|
Let me draft 5 players in the 1st round each year and i will spend the least on player development of any team in the majors and i will have the best system.
The point is that if a team spends 100 mil on player development and begins to win championships every year all teams will go in that direction. If you can't afford to go in that direction you can say goodbye to the team.
You set up a multi-million dollar enterprise and then you decide to cut corners on player development. It just would not make sense. If it can be turned off i will do so. but the reason i would do that is that i don't believe that any team in real baseball would cut corners on player development. Of course some teams spend more than others but does that translate to a better system of developing players.
In the game it sounds like if you use this feature and spend much more $ than any other team you will develop better players and what I am saying is that this just would never happen in real life. There is a point of spending where if you spend far less than any other team you probably would not have a good organization but no team will allow that to happen so what you have in real baseball are 30 teams that all have systems that will develop players at more or less the same pace.
Who in the world would sign out of the draft with a team that has a reputation for not spending $ to develop players. the edge in baseball is who has the $ to sign DEVELOPED players. Let's not give an additional edge to the haves that actually does not exist in real baseball.
I like to see new features in the game but there have been some that don't make sense and this one sounds that way.
|