SIM COMPLETE - 90-91 Off-Season 6 (Free Agency 3)

[Carlos]

I can be very serious about writing up a proposal but all it is going to say is: remove incentives altogether. I mean, that's the summary of it all. If you need a full page, I can provide it.

It will cover:

• Preventing owners from abusing the poor incentive coding in the game.
  
• Providing a fair and balanced free agent period that remains competitive.
  
• Protecting teams from poor accounting that could result in negative balances if an incentive is reached.

[Delandis]

I can be very serious about writing up a proposal but all it is going to say is: remove incentives altogether. I mean, that's the summary of it all. If you need a full page, I can provide it.

It will cover:

• Preventing owners from abusing the poor incentive coding in the game.
• Providing a fair and balanced free agent period that remains competitive.
• Protecting teams from poor accounting that could result in negative balances if an incentive is reached.

Boom. Problem Solved. Lets put this up to vote.

[Clay]

The problem of removing them (as I see it) is scenarios where the players wants them. I'd be pissed if I had a player that wanted $10.0 and a $600,000 incentive and got pissed and would no longer negotiate with me because I didn't offer one. Just saying.

[Jim]

The last time this came up I was for either what Matt suggested (max of 10% of contract in incentives) or what Carlos is suggesting, of no incentives whatsoever. I was in another league for a brief period of time and that league didn't allow incentives because they said it has been shown incentives can greatly influence a player, even if the contract isn't as good. My offer to Tardif is a great example. I think I offered $13.0 per with incentives around $1.5m per season. Since it's a longshot for him to win the pitcher bonus, my offer would be better.

It's obviously too late for this season but I really think we need to come up with something concrete for next season. Unfortunately it seems like the 'fair play & gentlemen' rules haven't been too successful, as we've seen other owners take advantage of loopholes too. What I try to keep in mind when I do anything in game is determine if it's realistic and I also remember I'm playing against other people, not the computer...so I don't look for exploits, I try to keep it fair.

[Clay]

It's obviously too late for this season but I really think we need to come up with something concrete for next season. Unfortunately it seems like the 'fair play & gentlemen' rules haven't been too successful, as we've seen other owners take advantage of loopholes too. What I try to keep in mind when I do anything in game is determine if it's realistic and I also remember I'm playing against other people, not the computer...so I don't look for exploits, I try to keep it fair.

I disagree. With as many seasons as we've had and number of ownership changes, I think we've done remarkably well with "fair play/honor system" rules.

[Jim]

I guess you're right, overall it has been good. I think I try to play fair and most people play fair, but we've had some owners who try to game the system.

[Clay]

I guess you're right, overall it has been good. I think I try to play fair and most people play fair, but we've had some owners who try to game the system.

You can just say, Smear... we know who you mean.

[Carlos]

To be fair to Davenport, I don't think he was purposely trying to take advantage of us or the game. What he did seems like a logical step to take if the game allows it. Unfortunately, the problem is the game does allow it.

I seem to remember this happening last season.


As for Clay's example of pissing off a player...I have never seen a player get upset because I didn't offer an incentive. I never offer incentives, actually, and I've been fine in regards to the contracts I offer. Most guys don't like my offers simply because I offer less or I've been outbid.

But, if we want to be avoid being dramatic by removing incentives completely, I think Matt's stance that the option should not exceed that which the player demands in his contract is fair. The 10% idea is fine too.

Another option is to set the incentive ourselves. Hitter/Pitcher of the Year cannot be more than $1 MM, for example. Just throwing a random number.

[Spear]

To be fair to Davenport, I don't think he was purposely trying to take advantage of us or the game. What he did seems like a logical step to take if the game allows it. Unfortunately, the problem is the game does allow it.

I seem to remember this happening last season.

Only found about this now.

I only threw an offer out there because I didn't think he'd accept it. I agree with Carlos that this a game problem and not an owner problem. I didn't think the incentive would sway Tardiff to actually sign the contract. I just figured I'd throw it in there because yeah if he actually did become pitcher of the year then all the power to him and he should be rewarded in some way.

This league is the only reason why I own OOTP and I don't even play it on single player anymore. I didn't realize that incentives were weighed that heavily in the players mind.

Thanks to Carlos and anybody else for understanding. I had no intention of attempting to cheat the system, the game, or my fellow owner. I'm sorry that it came across this way.

I have no problem having the contract voided and Tardiff being added to the free agency pool again. But we should add a rule about incentives so this type of thing doesn't happen again.

[Jim]

I'm fine with leaving it as is but I don't know if anyone else had put in an offer and wants another shot at him.

Regardless of whether or not someone was trying to find an exploit, I think owners need to be realistic with their offers. In the MLB, you wouldn't see a guy have a clause in his contract that would give him a bonus of about 90% of his annual salary for hitting one achievement.

Spear, not picking on you, this was just a prime example of why we need a specific rule on this topic. Not only does it need to be in place for everyone to have a fair shot at signing players, but it can also screw up the financials (I think someone else mentioned this). If Tardif does get that bonus, that's a huge hit to your budget that your financials don't take into consideration when figuring out your budget.

[funclown]

Surprised I was able to land Xi. Should provide some much needed lefty help out of the pen. Also landed a few minor leaguers for my AAAA team.

I had an offer for 3ml a year, but pulled it on my last export. He has the ratings, but just not showing it on the field.

[Spear]

I'm fine with leaving it as is but I don't know if anyone else had put in an offer and wants another shot at him.

Well I would rather not have him on my team if the contract is deemed unfair. The last thing I'm trying to do is exploit a flaw in the game's logic or to piss people off here. Yes, I do get my exports in all the time but I'm not mulling over my team for hours on end, nor am I logging on to the OOTP forums looking for work arounds with the AI.

Regardless of whether or not someone was trying to find an exploit, I think owners need to be realistic with their offers. In the MLB, you wouldn't see a guy have a clause in his contract that would give him a bonus of about 90% of his annual salary for hitting one achievement.

I understand that and I suppose I should have ignored the pitcher of the year incentive all together. But if MLB teams were to offer incentives for winning the Cy Young how much would they be willing to dish out?

I'm not a contract expert so I don't even know if they do offer that as an incentive or not. I think I remember hearing about players getting incentives based upon Cy Young votes but not for winning the actual award?

I'm not trying to be super defensive but I figured there was some leeway as at the end of the day the BLB isn't the MLB.

I was only offering such an incentive as a long shot to get his massive ego motivated and thought he should be rewarded with such a bonus if he could achieve it. I didn't think it would be factored into his decision so greatly.

Spear, not picking on you, this was just a prime example of why we need a specific rule on this topic. Not only does it need to be in place for everyone to have a fair shot at signing players, but it can also screw up the financials (I think someone else mentioned this). If Tardif does get that bonus, that's a huge hit to your budget that your financials don't take into consideration when figuring out your budget.

I appreciate that and I think I've been in the league long enough that I shouldn't have to be accused of trying to cheat you guys. I thought the bonus would come from the $ available for FA's which I believe I can afford.

I have no problem with a voiding of the contract, it's better than a * beside every statistic he would earn as a Brawler. Perhaps the Spear rule can be born and we can eliminate incentives all together from BLB contract negotiations.

[Clay]

For Informational Purposes... the bonus is paid on Player Expenses the following season. You'll see right now I have $2.5 million in Player Expenses paid this season... that's Mel Woodbury's bonus for winning his 3rd straight Stout Slugger. BTW... did I mention he's won 3 straight Stout Sluggers.

[Z]

For Informational Purposes... the bonus is paid on Player Expenses the following season. You'll see right now I have $2.5 million in Player Expenses paid this season... that's Mel Woodbury's bonus for winning his 3rd straight Stout Slugger. BTW... did I mention he's won 3 straight Stout Sluggers.

[Clay]

That makes it all worth it.