FA Offer Problems

[Andrew]

What I did this morning quickly was withdraw an offer for like $1.6mm since I no longer need that postion and it didn't change my available budget at all. Maybe it doesn't change until we sim forward?

That might be the case. We might need to sim forward a day for the money to get returned. Let me know after the next sim whether it's there or not.

[Andrew]

Sorry I'm a bit late to the party, but seeing as I have been made an example of (I actually like it, it gives me hard evidence rather that having to do the math) I thought I'd chime in. I agree, mostly, with all of the reasoning. The only thing I have an issue with is the result. Now that I know the cause it's hard for me to backtrack and make it work although knowing the why earlier would have made it easier to adjust. I would like to see a one time fix to combat the poor info so that teams can look at being competitive right now. Having to overcome a $7+ mil deficit is next to impossible at this point without dropping into the "rebuilding" stage again by trading away some big players. On the other hand I do see the danger of trying to adjust to the financial system. The numbers will balance out in time (I hope) but it will make this season (and the next few) a bit of a drag.

I've been looking at this issue quite a bit this morning. I'm actually finishing off a post in the OOTP 9 beta forums if you want to chime in over there as well.

I haven't gotten anywhere but hopefully I've made some progress in convincing Markus that this is a bug. Here's what I posted over there:

Team A is Los Alamos and Team B is Hartford.

I'm sorry but I can't let this one die. Here's an example from 2 teams in my league:

Team A has 11 arbitration cases and 6 minimum contracts for next season.
Proj Budget Room: $ -5,599,096
Cash: $13,594,572
Money Available for signings: $7,995,476

Team A's owner is not allowed to make an offer over $530,000 which is about $7.5 mil less than his available money. OK so he has a lot of arbitration cases, so maybe that's why the owner won't approve the deal. Let's take a look at Team B...

Team B has 6 arbitration cases and 5 minimum contracts for next season.
Proj Budget Room: $ -1,652,988
Cash: $15,370,289
Money for Signings: $13,717,301

Team B has less arbitration cases and a little bit more money to play with so he should be able to spend a little more, right? WRONG. He can spend a lot more. Team B's owner will allow him to make an offer of up to $17 million per year which is $4 million more than his available money for signings.

This makes absolutely no sense. There is definitely something else going on here. The complete randomness of this bug really makes me think the supposedly disabled owner is still having some influence over what teams can spend.

[Andrew]

At this point I am definitely willing to enter any 1 year deals for up to the available money for the teams experiencing this issue. I'm going to keep working on it and will let you know what I can figure out.

[Andrew]

The problem I'm now having is that if I withdraw an offer I don't get the money back into my budget, so this could become problematic pretty quickly.

Looking at this again, it appears the game is working correctly.

The offered contracts only count against your projected budget and available money if the player favors your offer. Makes sense that you can spend money elsewhere if a guy isn't going to sign with you for the amount that's on the table.

[Riverman]

At this point I am definitely willing to enter any 1 year deals for up to the available money for the teams experiencing this issue. I'm going to keep working on it and will let you know what I can figure out.

I think it would be helpful if you also entered multi-year deals up to the money available for the teams having this problem. They will be at a big disadvantage if they cannot offer more than one year and it seems clear that this is an unexplained glitch not related to possible future arbitration contracts.

Also, if I recall correctly, it is the same teams having the problem this year as last - Los Alamos and Pittsburgh (and others?).

[Andrew]

I think it would be helpful if you also entered multi-year deals up to the money available for the teams having this problem. They will be at a big disadvantage if they cannot offer more than one year and it seems clear that this is an unexplained glitch not related to possible future arbitration contracts.

Also, if I recall correctly, it is the same teams having the problem this year as last - Los Alamos and Pittsburgh (and others?).

Los Alamos was definitely having the problem last year. I'm not sure about other teams. i thought California, Hartford and Pittsburgh were having the issue as well but all seem to be able to make offers right now.