Creative Finances

[PSUColonel]

I cannot stand that I do no have the leeway to do some creative financing in OOTP. I am trying to resign a pitcher (Colby Lewis) to a fairly large contract, but my owner will not approve the deal because it goes over budget for year two. What this game refuses to acknowledge is the I have Roy Holliday signed through that second year to a team option worth 20 million. If I don't pick up this option (which I am not) I am actually saving the club 5 million, and getting a younger pitcher locked up for more years. What gives? If this is going to be a GM simulation, you have to allow for this type of thing...otherwise, what is the point?

Is there anything I can do? If I keep trying to lowball Lewis (which I shouldn't have to) he will eventually cut off negotiations

[byzeil]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

I cannot stand that I do no have the leeway to do some creative financing in OOTP. I am trying to resign a pitcher (Colby Lewis) to a fairly large contract, but my owner will not approve the deal because it goes over budget for year two. What this game refuses to acknowledge is the I have Roy Holliday signed through that second year to a team option worth 20 million. If I don't pick up this option (which I am not) I am actually saving the club 5 million, and getting a younger pitcher locked up for more years. What gives? If this is going to be a GM simulation, you have to allow for this type of thing...otherwise, what is the point?

Is there anything I can do? If I keep trying to lowball Lewis (which I shouldn't have to) he will eventually cut off negotiations

You could go into the editor and edit Halladay's contract and totally remove the option year. Then the AI wouldn't see that possible expense. Without the editor don't know what you can do. The AI is anticipating the worst case scenario, you picking up Halladay's TO.

[PSUColonel]

I would, but it feels like cheating because the AI cannot do the same. This really needs to be re-worked. I mean, how can one operate as a GM with very little to no financial flexibility. Markus needs to get a realistic working financial model...this stuff is for people who don't want to take the time to run an organization properly. The simplification model doesn't work for those who want to replicate the GM experience.

[byzeil]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

I would, but it feels like cheating because the AI cannot do the same. This really needs to be re-worked. I mean, how can one operate as a GM with very little to no financial flexibility. Markus needs to get a realistic working financial model...this stuff is for people who don't want to take the time to run an organization properly. The simplification model doesn't work for those who want to replicate the GM experience.

I agree. It could be built in that if come the time for the decision on the TO if the team does not have the budget room to exercise said option that it is automatically not picked up.

[endgame]

If you are adamant about spreading the 'flexibility' equally to both you and the AI, then you may consider (backup first, of course) utilizing the Assign or Adjust Fictional Finances function in the league setup. This will equally assign new finances/budgets across the board based on payroll in the league. It's a subtle maneuver- I use it every time I've run an Inaugural Draft because of the funky carryover of imaginary last year numbers to iron things out. Now whether it distinctly addresses your issue or not, it'll serve to mitigate it somewhat and likely realign your current budget room. FWIW, it's creative financing.

[PSUColonel]

I hate to say, but I have done a lot to get my organization right to a place I want it, and now my plans are ruined as a result of this. Kind of just kills it for me.

[endgame]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

I hate to say, but I have done a lot to get my organization right to a place I want it, and now my plans are ruined as a result of this. Kind of just kills it for me.

Well, yes and no. An option is an option. The game plans for utilizing that option. If you have made the decision NOT to spend the option, then reflect that by altering the contract. It isn't cheating to put into form your reality. If it were me, and I didn't use the suggestion I made previously, I do just that: make it clear the option is not going to apply AND I'd probably decide how Holliday will react, and if you have morale turned on, may decide to edit that. There IS a workaround, in fact quite a few, but it turns on an original commitment you already made so it's less a matter of the game's flexibility than it is your credibility, at least as far as the player would be concerned, isn't it?

[Bluenoser]

You are asking to do something that cannot be done. Basically, you want to make the decision on Halladay's option now instead of next year when the option comes due. You can't do that.

By deciding to use the $20M to sign Lewis, you've basically just told Halladay "Sorry Roy, we're not exercising the option no matter what you do next year. We're using the money on Lewis".

Halladay is now pissed and has no incentive to even try and pitch for you next season.

The players union is probably also pissed because you violated provisions in the CBA.


There's a reason that a specific date is selected for when the decision has to be made on options. Bad contracts always have a way of coming back to haunt you.

[OBSL Commish]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

I hate to say, but I have done a lot to get my organization right to a place I want it, and now my plans are ruined as a result of this. Kind of just kills it for me.

Edit Halladay's option out, sign Lewis, then re-edit Halladay's option back in. You should be fine.

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by Bluenoser

You are asking to do something that cannot be done. Basically, you want to make the decision on Halladay's option now instead of next year when the option comes due. You can't do that.

By deciding to use the $20M to sign Lewis, you've basically just told Halladay "Sorry Roy, we're not exercising the option no matter what you do next year. We're using the money on Lewis".

Halladay is now pissed and has no incentive to even try and pitch for you next season.

The players union is probably also pissed because you violated provisions in the CBA.


There's a reason that a specific date is selected for when the decision has to be made on options. Bad contracts always have a way of coming back to haunt you.

I hear ya..I guess I am just saying "I know the money is really there"

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by OBSL Commish

Edit Halladay's option out, sign Lewis, then re-edit Halladay's option back in. You should be fine.

but does the AI have that same option when dealing with it's contracts?

[PSUColonel]

I guess what I will have to do is not exercise the option, and then attempt to sign Lewis in Free Agency...which will of course cost me much more and cancel all of my free agency plans. I had 12 mill designated for contract extensions...is there any way to take that cash and apply it towards free agency?

EDIT: Although letting some players slated for arbitration, and not picking up Holliday's option, more cash should be available, no? How much I am not sure though...or how to even find out.

[injury log]

Originally Posted by byzeil

I agree. It could be built in that if come the time for the decision on the TO if the team does not have the budget room to exercise said option that it is automatically not picked up.

No, the game shouldn't do that, because when the option comes due, you'll have the alternative option to nontender some arbitration eligible players to free up cash to execute the option.

And while I do think the game should allow you to decline options before they come due, the financial system really shouldn't allow the user overmuch flexibility. Finances are only an interesting part of the game if they force you to make choices. If you can always sign whoever you want, there's no reason to have a financial system at all.

[RchW]

I agree with PSU it is frustrating. I have $43M for extensions and $9M for FA but I have all the players I really want signed already. I've had the best pitching in MLB for the last 4 seasons plus a good offense which went cold in the playoffs each time. I'd make a trade but can't get squat back for starting pitchers that would be 1 or 2 on most of the other 29 teams.

I have 3 or 4 seasons with no contract issues pending but I can't use the money.

[RchW]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

but does the AI have that same option when dealing with it's contracts?

No and it probably explains why AI teams can't seem to be consistently good. I haven't won a WS in 7 seasons but only 1 of the 11 AI WS winners and losers in that period made the playoffs more than 2 seasons in a row.

[le receveur]

Have you tried to drop the 2nd year salary, and spread across other years? i was able to sign a

10/8/13/14 extension (for a player who wanted 10/11/12/13) to go around my owner

[PSUColonel]

He is starting to get a little testy, so I think I will wait until the season is nearly over, and then try a backloaded deal and see if that works. If not, I'll try in free agency. I have 12 million for contract extensions, but he wants 15. He also wanted seven years, but at least I got him down to four..so it could make it tough for him to budge any further.

[Barkingturtle]

The option year must count against the budget.

Otherwise, you could sign all your players to enter their option years simultaneously, and you'd have a totally clean payroll.

[RchW]

Originally Posted by Barkingturtle

The option year must count against the budget.

I'm not an accountant so stand to be corrected but team options are not committed money except for the buyout. I fail to see how one must count such money against future payroll when the business has revenue. I don't think most businesses could operate that way. Could someone clarify this?

Originally Posted by Barkingturtle

Otherwise, you could sign all your players to enter their option years simultaneously, and you'd have a totally clean payroll.

It would be very difficult to arrange 25 players of different ages service time, contract lengths and dollar values to have co-incidental team option years.



See below; it's my contention that Corona's team option in 2069 should show only the $1M buyout vs $14.6M. I've made no commitment to pay him $14.6M. His contract calls for $1M. The same should apply to any player with a team option.

[PSUColonel]

Here is the financial look of my club...you can clearly see what I wanted to do.