Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

SQL Utilities/Financial Utility

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    Originally posted by Pat View Post
    No, they don't.

    And teams like Pittsburgh, Kansas City, Milwaukee, etc, year in year out, don't even compete.
    But why can Minn & Tampa compete? And must we mentioned the Cubs
    PAWTUCKET PATRIOTS
    Brewmaster's Cup Champions 2010, 2013, 2014, 2016
    DL Champions 91, 03, 04, 10, 13, 14**,16,17
    Ale Champions 92, 93, 94, 02, 03, 04, 10, 11, 13, 14**, 16, 17, 18
    Wildcard 91, 95, 12


    ** Partial credit. Ran in Expo mode.

    Comment


    • #92
      Originally posted by Carlos View Post
      Anyway, you set a cap in MLB and does KC and Pittsburgh suddenly compete? I say no. They are still tens of millions below the $90 MM mark - which I assume is where everyone would want the cap.
      But that's a direct result to the system. Let's say, 20 years ago, MLB instituted a salary cap. Things wouldn't completely be different today. Other owners would own teams with the intentions of being competitive.

      Originally posted by Carlos View Post
      A hard cap would drive salaries down so the top teams can still sign the best players. Maybe not as many, but there's a hard cap in the NFL and the same teams still win the championship.
      Really? There has been quite a bit of parity in the NFL the last 20 years. A lot "mid-market" teams have made the SB. That normally isn't the case in baseball.
      Wilmington Wildcats- 2057-
      Seattle Pilots- 2017-2041
      Washington Bats - 1979-2013

      Comment


      • #93
        Originally posted by funclown View Post
        But why can Minn & Tampa compete? And must we mentioned the Cubs
        Tampa is relatively "new" to competing. Three .500 seasons in 13 years. Plus, their payroll continues to increase by about $10,000,000 each of the past few seasons. Don't be surprised to see them in the upper half of MLB in a season or two. I think their payroll this year was something like $75,000,000. Now, that's not close to the top dogs, but that's still more than roughly 10 other teams. And a lot more than the $30-$40 million teams they were running out there from 1998 to about 2007.

        Minnesota is kinda the same. The Twins had some success and then increased their budget. I think they broke the $100,000,000 payroll for the first time in franchise history this year. Pretty sure they have a top 10 payroll this year. Or very, very close.

        The Cubs are cursed....duh.
        Wilmington Wildcats- 2057-
        Seattle Pilots- 2017-2041
        Washington Bats - 1979-2013

        Comment


        • #94
          Originally posted by Pat View Post

          Really? There has been quite a bit of parity in the NFL the last 20 years. A lot "mid-market" teams have made the SB. That normally isn't the case in baseball.
          This is an off-topic discussion, but check the numbers, Pat. Baseball has more parity than the NBA or the NFL.

          Saying baseball has no parity is just a myth created by the ill-informed media. Really, look through the past 20 years in all three sports.
          Denver Bulls

          Comment


          • #95
            Originally posted by Carlos View Post
            This is an off-topic discussion, but check the numbers, Pat. Baseball has more parity than the NBA or the NFL.

            Saying baseball has no parity is just a myth created by the ill-informed media. Really, look through the past 20 years in all three sports.
            Before I "check the numbers" what am I checking?

            Teams that have made the playoffs in the last 20 years from each sport? Teams that have won titles over the last years? Teams that have made the SB/WS/Finals?
            Wilmington Wildcats- 2057-
            Seattle Pilots- 2017-2041
            Washington Bats - 1979-2013

            Comment


            • #96
              Originally posted by Andrew View Post
              With that in mind, maybe a better approach would be to further narrow the gap between largest market and smallest market and not implement a hard cap.

              The proposal I posted earlier had 6 teams at each market size level from 5-8. Maybe we should consider bumping it to 6-8 instead. This, along with revenue sharing, would give us some variety in market size but make the gap narrower.

              Assuming the average media contract stays constant, raising the average market size won't create a large influx of cash into the league.
              Originally posted by BradZ View Post
              I liked the original thought of narrowing the gap between the market sizes, so squeezing them even more while still allowing for some diversity between club sizes sounds great to me.
              I agree. Andrew, I liked your initial proposal and was fine to move on with it. If its agreed that a 6-8 scale would be even better, then i'm for it.

              And I agree, as long as there is extra cash floating around, FA demands will grow. Less cash, lower demands.

              In the end, I don't think this is anything that can be solved with one decision, rather a series of steps taken to balance things out a bit.

              Comment


              • #97
                Originally posted by Pat View Post
                Before I "check the numbers" what am I checking?

                Teams that have made the playoffs in the last 20 years from each sport? Teams that have won titles over the last years? Teams that have made the SB/WS/Finals?
                Yea, the numbers will be different depending on what you're looking for here. So, I'm sure one of those ways would say you're right.

                If you go by teams that have made the playoffs (just for example), MLB is at a disadvantage because 8 teams make it a year. NBA has 16. NFL has 12.

                There simply is more opportunity for those two leagues.

                I'm not looking it up again and this may no longer be true since last season, but I thought I remembered that more teams have won a title in the MLB in the past 20 years than in the NBA or NFL.

                Of course, it probably doesn't really matter because one major point people bring up is that most of the teams with the highest payrolls win a championship in MLB. Although, my only argument against that is MLB allows that to happen (which I agree is what people are arguing against). It's sort of unfair to compare it to the NBA or NFL in that case because those leagues have zero comparisons with their salary caps - keeping in mind I honestly have never looked at the math with the NBA champ and their salary above the luxury tax threshold.
                Denver Bulls

                Comment


                • #98
                  Originally posted by chippered View Post
                  I agree. Andrew, I liked your initial proposal and was fine to move on with it. If its agreed that a 6-8 scale would be even better, then i'm for it.

                  And I agree, as long as there is extra cash floating around, FA demands will grow. Less cash, lower demands.

                  In the end, I don't think this is anything that can be solved with one decision, rather a series of steps taken to balance things out a bit.
                  I never help run these tests but I can try when I'm away. I don't know if I'll have internet connection but I don't think I need any to run leagues in the background.

                  Also, couldn't we lower the average demand for each player in the league settings or is there something that could go terribly wrong by doing so?
                  Denver Bulls

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    If we went with the latest idea, these would be the new market sizes:

                    The method I used to determine who moved up:
                    - Larger current market size got first priority
                    - In the event of a tie, larger current budget moved up a market size


                    <table x:str="" style="border-collapse: collapse; width: 297pt;" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="396"><col style="width: 107pt;" width="142"> <col style="width: 74pt;" width="99"> <col style="width: 56pt;" width="75"> <col style="width: 60pt;" width="80"> <tbody><tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt; width: 107pt;" x:str="Team " height="17" width="142">Team </td> <td style="width: 74pt;" x:str="Current Budget " width="99">Current Budget </td> <td style="width: 56pt;" x:str="Old Market " width="75">Old Market </td> <td style="width: 60pt;" x:str="New Market " width="80">New Market </td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" x:str="Virginia Colonials " height="17">Virginia Colonials </td> <td class="xl24" x:num="117158026" align="right">$117,158,026 </td> <td x:num="" align="right">8</td> <td x:num="" align="right">8</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" x:str="Washington Bats " height="17">Washington Bats </td> <td class="xl24" x:num="114576362" align="right">$114,576,362 </td> <td x:num="" align="right">7</td> <td x:num="" align="right">8</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" x:str="Baltimore Bulldogs " height="17">Baltimore Bulldogs </td> <td class="xl24" x:num="113502767" align="right">$113,502,767 </td> <td x:num="" align="right">8</td> <td x:num="" align="right">8</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" x:str="Dallas Snappers " height="17">Dallas Snappers </td> <td class="xl24" x:num="110202016" align="right">$110,202,016 </td> <td x:num="" align="right">7</td> <td x:num="" align="right">8</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" x:str="Syracuse Slammers " height="17">Syracuse Slammers </td> <td class="xl24" x:num="106790075" align="right">$106,790,075 </td> <td x:num="" align="right">8</td> <td x:num="" align="right">8</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" x:str="Sin City Gamblers " height="17">Sin City Gamblers </td> <td class="xl24" x:num="102197525" align="right">$102,197,525 </td> <td x:num="" align="right">7</td> <td x:num="" align="right">8</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" x:str="Los Alamos Bandits " height="17">Los Alamos Bandits </td> <td class="xl24" x:num="95267626" align="right">$95,267,626 </td> <td x:num="" align="right">7</td> <td x:num="" align="right">8</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" x:str="Pawtucket Patriots " height="17">Pawtucket Patriots </td> <td class="xl24" x:num="83887479" align="right">$83,887,479 </td> <td x:num="" align="right">7</td> <td x:num="" align="right">8</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" x:str="Maine Guides " height="17">Maine Guides </td> <td class="xl24" x:num="101928810" align="right">$101,928,810 </td> <td x:num="" align="right">5</td> <td x:num="" align="right">7</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" x:str="California Kodiaks " height="17">California Kodiaks </td> <td class="xl24" x:num="100927990" align="right">$100,927,990 </td> <td x:num="" align="right">6</td> <td x:num="" align="right">7</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" x:str="Philadelphia Freedom " height="17">Philadelphia Freedom </td> <td class="xl24" x:num="100919633" align="right">$100,919,633 </td> <td x:num="" align="right">6</td> <td x:num="" align="right">7</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" x:str="Denver Bulls " height="17">Denver Bulls </td> <td class="xl24" x:num="92823058" align="right">$92,823,058 </td> <td x:num="" align="right">5</td> <td x:num="" align="right">7</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" x:str="Carolina Tobs " height="17">Carolina Tobs </td> <td class="xl24" x:num="91502548" align="right">$91,502,548 </td> <td x:num="" align="right">5</td> <td x:num="" align="right">7</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" x:str="Hyundai Dinos " height="17">Hyundai Dinos </td> <td class="xl24" x:num="89752209" align="right">$89,752,209 </td> <td x:num="" align="right">6</td> <td x:num="" align="right">7</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" x:str="Wilmington Wildcats " height="17">Wilmington Wildcats </td> <td class="xl24" x:num="88176895" align="right">$88,176,895 </td> <td x:num="" align="right">5</td> <td x:num="" align="right">7</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" x:str="Pittsburgh Millers " height="17">Pittsburgh Millers </td> <td class="xl24" x:num="76067904" align="right">$76,067,904 </td> <td x:num="" align="right">5</td> <td x:num="" align="right">7</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" x:str="Los Lunas Javelinas " height="17">Los Lunas Javelinas </td> <td class="xl24" x:num="89329298" align="right">$89,329,298 </td> <td x:num="" align="right">4</td> <td x:num="" align="right">6</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" x:str="Windy City Playboys " height="17">Windy City Playboys </td> <td class="xl24" x:num="87768054" align="right">$87,768,054 </td> <td x:num="" align="right">4</td> <td x:num="" align="right">6</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" x:str="Davenport Brawlers " height="17">Davenport Brawlers </td> <td class="xl24" x:num="86399626" align="right">$86,399,626 </td> <td x:num="" align="right">4</td> <td x:num="" align="right">6</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" x:str="Mississippi Storm " height="17">Mississippi Storm </td> <td class="xl24" x:num="81261758" align="right">$81,261,758 </td> <td x:num="" align="right">3</td> <td x:num="" align="right">6</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" x:str="Hartford Whalers " height="17">Hartford Whalers </td> <td class="xl24" x:num="77431952" align="right">$77,431,952 </td> <td x:num="" align="right">4</td> <td x:num="" align="right">6</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" x:str="Indianapolis Clowns " height="17">Indianapolis Clowns </td> <td class="xl24" x:num="72115106" align="right">$72,115,106 </td> <td x:num="" align="right">3</td> <td x:num="" align="right">6</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" x:str="Batavia Muckdogs " height="17">Batavia Muckdogs </td> <td class="xl24" x:num="69275090" align="right">$69,275,090 </td> <td x:num="" align="right">3</td> <td x:num="" align="right">6</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" x:str="Morgantown Mohawks " height="17">Morgantown Mohawks </td> <td class="xl24" x:num="62258528" align="right">$62,258,528 </td> <td x:num="" align="right">3</td> <td x:num="" align="right">6</td></tr></tbody></table>

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Carlos View Post
                      I never help run these tests but I can try when I'm away. I don't know if I'll have internet connection but I don't think I need any to run leagues in the background.

                      Also, couldn't we lower the average demand for each player in the league settings or is there something that could go terribly wrong by doing so?
                      You can lower average demand but it doesn't do any good if there's a ton of free cash/budget room in the league. I think our average demand for superstars is set around $16m and we routinely see demands for 20+.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Carlos View Post
                        Yea, the numbers will be different depending on what you're looking for here. So, I'm sure one of those ways would say you're right.

                        If you go by teams that have made the playoffs (just for example), MLB is at a disadvantage because 8 teams make it a year. NBA has 16. NFL has 12.

                        There simply is more opportunity for those two leagues.

                        I'm not looking it up again and this may no longer be true since last season, but I thought I remembered that more teams have won a title in the MLB in the past 20 years than in the NBA or NFL.

                        Of course, it probably doesn't really matter because one major point people bring up is that most of the teams with the highest payrolls win a championship in MLB. Although, my only argument against that is MLB allows that to happen (which I agree is what people are arguing against). It's sort of unfair to compare it to the NBA or NFL in that case because those leagues have zero comparisons with their salary caps - keeping in mind I honestly have never looked at the math with the NBA champ and their salary above the luxury tax threshold.
                        Interesting take on the argument: http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcont...l.460bc63.html

                        If in Spring Training of 2009, I had told you that the Phillies, Yankees, Dodgers and Angels were going to be the final four teams, you'd probably feel like that was a good bet Those four teams were all over $100,000,000 and probably four of the top like seven payrolled teams.

                        Here is my thinking about parity...it boils down to how many teams, year in, year out, actually have a shot at being a competitive team.

                        In the NFL, the longest suffering teams are the Browns, Bills, Lions and Texans. The latter, were an expansion team, and the last three seasons, they have been knocking on the door and most experts consider them a legit playoff contender this year. The Bills have suffered this decade but the previous, they were dominant. The Lions and Browns, over the last 20 years, have made the playoffs a combined nine times, but were never really a "contender" except for maybe one of the Lions seasons. So, that's basically two teams in the last 20 years that haven't really been competitive.

                        In the MLB, the Orioles have been a legit "contender" once, back in '97. The past 20 years besides that, they made the playoffs once, and have finished sub .500 the last 12 years. Besides this year, the Reds were in a decade long sub .500 stretch. They did have some competitive years in the 90's though, including a WS. I know the Rockies made the WS in 2007, but in their franchise history, since 1993, they have never finished 1st in their division. The Tigers have reached the playoffs once since 1988. The Royals won the WS in 1985 and have been awful the last 25 years. The Brewers have finished 2nd in their divison three times since 1983, and not once finished first during that span. Made the playoffs once, 2008. The Pirates have finished 2nd in their divison once, since 1993 and third only twice. Haven't made the playoffs during that stretch. The Rangers have made the playoffs three times since 1961, and prior to this year haven't even sniffed the playoffs since 1999. The Blue Jays finished 2nd in their division once since 1993, and wasn't even close to making a WC spot. Since the strike, the Expos/Nats have won more than 83 games once, 88 in '96.

                        I know, I know, the playoff format is completely different, but most of those MLB teams I listed, wouldn't sniff the playoffs in the NFL format. That's just how it is in baseball, there is a solid handful of teams, every year, that you know won't even sniff a .500 record.
                        Last edited by Pat; 09-02-2010, 04:30 PM.
                        Wilmington Wildcats- 2057-
                        Seattle Pilots- 2017-2041
                        Washington Bats - 1979-2013

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Andrew View Post
                          You can lower average demand but it doesn't do any good if there's a ton of free cash/budget room in the league. I think our average demand for superstars is set around $16m and we routinely see demands for 20+.
                          I agree. I've tried this in solo leagues, and like Andrew said, if the players see cash lying around, they will ask for it.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Andrew View Post
                            If we went with the latest idea, these would be the new market sizes:

                            The method I used to determine who moved up:
                            - Larger current market size got first priority
                            - In the event of a tie, larger current budget moved up a market size

                            Spoiler

                            Does this factor in the 30% revenue redistribution?
                            Philly Freedom
                            Owner & GM: 1987 - Pres.
                            Porter Div. Champs (Mbr '84-'15): 1984, 1985, 1988, 1990, 1991, 2002, 2004, 2010, 2011
                            Stout Div. Champs (Mbr '78-'83 & '16-present): 2016, 2017
                            IL Wild Card Winner: 1987, 2013, 2018, 2019
                            Import League Champs: 1984, 2010, 2017

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Pat View Post
                              Interesting take on the argument: http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcont...l.460bc63.html

                              If in Spring Training of 2009...
                              Also, to support your comment, while you could say that the NFL (according to the posted article) has 12 teams a year that could win the Super Bowl, the major difference is that only about 4 or so teams consistently fit that picture. The last 4 are almost always someone different every year. So while the Bengals may be out of hope for three straight years, the next three will be great for the fans.

                              That's clearly not the case in MLB.

                              I think more teams have a shot in MLB every season, but the bottom feeders are in a worse position compared to the NFL or NBA.
                              Denver Bulls

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Andrew View Post
                                Anyone else have anything relevant to add to the discussion? I've seen a lot of discussion over the last couple weeks and in the past about frustrations with the financial system. However, when the opportunity to do something about it comes up only a handful of people want to participate in the discussion.
                                Well that's easy to see who that is going after so I'll repeat what I told Brad.

                                I don't understand the OOTP financial system nor baseball economics to any great extent, I apologize. I do believe that anything that evens the playing field like a hard cap and closer together market sizes is a good thing.

                                The NFL is a dominant force these days because of the salary cap and revenue sharing. Every season a good share of the teams have a chance for the title and it has made it exciting and generated more interest. I think anything that resembles or brings us closer to that model (which is what ours sounds like) is a great idea.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X