All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 32 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Mar 13, 2018 12:03 pm 
Offline
Double-A
Double-A
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 4:45 pm
Posts: 345
Location: Harrisburg, PA
For the record, the league average salary right now is $3,442,353 making triple that $10,327,059.

I think the issue people may have with that is if I want to extend an "average" player through his FA years I'd have to shell out $10mil a year for someone who may be worth 5-7.

_________________
Dylan Krupilis
GM - Toyama Wind Dancers


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 13, 2018 12:14 pm 
Online
Hall of Famer
Hall of Famer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 22, 2009 8:27 pm
Posts: 6034
Location: San Francisco
Wind Dancers wrote:
For the record, the league average salary right now is $3,442,353 making triple that $10,327,059.

I think the issue people may have with that is if I want to extend an "average" player through his FA years I'd have to shell out $10mil a year for someone who may be worth 5-7.

:shock:
Yikes!! That's a lot of change!

_________________
Michael Topham, President Golden Entertainment & President-CEO of the Aurora Borealis
Image
2019, 2021, 2022, 2023 PEBA Champions


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 13, 2018 3:18 pm 
Offline
Major Leaguer
Major Leaguer
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 4:52 pm
Posts: 861
Location: West Coast United States of America
James and Mike. Thank you for your thoughtful responses. I do think we need to remember that the house rules are also governed by the idea of "players rights" in our universe. I'd hate to see us with a labor issue should we be too extreme in a change.

Anyways, I am in agreement with James and Mike's analysis. I think that Jame provides a way to easily transition from the old rules and not shock the system too much. I think the changes that need to be addressed are these two aspects which seem to create the most angst among everyone.

1 - 3 times league salary in free agency years for extensions (James solutions solves this)

2 - 25% rule in buy-outs. (This one has been in existence for the 3 season that I have been involved. I think we need to slowly phase this one out as to not create a competitive imbalance with teams who are stuck with these deals because they followed the rules. I would propose. Cutting it to 20% for this season and then finally 10% for next season and keep it there per James analysis that it should be kept in some respect but reduce it.)

I only have this to add:

3 - Bonus offers. (This should be scraped completely, since it will be too hard to police as this was the biggest violation, but those who violated the rule just add the value to the salary.)

4 - Keep Vesting and Bonus thresholds the same as James suggests.

I do think scraping the rules completely would be a mistake and create too much imbalance for those locked into compliant contracts. I think slight modifications will make everyone happy.

Lastly... dare I open this box... Is a contraction with so many open teams warranted? The last contraction was when I joined, so I don't know that situation completely, but so many vacancies will either require care-taking and the commissioner to do a lot of work. Dare I say keep about 4 teams open and if we need to add a team allow an expansion from the WIL? Perhaps we see what happens after next season? I just want to throw it out there to see how everyone else feels about the amount of open teams at this point.

_________________
RJ Ermola
Vice President and General Manager of Baseball Operations
Crystal Lake Sandgnats

*2024 PEBA Champions*


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 13, 2018 3:29 pm 
Offline
Double-A
Double-A
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 4:45 pm
Posts: 345
Location: Harrisburg, PA
Sandgnats wrote:
James and Mike. Thank you for your thoughtful responses. I do think we need to remember that the house rules are also governed by the idea of "players rights" in our universe. I'd hate to see us with a labor issue should we be too extreme in a change.


The Great PEBA Strike of 2027??

Regarding the open teams: I think we should have a dedicated "recruiter" who actively tries to bring in new GM's. Contraction may be a bit premature if there hasn't really been a large effort to bring GMs in for a few months. With 19 on the horizon, it could pull possible GMs away from 18 BUT baseball season is almost here which also brings a lot of users to the game. If we are going to really push for recruits now's the time. It may not hurt to reach out to some former GMs to gauge any comeback interest.

_________________
Dylan Krupilis
GM - Toyama Wind Dancers


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 13, 2018 5:05 pm 
Offline
Double-A
Double-A
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2016 12:20 pm
Posts: 185
I would add on that my violation - Shimuzu - was in violation of the 3x rule at $9,160,000 - which I tried to make up on the back end to get him to agree because next year is going to be rough financially. (I did request a link to the Constitution before signing him but it was down which is why the error). Not sure the reasoning behind the rule since I'm an average market team with a weak fan base but I'm not that concerned with the financial rules. Whatever decided is fine by me.

_________________
Mike Best
San Juan Coqui


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 13, 2018 5:48 pm 
Offline
Major Leaguer
Major Leaguer
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 7:59 pm
Posts: 1107
Correcting salaries to comply with constitution is ok with me.

_________________
RonHi
ronhi0@yahoo.com
Neo-Tokyo Akira
Trade Block updated on 3/12/2018
2012 Neo-Tokyo Cup Winner
2017 Neo-Tokyo Cup Winner


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 13, 2018 6:05 pm 
Offline
Double-A
Double-A
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 4:45 pm
Posts: 345
Location: Harrisburg, PA
I like the idea James put forward as it prevents people from signing future stars for chump change while allowing the freedom to freely extend players who have made it past their Arb years.

Usually by the time players get out of arb, their demands go up anyway.

_________________
Dylan Krupilis
GM - Toyama Wind Dancers


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 13, 2018 7:22 pm 
Offline
Major Leaguer
Major Leaguer
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 4:52 pm
Posts: 861
Location: West Coast United States of America
Wind Dancers wrote:
I like the idea James put forward as it prevents people from signing future stars for chump change while allowing the freedom to freely extend players who have made it past their Arb years.

Usually by the time players get out of arb, their demands go up anyway.


Agreed.

_________________
RJ Ermola
Vice President and General Manager of Baseball Operations
Crystal Lake Sandgnats

*2024 PEBA Champions*


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2018 3:30 pm 
Offline
Major Leaguer
Major Leaguer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:54 pm
Posts: 956
Quote:
1. Yearly salaries within any multi-year contract offer (as a free agent or as an extension of an existing contract) may never decrease. Salaries may only be at or above the value of the previous season’s salary within a multi-year contract offer. While not a requisite, GMs are strongly encouraged to realistically escalate salaries over the life of a multi-year contract.

There's not much support for this rule, and I agree that GMs should be free to structure contracts as they wish, and that there is such a thing as the time value of money.

Quote:
2. The salary in the first year of an extension must be at or above the value of the player’s current year salary. If you wish to sign the player to a contract with a salary lower than what he is currently making, you must first let him test free agency. Once a player reaches free agency, you may offer him whatever you like.

There has been support for this rule, however, I think this rule is closely tied to no. 1. If this rule stays in place, but no. 1 is scrapped, then there is a heavy disincentive to escalate salaries in a multi-year deal, since it basically takes away the option of a later one year extension for that player, and generally hinders the flexibility of a GM to negotiate an extension for that player down the road.

Quote:
3. Extensions of three or more years in length must adhere to the following minimum salary restrictions:
All contract years that cover a player’s arbitration years must feature a salary at least equal to the league average salary.
All contract years that cover a player’s free agency years must feature a salary at least triple the league average salary.
For the purpose of calculating contract years, an option year will counted as a contract year.

The purpose of the rule is to keep teams from exploiting young talent, though GM's tend to focus on competitive advantage here, but it amounts to the same thing. There should be a way to adhere to the spirit of the rule and eliminate complexity. In think we should start with the assumption that the AI can negotiate fair contracts for players who are FA eligible.

Quote:
Exception : Between the conclusion of a league’s playoffs and the arrival of free agency, qualifying veterans may be offered a 1-year contract at a salary no less than 75% of the player’s current salary. The qualifications are as follows:
Player is at least 33 years old as of the conclusion of a league’s playoffs
Player has a Loyalty rating of “Normal” or higher
Player has enough service time to qualify for free agency
Player has signed at least one previous major league contract with his current team
Player has been under major league contract with his current team for the previous three consecutive seasons or six total seasons

Again, In think we should start with the assumption that the AI can negotiate fair contracts for players who are FA eligible.

Quote:
4. Teams may not sign a player to a major league extension within 45 days of his signing a major league contract. A brief cool-down period is required before a new contract may be extended.

The only instance that I could think of where a team might want to break this rule, is extending a player recently called up. If sufficient rules exist to protect such players from disastrous long-term deals, then I don't think this rule would be needed.

Quote:
5. If a contract with a player is voided, the GM’s next contract offer to the player must feature a guaranteed average yearly salary at least 150% of the average salary of the previous offer (including option years).

This is an area where the punishment doesn't seem to fit the crime, at least with respect to extensions, where a team is only bidding against itself. I come at the issue of compliance with the assumption that GMs aren't actively trying to cheat the system. We've been restructuring, rather than voiding contracts, though I do think that free agent contracts and extensions should be treated differently.

Quote:
Bonus Clauses: Bonus clauses in contracts are governed by several house rules, both for free agents and extensions. Contracts in violation of these rules are subject to review by the Board, which reserves the right to void the contract. If you wish to offer a contract that breaks one or more of these rules, contact the Board prior to making the offer to explain your intent. You will be provided with guidance on an agreeable contract offer.

1. Players must meet a minimum average guaranteed salary value in order to qualify to be offered Royal Raker or Golden Arm bonus.
Contracts require an average guaranteed yearly salary value of at least $5M to qualify for award bonus offers.
Example: GMs are allowed to offer a Royal Raker bonus along with a contract offer of $4M for 2010, $5M for 2011 and $6M for 2012 (average value of $5M). If the $6M for 2012 is absent from the offer (dropping the average value

2. PA/IP bonuses can be given to any player, up to 650 PA / 200 IP.

3. The cap on the amount of total bonus money that may be offered is 25% of the highest guaranteed yearly salary in the contract.
Example: In a contract offer of $5M for 2010, $6M for 2011 and a $7M option for 2012, a GM may offer bonuses up to $1.5M (25% of $6M, the highest guaranteed yearly salary in the contract).
4. From June 6th until the end of the PEBA playoffs, bonuses may only be offered to free agents if the contract spans multiple seasons.

5. If a contract features an illegal bonus, the bonus will be added to yearly salaries. Example: GMs cannot include Royal Raker or Golden Arm bonuses unless the average guaranteed yearly salary value of the contract is at least $5M. If a PEBA team signs a contract with a player that features an average guaranteed yearly salary value of $4.5M and includes a $1M Royal Raker bonus, that bonus will be eliminated and $1M will be added to the base salary of each season covered by the contract.

These are my least favorite rules. If GMs truly believe that bonus clauses can be used to unfairly exploit the AI, then such restrictions could be kept at least in some form. My preference would be to cut them and monitor.

Quote:
Vesting, Player and Team Options
These are allowed in multi-year contracts subject to the following provisos
Player options must precede team options when both are offered in the same contract
Team options must include a buyout fee of at least 25% of that year's salary
Vesting options must be realistic. You cannot ask for more than PITCHERS 30 games started, 180 IP (starters) , 20 games finished (Relievers). BATTERS 450 AB, 120 games played.

I think this rule can be simplified, eliminating the math.

_________________
Morris Ragland
Commissioner


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2018 3:35 pm 
Offline
Major Leaguer
Major Leaguer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:54 pm
Posts: 956
This is my proposal:

Quote:
Article V Player Contracts

Section 1. [1] Contracts are governed by the CSA. Any contracts that, in the Board's view, unreasonably exploit a flaw in the game AI will be subject to restructuring or voiding. GMs are encouraged to contact the Board for guidance before making a contract offer when in doubt.

[2] GMs with offending contract extensions will be offered a restructured contract to bring them into compliance with league rules. $500,000 will be added to the fist year of the player's extension. Alternatively, the GM can opt to void the contract extension, in which case they may not make another contract extension offer until that player has gone to free agency.

[3] Contracts to free agents will not be restructured. In the event that a contract with a free agent player is voided, the GM who offered the voided contract will not be allowed to make any additional offers to that player until the next offseason.

[4] Maximum contract length is six years (including option years), with one exception detailed below.

[5] Extensions to players with fewer than six years of ML service time cannot exceed one year in length.

[6] Vesting, Player and Team Options are allowed in multi-year contracts subject to the following provisos.
Team options must include a buyout fee of at least $2,000,000. Vesting options must be realistic. You cannot ask for more than PITCHERS 30 games started, 180 IP (starters) , 20 games finished (Relievers). BATTERS 450 AB, 120 games played.

[7] The international free agent signing period is in July of each year, and PEBA teams are allowed to bid on international free agents.

_________________
Morris Ragland
Commissioner


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2018 3:48 pm 
Online
Hall of Famer
Hall of Famer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 22, 2009 8:27 pm
Posts: 6034
Location: San Francisco
Commish wrote:
Quote:
1. Yearly salaries within any multi-year contract offer (as a free agent or as an extension of an existing contract) may never decrease. Salaries may only be at or above the value of the previous season’s salary within a multi-year contract offer. While not a requisite, GMs are strongly encouraged to realistically escalate salaries over the life of a multi-year contract.

There's not much support for this rule, and I agree that GMs should be free to structure contracts as they wish, and that there is such a thing as the time value of money.

Is there not much support for this? I don't think that's quite true. Where there seems to be concern is with older players who we might see declining salaries allowed. I don't think that allowing a player in his prime production years (25-32?) should be receiving a contract of declining value.

Now, what might be more fair for players is that the overall average of the contract (extension) being greater than their previous year - thus allowing a deal to be front-loaded (recognizing that this is a somewhat common deal these days), yet players in their prime still technically making more money over the life of the contract.

I just feel like we have the rules we have for a reason, and changes should allow for those reasons to still be honored.

And for the record, I have no faith in the AI...

_________________
Michael Topham, President Golden Entertainment & President-CEO of the Aurora Borealis
Image
2019, 2021, 2022, 2023 PEBA Champions


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2018 3:50 pm 
Online
Hall of Famer
Hall of Famer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 22, 2009 8:27 pm
Posts: 6034
Location: San Francisco
Commish wrote:
Section 1. [1] Contracts are governed by the CSA. Any contracts that, in the Board's view, unreasonably exploit a flaw in the game AI will be subject to restructuring or voiding. GMs are encouraged to contact the Board for guidance before making a contract offer when in doubt.

What is CSA?

Commish wrote:
[2] GMs with offending contract extensions will be offered a restructured contract to bring them into compliance with league rules. $500,000 will be added to the fist year of the player's extension. Alternatively, the GM can opt to void the contract extension, in which case they may not make another contract extension offer until that player has gone to free agency.

This feels reasonable

Commish wrote:
[3] Contracts to free agents will not be restructured. In the event that a contract with a free agent player is voided, the GM who offered the voided contract will not be allowed to make any additional offers to that player until the next offseason.

The first part is reasonable, but I think the GM should still be able to make offers - it's not likely the game will allow them to be accepted; I think the player will be pretty pissed...

Commish wrote:
[4] Maximum contract length is six years (including option years), with one exception detailed below.

This is fine

Commish wrote:
[5] Extensions to players with fewer than six years of ML service time cannot exceed one year in length.

Why would we do this? How about allowing these deals to extend beyond just first year of FA? Many players already don't want to extend more than a year, but for those who do want a longer deal (and some won't take only 1-year), we should be allowed to go longer as long as they meet the 'equal or more' premise.

Commish wrote:
[6] Vesting, Player and Team Options are allowed in multi-year contracts subject to the following provisos.
Team options must include a buyout fee of at least $2,000,000. Vesting options must be realistic. You cannot ask for more than PITCHERS 30 games started, 180 IP (starters) , 20 games finished (Relievers). BATTERS 450 AB, 120 games played.

I think this is fair - except for all the contracts that have already been negotiated under the 25% rule - Maybe we ween this down to $2M over 3-seasons? 20%, 15%, 10% - then $2M - although, maybe it should read 'Buyout equal to salary up to $2M' so players who are actually receiving less in salary aren't getting a $2M buyout.

Commish wrote:
[7] The international free agent signing period is in July of each year, and PEBA teams are allowed to bid on international free agents.

Is this with no penalties as we currently have?

_________________
Michael Topham, President Golden Entertainment & President-CEO of the Aurora Borealis
Image
2019, 2021, 2022, 2023 PEBA Champions


Last edited by Borealis on Sat Mar 17, 2018 4:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2018 3:53 pm 
Offline
Major Leaguer
Major Leaguer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:54 pm
Posts: 956
Borealis wrote:
What is CSA?

The Common Sense Accord.

_________________
Morris Ragland
Commissioner


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2018 4:11 pm 
Offline
Hall of Famer
Hall of Famer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 10:37 am
Posts: 2747
I think the proposal is a huge step in the right direction. Much better more straightforward than the current setup. I love that it lowers the burden on what needs to be watched for.

My thoughts on each rule:

1. Seems good.
2. Not being able to offer a contract again until free agency seems too harsh. What if a team is trying to extend a very young player? I think no negotiations for the rest of the season would be fairer and easier to govern. I don't think anyone wants to track that sort of thing over multiple seasons...
3. Perfect.
4. No problem.
5. Do we really not want to be able to negotiate multi year deals that covers pre-arbitration and arbitration years? My understanding of the general feeling of the group was that no more than 1 year of Free Agency could be covered by a contract with a player who had never before reached free agency.
6. I like the vesting rules. But not the Team Option buyout rule. I thought we were counting on AI being able to negotiate? What's the need for this?
7. No problem.

_________________
Kevin Vail. - GM of the Shin Seiki Evas.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 17, 2018 4:33 pm 
Offline
Major Leaguer
Major Leaguer
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 4:52 pm
Posts: 861
Location: West Coast United States of America
Borealis wrote:
Commish wrote:
Section 1. [1] Contracts are governed by the CSA. Any contracts that, in the Board's view, unreasonably exploit a flaw in the game AI will be subject to restructuring or voiding. GMs are encouraged to contact the Board for guidance before making a contract offer when in doubt.

What is CSA?

Commish wrote:
[2] GMs with offending contract extensions will be offered a restructured contract to bring them into compliance with league rules. $500,000 will be added to the fist year of the player's extension. Alternatively, the GM can opt to void the contract extension, in which case they may not make another contract extension offer until that player has gone to free agency.

This feels reasonable

Commish wrote:
[3] Contracts to free agents will not be restructured. In the event that a contract with a free agent player is voided, the GM who offered the voided contract will not be allowed to make any additional offers to that player until the next offseason.

The first part is reasonable, but I think the GM should still be able to make offers - it's not likely the game will allow them to be accepted; I think the player will be pretty pissed...

Commish wrote:
[4] Maximum contract length is six years (including option years), with one exception detailed below.

This is fine

Commish wrote:
[5] Extensions to players with fewer than six years of ML service time cannot exceed one year in length.

Why would we do this? How about allowing these deals to extend beyond just first year of FA? Many players already don't want to extend more than a year, but for those who do want a longer deal (and some won't take only 1-year), we should be allowed to go longer as long as they meet the 'equal or more' premise.

Commish wrote:
[6] Vesting, Player and Team Options are allowed in multi-year contracts subject to the following provisos.
Team options must include a buyout fee of at least $2,000,000. Vesting options must be realistic. You cannot ask for more than PITCHERS 30 games started, 180 IP (starters) , 20 games finished (Relievers). BATTERS 450 AB, 120 games played.

I think this is fair - except for all the contracts that have already been negotiated under the 25% rule - Maybe we ween this down to $2M over 3-seasons? 20%, 15%, 10% - then $2M - although, maybe it should read 'Buyout equal to salary up to $2M' so players who are actually receiving less in salary aren't getting a $2M buyout.

Commish wrote:
[7] The international free agent signing period is in July of each year, and PEBA teams are allowed to bid on international free agents.

Is this with no penalties as we currently have?


I agree with Mike on phasing out the 25% rule. This would be a fairer adjustment.

_________________
RJ Ermola
Vice President and General Manager of Baseball Operations
Crystal Lake Sandgnats

*2024 PEBA Champions*


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 32 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group