Offseason Re-signings suggestion

[ezpkns34]

Either way, I think you shouldn't distort player ratings during this phase. As is, ratings barely mean anything. Season by season, they fluctuate enough to where you don't know if the player is degressing or just having a bad stretch until you examine a few years work at a time. By hiding peaks and having non-perfect scouting, your really giving GMs a big disadvantage where it normally would not make a difference.

Just my two cents.

Personally, I'm completely against a sim ahead file with peaks shown & scouting perfect. Of course, no sim ahead file would be necessary with this suggestion though...

i agree with mstrpr that we deserve offseason resigning

Nobody is saying we shouldn't do offseason re-signings

[40/40]

Either way, I think you shouldn't distort player ratings during this phase. As is, ratings barely mean anything. Season by season, they fluctuate enough to where you don't know if the player is degressing or just having a bad stretch until you examine a few years work at a time. By hiding peaks and having non-perfect scouting, your really giving GMs a big disadvantage where it normally would not make a difference.

Just my two cents.

Personally, I'm completely against a sim ahead file with peaks shown & scouting perfect. Of course, no sim ahead file would be necessary with this suggestion though...

Not at all. The only thing you need to do is change all the talent distribution settings to 0.0. This, in effect, makes simming completely useless as players will not progress as they will when talent distribution settings are set back to normal after the extension phase is completed. This gives nobody an advantage to sim, as the results received will not coincide with the in-season simming. Now, you don't have to do it this way, but it's actually easier.

As for not showing peaks and non-perfect scouting, why are you against it? In all honesty, it really makes no difference as to fairness & realism, for the reasons I previously stated. With that out of the way, I'm not quite sure what it hurts to leave them alone?

[ezpkns34]

Following my suggestion is another option, which is even easier than either of the other options:
- No second file with tweaked settings needs to be put out by admins
- No sifting through hundreds of other players to get to your own guys to re-sign
- Far, far more realistic in that you only getting one shot to make an arby offer that you think your player will sign


Just don't see the need for a second file with tweaked settings (regardless of which ones are tweaked) when we can accomplish all the re-signings without a sim ahead file

[40/40]

Following my suggestion is another option, which is even easier than either of the other options:
- No second file with tweaked settings needs to be put out by admins
- No sifting through hundreds of other players to get to your own guys to re-sign
- Far, far more realistic in that you only getting one shot to make an arby offer that you think your player will sign


Just don't see the need for a second file with tweaked settings (regardless of which ones are tweaked) when we can accomplish all the re-signings without a sim ahead file

2 thumbs up.

[mike]

The thing is I don't trust the mogul AI to make a proper decision. With my catcher I think it was I lowered his offer by 200k and the arbitor awarded in favor of the player when it was over a lousy 200k. That may not be a strong example but I think we can all agree that the AI in mogul is not smart in any other facet of the game so why should we trust the AI of the Arbitor. Secondly, I'm not sure if this is true but their happiness or the amount they want (any player not just arby ones) may change during the end of the year re-signing phase. That would have to be tested though. Also I think where it says roughly what they want for arby is a long way off from what actually happens in the end the year phase but that could just be my perception.

[ezpkns34]

The thing is I don't trust the mogul AI to make a proper decision. With my catcher I think it was I lowered his offer by 200k and the arbitor awarded in favor of the player when it was over a lousy 200k.

Ok, you have qualms with the BM AI, but I don't see how that affects this suggestion in the least. If a player's arby offer is $2M & you lose your bid of $1.8M, you would have lost that bid whether you made it with a sim ahead file or not.

That may not be a strong example but I think we can all agree that the AI in mogul is not smart in any other facet of the game so why should we trust the AI of the Arbitor.

Again, it seems your qualm is with how the AI handles arby. Ai will handle arby decisions of what the player wants. You being able to sim ahead isn't going to suddenly change what the player will be willing to accept.

As a side note, I agree that the AI could use a small tweaking when it comes to arby deals. But that's a coding problem, not a problem with whether we're needlessly simming ahead or not

Secondly, I'm not sure if this is true but their happiness or the amount they want (any player not just arby ones) may change during the end of the year re-signing phase. That would have to be tested though.

Here are a list of random players heading to arby:
SP Julio Pena (CHC)
C Manuel Pina (KC)
2B Ivan DeJesus Jr (LAD)
1B Logan Morrison (Phi)
SP Aaron Weatherford (Tor)

I opened their player cards before simming ahead to FA signing and hit "negotiate." Here's what they were asking for:
Pena - $2.2M per
Pina - $2.1M per
DeJesus - $2.9M per
Morrison - $5.8M per
Weatherford - $5.8M per

I then looked at "Contract Sought" for each of the players:
Pena - $2.1M per
Pina - $2M per
DeJesus - $2.8M per
Morrison - $6.4M per
Weatherford - $5.8M per

I then simmed to the FA signing part. Here's what their arby requests were:
Pena - $2.5M
Pina - $2.1M
DeJesus - $3.5M
Morrison - $6.6M
Weatherford - $5.2M

Not only are all 3 figures quite similar for all five randomly selected players, but I was able to sign all listed players for less than what his Negotiate & Contract Sought figures listed

Also I think where it says roughly what they want for arby is a long way off from what actually happens in the end the year phase but that could just be my perception.

It is just your perception. It's like thinking that having a 96/96 in R ball during the offseason will hurt him. You want to make Mogul more complicated than it is


The only reason I see for being against this idea is if you simply don't want the realism factor of not always winning arby with the lowest possible amount you can offer them. Or if you enjoy X-ing out of 29 other teams' worth of players during the re-signing phase

[Scott]

Without reading all of this crap ;) how would we then negotiate arby with players?

[ezpkns34]

Without reading all of this crap ;) how would we then negotiate arby with players?

This way:

- If the player is up for arbitration, you can go to "Sortable Stats" (ctrl + R) and select "Current Contract Sought" as a column heading. This gives you an idea for what the player is looking for in arby. You can also click the "negotiate" button for that player to see his general price range as well (often these 2 numbers are identical or close to it). This is also more realistic as you have one shot to offer what you think the player will accept in arbitration.

In your offseason re-signings thread, just simply put your arby offer to the player like you do now. Only difference is you aren't 100% certain if you'll win now or not

[mike]

Another point I want to bring up is I'd only be for this idea if the resiginings were due a day after the playoffs were finished. With not knowing if I'm going to win the arby case or not means I don't know what my budget space will be like. Which in turn means we're or at least I'd be handcuffed in trades since I need to keep a close eye on how much I spend. We already have a limted window for the offseason trade making I don't want to make it any smaller.

[ezpkns34]

bump

Lots of complaints about wanting more realism, but this idea is left behind?