Player Agents?

[captaincoop17]

As it stands now in OOTP 16 (and previous versions), you can get almost any player to agree to a cheap contract extension. In online leagues, we have some house rules that help to prevent this, but there are still some that slide through.

To help prevent this from happening (particularly to guys like Harper and Strasburg), could agents be implemented? Each agent would be given certain characteristics when negotiating for the player. For example, if Scott Boras is the agent for a player, the chances of him even opening up extension talks should be VERY low.

We currently have coaches and managers with characteristics, so how hard would it be to implement agents/agencies?

[Kent814]

Ive heard this discussion before and I think it's because it would be too hard to code

[Roy Tucker]

I think rather than agents, have extensions be based more on the players' personality. Loyal players are more likely to sign. Players who want to play for a winner will look at your team's record to see if they want an extension. Greedy players will either refuse to negotiate or ask for the moon. And of course all that could be intertwined, but I do think more often than not, top players should ask for a high number or say they want to test free agency.

[Cryomaniac]

Originally Posted by Roy Tucker

I think rather than agents, have extensions be based more on the players' personality. Loyal players are more likely to sign. Players who want to play for a winner will look at your team's record to see if they want an extension. Greedy players will either refuse to negotiate or ask for the moon. And of course all that could be intertwined, but I do think more often than not, top players should ask for a high number or say they want to test free agency.

Thats probably an easier way of doing it than adding agents.

[Lukas Berger]

Originally Posted by Roy Tucker

I think rather than agents, have extensions be based more on the players' personality. Loyal players are more likely to sign. Players who want to play for a winner will look at your team's record to see if they want an extension. Greedy players will either refuse to negotiate or ask for the moon. And of course all that could be intertwined, but I do think more often than not, top players should ask for a high number or say they want to test free agency.

Isn't this more or less how it works now, or am I wrong? There are other factors as well, so this stuff will never be 100% of the determining factors, but it all matters a lot, no?

[Roy Tucker]

I don't feel like there is a strong enough of a connection between players' personality, playing time and player extensions. In general, it seems to be too easy to sign players to team friendly extensions. More than happy to be proven wrong since I haven't done an extensive study. Just a gut feel.

[Markus Heinsohn]

Originally Posted by Roy Tucker

I think rather than agents, have extensions be based more on the players' personality. Loyal players are more likely to sign. Players who want to play for a winner will look at your team's record to see if they want an extension. Greedy players will either refuse to negotiate or ask for the moon. And of course all that could be intertwined, but I do think more often than not, top players should ask for a high number or say they want to test free agency.

That's already how it works.

[jpeters1734]

Exactly. I feel there's no need for agents. The concept is already there. That guy with high greed already has a boras like agent. It's just not represented specifically in the game. I think it's fine the way it is

[JMDurron]

Originally Posted by Markus Heinsohn

That's already how it works.

How does it work if player personalities/morale are turned off?

I ask because I've often wondered if these ratings are still used to help determine contract demands even if personalities/morale are not used.