Questions on financials: inflation and back-end loaded contracts?

le receveur · 11-01-2013, 01:35 PM

So i have been running (GM role) my team for 3 years

, default MLB structure, still not sure ready to move into my own design... Started figuring out some of the salary features like team options, that i intend to decline, still counting towards my expected payroll so owner won't let me have the money to extend other player until i release or trade the dead weight...so all good so far:

2 questions have come up

1) Is there any inflation assumption anywhere in the system as time go, or do i assume constant dollar, as years go by?

2) Often when i make contract offers to players, I get a message from my owner that the proposed contract is not level in $ enough (maybe i should take over the Marlins

)... Is there a rule of thumb of what is allowable, or is that owner specific?

btw, if i should not start a new thread with each no question please feel free to let me know

Déjà Bru · 11-01-2013, 07:20 PM

1) Not unless you are playing historically and choose to import historical financials every season. If not, or if you do and you reach 2012 and go beyond, I believe your league's financial structure will remain unchanged; i.e., no inflation.

2) Not sure what you mean. Is the game not allowing you to "heavy up" some years and "lighten up" others in a multi-year contract offer? That could be due to projected budgets limits for one year or another. Or maybe you are offering less than the minimum in one of those years. If I experiment in my game and find out something, I'll come back to post.

le receveur · 11-01-2013, 09:44 PM

hi. ok i'll try to make my 2nd one more clear

sometimes i would do a something like 3/8/12/16 over 4 years, and get message Owner does not want salaries where the variations are so wide, do something more level... (so not a not enough money message).

not constant however...sometimes i am able.

Déjà Bru · 11-03-2013, 12:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by le receveur

hi. ok i'll try to make my 2nd one more clear

sometimes i would do a something like 3/8/12/16 over 4 years, and get message Owner does not want salaries where the variations are so wide, do something more level... (so not a not enough money message).

not constant however...sometimes i am able.

I've never seen that message, but then again I have never offered such a lop-sided contract. It probably has to do with the calculation that the AI does in projecting your salary/budget structure for the third and fourth year; maybe it cannot do such a projection in that circumstance or, having done so, has determined that you will not have enough available money in those years.

So to answer your original question (by not answering it, unfortunately), I am unaware of any "rule of thumb" in this regard. There probably isn't any such rule as the rejection is based on analysis of your current budget, your owner's personality as to financial matters, the prevailing salary/fiscal structure in your league, etc.

tejdog1 · 11-05-2013, 09:07 PM

I get that message, too. A good rule of thumb I've found is to keep the differences in year to year salary under 1.5m.

So 5/6.5/8/9.5/11. It's dumb because it doesn't mirror IRL contract structures (especially for pre-arby/first year arby extensions for young players), but whatcha gonna do.

TGH-Adfabre · 11-05-2013, 10:01 PM

I have done some massively back loaded contracts. I have not seen that message. I think in version 13 there was a change, before that you could not offer a contract that one year was more than double the salary of another. Now you can have huge differences. Maybe not as much as you are trying but you can do it. I did a really remedial test when the change was made but I cannot remember the largest difference in salaries I could get the game to accept. It was big though, maybe $20 million or more?

le receveur · 11-06-2013, 01:06 PM

thanks. yeah, i have not been able to reproduce the message, but i swear it was about levelling, since i was attempting to go over my salary crunch in early years. 2 years later, and all seems better, i did have many backloaded contracts which have now expired... maybe the owner was worried about a bubble.

11-01-2013, 01:35 PM	#1
le receveur All Star Starter Join Date: Oct 2013 Location: canada Posts: 1,736	Questions on financials: inflation and back-end loaded contracts? So i have been running (GM role) my team for 3 years , default MLB structure, still not sure ready to move into my own design... Started figuring out some of the salary features like team options, that i intend to decline, still counting towards my expected payroll so owner won't let me have the money to extend other player until i release or trade the dead weight...so all good so far: 2 questions have come up 1) Is there any inflation assumption anywhere in the system as time go, or do i assume constant dollar, as years go by? 2) Often when i make contract offers to players, I get a message from my owner that the proposed contract is not level in $ enough (maybe i should take over the Marlins )... Is there a rule of thumb of what is allowable, or is that owner specific? btw, if i should not start a new thread with each no question please feel free to let me know

11-01-2013, 07:20 PM	#2
Déjà Bru Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Long Island Posts: 11,742	1) Not unless you are playing historically and choose to import historical financials every season. If not, or if you do and you reach 2012 and go beyond, I believe your league's financial structure will remain unchanged; i.e., no inflation. 2) Not sure what you mean. Is the game not allowing you to "heavy up" some years and "lighten up" others in a multi-year contract offer? That could be due to projected budgets limits for one year or another. Or maybe you are offering less than the minimum in one of those years. If I experiment in my game and find out something, I'll come back to post. __________________ - Bru

11-05-2013, 09:07 PM	#5
tejdog1 All Star Starter Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: Danbury, CT Posts: 1,654	I get that message, too. A good rule of thumb I've found is to keep the differences in year to year salary under 1.5m. So 5/6.5/8/9.5/11. It's dumb because it doesn't mirror IRL contract structures (especially for pre-arby/first year arby extensions for young players), but whatcha gonna do. __________________ It's amazing How you make your face just like a wall How you take your heart and turn it off How I turn my head and lose it all And it's unnerving How just one move puts me by myself There you go just trusting someone else Now I know I put us both through hell ~Matchbox 20, "Leave" Everyone knows it's spelled "TRAID", not trade

11-05-2013, 10:01 PM	#6
TGH-Adfabre Hall Of Famer Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 2,601	I have done some massively back loaded contracts. I have not seen that message. I think in version 13 there was a change, before that you could not offer a contract that one year was more than double the salary of another. Now you can have huge differences. Maybe not as much as you are trying but you can do it. I did a really remedial test when the change was made but I cannot remember the largest difference in salaries I could get the game to accept. It was big though, maybe $20 million or more? __________________ You mock me, therefore I am My wife

11-01-2013, 09:44 PM	#3
le receveur All Star Starter Join Date: Oct 2013 Location: canada Posts: 1,736	hi. ok i'll try to make my 2nd one more clear sometimes i would do a something like 3/8/12/16 over 4 years, and get message Owner does not want salaries where the variations are so wide, do something more level... (so not a not enough money message). not constant however...sometimes i am able.

11-06-2013, 01:06 PM	#7
le receveur All Star Starter Join Date: Oct 2013 Location: canada Posts: 1,736	thanks. yeah, i have not been able to reproduce the message, but i swear it was about levelling, since i was attempting to go over my salary crunch in early years. 2 years later, and all seems better, i did have many backloaded contracts which have now expired... maybe the owner was worried about a bubble.