Insane contract...and it's not how high it went! - Page 2

gmo · 08-11-2004, 10:21 PM

Just to throw something else into the discussion for possible consideration involving the free agency process... Seems to me at least some players have a willingness to lower their demands as time proceeds through the free agency period. The most extreme cases would be the players who simply do not sign but then take much less after free agency than they could have gotten signing during free agency. I have no evidence but I believe I have seen players I have considered bidding for, seen they were asking more than I wanted to pay, checked later when, and saw they were asking for somewhat less. Signing bonuses work this way in the draft, right?

Pietro Dulce · 08-11-2004, 10:44 PM

The problem here seems to be a created player. I ran a league once where the exact same thing happened, a player I created to bring in FA to spice up the offseason when offered would always take the last offer entered. The only real way around this is to FTP all offers, but if you have a system that prohibits that, you have to use another workaround. The commisioner has to himself determine the best contract for the player in question.

This cannot be done if the commish has a team or is connected to another team somehow (friend of a GM or such). It has to be completely unbiased. One could mask the offering teams somehow (such as owners swapping team names with the commisioner blind to who is whom) and then the best contract can be decided on.

Total dollars, length of contract would be most important. However this takes out other factors such as play availability or winning (which I don't believe the game always takes into account properly anyways).

Hope this helps.

P.S. This also seems to happen with players who are edited a great deal also.

Another Mike D · 08-12-2004, 07:27 AM

Edited out, see next post.

Another Mike D · 08-12-2004, 09:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pietro Dulce

The problem here seems to be a created player. I ran a league once where the exact same thing happened, a player I created to bring in FA to spice up the offseason when offered would always take the last offer entered. The only real way around this is to FTP all offers, but if you have a system that prohibits that, you have to use another workaround. The commisioner has to himself determine the best contract for the player in question.

Hope this helps.

P.S. This also seems to happen with players who are edited a great deal also.

Thanks, I went back and duplicated the file and ran things again and you are correct. If I tried an "undercutting deal" on an established player, they didn't seem to care. Only when I bid on a created player do they prefer the last bid submitted and pay no attention to anything else. I can't really fault the beta team for not picking up on this as I'm sure it is not often people create players and put them in FA, but I think this should be fixed and noted as a bug so other commishes do not fall into the same trap.

mad0die · 08-12-2004, 09:45 AM

I wonder if this affects imported historical players as well. One of my leagues imports 'MLB Defectors' and this could explain them accepting some offers that were lower than others were claiming to have made.

Dan Theman · 08-12-2004, 10:10 AM

This seems like a simple logic fix. Whatever function that sorts and then rejects lesser offers is simply not built into the created player. Anybody post this in the support forum, yet?

I doubt this effects historical players, as they're generated in different ways.

Dwolfson20 · 08-12-2004, 11:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dan Theman

This seems like a simple logic fix. Whatever function that sorts and then rejects lesser offers is simply not built into the created player. Anybody post this in the support forum, yet?

http://www.ootpdevelopments.com/boar...449#post814449

rem · 08-12-2004, 11:44 PM

Why wouldn't you FTP all offers?

sporr · 08-13-2004, 10:38 AM

This does sound like a bug.

That said, I would be very careful about asking the game to be programmed to only take the highest offer. There are many factors IRL that contribute to where a player will sign. Players don't always take the top money offer out there. For the sake of realism, I would like the game to still have players sign for less sometimes. Just as in real life, we (the owners) don't have to know the reasons for the player doing this. Sometimes it could just be personal reasons.

Karros270 · 08-13-2004, 12:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sporr

This does sound like a bug.

That said, I would be very careful about asking the game to be programmed to only take the highest offer. There are many factors IRL that contribute to where a player will sign. Players don't always take the top money offer out there. For the sake of realism, I would like the game to still have players sign for less sometimes. Just as in real life, we (the owners) don't have to know the reasons for the player doing this. Sometimes it could just be personal reasons.

If the game ever assigns cities to players it would be great to see them sometimes give a hometown discount, especially in their later years as seems to happen frequently in MLB.

ctorg · 08-13-2004, 01:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Karros270

If the game ever assigns cities to players it would be great to see them sometimes give a hometown discount, especially in their later years as seems to happen frequently in MLB.

Or some may just not want to play at home and refuse to sign there. Maybe they hate where they grew up. Either way, it would be cool to see players react differently and with purpose to particular places. Perhaps some sort of file could be made to determine the relations of people born in particular places to others, and it could be randomized off that. Also, it would be cool if players were consistent from season to season regarding where they will not sign (unless it's just for want of a winning team, of course).

Another Mike D · 08-13-2004, 10:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sporr

This does sound like a bug.

That said, I would be very careful about asking the game to be programmed to only take the highest offer. There are many factors IRL that contribute to where a player will sign. Players don't always take the top money offer out there. For the sake of realism, I would like the game to still have players sign for less sometimes. Just as in real life, we (the owners) don't have to know the reasons for the player doing this. Sometimes it could just be personal reasons.

I agree. In OOTP usually this is exactly how it works 99% of the time. The players don't really take less to go to winning teams (as long as you fit the qualification of "play for winner" it goes to the highest bidder). Many leagues used created players, so the fix should just be to assign the same contract logic to their signing as normal players. Obviously something was ommitted in the player creation that just makes them favor the latest offer they get no matter how crappy.

Anachronism · 09-29-2004, 08:43 PM

Actually... I'm not sure it is the AI logic between choosing a contract... what I would suspect is something in the way the game stores bids to players. I have a feeling that "created" players might have been overlooked when it came to the way the game "remembers" bids - so for the created player, the last bid is the "only" bid he is aware of....

jaxmagicman · 09-30-2004, 07:35 PM

Come on, its not all about the money. Some players sign because they like the team.

scprideandms · 10-01-2004, 01:11 PM

link broken

Vezna31 · 10-01-2004, 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sporr

This does sound like a bug.

That said, I would be very careful about asking the game to be programmed to only take the highest offer. There are many factors IRL that contribute to where a player will sign. Players don't always take the top money offer out there. For the sake of realism, I would like the game to still have players sign for less sometimes. Just as in real life, we (the owners) don't have to know the reasons for the player doing this. Sometimes it could just be personal reasons.

Absolutely correct...Curt Schilling accepted less money to stay with the Phillies than he would have gotten in free agency with his first re-signing with them back in the '90s because he loved the city and he didn't want to move his family.

Eckstein 4 Prez · 10-01-2004, 06:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

Well, there is a certain logic to it.

I hereby offer you eight cents an hour to quit your current job and become my personal valet.

Carlton · 10-01-2004, 08:59 PM

Just looking at the intial offers

I see Cincy is the only one who offered 4 years

The AI is really buggy when it comes to years...so even a 20m at 5 years will bring the dreaded (I don't want to be tied up so long)

That 6 year offer...he could have offered the moon and the AI would reject it

08-12-2004, 07:27 AM	#23
Another Mike D All Star Reserve Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: atl Posts: 891	Edited out, see next post. __________________ San Diego Padres NexGen Baseball League Cleveland Indians United Baseball League Co-commissioner of United Baseball League Last edited by Another Mike D; 08-12-2004 at 09:28 AM.

08-12-2004, 09:45 AM	#25
mad0die All Star Reserve Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: TX Posts: 912	I wonder if this affects imported historical players as well. One of my leagues imports 'MLB Defectors' and this could explain them accepting some offers that were lower than others were claiming to have made. __________________ Commish GUBA

08-12-2004, 11:44 PM	#28
rem Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: College Park, Md. Posts: 5,024	Why wouldn't you FTP all offers? __________________ OTBA: Washington Filibusters CLBR: Minnesota Twins 2005 Winner of LL's Pick the Loser Contest! - 15-0

09-29-2004, 08:43 PM	#33
Anachronism All Star Reserve Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Great White North Posts: 945	Actually... I'm not sure it is the AI logic between choosing a contract... what I would suspect is something in the way the game stores bids to players. I have a feeling that "created" players might have been overlooked when it came to the way the game "remembers" bids - so for the created player, the last bid is the "only" bid he is aware of.... __________________ "Ruth did it on Beer and Hotdogs..."

09-30-2004, 07:35 PM	#34
jaxmagicman Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Retired defloration-maker living in Myrtle Beach, SC Posts: 7,801	Come on, its not all about the money. Some players sign because they like the team. __________________ See ID Major League Baseball trademarks and copyrights are used with permission of MLB Advanced Media, L.P. Minor League Baseball trademarks and copyrights are used with the permission of Minor League Baseball. All rights reserved.

08-11-2004, 10:21 PM	#21
gmo Hall Of Famer Join Date: May 2002 Location: Longmont, CO Posts: 3,152	Just to throw something else into the discussion for possible consideration involving the free agency process... Seems to me at least some players have a willingness to lower their demands as time proceeds through the free agency period. The most extreme cases would be the players who simply do not sign but then take much less after free agency than they could have gotten signing during free agency. I have no evidence but I believe I have seen players I have considered bidding for, seen they were asking more than I wanted to pay, checked later when, and saw they were asking for somewhat less. Signing bonuses work this way in the draft, right?

08-11-2004, 10:44 PM	#22
Pietro Dulce Bat Boy Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 8	The problem here seems to be a created player. I ran a league once where the exact same thing happened, a player I created to bring in FA to spice up the offseason when offered would always take the last offer entered. The only real way around this is to FTP all offers, but if you have a system that prohibits that, you have to use another workaround. The commisioner has to himself determine the best contract for the player in question. This cannot be done if the commish has a team or is connected to another team somehow (friend of a GM or such). It has to be completely unbiased. One could mask the offering teams somehow (such as owners swapping team names with the commisioner blind to who is whom) and then the best contract can be decided on. Total dollars, length of contract would be most important. However this takes out other factors such as play availability or winning (which I don't believe the game always takes into account properly anyways). Hope this helps. P.S. This also seems to happen with players who are edited a great deal also.

08-13-2004, 10:38 AM	#29
sporr Global Moderator Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Muscatine, IA Posts: 8,277	This does sound like a bug. That said, I would be very careful about asking the game to be programmed to only take the highest offer. There are many factors IRL that contribute to where a player will sign. Players don't always take the top money offer out there. For the sake of realism, I would like the game to still have players sign for less sometimes. Just as in real life, we (the owners) don't have to know the reasons for the player doing this. Sometimes it could just be personal reasons.

10-01-2004, 01:11 PM	#35
scprideandms All Star Starter Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: N KY, 25 miles from Cincy Posts: 1,314	link broken __________________ Change your playground + change your playfriends + change your playtoys + change your playtime = Change your life. If you keep on doing what you've always done you'll keep on gitting what you've always gotten.

10-01-2004, 08:59 PM	#38
Carlton Hall Of Famer Join Date: Mar 2002 Posts: 3,765	Just looking at the intial offers I see Cincy is the only one who offered 4 years The AI is really buggy when it comes to years...so even a 20m at 5 years will bring the dreaded (I don't want to be tied up so long) That 6 year offer...he could have offered the moon and the AI would reject it