Eliminating Draftee Signing Bonuses or change finacial #'s

Ideas for Rules Will be Discussed and Debated Here
User avatar
Lovepump(Giants)
Posts: 45
Joined: Fri May 26, 2017 3:12 pm
Location: St. Louis

Re: Eliminating Draftee Signing Bonuses or change finacial #

Post by Lovepump(Giants) » Thu Jul 13, 2017 5:02 pm

I have seen that applied to Ai contracts and/or any contracts the new GM inherited. The concern is that a team is poorly run, the GM leaves, new GM takes big risks, leaves and the 3rd or 4th GM has market size, fan interest, fan loyalty and financial problems. This happens often in leagues, the bottom teams end up being entire organization rebuilds with some factors well beyond their control.

yeliel-Dbacks

Re: Eliminating Draftee Signing Bonuses or change finacial #

Post by yeliel-Dbacks » Thu Jul 13, 2017 9:40 pm

I am in favor of leaving the bonuses the way they are. In my experience they add to the realism of the game. Thanks.

User avatar
DavidJ
Posts: 128
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 4:32 pm
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: Eliminating Draftee Signing Bonuses or change finacial #

Post by DavidJ » Fri Jul 14, 2017 12:55 am

If we are going to entertain a proposal where a GM gets to eliminate a contract and spend brainpower (most likely the Commissioner's) in determining which one that is, then I would further propose that SHOULD a NEW GM CHOOSE to do that, then, in order of priority:

1) They should not be allowed to just dive right back into a long term free agent contract. Therefore I would further propose that they be limited to only ONE year free agent contracts and, should they meet the rules, be limited to only a three year extensions while they are in their FIRST full year as GM, should they CHOOSE to eliminate a contract. And that's IF a player will agree to sign anything with their team (which, if they are brutal, could very well be the case int he game).

2) They must assign ONLY the slot value amount to their DRAFT budget (after all, that's what has come up most in their discussion).

3) They have a ceiling automatically imposed on how much they can spend on Development & Scouting (suggest HALF the base value) budgets, and ZERO allocated to International budget, should they CHOOSE to eliminate a contract in their first FULL year ("full" being purposeful, in case they join with three weeks left in the season or something).

If those last two cannot be met, then the situation is indeed much worse than expected and they should be totally capped on their budgeting to get back to green ASAP.

And all of this should be cleared by the Commissioner ahead of any moves whatsoever.

There is no point in freeing them of the frying pan only to have them faceplant in the fire.
GM New York Yankees - 2029

GM Los Angeles Dodgers - 2022-2028
GM Toronto Blue Jays - 2020-2021

User avatar
Lovepump(Giants)
Posts: 45
Joined: Fri May 26, 2017 3:12 pm
Location: St. Louis

Re: Eliminating Draftee Signing Bonuses or change finacial #

Post by Lovepump(Giants) » Fri Jul 14, 2017 1:16 am

I don't agree with any of that. Basically that is, here is help but you are hamstrung if you take it.

User avatar
DavidJ
Posts: 128
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 4:32 pm
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: Eliminating Draftee Signing Bonuses or change finacial #

Post by DavidJ » Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:06 pm

I have seen people take over the MLB Yankees in another league, THINK that they have tons of money and payroll space (which they did), go nuts in free agency flaunting their wealth, make bad decisions and quickly become a last place team with a bunch of albatross contracts that set the franchise back years. There are likely similar examples in this league (IN FACT NOT RULING OUT THE DODGERS - signing a ten-year IAFA to the highest annual value in the league, likely the moment he hit the market as being a risky move, even with the financial capacity).

If we're concerned about helping a franchise (and/or new GM) get out of the hole, then there should be some constructive consequences. I propose treating it like a loan, where you have an obligation to at least try to be responsible (and, in the case of a loan, pay it back). But if you would rather simply make it a hand out so someone can dig themselves back in deep, of their own doing this time, then we'll have to disagree - which is fine.
GM New York Yankees - 2029

GM Los Angeles Dodgers - 2022-2028
GM Toronto Blue Jays - 2020-2021

User avatar
Eddie Paxil-Commish
Site Admin
Posts: 1904
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2014 3:42 am
Location: Union City, New Jersey
Contact:

Re: Eliminating Draftee Signing Bonuses or change finacial #

Post by Eddie Paxil-Commish » Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:45 pm

DavidJ wrote:I have seen people take over the MLB Yankees in another league, THINK that they have tons of money and payroll space (which they did), go nuts in free agency flaunting their wealth, make bad decisions and quickly become a last place team with a bunch of albatross contracts that set the franchise back years. There are likely similar examples in this league (IN FACT NOT RULING OUT THE DODGERS - signing a ten-year IAFA to the highest annual value in the league, likely the moment he hit the market as being a risky move, even with the financial capacity).

If we're concerned about helping a franchise (and/or new GM) get out of the hole, then there should be some constructive consequences. I propose treating it like a loan, where you have an obligation to at least try to be responsible (and, in the case of a loan, pay it back). But if you would rather simply make it a hand out so someone can dig themselves back in deep, of their own doing this time, then we'll have to disagree - which is fine.
Does the fact that he made a distinction to an AI signed contract differ in your mind, or does that not matter?
Eddie Paxil
OMLB Commissioner
New Jersey Pioneers GM (2025-Present) Continental Expansion League Champions 2025 and 2026
Miami Marlins GM (2014-2024) NL East Champions 2016, 2019, & 2022

User avatar
DavidJ
Posts: 128
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 4:32 pm
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: Eliminating Draftee Signing Bonuses or change finacial #

Post by DavidJ » Sat Jul 15, 2017 2:07 am

Eddie Paxil-Commish wrote:
DavidJ wrote:I have seen people take over the MLB Yankees in another league, THINK that they have tons of money and payroll space (which they did), go nuts in free agency flaunting their wealth, make bad decisions and quickly become a last place team with a bunch of albatross contracts that set the franchise back years. There are likely similar examples in this league (IN FACT NOT RULING OUT THE DODGERS - signing a ten-year IAFA to the highest annual value in the league, likely the moment he hit the market as being a risky move, even with the financial capacity).

If we're concerned about helping a franchise (and/or new GM) get out of the hole, then there should be some constructive consequences. I propose treating it like a loan, where you have an obligation to at least try to be responsible (and, in the case of a loan, pay it back). But if you would rather simply make it a hand out so someone can dig themselves back in deep, of their own doing this time, then we'll have to disagree - which is fine.
Does the fact that he made a distinction to an AI signed contract differ in your mind, or does that not matter?
In my mind, that is hard to track. I guess best situation would be to not allow that to happen in the first place.

And I am pretty certain that the argument would quickly evolve to a bad contract by the previous GM if you open the door. Which also ties in with my comment that GMs can often get themselves into just as much trouble as the previous GM (or indeed the AI).

If we are trying to fix problems, there should be measures in place to not allow new problems. Just one opinion of many of course.
GM New York Yankees - 2029

GM Los Angeles Dodgers - 2022-2028
GM Toronto Blue Jays - 2020-2021

User avatar
Lovepump(Giants)
Posts: 45
Joined: Fri May 26, 2017 3:12 pm
Location: St. Louis

Re: Eliminating Draftee Signing Bonuses or change finacial #

Post by Lovepump(Giants) » Sun Jul 16, 2017 4:40 pm

DavidJ wrote:I have seen people take over the MLB Yankees in another league, THINK that they have tons of money and payroll space (which they did), go nuts in free agency flaunting their wealth, make bad decisions and quickly become a last place team with a bunch of albatross contracts that set the franchise back years. There are likely similar examples in this league (IN FACT NOT RULING OUT THE DODGERS - signing a ten-year IAFA to the highest annual value in the league, likely the moment he hit the market as being a risky move, even with the financial capacity).

If we're concerned about helping a franchise (and/or new GM) get out of the hole, then there should be some constructive consequences. I propose treating it like a loan, where you have an obligation to at least try to be responsible (and, in the case of a loan, pay it back). But if you would rather simply make it a hand out so someone can dig themselves back in deep, of their own doing this time, then we'll have to disagree - which is fine.
The Yankees are not a good tool for argument. They can make a mistake that is 1/2 of another teams entire budget and survive it. No one has stumped for the richest teams in the league being bailed out of their incompetence.

I have a team that is $50+ million over budget. I inherited it. How they are that far over I have no clue. My options are to eat it and pray I can remain competitive with no money for FA or extension for the next 2-5 years (in 2 years my payroll will be even with my entire budget).
I have already stated that I will vote for the rules to stay the same. I am not stumping for me. I am stumping for someone new to OOTP or Online play that get a team like this.

I am still in a holding pattern to see if I will have any money to sign draftees. If you know for sure that a team that is over budget this much and has no FA or extension money can sign a Draftee let me know.

User avatar
captaincoop17
Posts: 299
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2014 5:40 pm
Location: Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: Eliminating Draftee Signing Bonuses or change finacial #

Post by captaincoop17 » Sun Jul 16, 2017 7:58 pm

This is what we use in another league I'm in:
Article X

AMNESTY RELEASE

Each franchise will be permitted 1 Amnesty Release per Offseason of a player deemed to have a crippling contract. The player being released must meet the following criteria:

(a) Player must have been signed by the previous GM or CPU if vacant.

(b) Contract must be a minimum of 5 seasons long when signed, excluding team options, and must still be in the first half of the contract.

(c) Player must be released between the end of the season and the start of the Pre-Season.

***In some instances the commissioner may choose a player to be Amnestied on behalf of the franchise if it sits vacant during the Offseason. This may be done to help the franchise retain their own players or free up finances to sign Free Agents.***
Charlie Cooper, GM Los Angeles Angels
2014 HOU: 67-95
2015 HOU: 44-118
2016 HOU: 74-88
2017 HOU: 75-87
2018 LAA: 80-82
2019 LAA: 64-98
2020 LAA: 45-117
2021 LAA: 72-90
2022 LAA: 96-66 ~ AL West Champions
2023 LAA: 83-79
2024 LAA: 113-49 ~ AL West Champions

User avatar
Lovepump(Giants)
Posts: 45
Joined: Fri May 26, 2017 3:12 pm
Location: St. Louis

Re: Eliminating Draftee Signing Bonuses or change finacial #

Post by Lovepump(Giants) » Sun Jul 16, 2017 8:23 pm

I have been in leagues with similar. It has worked in the leagues I have played in with similar rules.

User avatar
DavidJ
Posts: 128
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 4:32 pm
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: Eliminating Draftee Signing Bonuses or change finacial #

Post by DavidJ » Sun Jul 16, 2017 8:25 pm

Lovepump(A's) wrote:
DavidJ wrote:I have seen people take over the MLB Yankees in another league, THINK that they have tons of money and payroll space (which they did), go nuts in free agency flaunting their wealth, make bad decisions and quickly become a last place team with a bunch of albatross contracts that set the franchise back years. There are likely similar examples in this league (IN FACT NOT RULING OUT THE DODGERS - signing a ten-year IAFA to the highest annual value in the league, likely the moment he hit the market as being a risky move, even with the financial capacity).

If we're concerned about helping a franchise (and/or new GM) get out of the hole, then there should be some constructive consequences. I propose treating it like a loan, where you have an obligation to at least try to be responsible (and, in the case of a loan, pay it back). But if you would rather simply make it a hand out so someone can dig themselves back in deep, of their own doing this time, then we'll have to disagree - which is fine.
The Yankees are not a good tool for argument. They can make a mistake that is 1/2 of another teams entire budget and survive it. No one has stumped for the richest teams in the league being bailed out of their incompetence.

I have a team that is $50+ million over budget. I inherited it. How they are that far over I have no clue. My options are to eat it and pray I can remain competitive with no money for FA or extension for the next 2-5 years (in 2 years my payroll will be even with my entire budget).
I have already stated that I will vote for the rules to stay the same. I am not stumping for me. I am stumping for someone new to OOTP or Online play that get a team like this.

I am still in a holding pattern to see if I will have any money to sign draftees. If you know for sure that a team that is over budget this much and has no FA or extension money can sign a Draftee let me know.
You undoubtedly know this, but even well over budget GM's can still offer arb and have players accept and stay with their team. Does NOT help the money of course.

You can make a QO to a player that refuses to negotiate, hoping for a draft pick. If they sign, again keeps you red, but if they leave, pick. And if you are cash strapped, those aren't the players to sign or extend anyway.

You can (in fact are forced to) bring up AAA through development. Helps your budget and one or two may catch fire.

Charlie's is not the worst option, but my fear would be that it is used annually (as isbsuggeated) and GMs will just dive right back into big deals knowing that!

IF.WE HAD TO, again I suggest some form of "one-off" for new GMs only and then some kind of controls for the first season to bail the team out.
GM New York Yankees - 2029

GM Los Angeles Dodgers - 2022-2028
GM Toronto Blue Jays - 2020-2021

User avatar
DavidJ
Posts: 128
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 4:32 pm
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: Eliminating Draftee Signing Bonuses or change finacial #

Post by DavidJ » Sun Jul 16, 2017 8:28 pm

If you can plan ahead which contract to amnesty drop, then you can just not sign those deals in the first place. ;-)
GM New York Yankees - 2029

GM Los Angeles Dodgers - 2022-2028
GM Toronto Blue Jays - 2020-2021

Yankees
Posts: 26
Joined: Sat Jul 15, 2017 4:04 pm

Re: Eliminating Draftee Signing Bonuses or change finacial #

Post by Yankees » Sun Jul 16, 2017 9:11 pm

It is the reality, you have to manage your team from day one, some GM go after big name thinking that it will help their team, and i reality i screw up their finance, samething with trades always checks the contract of the player you are getting, i saw some Gm on other league stock with a player at 30 millions a year for the left of the contract.
And if you have no money for signing bonus, well there is always next year, but the trick is to manage at the beginning, and get your rosters in good standing. :P

User avatar
captaincoop17
Posts: 299
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2014 5:40 pm
Location: Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: Eliminating Draftee Signing Bonuses or change finacial #

Post by captaincoop17 » Sun Jul 16, 2017 9:23 pm

DavidJ wrote:
Lovepump(A's) wrote:
DavidJ wrote:I have seen people take over the MLB Yankees in another league, THINK that they have tons of money and payroll space (which they did), go nuts in free agency flaunting their wealth, make bad decisions and quickly become a last place team with a bunch of albatross contracts that set the franchise back years. There are likely similar examples in this league (IN FACT NOT RULING OUT THE DODGERS - signing a ten-year IAFA to the highest annual value in the league, likely the moment he hit the market as being a risky move, even with the financial capacity).

If we're concerned about helping a franchise (and/or new GM) get out of the hole, then there should be some constructive consequences. I propose treating it like a loan, where you have an obligation to at least try to be responsible (and, in the case of a loan, pay it back). But if you would rather simply make it a hand out so someone can dig themselves back in deep, of their own doing this time, then we'll have to disagree - which is fine.
The Yankees are not a good tool for argument. They can make a mistake that is 1/2 of another teams entire budget and survive it. No one has stumped for the richest teams in the league being bailed out of their incompetence.

I have a team that is $50+ million over budget. I inherited it. How they are that far over I have no clue. My options are to eat it and pray I can remain competitive with no money for FA or extension for the next 2-5 years (in 2 years my payroll will be even with my entire budget).
I have already stated that I will vote for the rules to stay the same. I am not stumping for me. I am stumping for someone new to OOTP or Online play that get a team like this.

I am still in a holding pattern to see if I will have any money to sign draftees. If you know for sure that a team that is over budget this much and has no FA or extension money can sign a Draftee let me know.
You undoubtedly know this, but even well over budget GM's can still offer arb and have players accept and stay with their team. Does NOT help the money of course.

You can make a QO to a player that refuses to negotiate, hoping for a draft pick. If they sign, again keeps you red, but if they leave, pick. And if you are cash strapped, those aren't the players to sign or extend anyway.

You can (in fact are forced to) bring up AAA through development. Helps your budget and one or two may catch fire.

Charlie's is not the worst option, but my fear would be that it is used annually (as isbsuggeated) and GMs will just dive right back into big deals knowing that!

IF.WE HAD TO, again I suggest some form of "one-off" for new GMs only and then some kind of controls for the first season to bail the team out.
My suggestion only pertains to new GMs... no one would get a freebie every season.
Charlie Cooper, GM Los Angeles Angels
2014 HOU: 67-95
2015 HOU: 44-118
2016 HOU: 74-88
2017 HOU: 75-87
2018 LAA: 80-82
2019 LAA: 64-98
2020 LAA: 45-117
2021 LAA: 72-90
2022 LAA: 96-66 ~ AL West Champions
2023 LAA: 83-79
2024 LAA: 113-49 ~ AL West Champions

Fat-Nige

Re: Eliminating Draftee Signing Bonuses or change finacial #

Post by Fat-Nige » Sun Jul 16, 2017 9:34 pm

I know it sounds harsh but no-one walks into a GMs job blindfolded. You know the situation when you take over a team, work your way out of it. That’s the way I like to play - get myself into a financial pickle and then work my way out of it.

Well, I think it’s just that I’m crap at finances lol. Too much of this meddling with the finances though undermines the GM’s that try to run their franchises responsibly. Everybody should just accept what they take over, no-one forces them to take that team. If they feel they can’t handle the team situation wait for a better team to come along

User avatar
Lovepump(Giants)
Posts: 45
Joined: Fri May 26, 2017 3:12 pm
Location: St. Louis

Re: Eliminating Draftee Signing Bonuses or change finacial #

Post by Lovepump(Giants) » Sun Jul 16, 2017 10:29 pm

So I am for leaving the draft bonus system intact.
I think a single amnesty contract drop for new GMs is a good league wide protection against bottom team churn.

User avatar
Eddie Paxil-Commish
Site Admin
Posts: 1904
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2014 3:42 am
Location: Union City, New Jersey
Contact:

Re: Eliminating Draftee Signing Bonuses or change finacial #

Post by Eddie Paxil-Commish » Mon Jul 17, 2017 1:52 am

I want to highlight two things here that David said.
DavidJ wrote: In my mind, that is hard to track.
The Yankees GM was removed the last day of the season after the World Series. The new Yankees GM took over March 25. Everything in between is an AI signing. Not that hard to track.
DavidJ wrote:I guess best situation would be to not allow that to happen in the first place.
Going back to something I said earlier which may have gotten lost. The old policy was let the AI do everything but sign new players.

As for Charlie's idea. I don't hate it. May be we could adjust to to just AI contracts.

Another thought to make all of this trackable as David said. We don't grandfather people in. If the rule is passed it's from that point forward. Since we have a full league now I can post the exact game date an exiting GM is removed from the file to track things.
Eddie Paxil
OMLB Commissioner
New Jersey Pioneers GM (2025-Present) Continental Expansion League Champions 2025 and 2026
Miami Marlins GM (2014-2024) NL East Champions 2016, 2019, & 2022

User avatar
Lovepump(Giants)
Posts: 45
Joined: Fri May 26, 2017 3:12 pm
Location: St. Louis

Re: Eliminating Draftee Signing Bonuses or change finacial #

Post by Lovepump(Giants) » Mon Jul 17, 2017 9:54 pm

Another thought to make all of this trackable as David said. We don't grandfather people in. If the rule is passed it's from that point forward. Since we have a full league now I can post the exact game date an exiting GM is removed from the file to track things.
Works for me.

Jesse_ChiSox

Re: Eliminating Draftee Signing Bonuses or change finacial #

Post by Jesse_ChiSox » Fri Aug 04, 2017 7:51 pm

I think bonuses should stay. I think this is an integral part of the management for the team. I had to auto this past draft because I was not at home. So I hope the AI didnt go apeshit, but I never knowingly draft anyone who is "impossible" no matter how good they are. That is just the way it is. It makes the game more real, and I am all for it.

As far as the other topic that has cropped up, when a GM takes over an organization in bad shape. I think that there needs to be some consideration about this, no matter how realistic we want the league to be. I am sure we have all seen situations where a GM destroys an organization then bails. I took over a team in another league where the previous GM signed outrageous contracts, they met league rules for length and salary increases, but the total value of these contracts was unreal. For example, 5 year deals worth $200M for players on the ends of their careers. He was trying to win the WS. He also traded all of the top draft picks away. So I took over the next season because he bailed when he got knocked out in the playoffs and never made it to the WS. The team was $50m in the red and was projected to be $90M at the end of the season. Yes, I knew what I was getting in to, but no GM would make those kinds of deals in real life. Why did he do it? Who knows, but he didnt stay around to deal with his mess, I was left to try to clean it up.

Situations like this may be the reason some teams are so difficult to fill. Who wants to take on on this kind of disaster? Yea, I did, I may be a glutton for punishment. But this season has been a real struggle to not only sign players to fill the rosters, but players that give me a chance to actually win a game.

So maybe if there could be some mechanism in place to help new GMs when they walk into a situation like this. Who knows? I think it is one thing to deal with someones mistakes and them bailing on a team they have realized they dont have a clue with, but it is something different when a team is put in the crapper financially on purpose and someone has to try to fix it.

Just my 2 cents, or maybe more like 25 cents :)

User avatar
Eddie Paxil-Commish
Site Admin
Posts: 1904
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2014 3:42 am
Location: Union City, New Jersey
Contact:

Re: Eliminating Draftee Signing Bonuses or change finacial #

Post by Eddie Paxil-Commish » Sat Aug 12, 2017 8:06 pm

I made a call on this and the decision is here: http://theomlb.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=1476
Eddie Paxil
OMLB Commissioner
New Jersey Pioneers GM (2025-Present) Continental Expansion League Champions 2025 and 2026
Miami Marlins GM (2014-2024) NL East Champions 2016, 2019, & 2022

Locked