2066 Season Thread

[Orlando]

who gives a shit about the bitching and gaming? My whole point was that it wasn't a rule. Bitching/gaming /= rule

i hope wooly signs all his young upcoming studs to 10 year 5 million dollar contracts so he still has 100 million sittin in the bank and can buy all the IFA/FA and totally own this game and further kill the immersion that has been lost over the last year or so

Fair enough. I know people have been bitching about it since we started basically. All the seasons blend together at this point. My bad for misremembering when it became a rule.

 

[TonyGin&Juice]

I thought it just has to be above the ARB estimate for every year. I thought the example was just to show you could not avg the ARB estimate but dip below it at any point. FYI, the ARB was 3.6M.

If a 3M swing really pisses people off than go ahead and even those years out. I didn't suggest the 10 years to Bucky, it was his starting offer. I was pleasantly shocked. I didn't even haggle really. I just made the AAV what he wanted and gave a little yearly undulation, and submitted it. I even had to raise next year's salary to above his 3.6 ARB estimate.

I once made a contract witg huge year to year swings, 10M, and was asked not to make that kind of swing again. I have never done it since. I didn't think anyone cared about 3M, but apparently they do.

You can't be serious about any of this. I hope you get rekt in the SLDS.

 

[doh]

Is this kind of fuckstick shit allowed now?

View attachment 4561

Yeah... BUT ITZ WAY BETTER IN OOTP 2018

Game doesn't understand how to do extensions for people before they hit arb. You can totally game the system. Old news.

 

[NML]

The unanimous thing is a joke because it never happens. We have made plenty of changes without a unanimous decision. Recently we changed the DL rules and we changed the lamb to 7 games. There are others as well. Commishes also make changes for what we hope is the good of the league. We felt the AI had developed enough not for this to be a problem. Quite a few GMs chimed in, no one really opposed even after I said I'd wait. I forgot after that and still no one chimed in with real concern.

Rule changes are what have essentially driven out owners and every commish that has stepped away. I know you'll think running this is easy, but it is really difficult to make everyone happy and remain diplomatic. Sorry you didn't approve.

I hate even winning the ship at this point which is sad. At least I have the Swedes.

I'll wait a few days and see if anyone really hates the idea.

Proposal is:

Pre-arbitration extensions must wait until the player has one year of service time and must at least be equal to the arbitration estimate. Pre-arbitration contracts have a maximum length of 5 years.

Voting no

Just leave it the way it is if that's the case.

I lean no as well, for this reason. Seems like it's better to have more people in FA

 

[osick87]

You can't be serious about any of this. I hope you get rekt in the SLDS.

Don't wish ill will on people Tony. It's very unbecoming.

 

[Travis7401]

1. It is hilarious Yankee is all upset about IFA when he was one of those GOD LIKE INTERNATIONAL DISCOVERIES. Wooly just got lucky this dude showed up. Baseball gods aren't fair!

2. The rule was you have to exceed the HIGHEST arb estimate (and all years need to exceed it). There is no fucking way his highest arb estimate was 3.6M. Even my BUM Adrian Fuentes the Substitute All Star has the following arb estimates...


3.0, 3.2, 4.8, 6.5

If I wanted to sign that bum to a 10 year contract, I'd need each year to be AT LEAST 6.5M

 

[NML]

I don't mean to think/say/imply anything involving running the league is easy, but I just want consistency.

The way it was handled compared to other rules feels dictator-y to me to me

 

[Travis7401]

It probably is an honest misunderstanding of the rule on @Wooly's part. I can see how you would think that you just need to exceed the arb estimate each year, but you need to exceed the MAX arb estimate... which should be a good bit higher.

 

[Yankee151]

OU11 said: ↑

I'm going to come to colorado and shoot you with an arrow. Stop it with this. I took math, I know what a bell curve is. Explain how it would work with a position with little talent that only has a few at the top end and a lot at the lower end​

Vintage OU. That whole topic was like 20 pages of OU and Travis going back and forth on math just to decide how we should display ratings

Anyways I didn't find the old rule. Maybe I can check a cached version of the FAQ page or something.

 

[doh]

How can anyone see the max arb once someone signs?

The rule was designed to not allow garbage like this. People complain about lack of competitive balance yet want this rule? Moronic. Without this rule, I have guys signed on my team for millions and millions less and have that much more for IFA/FA.

It was just @Mr. Radpants throwing a hissy fit that's been going on for 3-4 years and finally getting his way.

 

[Travis7401]

I applaud Wooly for the contract. He pays attention and exports and prolly checked it every week until the fucker had a bad day or something. Now I hope the guy dies and he's on the hook for 10 years!

 

[Yankee151]

How can anyone see the max arb once someone signs?

The rule was designed to not allow garbage like this. People complain about lack of competitive balance yet want this rule? Moronic. Without this rule, I have guys signed on my team for millions and millions less and have that much more for IFA/FA.

It was just @Mr. Radpants throwing a hissy fit that's been going on for 3-4 years and finally getting his way.

Well that's the big paradox. I've screenshot some of my guys but some I just don't care enough. Once you sign the deal it's a mystery.

I'm sure Wooly wasn't being intentionally malicious, the AI is just sometimes stupid. It's frustrating because I've been on both sides of this argument and it ultimately comes down to don't sign any deals that are clearly gaming the system, which is hard to do when the system itself is presenting them to you

Max Arb as AAV makes the most sense. Making it 9M per at 10 years is at least a decent start.

 

[Yankee151]

FWIW I'm pretty sure Max Arb as AAV isn't the rule either? It used to be 80% right?

 

[Orlando]

I don't mean to think/say/imply anything involving running the league is easy, but I just want consistency.

The way it was handled compared to other rules feels dictator-y to me to me

I guess I don't see inconsistency. Someone opposes every decision the commishes make. I think we have been pretty diplomatic about things though. Almost all the ideas come from the GMs at this point. I can teach someone else and step back though. It's probably time.

 

[doh]

Arb in the game has changed too it seems like recently.

 

[Orlando]

Vintage OU. That whole topic was like 20 pages of OU and Travis going back and forth on math just to decide how we should display ratings

Anyways I didn't find the old rule. Maybe I can check a cached version of the FAQ page or something.

What are you looking for? I'll post it.

 

[osick87]

I guess I don't see inconsistency. Someone opposes every decision the commishes make. I think we have been pretty diplomatic about things though. Almost all the ideas come from the GMs at this point. I can teach someone else and step back though. It's probably time.

I'm pretty much at this point too and I don't frequent these boards nearly as much as Orlando.

 

[Yankee151]

What are you looking for? I'll post it.

We used to have an example added on to the Faq. It was somthing like:

Arb Estimate is 7M

Legal: 7M/9M/11M/11M/11M

Illegal: 1M/1M/1M/1M/1M

Illegal: 7M/1M/1M/1M/1M

I don't know if the example was removed as part of the removal of the doh rule, since it was used to show the 5 year thing. I do remember we had a thing stating each year had to be greater than or equal to the arb estimate which is where that second illegal example comes in. I didn't see us say anything one way or another when we removed the doh rule itself in regards to keeping that aspect.

 

[Travis7401]

The league should definitely just end this year and I'll always tell myself it was the rigger's year because I've been saying they'd win the SHIP since preseason. No need to sim it out, lets just crown the riggers and call it a life.

 

[Orlando]

We used to have an example added on to the Faq. It was somthing like:

Arb Estimate is 7M

Legal: 7M/9M/11M/11M/11M

Illegal: 1M/1M/1M/1M/1M

Illegal: 7M/1M/1M/1M/1M

I don't know if the example was removed as part of the removal of the doh rule, since it was used to show the 5 year thing. I do remember we had a thing stating each year had to be greater than or equal to the arb estimate which is where that second illegal example comes in. I didn't see us say anything one way or another when we removed the doh rule itself in regards to keeping that aspect.

This was after they went through arb.

Here you go:

• Pre-arbitration extensions must wait until the player has one year of service time and must at least be equal to the arbitration estimate. Pre-arbitration contracts have a maximum length of 5 years.
• Pre-arbitration extensions must wait until the player has one year of service time and must at least be equal to the arbitration estimate.
• 
  If a player has gone through an arbitration hearing, the salary of each future arbitration eligible year must be equal to or greater than the amount awarded to the player.
• 
  Example:
  Player was awarded $7 million in arbitration in 2022
  Correctly structured contract extension: 2023 $7m, 2024 $7m, 2025 $7m
  Incorrectly structured contract extension: 2023 $6m, 2024 $7m, 2025 $8m or 2023 $4m, 2024 $5m, 2025 $6m
  
  Contracts will be reviewed and altered to equal arbitration award

 

[Yankee151]

Without that then Wooly's contract is legal? Though I would still favor exploring adding that restriction against decreasing arb year salaries/front loading arb years whether it's retroactive or not.

FWIW I don't think Max Arb AAV was a thing, right? If it is then our Requero deal is illegal too (7.9ishM AAV with a 9.6 Max) even though every year of the deal is higher than the arb estimate for each individual year.

 

[Yankee151]

This was after they went through arb.

Here you go:

• Pre-arbitration extensions must wait until the player has one year of service time and must at least be equal to the arbitration estimate. Pre-arbitration contracts have a maximum length of 5 years.
• Pre-arbitration extensions must wait until the player has one year of service time and must at least be equal to the arbitration estimate.
• 
  If a player has gone through an arbitration hearing, the salary of each future arbitration eligible year must be equal to or greater than the amount awarded to the player.
• 
  Example:
  Player was awarded $7 million in arbitration in 2022
  Correctly structured contract extension: 2023 $7m, 2024 $7m, 2025 $7m
  Incorrectly structured contract extension: 2023 $6m, 2024 $7m, 2025 $8m or 2023 $4m, 2024 $5m, 2025 $6m
  
  Contracts will be reviewed and altered to equal arbitration award

Gotcha, so I misremembered and though the frontloading/less than arb value thing also applied to pre arb and estimates.

 

[Travis7401]

Without that then Wooly's contract is legal? Though I would still favor exploring adding that restriction against decreasing arb year salaries/front loading arb years whether it's retroactive or not.

FWIW I don't think Max Arb AAV was a thing, right? If it is then our Requero deal is illegal too (7.9ishM AAV with a 9.6 Max) even though every year of the deal is higher than the arb estimate for each individual year.

I thought the max arb thing was only for PRE arb contracts. I'm probably wrong doe. Once they actually went through arb you could just meet that estimate?

 

[Orlando]

Without that then Wooly's contract is legal? Though I would still favor exploring adding that restriction against decreasing arb year salaries/front loading arb years whether it's retroactive or not.

FWIW I don't think Max Arb AAV was a thing, right? If it is then our Requero deal is illegal too (7.9ishM AAV with a 9.6 Max) even though every year of the deal is higher than the arb estimate for each individual year.

Yeah that doesn't apply to wooly's deal anyway.

Max arb was never a thing. It was just arb estimate, which generally meant the first or next year. It was already a lot to police without getting granular.

If you guys hate this deal, then yes discuss whatever you'd like to see happen so they don't come up.

 

[Wooly]

Before I go, Wooly should produce a screenshot showing that Bucky was estimated for 3.6M in arb for 2067, which I find impossible.

1. It is hilarious Yankee is all upset about IFA when he was one of those GOD LIKE INTERNATIONAL DISCOVERIES. Wooly just got lucky this dude showed up. Baseball gods aren't fair!

2. The rule was you have to exceed the HIGHEST arb estimate (and all years need to exceed it). There is no fucking way his highest arb estimate was 3.6M. Even my BUM Adrian Fuentes the Substitute All Star has the following arb estimates...


3.0, 3.2, 4.8, 6.5

If I wanted to sign that bum to a 10 year contract, I'd need each year to be AT LEAST 6.5M

It probably is an honest misunderstanding of the rule on @Wooly's part. I can see how you would think that you just need to exceed the arb estimate each year, but you need to exceed the MAX arb estimate... which should be a good bit higher.

NVM

 

[Yankee151]

From what I can tell, the only real malicious thing about Wooly's deal is the alternating values. But Travis might be on to something with Max Arb to determine these contracts. I like that as a better judge of a players long term prognostication. Doing the full value wouldn't make sense though, since it would make sense that a player would take less money per year to offset risk compared to the potential of making that max value.

Something like:

Any Pre-Arb extension that buys out past the 7th year of service time must have an AAV worth 70% or greater of the Max Arbitration Value

could work. I think it tackles two things and covers a third

• Protects against what the original Doh rule was made to prevent (6+ year deals being based off of year 1 of arbitration)
• Allows for long term contracts to be signed by Pre-Arb players of any year length that are still fair.
• Allows Post-Arb deals (3+ years ST) to remain unaffected as these are a LOT more stable (Monfre Braves, Trevor Mintey I believe were both these)

Numbers could be tweaked, but this seems like an okay compromise between the hard restrictions of the Doh rule and the sometimes wacky deals that can come out of basing a player's 10 year value off their third season.

We can only guess what Bucky's max arb estimate was, but given Requero's was 9.6, I doubt Bucky had one higher than 11M. 70% of that will put him around 8.5M, which is at least higher than 7M.

 

[Yankee151]

Fwiw, this was Requero before his extension. Similar service time, 20% of Bucky's production. But even then I can't see Bucky being that much higher. Maybe 12M at max.

 

[Yankee151]

My proposal also wouldn't effect just buying out arb years + 1 from pre-arb, which would remain as it is with the must be equal to arb estimate. It would just prevent very long term deals from being based off that 2nd year of service time

 

[Orlando]

I doubt Bucky's was above $7m

 

[Travis7401]

Fuck yankee, he's an idiot. None of us even knew what the fucking rule was, you in here trying to make it more complicated?

 

[Orlando]

My proposal also wouldn't effect just buying out arb years + 1 from pre-arb, which would remain as it is with the must be equal to arb estimate. It would just prevent very long term deals from being based off that 2nd year of service time

Proposals should be practical, unless this is part of your commish pitch.

 

[Travis7401]

Riggers are ready 2 roll for all playoffs btw... OTTO DON'T LET ME DOWN!!

 

[Yankee151]

The reason I thought the Mintey and Braves deals were amazing guidelines for a realistic pre-arb deal were because they were based very closely off that max-arb even though the deals go well past service time wise. Braves is signed through his 10th year of service, but the AAV is 10.5M or so (even though when signed, the arb estimate was much lower for his 1st year). Mintey is similar, 9/101 (~11M) though he had been through a year of Arb at 3M. He's signed through his 12th year, but based off a much higher number than that 3M.. That's the kind of extension agents and players should be signing.

Now granted both those contracts might flame out, but Braves right now is outplaying his contract nicely while Mintey isn't, so it provides a good example of both scenarios when working closer to this max arb number.

 

[Wooly]

You are correct sir. I went and pulled up the game on my laptop, and I have screenshots from before the contract was offered.

 

[Yankee151]

I was trying to save the league with that proposal, but I'll take my ball and go home I guess.

If Bucky's max arb was really 6.5M, then I guess it doesn't matter anyways. Seems fair to me. Wooly was just lucky to get a guy with those intangibles who doesn't mind taking a discount.

 

[Travis7401]

I just can't wait till someone signs a CAN'T MISS player like BOYS for 10 years.

 

[Wooly]

For the record, I voted against opening up contracts for longer periods, but if a player is going to offer and the league is allowing it, I am taking it.

I will apologize for trying to squeeze out a few million for IFA though. If it helps with some of your sandy vaginas, go ahead and average it out.

 

[Orlando]

Bucky could also be average from here on out. We wasnt exactly killin it last year. Does no one remember Tambourine?

 

[Yankee151]

I do think averaging those 6's and 9's to 7.5 would be better, but I don't care anymore

 

[Orlando]

Braves didn't even go through arb. Was that a legal deal at the time? Maybe you were thinking of Cross?

 

[Wooly]

I was trying to save the league with that proposal, but I'll take my ball and go home I guess.

If Bucky's max arb was really 6.5M, then I guess it doesn't matter anyways. Seems fair to me. Wooly was just lucky to get a guy with those intangibles who doesn't mind taking a discount.

I still favor going back to reduced contract lengths, max ARB, and something to reduce IFA. I was in favor of that from when I started. I still think more financial parity would be good for the league.

 

[Yankee151]

FWIW, His BABIP last year was .300, this year it was .390, so he is due for a regression. He also played LF where he's probably a 95 rating so that accounts for a chunk of the WAR.

 

[Travis7401]

I'm excited for 10 year contracts, they've all worked out so well!

 

[Yankee151]

Braves didn't even go through arb. Was that a legal deal at the time? Maybe you were thinking of Cross?

Yeah that was my point since he hadn't been through arb yet, but it doesn't matter now

 

[Soonerfan09]

Moscow is set through game 5.

 

[Orlando]

Yeah that was my point since he hadn't been through arb yet, but it doesn't matter now

But was it legal?

 

[Yankee151]

It's legal now.

 

[Orlando]

 

[Yankee151]

I know I signed it after the Mintey deal since they were so similar, but if we hadn't revoked the doh rule yet we were about to anyways

 

[Orlando]

The deal is fine if you ignore the rules. Mintey went through arb. It was just funny because you said, here is a great example of a deal and it broke the rules haha. Just another inconsistency by me letting that one through!