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


Owners budgets/Entire revenue stream?

Share

Poll

Which would you prefer?

[ 7 ]
47% [47%] 
[ 8 ]
53% [53%] 

Total Votes: 15
avatar
Rich
Commish

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

Re: Owners budgets/Entire revenue stream?

Post by Rich on June 4th 2014, 12:48 pm

WhoDat wrote:I think a big factor in keeping things under control in a nocap world might be to put a limit on how big/small a team's market size can go to.  The have's bring in the fans and have the fan loyalty so revenue is up which is justified.  But when that market size jumps a peg or two their advantage really starts to grow.

-No cap
-All revenue available
-Luxury Tax
-Either freeze or cap market size growth/reduction
this is what I was thinking.  Right now Missy has the highest budget at 142,000,000 and the lowest at 102,000,000 (Tacoma and Thunder Bay).


_________________
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: Owners budgets/Entire revenue stream?

Post by WhoDat on June 4th 2014, 12:43 pm

My understanding that one of the big factors on what FAs ask for in salary demands is 'Cash on hand'.  Even if you go no cap you still keep the 'cash max' at $10mil and, in theory, FA demands should not get that out of whack.

Also, there is nothing wrong with a player sitting in the FA pool until (or if) his contract demands come down.  Many people in leagues point to these guys left in the pool and say that isn't realistic.  True but neither are their demands.  IRL there is more compromise.  Also, there are guys IRL who retire but if you were willing to pay them %50mil per year they would forgo their retirement for a year or 2.
avatar
WhoDat
T Ball'er
T Ball'er

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

Re: Owners budgets/Entire revenue stream?

Post by WhoDat on June 4th 2014, 12:38 pm

I think a big factor in keeping things under control in a nocap world might be to put a limit on how big/small a team's market size can go to.  The have's bring in the fans and have the fan loyalty so revenue is up which is justified.  But when that market size jumps a peg or two their advantage really starts to grow.

-No cap
-All revenue available
-Luxury Tax
-Either freeze or cap market size growth/reduction
avatar
Rich
Commish

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

Re: Owners budgets/Entire revenue stream?

Post by Rich on June 4th 2014, 12:35 pm

the problem with the cap is the players are going to increase there offers with the inflation and extra money in the game.  So if I'm making all this extra cash each season and can't spend it.  The players say- North Shore is sitting on 40 mil so I want 18 mil a season.  I can't spend it so I don't make an offer.  Most of the teams with the extra cash are already at the cap.  The poorer teams don't have the budget to spend it either because of the lower budgets.  The only way to bring in fans and increase budgets is to sign popular players and win.  The poor team doesn't have the budget to sign them and the richer teams don't have the cap room to sign them.  The player things there all this money out there so there demands don't go down- so the players sits a free agent.


_________________
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: Owners budgets/Entire revenue stream?

Post by WhoDat on June 4th 2014, 12:34 pm

Bumstead wrote:
Rich wrote:
Bumstead wrote:With the salary cap in place, doesn't that just allow the "have's" to spend even more money to maintain their dynasties?  I would rather see something more dramatic, like removing the cap altogether and instituting Luxury Tax and Revenue sharing than just give the rich teams a more decided advantage.  All but one team has a higher budget than me, so they already have that advantage.  Not complaining; just saying.
I'm with you on removing the cap but we need to vote that in and thats someting a few seasons down the road (not this season). 

 Around ootp12 I changed from pro cap to anti cap.  using the entire rev stream would give everyone more money.  How much depends on different variable but it takes the owner out of the equation.

I think there needs to be no cap, full rev stream, and equal finances.  Leave it up to winning brings in fans and increases revenue.  May not need luxury tax- because that might negate the awards for winning.

Luxury tax is generally set well above the league average for team salaries.  It is meant to force teams like the Yankees to think rather than just spend.  And it helps teams like the Marlins, who apparently don't have the wherewithal to pay higher salaries, to not be put in a position where they may as well be a AAA team.  It reigns in some teams so to speak...

I think if you go nocap you need to have the luxury tax.  I don't think it has a major affect on the have's as they have the cash to pay the tax too (the Yankees and yes the Assassins) but it does help the have not's because they do get to benefit to n extent from the have's success.
avatar
Rich
Commish

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

Re: Owners budgets/Entire revenue stream?

Post by Rich on June 4th 2014, 12:27 pm

Bumstead wrote:
WhoDat wrote:
Bumstead wrote:With the salary cap in place, doesn't that just allow the "have's" to spend even more money to maintain their dynasties?  I would rather see something more dramatic, like removing the cap altogether and instituting Luxury Tax and Revenue sharing than just give the rich teams a more decided advantage.  All but one team has a higher budget than me, so they already have that advantage.  Not complaining; just saying.
 Oh boy, agreeing with Jeff again...for the most part.

I think removing the cap an instituting other controls might be the way to go though, and this is where I diverge from Jeff, this could very well lead to the gap between the have's and have not's being greater.  The salary cap at least puts a hard limit on what the Have's can spend.

Also Jeff, since you have just about the lowest owner budget wouldn't changing to being allowed to spend all your revenue stream be an improvement?  The Have's already have budgets over the salary cap so they can spend to the cap whereas your budget is below the cap and even if you have the revenue to do so you can't spend to the cap.

I apologize for your bad day...I would have to look at my revenue.  As a GM with a large budget, you are only limited in spending on salary at the cap.  Your higher budget allows you to spend up to the cap and still put a significant amount into Scouting and Player Development.  My little budget, which is barely over the cap, forces me to make hard decisions based on where my team is at competitively and how much cap space I want to "sacrifice" for scouting and player development.  

I would have to look at my revenue stream (and my team is profitable), but I would think the have's revenue stream would be significantly higher than mine just do to the fact that y'all have fans and such....It seems like the disparity would be greater than it is when using team budgets.  I could be wrong.  Have to look this weekend.
I think everyone will get more money.  I think the stingier owner teams would benefit the most because more being taking out of the revenue stream.  Now since we equalized the owners (made them closer) it might not be that big of a difference.  It basically making everyone owner/GMs and you would have situations where you are 10 mil under the cap but can't sign a free agent because the owner has all that money under extensions.


_________________
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: Owners budgets/Entire revenue stream?

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

Rich wrote:
Bumstead wrote:With the salary cap in place, doesn't that just allow the "have's" to spend even more money to maintain their dynasties?  I would rather see something more dramatic, like removing the cap altogether and instituting Luxury Tax and Revenue sharing than just give the rich teams a more decided advantage.  All but one team has a higher budget than me, so they already have that advantage.  Not complaining; just saying.
I'm with you on removing the cap but we need to vote that in and thats someting a few seasons down the road (not this season). 

 Around ootp12 I changed from pro cap to anti cap.  using the entire rev stream would give everyone more money.  How much depends on different variable but it takes the owner out of the equation.

I think there needs to be no cap, full rev stream, and equal finances.  Leave it up to winning brings in fans and increases revenue.  May not need luxury tax- because that might negate the awards for winning.

Luxury tax is generally set well above the league average for team salaries.  It is meant to force teams like the Yankees to think rather than just spend.  And it helps teams like the Marlins, who apparently don't have the wherewithal to pay higher salaries, to not be put in a position where they may as well be a AAA team.  It reigns in some teams so to speak...
avatar
Bumstead
T Ball'er
T Ball'er

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

Re: Owners budgets/Entire revenue stream?

Post by Bumstead on June 4th 2014, 12:20 pm

WhoDat wrote:
Bumstead wrote:With the salary cap in place, doesn't that just allow the "have's" to spend even more money to maintain their dynasties?  I would rather see something more dramatic, like removing the cap altogether and instituting Luxury Tax and Revenue sharing than just give the rich teams a more decided advantage.  All but one team has a higher budget than me, so they already have that advantage.  Not complaining; just saying.
 Oh boy, agreeing with Jeff again...for the most part.

I think removing the cap an instituting other controls might be the way to go though, and this is where I diverge from Jeff, this could very well lead to the gap between the have's and have not's being greater.  The salary cap at least puts a hard limit on what the Have's can spend.

Also Jeff, since you have just about the lowest owner budget wouldn't changing to being allowed to spend all your revenue stream be an improvement?  The Have's already have budgets over the salary cap so they can spend to the cap whereas your budget is below the cap and even if you have the revenue to do so you can't spend to the cap.

I apologize for your bad day...I would have to look at my revenue.  As a GM with a large budget, you are only limited in spending on salary at the cap.  Your higher budget allows you to spend up to the cap and still put a significant amount into Scouting and Player Development.  My little budget, which is barely over the cap, forces me to make hard decisions based on where my team is at competitively and how much cap space I want to "sacrifice" for scouting and player development.  

I would have to look at my revenue stream (and my team is profitable), but I would think the have's revenue stream would be significantly higher than mine just do to the fact that y'all have fans and such....It seems like the disparity would be greater than it is when using team budgets.  I could be wrong.  Have to look this weekend.
avatar
Rich
Commish

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

Re: Owners budgets/Entire revenue stream?

Post by Rich on June 4th 2014, 12:11 pm

Bumstead wrote:With the salary cap in place, doesn't that just allow the "have's" to spend even more money to maintain their dynasties?  I would rather see something more dramatic, like removing the cap altogether and instituting Luxury Tax and Revenue sharing than just give the rich teams a more decided advantage.  All but one team has a higher budget than me, so they already have that advantage.  Not complaining; just saying.
I'm with you on removing the cap but we need to vote that in and thats someting a few seasons down the road (not this season). 

 Around ootp12 I changed from pro cap to anti cap.  using the entire rev stream would give everyone more money.  How much depends on different variable but it takes the owner out of the equation.

I think there needs to be no cap, full rev stream, and equal finances.  Leave it up to winning brings in fans and increases revenue.  May not need luxury tax- because that might negate the awards for winning.


_________________
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: Owners budgets/Entire revenue stream?

Post by WhoDat on June 4th 2014, 12:07 pm

Bumstead wrote:With the salary cap in place, doesn't that just allow the "have's" to spend even more money to maintain their dynasties?  I would rather see something more dramatic, like removing the cap altogether and instituting Luxury Tax and Revenue sharing than just give the rich teams a more decided advantage.  All but one team has a higher budget than me, so they already have that advantage.  Not complaining; just saying.
 Oh boy, agreeing with Jeff again...for the most part.

I think removing the cap an instituting other controls might be the way to go though, and this is where I diverge from Jeff, this could very well lead to the gap between the have's and have not's being greater.  The salary cap at least puts a hard limit on what the Have's can spend.

Also Jeff, since you have just about the lowest owner budget wouldn't changing to being allowed to spend all your revenue stream be an improvement?  The Have's already have budgets over the salary cap so they can spend to the cap whereas your budget is below the cap and even if you have the revenue to do so you can't spend to the cap.
avatar
Bumstead
T Ball'er
T Ball'er

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

Re: Owners budgets/Entire revenue stream?

Post by Bumstead on June 4th 2014, 12:00 pm

With the salary cap in place, doesn't that just allow the "have's" to spend even more money to maintain their dynasties?  I would rather see something more dramatic, like removing the cap altogether and instituting Luxury Tax and Revenue sharing than just give the rich teams a more decided advantage.  All but one team has a higher budget than me, so they already have that advantage.  Not complaining; just saying.
avatar
Rich
Commish

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

Owners budgets/Entire revenue stream?

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

At creation we used owner budgets to try to make it more challenging?  Should we stick with owner budgets are allow the entire revenue stream?  We have done both over the many version of AHIBA/NABL.


Last edited by Rich on June 10th 2014, 10:16 am; edited 2 times in total


_________________
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.]

Sponsored content

Re: Owners budgets/Entire revenue stream?

Post by Sponsored content


    Current date/time is December 15th 2018, 9:52 am