[Another Mike D]

Originally Posted by injury log

Salary demands are, at least in part, determined by ratings (and to avoid the situation you describe, I think they should be based more on stats). Is it possible that your pitcher has taken a nosedive, and your scouts haven't picked up on it yet?



I've certainly noticed that it's harder than in '06 to sign a player with limited service time to a long contract, but this makes sense to me, and is much like real life. A decent player who might become a star later wouldn't want to forego the chance for a big payday that free agency might provide. Players with 6+ years of MLB service should probably all prefer long contracts if the money is as good as they could reasonably expect.

Thanks for the reply, but scouts are off so it shouldn't really matter. Also, I changed the AI evaluation to set 100% on ratings and guess what...there was no difference in asking price of the above mentioned dudes. Guess what else...I changed the AI evaluation to be 0% ratings, 100% on prior year's stats and...no difference (maybe 500k or so). Ollis, one of the links above, is probably the top pitcher in the game, a complete stud, so he's asking for the 12-13M range for 2 years???

http://www.united-baseball.org/news/...ayer_2181.html peep that dude. He's 27 years old, coming off a nice season, his ratings have him at 4.5*, you know what he asked for? A 2 year deal worth 19M, with the second year being a team option at 10M. That's right, the 27 year old All-Star is willing to play a 1 year guaranteed contract for 9M. I complained bitterly about this in testing and was assured it was being looked into. Some of these are getting down-right silly. I don't care what scouts perceive or don't, a player who is still top 10 in ERA making 13.5M should not accept a 2 year offer for 600k per, with no noticeable drop in ratings.