.

Personally I like nocap leagues and the online league concept that I am tossing around in my head is a nocap league.  But in that league GMs would have to be committed to managing their finances reasonably or the league will step in and stop them from burying the team for the better of the league.
we are also having turnover because of the cap.  There are certain teams that keep opening up.  New GMs come in and can't make any trades so they leave.  You can rebuild - it not easy.  

If we went no cap we would def need limits and market sizes would be set to the same and kept there.  Also budgets (maybe) budgets and revenue streams.  If we still keep the budgets down it would limit crazy spending.


_________________
Richard J. Rutkowski
North Shore Honu
2020-Present
.556(900-720)
2027 NABL Champs!
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.][You must be registered and logged in to see this link.][You must be registered and logged in to see this link.][You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
avatar
Bumstead
T Ball'er
T Ball'er

Posts : 518
Join date : 2012-10-12
Age : 50
Location : Valparaiso, IN

Re: Cash in Trades?

Post by Bumstead on June 4th 2014, 12:12 pm

WhoDat wrote:
Bumstead wrote:I agree with Mark here...sorry Mark, you may have to reconsider your stance now.  Cash has value, but the cap should remain the cap IMHO.

And Karl, I don't mind volunteering me to act as a trade partner.  I would love to make some trades.  I can't find anybody willing to give anything up for a player that is paid close to market value despite the fact that said player would improve their team.  But, alas, this is an issue in many of these leagues with caps.  As I ponder my OOTP "career," er fantasy life, I am starting to come around to the realization that this game operates much better without a hard cap, or most likely without a cap at all.  Seems like revenue sharing and luxury tax may actually allow for a more active league as far as trading goes.  Dynasties will exist in these games regardless, as some owners not only are a bit more savvy, but some owners also spend a lot more time than others working on their teams.  This is not a shot at those that spend that time; I have spent that time in the past and was rewarded with really good teams and results.  Recent events over the last year or two have led me to be a bit more laid back with this league.  I wish my team was better, but it's not and that ball lies in my court.  I still think a no salary cap league would be an interesting way to go in an online league; the activity level would have to be higher, especially if you had similar to the quality of owners that we either have in this league now or back when we started this league.  I don't know many of you like I did when we started, so I have no real way to judge at this point.  We do still have quite a few originals.

hmmm...what the heck just happened...I just broke out in randomness, but I think it is useful so I will leave it.  study 

Bum   yay

This discussion may all me moot since obviously the world is about to come to an end what with Jeff and I agreeing Shocked 

The cap significantly changes how teams must operate, it takes away a lot of flexibility.  It also takes away a lot of the responsibility on the GMs part because they don't have to manage their finances as well as they would if there was no cap.  Without a cap a GM has to work harder, and show more restraint, so as to not put their team in a bad financial situation by overspending.  I have been in no cap leagues and it is nearly a forgone conclusion that one or more GMs will run their team into a financial graveyard by overspending.  Then one of two things happens; 1) the GM says he can't compete because is financials are a mess and he wants the league to help him out of his self created hole, or 2) he quits the league and we have an open team that some poor smuck has to come in and try to resurrect.

Another thing I've seen in nocap leagues is that the disparity between the haves and have nots can grow very big.  As a team wins his owner gives him a bigger budget, he fan loyalty increases, his market size increases (if allowed) and he has more money to spend while the team that struggles goes in the opposite direction.  Eventually enough people in the league think that the situation is no longer manageable and the league balances the league finances.  This is unfair to the teams who built a successful, profitable team within the rules and it bails out teams who did a poor job.  A nocap league is a capitalist league.  The successful teams thrive and the rest sit at the bottom.

At least a luxury tax would mitigate that a bit.  You could also freeze market sizes to limit financial growth.  If you go nocap you have to build in controls from the beginning or ultimately the league finances are going to get to a point where a lot of teams would be unhappy.

Personally I like nocap leagues and the online league concept that I am tossing around in my head is a nocap league.  But in that league GMs would have to be committed to managing their finances reasonably or the league will step in and stop them from burying the team for the better of the league.

But, in every league you have the "have's" and the "have nots" and that is always a contention.  You always have people taking over teams that have been run into the ground and then they want the league to help them.  It's hard to maintain an on-line league where the players take responsibility for what they created, because they can just leave at any time (and that is what a lot of owners do).  I can see, however, that a team can get way more out of shape financially in a no-cap league...seems like every league I have been in has the same team flipping over repeatedly to the point that the team just resembles a giant turd pile, which you are then trying to convince someone that it is actually a rose bush shaped like a turd pile.

Anyway, if you ever create this league you have evolving in your head, keep me in mind.  I would like to see how that evolves.  I will try not to be a meany, but I will be a character.  It's in my blood... cheers
avatar
WhoDat
T Ball'er
T Ball'er

Posts : 283
Join date : 2012-10-13
Location : Ewing, NJ

Re: Cash in Trades?

Post by WhoDat on June 4th 2014, 11:56 am

Bumstead wrote:I agree with Mark here...sorry Mark, you may have to reconsider your stance now.  Cash has value, but the cap should remain the cap IMHO.

And Karl, I don't mind volunteering me to act as a trade partner.  I would love to make some trades.  I can't find anybody willing to give anything up for a player that is paid close to market value despite the fact that said player would improve their team.  But, alas, this is an issue in many of these leagues with caps.  As I ponder my OOTP "career," er fantasy life, I am starting to come around to the realization that this game operates much better without a hard cap, or most likely without a cap at all.  Seems like revenue sharing and luxury tax may actually allow for a more active league as far as trading goes.  Dynasties will exist in these games regardless, as some owners not only are a bit more savvy, but some owners also spend a lot more time than others working on their teams.  This is not a shot at those that spend that time; I have spent that time in the past and was rewarded with really good teams and results.  Recent events over the last year or two have led me to be a bit more laid back with this league.  I wish my team was better, but it's not and that ball lies in my court.  I still think a no salary cap league would be an interesting way to go in an online league; the activity level would have to be higher, especially if you had similar to the quality of owners that we either have in this league now or back when we started this league.  I don't know many of you like I did when we started, so I have no real way to judge at this point.  We do still have quite a few originals.

hmmm...what the heck just happened...I just broke out in randomness, but I think it is useful so I will leave it.  study 

Bum   yay

This discussion may all me moot since obviously the world is about to come to an end what with Jeff and I agreeing Shocked 

The cap significantly changes how teams must operate, it takes away a lot of flexibility.  It also takes away a lot of the responsibility on the GMs part because they don't have to manage their finances as well as they would if there was no cap.  Without a cap a GM has to work harder, and show more restraint, so as to not put their team in a bad financial situation by overspending.  I have been in no cap leagues and it is nearly a forgone conclusion that one or more GMs will run their team into a financial graveyard by overspending.  Then one of two things happens; 1) the GM says he can't compete because is financials are a mess and he wants the league to help him out of his self created hole, or 2) he quits the league and we have an open team that some poor smuck has to come in and try to resurrect.

Another thing I've seen in nocap leagues is that the disparity between the haves and have nots can grow very big.  As a team wins his owner gives him a bigger budget, he fan loyalty increases, his market size increases (if allowed) and he has more money to spend while the team that struggles goes in the opposite direction.  Eventually enough people in the league think that the situation is no longer manageable and the league balances the league finances.  This is unfair to the teams who built a successful, profitable team within the rules and it bails out teams who did a poor job.  A nocap league is a capitalist league.  The successful teams thrive and the rest sit at the bottom.

At least a luxury tax would mitigate that a bit.  You could also freeze market sizes to limit financial growth.  If you go nocap you have to build in controls from the beginning or ultimately the league finances are going to get to a point where a lot of teams would be unhappy.

Personally I like nocap leagues and the online league concept that I am tossing around in my head is a nocap league.  But in that league GMs would have to be committed to managing their finances reasonably or the league will step in and stop them from burying the team for the better of the league.
avatar
KMcBride
T Ball'er
T Ball'er

Posts : 324
Join date : 2012-10-12
Age : 40
Location : Maine, USA

Re: Cash in Trades?

Post by KMcBride on June 4th 2014, 11:39 am

WhoDat wrote:I think trading in the league is an issue (as it is in many leagues) and in part it is the cap, but in any league with a cap it is an issue.  Part of the problem with trading is that practically everyone is looking for the proverbial prospects and picks.  Rarely is anyone looking for another major league piece to the puzzle.  I have tried trading prospects for other prospects/picks and get no response.  In part I think this also happens because the league was heavy on outfield prospects and that is what I was trying to trade.

I am in other leagues and in some the question comes up as to how to increase trading and what I think it comes down to is what people are willing to trade and almost no one is willing to deal prospects/picks for for a player that can help now.  For trading to pick up teams have to be willing to not keep building for the future but build to win now.  It seems that many teams think if they don't win the championship that they need to rebuild.  Even if you don't think you have the best team, once you make the playoffs anything can happen. If your goal is to win then the goal should be to make the playoffs.

The major reason why teams are looking for prospects/picks is because the cap has made prospects WAY WAY WAY more valuable (and, in fact, essential) than veterans, even VERY GOOD veterans.  It is way out of balance.  And for a team that is trying to re-build, they have no other options.    Most teams are not willing to take on high-priced veterans without also losing some big contracts, because cap space is just too valuable.
avatar
Rich
Commish

Posts : 5625
Join date : 2012-10-12
Location : Long Island NY

Re: Cash in Trades?

Post by Rich on June 4th 2014, 11:38 am

Bumstead wrote:I agree with Mark here...sorry Mark, you may have to reconsider your stance now.  Cash has value, but the cap should remain the cap IMHO.

And Karl, I don't mind volunteering me to act as a trade partner.  I would love to make some trades.  I can't find anybody willing to give anything up for a player that is paid close to market value despite the fact that said player would improve their team.  But, alas, this is an issue in many of these leagues with caps.  As I ponder my OOTP "career," er fantasy life, I am starting to come around to the realization that this game operates much better without a hard cap, or most likely without a cap at all.  Seems like revenue sharing and luxury tax may actually allow for a more active league as far as trading goes.  Dynasties will exist in these games regardless, as some owners not only are a bit more savvy, but some owners also spend a lot more time than others working on their teams.  This is not a shot at those that spend that time; I have spent that time in the past and was rewarded with really good teams and results.  Recent events over the last year or two have led me to be a bit more laid back with this league.  I wish my team was better, but it's not and that ball lies in my court.  I still think a no salary cap league would be an interesting way to go in an online league; the activity level would have to be higher, especially if you had similar to the quality of owners that we either have in this league now or back when we started this league.  I don't know many of you like I did when we started, so I have no real way to judge at this point.  We do still have quite a few originals.

hmmm...what the heck just happened...I just broke out in randomness, but I think it is useful so I will leave it.  study 

Bum   yay
I have to agree with Jeff- I came to the conclusion that it might be better to have no cap and maintain equal finances.  Like equal market sizes, tickets, and etc.  Then always fighting the games inflation.


_________________
Richard J. Rutkowski
North Shore Honu
2020-Present
.556(900-720)
2027 NABL Champs!
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.][You must be registered and logged in to see this link.][You must be registered and logged in to see this link.][You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
avatar
Rich
Commish

Posts : 5625
Join date : 2012-10-12
Location : Long Island NY

Re: Cash in Trades?

Post by Rich on June 4th 2014, 11:36 am

KMcBride wrote:
WhoDat wrote:We have a $95mil cap but that doesn't mean a team has the $95mil to actually spend on the cap, ask Jeff about that one.  A team's revenue may only be $90mil so acquiring $5mil cash in a trade would now allow the team to spend up to the cap.


I thought we fixed that issue?

WhoDat wrote: Also, the additional cash allows teams to put more into their scouting and development budgets which aren't covered by the cap.  So cash has it's value.

I didn't realize that.  But I would still say that adding money to scouting and development budgets doesn't go nearly  as far for increasing options for roster development and transactions for re-building as being able to manipulate the cap.  Now, I'm making an assumption that the league is interested in doing something to increase options for transactions . . .  I might be wrong about that.


WhoDat wrote:I don't think you want to open the can of worms of trading 'cap space'.  Firstly, it would be a logistical nightmare for the commish to track.
 

Agreed.  That does sound like a nightmare.  

WhoDat wrote: Secondly, the game has a hard cap set in it and limits what teams can spend on FA and extensions based on that cap, not sure how you could override that.

Is that true?  I thought our cap was imposed out-of-game and regulated by us?  There are teams that played practically half of last season over the cap and the game did nothing about it.  We utilized warnings from Rich and reminders on the message board to encourage those teams to get under the cap.  Seems like there's nothing to override in-game.  But I could be wrong.  Rich?

WhoDat wrote: Thirdly, it is one thing to trade cash to cover a player's salary but what I would see happening is some team trading prospects/picks for cash to go as much as $10mil over the cap so the cap really is not the cap.
Agreed.  I think we would have to limit the amount of space that could both be traded away and acquired.  I would also limit it in time.  In other words, you can't trade away $2m in cap space for each of the next 10 years; deals should be permitted for ONE season only.
we have a hard cap.  so you wouldn't be able to sign a free agent to go over the cap.  There are certain things that the game will let you go over the cap like arbitration, player promotions, and when the game bumps everyone on the 40 man up to the majors.  For the most part the game does have a hard cap and maintains it but there are a few scenarios where a team will get over the cap and be warned.  I override the trades and let them go through then the teams must fix the cap.


_________________
Richard J. Rutkowski
North Shore Honu
2020-Present
.556(900-720)
2027 NABL Champs!
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.][You must be registered and logged in to see this link.][You must be registered and logged in to see this link.][You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
avatar
Bumstead
T Ball'er
T Ball'er

Posts : 518
Join date : 2012-10-12
Age : 50
Location : Valparaiso, IN

Re: Cash in Trades?

Post by Bumstead on June 4th 2014, 11:32 am

I agree with Mark here...sorry Mark, you may have to reconsider your stance now.  Cash has value, but the cap should remain the cap IMHO.

And Karl, I don't mind volunteering me to act as a trade partner.  I would love to make some trades.  I can't find anybody willing to give anything up for a player that is paid close to market value despite the fact that said player would improve their team.  But, alas, this is an issue in many of these leagues with caps.  As I ponder my OOTP "career," er fantasy life, I am starting to come around to the realization that this game operates much better without a hard cap, or most likely without a cap at all.  Seems like revenue sharing and luxury tax may actually allow for a more active league as far as trading goes.  Dynasties will exist in these games regardless, as some owners not only are a bit more savvy, but some owners also spend a lot more time than others working on their teams.  This is not a shot at those that spend that time; I have spent that time in the past and was rewarded with really good teams and results.  Recent events over the last year or two have led me to be a bit more laid back with this league.  I wish my team was better, but it's not and that ball lies in my court.  I still think a no salary cap league would be an interesting way to go in an online league; the activity level would have to be higher, especially if you had similar to the quality of owners that we either have in this league now or back when we started this league.  I don't know many of you like I did when we started, so I have no real way to judge at this point.  We do still have quite a few originals.

hmmm...what the heck just happened...I just broke out in randomness, but I think it is useful so I will leave it.  study 

Bum   yay
avatar
KMcBride
T Ball'er
T Ball'er

Posts : 324
Join date : 2012-10-12
Age : 40
Location : Maine, USA

Re: Cash in Trades?

Post by KMcBride on June 4th 2014, 11:28 am

WhoDat wrote:We have a $95mil cap but that doesn't mean a team has the $95mil to actually spend on the cap, ask Jeff about that one.  A team's revenue may only be $90mil so acquiring $5mil cash in a trade would now allow the team to spend up to the cap.


I thought we fixed that issue?

WhoDat wrote: Also, the additional cash allows teams to put more into their scouting and development budgets which aren't covered by the cap.  So cash has it's value.

I didn't realize that.  But I would still say that adding money to scouting and development budgets doesn't go nearly  as far for increasing options for roster development and transactions for re-building as being able to manipulate the cap.  Now, I'm making an assumption that the league is interested in doing something to increase options for transactions . . .  I might be wrong about that.


WhoDat wrote:I don't think you want to open the can of worms of trading 'cap space'.  Firstly, it would be a logistical nightmare for the commish to track.
 

Agreed.  That does sound like a nightmare.  

WhoDat wrote: Secondly, the game has a hard cap set in it and limits what teams can spend on FA and extensions based on that cap, not sure how you could override that.

Is that true?  I thought our cap was imposed out-of-game and regulated by us?  There are teams that played practically half of last season over the cap and the game did nothing about it.  We utilized warnings from Rich and reminders on the message board to encourage those teams to get under the cap.  Seems like there's nothing to override in-game.  But I could be wrong.  Rich?

WhoDat wrote: Thirdly, it is one thing to trade cash to cover a player's salary but what I would see happening is some team trading prospects/picks for cash to go as much as $10mil over the cap so the cap really is not the cap.
Agreed.  I think we would have to limit the amount of space that could both be traded away and acquired.  I would also limit it in time.  In other words, you can't trade away $2m in cap space for each of the next 10 years; deals should be permitted for ONE season only.
avatar
WhoDat
T Ball'er
T Ball'er

Posts : 283
Join date : 2012-10-13
Location : Ewing, NJ

Re: Cash in Trades?

Post by WhoDat on June 4th 2014, 11:27 am

Trading is also an issue because of GM communication and how people go about trying to make trades.  Most people rely on posting a trade block then waiting for people to come to them.  In my experience this has a poor percentage of success unless you put a super commodity in your trade block.

I have found that if you want to make a trade you can almost always get something done if you do the leg work and identify players/picks you are interested in acquiring and you contact the team with those assets and make a legitimate offer.   This leads to negotiations and can lead to actually getting something done.  Often teams have not even thought about trading these assets until you inquire about them.

Being proactive is a huge part of getting deals done.
avatar
WhoDat
T Ball'er
T Ball'er

Posts : 283
Join date : 2012-10-13
Location : Ewing, NJ

Re: Cash in Trades?

Post by WhoDat on June 4th 2014, 11:21 am

I think trading in the league is an issue (as it is in many leagues) and in part it is the cap, but in any league with a cap it is an issue.  Part of the problem with trading is that practically everyone is looking for the proverbial prospects and picks.  Rarely is anyone looking for another major league piece to the puzzle.  I have tried trading prospects for other prospects/picks and get no response.  In part I think this also happens because the league was heavy on outfield prospects and that is what I was trying to trade.

I am in other leagues and in some the question comes up as to how to increase trading and what I think it comes down to is what people are willing to trade and almost no one is willing to deal prospects/picks for for a player that can help now.  For trading to pick up teams have to be willing to not keep building for the future but build to win now.  It seems that many teams think if they don't win the championship that they need to rebuild.  Even if you don't think you have the best team, once you make the playoffs anything can happen. If your goal is to win then the goal should be to make the playoffs.
avatar
Rich
Commish

Posts : 5625
Join date : 2012-10-12
Location : Long Island NY

Re: Cash in Trades?

Post by Rich on June 4th 2014, 11:16 am

1 more thing- I'm not sure we ever came to a decision if we are allowed to trade players for cash.  We briefly discussed it at league creation but I don't think we ever came to a yes or no decision.


_________________
Richard J. Rutkowski
North Shore Honu
2020-Present
.556(900-720)
2027 NABL Champs!
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.][You must be registered and logged in to see this link.][You must be registered and logged in to see this link.][You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
avatar
WhoDat
T Ball'er
T Ball'er

Posts : 283
Join date : 2012-10-13
Location : Ewing, NJ

Re: Cash in Trades?

Post by WhoDat on June 4th 2014, 11:10 am

Well cash does have a value in our league.  We have a $95mil cap but that doesn't mean a team has the $95mil to actually spend on the cap, ask Jeff about that one.  A team's revenue may only be $90mil so acquiring $5mil cash in a trade would now allow the team to spend up to the cap.  Also, the additional cash allows teams to put more into their scouting and development budgets which aren't covered by the cap.  So cash has it's value.

Major League include cash but it is used to cover the expense of the player not for cap purposes since the MLB has no cap.

I don't think you want to open the can of worms of trading 'cap space'.  Firstly, it would be a logistical nightmare for the commish to track.  Secondly, the game has a hard cap set in it and limits what teams can spend on FA and extensions based on that cap, not sure how you could override that. Thirdly, it is one thing to trade cash to cover a player's salary but what I would see happening is some team trading prospects/picks for cash to go as much as $10mil over the cap so the cap really is not the cap.

That cash goes to covering all expenses (salary, scout salary, dev and scouting budgets) not just cap expenses.  It helps a team from going into the red and not being able to spend up to the cap.
avatar
Rich
Commish

Posts : 5625
Join date : 2012-10-12
Location : Long Island NY

owner bugets/total revenue stream

Post by Rich on June 4th 2014, 11:10 am

KMcBride wrote:Just brainstorming . . . . total hypothetical, here.

Let's say Maine wants to trade with . . . . Tacoma (thanks for volunteering, Jeff) and the player in question is making $5m this season.  Tacoma wants to acquire him from Maine for prospects, but Tacoma only has $4m in cap room.  Maine offers to send the player plus $1m cash.  The teams want to dedicate that $1m cash to paying a portion of the player's salary so that Tacoma is not over the cap.  (Obviously, MLB teams do this all the time . . . where the team trading the player away offers to pay a portion of the player's existing contract, which sweetens the deal by minimizing the cost to the acquiring team.)

But, in order to be fair, that would have to mean that Maine should give up $1m of their own cap room (otherwise the trade creates artificial cap room space . . . it should be a zero-sum: if one team gains it, the other loses).  So, for that one season in question,  Maine would now be capped at $94m and Tacoma's cap is raised to $96m.

Obviously, this league is VERY different from MLB in this respect.  Having cash isn't an issue for our teams because of the financial rules we've put in place that (theoretically) level the playing field.  Everyone has at least the $95 million at their disposal to pay player salaries.  So, even though we're allowed to include cash in our trades, what's the point?  Where does the money go?  It doesn't add to the teams' ability to acquire or pay players, because the $95m cap is still the $95m cap.   Which is why our trades NEVER include cash.  Because there's no point to it.

The REAL currency in our league is cap space.  All of us are constricted by the cap (which is how it's supposed to be) so being able to spend and acquire cap space (as if it were cash) would definitely allow for more trading options and transactions, and allow teams to get more creative with crafting their rosters.   Consider this:  as it is right now, a team in a  "re-building" mode has one option:  trade away high-priced talent for prospects and draft picks.  And, they will soon find out that teams in this league are VERY reluctant to make that trade, so they're sorta stuck.  Rebuilding is VERY hard in this league for  that reason: the cap makes prospects EXPONENTIALLY more valuable than higher-priced veteran talent.  This system might give them more options:  offering teams cap room to make that high-priced talent more attractive (and affordable under the cap), OR trying to acquire some additional cap room so that they can make a big splash in free agency.

Anyway . .  these are just thoughts.  I'm WAY over-caffienated today.  Responses?
We have switched back and forth on this a few times over the years.  In this league we went with owner budgets to make it more of a challenge.  Do we like it this way- or should we go back to the total revenue stream available?


_________________
Richard J. Rutkowski
North Shore Honu
2020-Present
.556(900-720)
2027 NABL Champs!
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.][You must be registered and logged in to see this link.][You must be registered and logged in to see this link.][You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
avatar
Rich
Commish

Posts : 5625
Join date : 2012-10-12
Location : Long Island NY

Re: Cash in Trades?

Post by Rich on June 4th 2014, 11:07 am

KMcBride wrote:Just brainstorming . . . . total hypothetical, here.

Let's say Maine wants to trade with . . . . Tacoma (thanks for volunteering, Jeff) and the player in question is making $5m this season.  Tacoma wants to acquire him from Maine for prospects, but Tacoma only has $4m in cap room.  Maine offers to send the player plus $1m cash.  The teams want to dedicate that $1m cash to paying a portion of the player's salary so that Tacoma is not over the cap.  (Obviously, MLB teams do this all the time . . . where the team trading the player away offers to pay a portion of the player's existing contract, which sweetens the deal by minimizing the cost to the acquiring team.)

But, in order to be fair, that would have to mean that Maine should give up $1m of their own cap room (otherwise the trade creates artificial cap room space . . . it should be a zero-sum: if one team gains it, the other loses).  So, for that one season in question,  Maine would now be capped at $94m and Tacoma's cap is raised to $96m.

Obviously, this league is VERY different from MLB in this respect.  Having cash isn't an issue for our teams because of the financial rules we've put in place that (theoretically) level the playing field.  Everyone has at least the $95 million at their disposal to pay player salaries.  So, even though we're allowed to include cash in our trades, what's the point?  Where does the money go?  It doesn't add to the teams' ability to acquire or pay players, because the $95m cap is still the $95m cap.   Which is why our trades NEVER include cash.  Because there's no point to it.

The REAL currency in our league is cap space.  All of us are constricted by the cap (which is how it's supposed to be) so being able to spend and acquire cap space (as if it were cash) would definitely allow for more trading options and transactions, and allow teams to get more creative with crafting their rosters.   Consider this:  as it is right now, a team in a  "re-building" mode has one option:  trade away high-priced talent for prospects and draft picks.  And, they will soon find out that teams in this league are VERY reluctant to make that trade, so they're sorta stuck.  Rebuilding is VERY hard in this league for  that reason: the cap makes prospects EXPONENTIALLY more valuable than higher-priced veteran talent.  This system might give them more options:  offering teams cap room to make that high-priced talent more attractive (and affordable under the cap), OR trying to acquire some additional cap room so that they can make a big splash in free agency.

Anyway . .  these are just thoughts.  I'm WAY over-caffienated today.  Responses?
This is similar to the way the old ahiba ran before games had finances included in the game.  When we traded cash in the old ahiba it would add to your cap room.  Lets continue to discuss and talk it over.  I'm thinking we would just need to keep track of the extra cap cash like we do traded draft picks.

The one thing negative might be how the owner reacts when creating the budget.  If the cap is 95 mil and I get 3 mil from Maine.  I'm allowed to have 98 mil salary in 2025.  Not sure if the owners will bring down your budgets each year if your "over the cap" each season.


_________________
Richard J. Rutkowski
North Shore Honu
2020-Present
.556(900-720)
2027 NABL Champs!
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.][You must be registered and logged in to see this link.][You must be registered and logged in to see this link.][You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
avatar
KMcBride
T Ball'er
T Ball'er

Posts : 324
Join date : 2012-10-12
Age : 40
Location : Maine, USA

Cash in Trades?

Post by KMcBride on June 4th 2014, 10:53 am

Just brainstorming . . . . total hypothetical, here.

Let's say Maine wants to trade with . . . . Tacoma (thanks for volunteering, Jeff) and the player in question is making $5m this season.  Tacoma wants to acquire him from Maine for prospects, but Tacoma only has $4m in cap room.  Maine offers to send the player plus $1m cash.  The teams want to dedicate that $1m cash to paying a portion of the player's salary so that Tacoma is not over the cap.  (Obviously, MLB teams do this all the time . . . where the team trading the player away offers to pay a portion of the player's existing contract, which sweetens the deal by minimizing the cost to the acquiring team.)

But, in order to be fair, that would have to mean that Maine should give up $1m of their own cap room (otherwise the trade creates artificial cap room space . . . it should be a zero-sum: if one team gains it, the other loses).  So, for that one season in question,  Maine would now be capped at $94m and Tacoma's cap is raised to $96m.

Obviously, this league is VERY different from MLB in this respect.  Having cash isn't an issue for our teams because of the financial rules we've put in place that (theoretically) level the playing field.  Everyone has at least the $95 million at their disposal to pay player salaries.  So, even though we're allowed to include cash in our trades, what's the point?  Where does the money go?  It doesn't add to the teams' ability to acquire or pay players, because the $95m cap is still the $95m cap.   Which is why our trades NEVER include cash.  Because there's no point to it.

The REAL currency in our league is cap space.  All of us are constricted by the cap (which is how it's supposed to be) so being able to spend and acquire cap space (as if it were cash) would definitely allow for more trading options and transactions, and allow teams to get more creative with crafting their rosters.   Consider this:  as it is right now, a team in a  "re-building" mode has one option:  trade away high-priced talent for prospects and draft picks.  And, they will soon find out that teams in this league are VERY reluctant to make that trade, so they're sorta stuck.  Rebuilding is VERY hard in this league for  that reason: the cap makes prospects EXPONENTIALLY more valuable than higher-priced veteran talent.  This system might give them more options:  offering teams cap room to make that high-priced talent more attractive (and affordable under the cap), OR trying to acquire some additional cap room so that they can make a big splash in free agency.

Anyway . .  these are just thoughts.  I'm WAY over-caffienated today.  Responses?

Sponsored content

Re: Cash in Trades?

Post by Sponsored content


    Current date/time is December 15th 2018, 9:51 am