Contract negotiations processes I wish could be tweaked in 15

beorn · 11-18-2013, 05:04 PM

AMMY DRAFT PICK SIGNINGS AND BONUSES
a) The demands themselves seem way too good an indicator of actual player quality, at least the high level demands. This effectively makes scouting less important. Salary demand should not be a better determiner of player quality than scout's opinion.

I understand that in real life, the two things tend to coincide. But looking at it from a real life GMs perspective (the thing we are trying to recreate), the player is asking for a lot because scouts think well of him, not the team thinks well of him because the player is asking for a lot.

Perhaps demands could correlate with OSA ratings, which are sort of consensus "conventional wisdom" evaluation of the player.

b) Ammy pick negotiations feel wrong. Regardless of whether the player is supposed to be easy or hard to sign, you almost always have to look at the player demand and the slot value and offer 100% of the higher number. I'd suggest that players demands prior to the draft should be "top five pick" or "first round pick" meaning that regardless of where they go, they expect to get the established slot for that level. The especially greedy and self assured could ask for "record bonus."

Then, after the draft, the GM should be confronted with one number, the actual bonus demand -- not what the slot is, not what the player said he would demand, but what his agent actually demands. If the player was rated more difficult to sign, then this number would be likely higher than expected, if easy to sign, perhaps lower. But since this is meant to simulate negotiation, this is an opening offer.

The team should be able to accept the offer, ending negotiations. (No text about needing to offer AT LEAST what is demanded. That's not how negotiations work.) If the team offers less, the player might accept, might offer a middle ground, might break off negotiations (especially of a high school player), or might get pissed off and demand even more than he originally did. The easy-hard scale should affect the odds as to how the player will react to an offer below his original demand.

IN SEASON FREE AGENT OFFERS
It's not a number one priority, but it really does not feel right to have scrubs who are out of work during the season taking several days to respond to a contract offer. Let's face it, a real life GM would just say nevermind and call someone else.

CONTRACT EXTENSION OFFERS CLOSE TO THE DEADLINE
Far too often in online play I've seen a team offer a contract extension several days prior to the free agent deadline, get a verbal "sounds good", and then have the deadline pass without a signing. Again, this does not feel right.

One might say that the team should have made the offer earlier, but that is not always practical. Money freed up by not offering other players arbitration or by not executing other players' options is often not freed up until the season is over, leaving limited time.

In real life, people scurry to meet deadlines. They might use them strategically to create a crisis and raise their demands, but they do not just go silent, at least not routinely.

As it is now, the real contract offer deadline is an unannounced day several days prior to the published one, and I can't see how that is a good thing.

SCOUTING AMMIES

Not exactly a contract process, but I'll toss it in here anyway:

Re-scouting ammies does not improve the quality of the scouting report. I've tried it many times in real leagues plus in test leagues with highly granular 1-100 ratings.

It seems to me that it would be highly realistic to have the game system set up so that your scouts could take a closer look at some of the available ammies and improve the quality of the reports by doing so.

Matt Arnold · 11-18-2013, 05:17 PM

Entirely agree, on at least a few points.

Last season, I was going right to the FA deadline to decide on who to re-sign. I finally narrowed it down, and gave offers to my top C and LF for 4 year deals. I advance to arbitration a couple days later, and I lose both arbitration cases? I think back and even though the players "accepted" my deals, they didn't process in time.

It should be simple - right before the arbitration deadline, the game just needs to go clear out everyone's queue of contract negotiations. If they accepted a deal, then it gets processed. If they rejected the deal, then you get the email rejection and have a last chance to back out of offering arbitration if you were otherwise planning to.

I like your proposed entry draft suggestions, but I would still keep the "slot" amount listed in the UI, if only to have a sense of how far above or below the expected amount they should sign for is visible.

MrDov · 11-19-2013, 03:11 AM

I do agree that when it comes to the signing process of draft picks it should be changed to be a little more difficult to sign everyone. I never look at the asking price a player has, so maybe I've gotten lucky missing extremely greedy players, but I've not once had an issue signing all my top picks and staying under budget. It seems the guys that ask for a lot are either 1st round players, so obviously worth it, or end of the draft guys, players that you would never ever consider meeting their demands. I think a few more high demand guys should be sprinkled throughout the draft, especially in rounds 2-10. Guys where you actually need to think about whether their asking price is worth it or not. Maybe make you decide between signing your 3rd round pick or signing your 5th and 6th round picks. Things like that.

I really like your suggestion in point b). Maybe even have especially greedy players wait to sign and their demands would change based on other bonuses signed by other picks.

11-18-2013, 05:04 PM	#1
beorn All Star Starter Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: near Rochester, NY Posts: 1,269	Contract negotiations processes I wish could be tweaked in 15 AMMY DRAFT PICK SIGNINGS AND BONUSES a) The demands themselves seem way too good an indicator of actual player quality, at least the high level demands. This effectively makes scouting less important. Salary demand should not be a better determiner of player quality than scout's opinion. I understand that in real life, the two things tend to coincide. But looking at it from a real life GMs perspective (the thing we are trying to recreate), the player is asking for a lot because scouts think well of him, not the team thinks well of him because the player is asking for a lot. Perhaps demands could correlate with OSA ratings, which are sort of consensus "conventional wisdom" evaluation of the player. b) Ammy pick negotiations feel wrong. Regardless of whether the player is supposed to be easy or hard to sign, you almost always have to look at the player demand and the slot value and offer 100% of the higher number. I'd suggest that players demands prior to the draft should be "top five pick" or "first round pick" meaning that regardless of where they go, they expect to get the established slot for that level. The especially greedy and self assured could ask for "record bonus." Then, after the draft, the GM should be confronted with one number, the actual bonus demand -- not what the slot is, not what the player said he would demand, but what his agent actually demands. If the player was rated more difficult to sign, then this number would be likely higher than expected, if easy to sign, perhaps lower. But since this is meant to simulate negotiation, this is an opening offer. The team should be able to accept the offer, ending negotiations. (No text about needing to offer AT LEAST what is demanded. That's not how negotiations work.) If the team offers less, the player might accept, might offer a middle ground, might break off negotiations (especially of a high school player), or might get pissed off and demand even more than he originally did. The easy-hard scale should affect the odds as to how the player will react to an offer below his original demand. IN SEASON FREE AGENT OFFERS It's not a number one priority, but it really does not feel right to have scrubs who are out of work during the season taking several days to respond to a contract offer. Let's face it, a real life GM would just say nevermind and call someone else. CONTRACT EXTENSION OFFERS CLOSE TO THE DEADLINE Far too often in online play I've seen a team offer a contract extension several days prior to the free agent deadline, get a verbal "sounds good", and then have the deadline pass without a signing. Again, this does not feel right. One might say that the team should have made the offer earlier, but that is not always practical. Money freed up by not offering other players arbitration or by not executing other players' options is often not freed up until the season is over, leaving limited time. In real life, people scurry to meet deadlines. They might use them strategically to create a crisis and raise their demands, but they do not just go silent, at least not routinely. As it is now, the real contract offer deadline is an unannounced day several days prior to the published one, and I can't see how that is a good thing. SCOUTING AMMIES Not exactly a contract process, but I'll toss it in here anyway: Re-scouting ammies does not improve the quality of the scouting report. I've tried it many times in real leagues plus in test leagues with highly granular 1-100 ratings. It seems to me that it would be highly realistic to have the game system set up so that your scouts could take a closer look at some of the available ammies and improve the quality of the reports by doing so. __________________ Commish of Dog Days Baseball Commish Pennant Chase Baseball League (PCBL) Commish and Blue Jays GM Extra Innings Baseball

11-18-2013, 05:17 PM	#2
Matt Arnold OOTP Developer Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Here and there Posts: 14,143	Entirely agree, on at least a few points. Last season, I was going right to the FA deadline to decide on who to re-sign. I finally narrowed it down, and gave offers to my top C and LF for 4 year deals. I advance to arbitration a couple days later, and I lose both arbitration cases? I think back and even though the players "accepted" my deals, they didn't process in time. It should be simple - right before the arbitration deadline, the game just needs to go clear out everyone's queue of contract negotiations. If they accepted a deal, then it gets processed. If they rejected the deal, then you get the email rejection and have a last chance to back out of offering arbitration if you were otherwise planning to. I like your proposed entry draft suggestions, but I would still keep the "slot" amount listed in the UI, if only to have a sense of how far above or below the expected amount they should sign for is visible.

11-19-2013, 03:11 AM	#3
MrDov Minors (Triple A) Join Date: Aug 2012 Posts: 275	I do agree that when it comes to the signing process of draft picks it should be changed to be a little more difficult to sign everyone. I never look at the asking price a player has, so maybe I've gotten lucky missing extremely greedy players, but I've not once had an issue signing all my top picks and staying under budget. It seems the guys that ask for a lot are either 1st round players, so obviously worth it, or end of the draft guys, players that you would never ever consider meeting their demands. I think a few more high demand guys should be sprinkled throughout the draft, especially in rounds 2-10. Guys where you actually need to think about whether their asking price is worth it or not. Maybe make you decide between signing your 3rd round pick or signing your 5th and 6th round picks. Things like that. I really like your suggestion in point b). Maybe even have especially greedy players wait to sign and their demands would change based on other bonuses signed by other picks.