RoyalsGM
General Manager 
Kansas City Royals
Posts: 4,594 
|
Post by RoyalsGM on Sept 19, 2019 11:19:09 GMT -5
Currently, the game imposes a limit on the amount of dollars available for extension offers. HOFFBL has never had such a rule but instead has the game limit govern extension offers. I am proposing that we approve a rule that allows Commish to circumvent this artificial limit imposed by the game by temporary adding cash to a team's account to run extension offers, then removing the added cash prior to completing the sim.
I understand that the limit is in place to control financially irresponsible GMs, but we have a number of rules already in place to govern that and ultimately those penalties are at the Commish's discretion anyway. The game calculation is also based on prior financial history, which does not take into account current performance nor the GM's future plans to be fiscally responsible. The extension limit is worse than the FA limit, in my opinion, because FA is more susceptible to abuse and in-season performance is less predictable during the off-season.
Feel free to discuss below.
|
|
RoyalsGM
General Manager
Kansas City Royals
Posts: 4,594
|
Post by RoyalsGM on Sept 19, 2019 11:21:00 GMT -5
I did discuss with Chris prior to posting and he encouraged me to put this to a vote.
|
|
Spencer
General Manager
Posts: 5,920
|
Post by Spencer on Sept 19, 2019 11:21:42 GMT -5
I dont like it.
I think it circumvents not running a financially stable team.
|
|
Matt
Other 
Posts: 5,757
|
Post by Matt on Sept 19, 2019 11:24:20 GMT -5
I dont like it. I think it circumvents not running a financially stable team. So many teams have traded points for cash recently I'm not sure everyone is running a financially stable team anyway. |
|
jahallstar
General Manager
Baltimore Orioles
Posts: 963
|
Post by jahallstar on Sept 19, 2019 11:26:35 GMT -5
So change it will be 'yes' and keep it the same will be 'no' ?
|
|
Spencer
General Manager
Posts: 5,920
|
Post by Spencer on Sept 19, 2019 11:27:20 GMT -5
I dont like it. I think it circumvents not running a financially stable team. So many teams have traded points for cash recently I'm not sure everyone is running a financially stable team anyway. Trading for cash is maintaining your team financially. Im guessing that this is posted because he couldnt trade for cash and now he wants a different scenario to resign his players. I traded for a ton of cash at a increased rate to ensure my team was financially stable. |
|
RoyalsGM
General Manager
Kansas City Royals
Posts: 4,594
|
Post by RoyalsGM on Sept 19, 2019 11:32:20 GMT -5
So change it will be 'yes' and keep it the same will be 'no' ? A yes means the extension dollar limit will not be enforced, which is a change from status quo. |
|
RoyalsGM
General Manager
Kansas City Royals
Posts: 4,594
|
Post by RoyalsGM on Sept 19, 2019 11:33:17 GMT -5
So many teams have traded points for cash recently I'm not sure everyone is running a financially stable team anyway. Trading for cash is maintaining your team financially. Im guessing that this is posted because he couldnt trade for cash and now he wants a different scenario to resign his players. I traded for a ton of cash at a increased rate to ensure my team was financially stable. That is the impetus now, but I have never understood this limit. I get the FA one, the extension one is overkill in my opinion. I will get my player re-signed one way or another, so that's not really the point here. I originally planned to post this in the off-season, but Chris said go ahead and post it now, so I am not doing this for personal gain. |
|
|
|
Post by Sha-Le Unique on Sept 19, 2019 11:41:28 GMT -5
Dave I see where you’re coming from, but we’d have to all determine a reasonable amount of cash to be added in situations like this, and Chris himself would have to determine if the given team should even be allowed to do such things. It just sounds like a bit of a slippery slope and my biggest concern is that a move like this would discourage people from trying to trade for game cash in the first place because they could just bank on fake cash to be added. I feel like 80% of people here know how to budget themselves very reasonably, while the other 20 seem to be in constant financial turmoil. But if those individuals still try to play the right way and make efforts to add a sufficient amount of game cash, maybe your idea could work. Again the limits to how much fake cash could be added would have to be determined well below anything potentially gets implemented.
|
|
jahallstar
General Manager
Baltimore Orioles
Posts: 963
|
Post by jahallstar on Sept 19, 2019 13:20:07 GMT -5
It is a really simple formula. Pretty much just saying you can't go in the red.
|
|
RoyalsGM
General Manager
Kansas City Royals
Posts: 4,594
|
Post by RoyalsGM on Sept 19, 2019 14:19:43 GMT -5
Dave I see where you’re coming from, but we’d have to all determine a reasonable amount of cash to be added in situations like this, and Chris himself would have to determine if the given team should even be allowed to do such things. It just sounds like a bit of a slippery slope and my biggest concern is that a move like this would discourage people from trying to trade for game cash in the first place because they could just bank on fake cash to be added. I feel like 80% of people here know how to budget themselves very reasonably, while the other 20 seem to be in constant financial turmoil. But if those individuals still try to play the right way and make efforts to add a sufficient amount of game cash, maybe your idea could work. Again the limits to how much fake cash could be added would have to be determined well below anything potentially gets implemented. No actual cash is added, you have the same balance prior to the offer as you do after. You will still be in the same financial situation regardless. |
|
RoyalsGM
General Manager
Kansas City Royals
Posts: 4,594
|
Post by RoyalsGM on Sept 19, 2019 14:24:02 GMT -5
Use my current situation as an example. The game says I have $1.5m left for extensions, and it will probably take $7m to get Frost re-signed. I am well aware of my financial situation, our rules allow for you to go into the red for a year, and I have a plan to get back above zero in due time. My revenue will be higher this year because of performance, which the game does not assume. Why should we limit someone from making an offer if we have other rules in place to deal with financially irresponsible GMs? It is as easy as Chris adding $5m in cash, making the extension offer, and revising the cash back down before uploading the file. We alter the cash balance all the time for our purposes (see playoff revenue, trades, etc.), I don't see why this would be any different.
|
|
Spencer
General Manager
Posts: 5,920
|
Post by Spencer on Sept 19, 2019 15:20:04 GMT -5
I dont get how magically adding cash to your total is the same as adjusting the flaw of playoff revenue or trading assets for cash.
|
|
jahallstar
General Manager
Baltimore Orioles
Posts: 963
|
Post by jahallstar on Sept 19, 2019 15:24:01 GMT -5
The game already gives you some leeway with extensions though. I mean take your circumstances.
You are projected to have a cash balance of over -7,000,000 after this season (plus playoff revenue if you make the playoffs) This is calculating it based off of what your average attendance THIS year has been. In addition to that you already have 73,530,000 committed to next season already. You are currently projected to make 63,000,000 this year. So if the numbers stay the same and you don't make take on another penny in salary you are projected to have a cash balance of -18,000,000 at the end of next year. That is a lot to make up.
I'll be honest I budget my team like crazy. It is just part of the game. Everyone has been playing by the same guidelines for years and I think if anything they are to soft.
|
|
Spencer
General Manager
Posts: 5,920
|
Post by Spencer on Sept 19, 2019 15:24:43 GMT -5
And in your case your increase in revenue is extremely small. Much less than 5 million. Essentially youd use this extra cash to resign someone and make a run this year and then trade someone or acquire cash this offseason.
To me it just seems like a freebie. Not into it.
Maybe if you had to pay for it with reward points.
Or maybe if Chris initiated a system of buying cash from the "league" at market price. Essentially you lose 30 points to acquire 10 million.
Id be way more into that scenario.
|
|
Spencer
General Manager
Posts: 5,920
|
Post by Spencer on Sept 19, 2019 15:26:01 GMT -5
The game already gives you some leeway with extensions though. I mean take your circumstances. You are projected to have a cash balance of over -7,000,000 after this season (plus playoff revenue if you make the playoffs) This is calculating it based off of what your average attendance THIS year has been. In addition to that you already have 73,530,000 committed to next season already. You are currently projected to make 63,000,000 this year. So if the numbers stay the same and you don't make take on another penny in salary you are projected to have a cash balance of -18,000,000 at the end of next year. That is a lot to make up. I'll be honest I budget my team like crazy. It is just part of the game. Everyone has been playing by the same guidelines for years and I think if anything they are to soft. Ya. The math makes sense. Those numbers are valid. Imo the options should be trading or waiving salaries or trading assets for cash. |
|
jahallstar
General Manager
Baltimore Orioles
Posts: 963
|
Post by jahallstar on Sept 19, 2019 15:30:21 GMT -5
It cost 50 points to raise one player one talent increase. It should be 50 points for 10M cash to be honest. The rates here are way undervalued. $$ is king.
|
|
|
|
Post by Boston Red Sox on Sept 19, 2019 15:42:35 GMT -5
I think we could avoid these problems by simply having a "trade in points for cash to the bank" option
|
|
Matt
Other
Posts: 5,757
|
Post by Matt on Sept 19, 2019 15:51:53 GMT -5
I think we could avoid these problems by simply having a "trade in points for cash to the bank" option Or a "use your points for your own team and stop trading them to teams who can't understand how to keep their payroll under control" rule. I'm for no trading of points. At all. |
|
jahallstar
General Manager
Baltimore Orioles
Posts: 963
|
Post by jahallstar on Sept 19, 2019 15:55:54 GMT -5
I am too...I think if you need to trade for cash you should have to trade picks or players to get it.
|
|
Reddington
General Manager
Atlanta Braves
Posts: 17,853
|
Post by Reddington on Sept 19, 2019 16:31:39 GMT -5
I think we could avoid these problems by simply having a "trade in points for cash to the bank" option Or a "use your points for your own team and stop trading them to teams who can't understand how to keep their payroll under control" rule. I'm for no trading of points. At all. the only thing I don't like about this idea is I've done quite well trading cash, by constantly keeping my payroll in check. With the max of 20 mil a year and the rest goes into stadium account, there is only so much you can do to the stadium. I realize that is a separate issue, but at the same time I think it is part of the larger issue (money management) somewhat created my market size. |
|
|
|
Post by Boston Red Sox on Sept 19, 2019 16:31:48 GMT -5
I think that some teams need the extra yearly income to compete at all, and removing that option just makes parity worse
|
|
Danchevy
General Manager
Seattle Mariners
Posts: 2,131
|
Post by Danchevy on Sept 19, 2019 17:27:03 GMT -5
I think we could avoid these problems by simply having a "trade in points for cash to the bank" option Don't like this. I like the idea of only so much cash in a league. If you do this it's basically limitless. |
|
bigmark
General Manager
Chicago White Sox
Posts: 6,175
|
Post by bigmark on Sept 19, 2019 22:15:57 GMT -5
I think we could avoid these problems by simply having a "trade in points for cash to the bank" option Whoa whoa whoa...that's my business selling cash. Lol I actually don't care one way or another...I always run a financially stable team |
|
