Fictional League Financials

[Friendly_Beaver]

So I started my first fictional league, 16 teams 2 leagues mostly cities that already have MLB teams. I noticed after the initial draft that players were given service time and random contracts, I'm ok with that.

But it seems the financials were generated after the draft, I have 5 teams that have negative money for extensions and free agents, ironically places like Boston and New York were given "low Market sizes" and fan interest and have no money.

What's the best way to handle this? Manually edit those teams financials so they can at least afford they players they drafted or do a hard reset of all financials across the league?

[Cadieux39]

I've set up two two fictional leagues and have run into a very similar issue to you. Here is what you can expect, what you can fix, and what you can change.

First off there is an option for the inaugural league draft to use budgets based on city size. Your bigger markets will have a leg up on competition this way.

However even with adjusted budgets right from the inaugural draft I believe all the clubs draft to have the best team possible. Which means the small market teams draft above their allocated budgets.

In both fictional leagues I've created many teams had blown their budget after the inaugural draft. You can fix this by editing the budget of those teams. Be aware the game is going to balance itself, even if you inflate a city's budget expect that budget to shrink if its a small market city.

My suggestion is to simply let the game balance itself, it will take 2-3 seasons. But eventually the big market teams will see its budget expand, the small market teams will dump, trade, and lose all of its star players.

If you're looking for a desperate quick fix, then go edit the financials of the clubs in question. If you increase its market size and fan interest the larger budgets you give them should stick. (I haven't tested this)

I find it strange that New York has small market size, in both my leagues New York had a market size of Astronomical by default.

Final note, In both my leagues Boston has average market sizes and does not compete with the big dogs. OOTP deals with city sizes in an interesting fashion, in a way its very literal. Boston itself is only 600'000 people, OOTP would treat it the same as Quebec, Winnipeg in Canada, or Memphis and Las Vegas etc etc. Boston's Metro area is massive, so if you want to account for this and make it more realistic then absolutely change those values manually.

Hope this was helpful.

[thirdsaint]

Cadieux39 is spot on for financials. As far as service time goes, you can go into settings and reset the service time to 0 days for everyone. I do this so that way there's no free agency until all the arbitration years play out, etc. so it's more realistic, to me, of a new league starting.

[Friendly_Beaver]

Originally Posted by thirdsaint

Cadieux39 is spot on for financials. As far as service time goes, you can go into settings and reset the service time to 0 days for everyone. I do this so that way there's no free agency until all the arbitration years play out, etc. so it's more realistic, to me, of a new league starting.

I thought about doing this but then just decided to treat it like we absolved a league and recognized service time, I'm afraid of guys clogging up the system and not letting younger guys rise if teams can hang on to 33 year old stars for league min then arb for 6 years.

[Friendly_Beaver]

Originally Posted by Cadieux39

I've set up two two fictional leagues and have run into a very similar issue to you. Here is what you can expect, what you can fix, and what you can change.

First off there is an option for the inaugural league draft to use budgets based on city size. Your bigger markets will have a leg up on competition this way.

However even with adjusted budgets right from the inaugural draft I believe all the clubs draft to have the best team possible. Which means the small market teams draft above their allocated budgets.

In both fictional leagues I've created many teams had blown their budget after the inaugural draft. You can fix this by editing the budget of those teams. Be aware the game is going to balance itself, even if you inflate a city's budget expect that budget to shrink if its a small market city.

My suggestion is to simply let the game balance itself, it will take 2-3 seasons. But eventually the big market teams will see its budget expand, the small market teams will dump, trade, and lose all of its star players.

If you're looking for a desperate quick fix, then go edit the financials of the clubs in question. If you increase its market size and fan interest the larger budgets you give them should stick. (I haven't tested this)

I find it strange that New York has small market size, in both my leagues New York had a market size of Astronomical by default.

Final note, In both my leagues Boston has average market sizes and does not compete with the big dogs. OOTP deals with city sizes in an interesting fashion, in a way its very literal. Boston itself is only 600'000 people, OOTP would treat it the same as Quebec, Winnipeg in Canada, or Memphis and Las Vegas etc etc. Boston's Metro area is massive, so if you want to account for this and make it more realistic then absolutely change those values manually.

Hope this was helpful.

Thanks I think I'll let it figure its self out, however I'm going to manually change the market size for Boston and New York. I'm wondering if I accidentally set it to something like Buffalo, NY instead of NY, NY.

Thanks again.

[Cadieux39]

It's a good idea to check city locations for teams. If you suck at spelling like I do it is possible that OOTP simply could not find a matching city and therefore gives you a default average market size and average fan interest.

In my league I had an issue with St.Louis, OOTP set it below average for its city settings and the club really sucked. Once i looked at editing the teams information i found that OOTP could not match a city to St.Louis. I think OOTP matches the spelling as St Louis or St. Louis. Trial and error i guess...

Commissioner mode has saved my tail many times as i've made lots of mistakes building fictional / historical leagues.

[Cinnamon J. Scudworth]

If it's the same as in prior versions of OOTP, I'm pretty sure that initial market size in a fictional league has absolutely nothing to do with the city name. If you have an inaugural draft, it's directly related to the contracts that the game generates for the drafted players.

[Friendly_Beaver]

Originally Posted by Cinnamon J. Scudworth

If it's the same as in prior versions of OOTP, I'm pretty sure that initial market size in a fictional league has absolutely nothing to do with the city name. If you have an inaugural draft, it's directly related to the contracts that the game generates for the drafted players.

Really? I guess I'll have to do some research when I get home and edit some cities, I wanted fictional but market size should really be according to the selected city. New York I can live with having low fan interest or loyalty in a fictional league but they should still have a massive market size.

[jpeters1734]

they only time city size influences market size is during inaugural drafts and the budget is set to reflect city size. I personally like to apply the same budget to all teams. It's much more balanced that way

[Friendly_Beaver]

Originally Posted by jpeters1734

they only time city size influences market size is during inaugural drafts and the budget is set to reflect city size. I personally like to apply the same budget to all teams. It's much more balanced that way

But in the long run how would this work? I'd like my league to have distinct franchise traits. Like Tampa who wins by great drafting and player development but often has to trade away players before free agency to build back up.

Under this method would teams eventually be a low budget team or would they always be the same?

[Cadieux39]

Long term in a fictional league really anything can happen.

Here are my experiences.

My first league was set in 1978. Ran until 1986 when i accidentally broke it. (Whole other story)

The two new york teams dominated, they had big budgets, they spent on Scouting Development and always got the star players.

Some average teams climbed to the top, Kansas City and Vancouver both got young stars and dominated. Both clubs improved to championship competing clubs. Their budgets also grew to accommodate the talent, but it didn't grow to the point of Toronto, Brooklyn, New York or Los Angeles budget.

The crappy teams were Tampa Bay, Nashville and surprisingly St.Louis. I noticed later St.Louis is because OOTP didn't recognize the location. Nashville and Tampa consistently sucked. Slow growth, and players often leaving. They never got competitive.



Second fictional league set in 1946. (16 teams again) Played 5 years about to start the 1951 season.

New York, Brooklyn, Toronto and Los Angeles are still the dominant budget teams. They compete well and make the finals consistently.

Houston and St.Louis are mid budget teams who each had one great season and won a Championship. Overall these clubs play .500 ball.

Nashville and Seattle are the lame ducks, Small market teams just don't compete, neither team have grown into MoneyBall clubs. Nashville's struggle makes me consider moving them.

Interesting note is that Los Angeles despite being big budget have had two terrible years at the bottom, they have improved since.


All that to say, even in the small sample size i've played, the league is very organic. I'm not sure you can control how a team manages and conducts its business. It is great to imagine a story line where the small market team grows to compete, but unless you are building that story line yourself with your user controlled team, you really can't predict it. In a way that's the beauty of it. Each team will build its own history.


That said, there probably is a OOTP guru who can explain how modifying a teams strategy and managers preferences, you can build a network where a certain team is a pitching factory, a money ball genius, or dysfunctional money pit.

[Friendly_Beaver]

Originally Posted by Cadieux39

Long term in a fictional league really anything can happen.

Here are my experiences.

My first league was set in 1978. Ran until 1986 when i accidentally broke it. (Whole other story)

The two new york teams dominated, they had big budgets, they spent on Scouting Development and always got the star players.

Some average teams climbed to the top, Kansas City and Vancouver both got young stars and dominated. Both clubs improved to championship competing clubs. Their budgets also grew to accommodate the talent, but it didn't grow to the point of Toronto, Brooklyn, New York or Los Angeles budget.

The crappy teams were Tampa Bay, Nashville and surprisingly St.Louis. I noticed later St.Louis is because OOTP didn't recognize the location. Nashville and Tampa consistently sucked. Slow growth, and players often leaving. They never got competitive.



Second fictional league set in 1946. (16 teams again) Played 5 years about to start the 1951 season.

New York, Brooklyn, Toronto and Los Angeles are still the dominant budget teams. They compete well and make the finals consistently.

Houston and St.Louis are mid budget teams who each had one great season and won a Championship. Overall these clubs play .500 ball.

Nashville and Seattle are the lame ducks, Small market teams just don't compete, neither team have grown into MoneyBall clubs. Nashville's struggle makes me consider moving them.

Interesting note is that Los Angeles despite being big budget have had two terrible years at the bottom, they have improved since.


All that to say, even in the small sample size i've played, the league is very organic. I'm not sure you can control how a team manages and conducts its business. It is great to imagine a story line where the small market team grows to compete, but unless you are building that story line yourself with your user controlled team, you really can't predict it. In a way that's the beauty of it. Each team will build its own history.


That said, there probably is a OOTP guru who can explain how modifying a teams strategy and managers preferences, you can build a network where a certain team is a pitching factory, a money ball genius, or dysfunctional money pit.

Thanks again, I think it will be a trial and error for me as well. I may even take this league and simulate it about 10 years and see what's gone on and adjust some settings if I see things way out of whack and try again.

I think this is the only way to try and get something resembling what you want to see.