2022 Regular Season SIM 13 Complete - Next SIM Wednesday 7/26

[PaulC]

CC: Every collegiate athletic dept in the NCAA sans 10 teams *roll eyes*

Again with these financials. Idk why this is a surprise I do the same shit every few years. I identify a core I want to push, we push it as hard as we can, and then I've built in ways to eliminate that number. I do this every number of years like this isn't new by any stretch. If this was one long deficit, how would I have been able to spend on Danny Garcia? Oh thats right, I cleared the books like I do all the time.

The incessant crying about different things in this league is INSANE. If I'm passionate about something ever, there's a witch hunt. "You're an asshole mike, you're always a problem mike, blah blah" meanwhile every little thing you do to run a team goes under the microscope and you're all of a sudden gaming the system!!! You want to fix these issues? Make every thing equal. Lets get Marxist up in here then. We want to take different strategies out team building heres what we do.

I don't know why trying to learn the how the system works is viewed as incessant crying. I also don't see a perceived witch hunt. The discussion is a healthy way to keep the league working properly and having committed owners.

1. Every team has the same available budget. No longer should teams be rewarded for success by an increased budget. Let's say the agreed number is 135. In this instance, there also needs to be a floor. Maybe a number could be an agreed upon 75 % of that number. Teams that "Tank" (which we all know is a disgusting thing that should never be permitted) will not be able to pocket that money and will have to disperse it to other teams via a competitive balance clause. Not possible? Take away draft picks.

Here's another Idea - how about we make GM salaries the same too? Like, some of the complainers about finances are anti the GM change? Thats just stupid.

2. Hard cap. Simple. ex 135 is 135. Period, no more gaming the system!!!!

3. No more trading draft picks. you get 10 picks per draft. You are not allowed to trade picks because sometimes people plan ahead and have more time to spend on the game than others and thats simply not fair. 10 picks, only 10 picks and thats final.

I love this, but it will never happen. Nothing seems to skew league balance more than a team having a boat load of #1 for years on end. (Yes, that appears to have worked, at least for the time being, in California)

4. International Free Agency Budgets. In the MLB, teams are only allowed to spend X per season on IFL. Now, here we're not spending on 16 year olds, we're spending on players who are mostly ready to be the best player in the game and there's never any busts. This has been complained about so it needs to be fixed. Heres the fix.

30 mil max available to spend per 2 seasons. Idk how the number would work but essentially it breaks down like this:

Seattle spent a combined (idk but for the sake of argument) lets say 28 million between nieto and uloa last season. This offseason, the MAX they can spend on IFA is 2 million. This is a clause that then makes it more likely that the same teams A. Won't be able to sign multiple guys which spreads the IFL talent out, and won't be able to spend big in consecutive years. B. If you exceed the 30m, it gets removed from your future IFL budget. EX. (I gotta have this guy and want to pay 40 m per year,) you can, but you have nothing to spend next year, and only 20 the following.

5. Scouting budgets.

It's built in. Staff budget is X of the new equal balance, the scouting budget is Y and built in. Whether it works or it doesn't, whether you want it or you don't everyone's is the same.

I also like these two ideas! You're the voice of reason today Mike!

[umd]

We can go back and forth forever on all of these issues and we seem to every few seasons. It's a healthy exercise but kind of futile. We have reached a point after so many years where everyone is in a different place with their franchise.

For example, I'd be really pissed right now if we removed draft pick trading and capped IFA. That's a no for me because I've watched as others have done it and I selfishly want it to be my turn to do it. This league is a cycle and I'm just using myself as an example...

My point is there are not enough votes for major changes no matter what the issue is so we're all just going in circles. It took like a year for the GM salary vote to go through and that was one of the seemingly easiest to pass rules this league has encountered in real life years.

My recommendation is if you feel strongly for/against something just write a detailed proposal and let everyone vote on it. While discussions are healthy for a league, they don't really move the needle much when it comes to altering the positions of BLB GMs. Posting and voting on proposals is the only way to see where the league (as a whole) is at. Well if everyone votes in a timely matter that is.

Incremental change is possible around here by vote but most major moves have just been commissioner mandated
decisions (Expansion, Arby extensions, TO/MO/PO etc) that come with their own issues.

[funclown]

Mike,

I think no matter what there will always be complaints whether someone gaming the system, version change, financials ect. Just who we all are. Some complain more then others, but its all good. Its also what makes the league great. An outlet sort of for us living real life.

While I see some merits on what you said. The league needs good guys and bad guys.

Having a equal budget shouldn't be the case. Guys like Delandis, yourself or whoever is top dog earned that high budget. It ebbs and flows with the success of your team. We leveled this out ages ago and we allowed it to drift. I'm cool with it. Speaking of, no salary cap either. We have revenue sharing and its good enough. I despise the NHL for a reason.

'Tanking'. Not doing it with the current version of Pawtucket we just suck cuz we lost a ton of players due to high salaries , high defecit low or little draft picks and finally aging. Cost of winning a few cups. Its happens to the best of all teams. Have we 'tanked' before... OH HELL YEAH , but its no promise there will be light at the end nor the LENGTH the tunnel will be. Some teams sucked for well over a decade.

I'm sure I'm rambling , but we talk about "stop tanking" and I sort of look today at that "other" league called the MLB and appears its common place. Actually three professional sports teams in Chicago are now in that current concept. How does one even prevent tanking? How do you force some to try to win each season? Would we need a tank police ? Carolina is having an bad season so do we penalize them for it?? Would the measure be payroll??

Basically I'm playing devils advocate on this because we all play this game for our own reasons. The more we employ rigid rules for the sake of being the same the more I think this league loses some interest. (Trading draft picks, building style, figuring out whats under the hood of the ratings, ect)

Maybe I'm just old.

[PaulC]

Maybe I'm just old.

Hey! Get off my lawn!

[Sharkn20]

Nowadays there I'd one only way to create a great team here. Tanking. I don't see this changing anytime soon. Would be nice to find different ways to do it.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

[PaulC]

Nowadays there I'd one only way to create a great team here. Tanking. I don't see this changing anytime soon. Would be nice to find different ways to do it.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

I think rebuilding gets too often linked with tanking... I'm not sure they are the same thing...

[Spear]

Nowadays there I'd one only way to create a great team here. Tanking. I don't see this changing anytime soon. Would be nice to find different ways to do it.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

We all learned from the Chicago Cubs, I guess.

[Spear]

What differences do you see? Better or worse?

I missed the earlier discussion on scouting as well. Maybe I should venture over to get myself better educated on the subject.
If this is a flaw of the program, maybe there are some options to help even things out.
As UMD said, either change the settings so they better reflect our league, or get rid of scouting all together.
I'm always hesitant to ask the commish team to put more work into adjusting options. It's no sweat off my back demanding serious changes to the league settings, but it is for them.
I'd love to hear their thoughts on the subject.

Far worse results now.

When I was dedicated to rebuilding, we were making draft picks based upon the scout. I was looking at the picks and thinking uhhh "Folland, Reisinger" really? They all turned out to be decent big leaguers. My scout ratings were spot on. I was maxing everything into PD and Scouting during this period.

Right now, my scout isn't even close on any player BLB or Minor League. My PD sucks, our prospects are developing at a much slower pace. To the point where I'm going to put more into it next season. I used to have nice player development reports in the inbox with lots of green arrows telling me to move guys through the system. It's not the case anymore. But we're winning in the BLB which is the main thing!

[Guest]

Nowadays there I'd one only way to create a great team here. Tanking. I don't see this changing anytime soon. Would be nice to find different ways to do it.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

This isn't even remotely close to being true, and again seems to stem from your team's current circumstances.

I haven't tanked, my team is decent. Pittsburgh hasn't done this. Washington hasn't done this. Baltimore hasn't done this. I could go on and on.

[Matt]

Nowadays there I'd one only way to create a great team here. Tanking. I don't see this changing anytime soon. Would be nice to find different ways to do it.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

It's the same in the OSFL buddy. Look at Port City. Year after year of top 10 picks and you have a steady supply of studs. And with no real salary cap they can get re-signed with no issues. Now they have the best players in the league. Or you can go the trade rape way like you did signing that QB!

[umd]

This isn't even remotely close to being true, and again seems to stem from your team's current circumstances.

I haven't tanked, my team is decent. Pittsburgh hasn't done this. Washington hasn't done this. Baltimore hasn't done this. I could go on and on.

Not everyone does it. But it does work and it's a viable strategy in this league.

[Guest]

Not everyone does it. But it does work and it's a viable strategy in this league.

I agree, but I reject the premise that it's the only way.

[umd]

I agree, but I reject the premise that it's the only way.

Agreed. I'm gonna make it work for me though. I am shamelessly tanking with the hope of building an
unbeatable Super Team.

[funclown]

Nowadays there I'd one only way to create a great team here. Tanking. I don't see this changing anytime soon. Would be nice to find different ways to do it.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

Baltimore, Maine, Pittsburgh, Washington then you got several others who float in the middle......I strongly disagree with you.

[funclown]

We all learned from the Chicago Cubs, I guess.

And the Astros currently. Total admission I followed it to the tee 12-13 seasons ago. (Theo is god)

Today like PaulC said, its a rebuild. Its really not by choice.