FA Bidding

[rockybull]

I talked with andy about this, and he just told me to post this up and see what the league thinks about this, so here it is.

i was looking at FA a little bit and found this thread:

http://www.firstclassmogul.com/showthread.php?tid=29498

Come on now, you have to admit there is no mlb player that would accept 2 years at $5.5 mil per year which would equal $11 mil total over 1 year at $10 mil, especially connor when he could go back 1 year later and get easily over 1 mil. This is just an example and I felt the connor thread was a perfect example of this.

I know this has been discussed in the past, but FA Tool would fix this. The FA Tool, you'd have to go 2 years: $7.6 mil per year to beat 1 year: $10 mil. now in that situation I can see someone accepting that 2 year deal. I know FA Tool isn't perfect, but in all the leagues I've ever played in this tool has always made much more sense, but that's just me.

I'm pretty sure someone could post it on the site or a link to it, without you having to go to excel or anything like that, so if the league wanted it it shouldn't be a problem and it would be easy access for everyone.

This isn't a huge deal, but I do believe this improves FA bidding and for that this is worth the discussion.

[Geaux Blue]

I for one dislike the FA tool, our system make not be perfect but for the most part it is reasonable.

[mike]

The day the FA tool makes its way into this league is the day I'm done with mogul. The FA tool is crap for a multitude of reasons. It hugely promotes nickle and diming. It's just a hassle to punch in the numbers for every single bid and re-bid you need to make. And prolly worst of all it doesn't even factor in age. If anything the min bids could be re-evaluated to maybe make a 2 year deal a bit more difficult.

[Peter]

I do NOT think the FA tool is crap but I am on board with the thinking of GB that FA for the most part is reasonable and the best bid is usually the winning bid. For that small gain we would have we are adding complication so I would rather just see things stay as is.

[Harold]

I am with GB on this one, would prefer not to use FA tool

[Vertigo]

I'm not arguing for or against, but here's a link that can be added to the board for easy use of the FA tool.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1103...atool.html

[AndyP]

Thanks for posting that Vert. I wish we knew the formulas.

[rockybull]

Thanks for posting that Vert. I wish we knew the formulas.

i don't know the exact formula but it's a better formula than what this league uses. i've already realized this won't change, that's fine, not a biggie to me, but it makes no sense that I could offer 1 year: $15 mil contract, next gm can offer 3 years: $5.1 mil per year and beat my offer. FA tool you could offer 1 year: $15 mil and if you wanted to go 3 years, you'd have to offer 3 years: $10.1 million per year to win. not a single smart player on this planet would accept 3 years: $5.1 mil per year over 1 year: $15 mil unless that player has some huge loyalty and loves it, but we don't have that here.

i'm ok with it staying same, cause i don't want anyone to quit over it if we use the FA tool and sounds like mike would, so it's not worth anyone quiting over, so we can just close this thread, but FA Tool is a better method to figuring out more fair type of deals for FA's.

[Geaux Blue]

It may be a better method but is it worth going to the FA tool every time you needed to make a bid? And is FA really an issue anyways?

[gmoney]

I think the system adds more work for something that isn't broken and has only a few flaws. Punching in each bid seems like a ton of more work for owners.

Also, I'm not comfortable adding something that we don't know the formulas for and that we can't tweak later in the case where we find flaws later. If someone can reverse engineer the spreadsheet and tell us the formula that it uses, I might be willing to change my mind on this.