The two things I really want in the new OOTP

[Jeffy25]

I have been campaigning for both for several years and they are at the core of my only frustration with the best baseball game ever made.

1. I would really like pre-arb and arb players and their contracts to be negotiated more closely with real life. Let's say I have Mike Stanton and I'm the Marlins and it's 2012. Currently if I go to talk to him about an extension when the guy has 4 years before he is a free agent and is still pre-arb. If I want to ask him what he wants, he wants something like 1 year and 6.5 million, which is basically me just giving him a raise from league min to 6.5 million for no reason. I should be able to make him a 4 year offer that buys out his remaining arb years at an elevator rate, so 650k in 2012, 3 mil in 2013, 6 mil in 2014, 9 mil in 2015 and then two club option years in 2016 and 2017 for 16 mil each. But under the current set up, you can't possibly get any Matt Moore, Evan Longoria contracts. I would like to be able to do that. Of course some players don't have to have any interest in it, but it would be a huge upgrade IMO. It's certainly the future of MLB contracts this next decade.
2. More difficulty getting the free agents I want every off-season. For me it's far too easy. If I have 9 targets, and I negotiate with each, I always get basically all of them, especially the minor league deals. This has to be the only thing that Baseball Mogul still has over OOTP. Players have interests. Teams they would rather play for, maybe it's because they are winners, maybe it's because they are from that teams area, maybe it's because of a particular player or coach on that team, or maybe it's just the money. I also like how you can make offers to a player, and then another team still has a chance to match or beat your offer, and you are also given that opportunity. So just because you offer a guy 5 years and 14 million, doesn't mean he either takes it or doesn't. He can take that offer to another team or ask you to match (if already in negotiations) another teams offer if he has interest in negotiating with you further. Or maybe you have to beat it because there is another offer on the table he likes better.
My dream world. Every free agent has a list of 4-8 teams he will even want to talk to. It will say under interests (and this is based on the players wants, where he is from, team mates, coaches, greed, if the team has been a winner for a few years in a row) something like CHC, BOS, MIL, HOU, STL, NYY, LAA as the teams he will be most interested in. It doesn't mean that player won't sign with an outside team, but it might take a little more work. Maybe more money, maybe the right years, maybe the right incentives to talk him into it. Or maybe he doesn't have other suitors.

I also wish that free agents actually wanted longer term deals like they get in real life. Pujols always seemed to sign 3 and 4 year deals in OOTP12, well he obviously got longer than that, and I think players in their prime years should be shooting for longer term years.

I would just really like the free agent process to be improved, it's currently my least favorite aspect of the game and I always have to put self imposed rules on myself and friends when we do solo play.


Speaking of targets. I think it would be neat if you could have a blank notes page when entering free agency where you type in, or maybe the scout makes suggestions for team needs every off-season. Something like a list of 5 notes. 1. Upgrade at CF. 2. A new number 3 starter 3. etc etc etc etc. That might be a little much, but it's something I always do any way off screen, could be cool if it was in the game too.

[MrPerfect]

Agree 100%

[Cras]

It seems to me that free agency is completely based on the market at that very moment. Meaning, they guy may want a long term deal, but if no teams are offering him that, it never gets to that point. What I guess I am saying is, the player (or really his agent), does not seem to do a good enough job driving up the market for his player. A good player should be assumed to have a good agent, a great player has a great agent, so it should then be harder to get a deal done (loyalty can still be worked in to this, as can location).

I would not have a problem seeing a guy sit in FA until spring training because he is holding out for a long term deal. As it stands now, an FA will only hold out that long if there is sufficient action. Teams keep uping the offers, so he drags his feet. There needs to be a mechanism that will have a player insist on the years, and drag his feet even when the fish aren't biting on the deal. But again, there should not be the feeling that it is robotic, that every guy in his situation will behave the same way. Some guys just want a deal, some guys want to sign for their home town, or will take that discount to stay put. But I see Fielder is still sitting out there in FA, because he wants his money and his years. In OOTP, he would have signed back in December for a three or four year deal, and not hold out for the Pujols type numbers he thinks he deserves.

[Erik]

Originally Posted by Jeffy25

Speaking of targets. I think it would be neat if you could have a blank notes page when entering free agency where you type in, or maybe the scout makes suggestions for team needs every off-season. Something like a list of 5 notes. 1. Upgrade at CF. 2. A new number 3 starter 3. etc etc etc etc. That might be a little much, but it's something I always do any way off screen, could be cool if it was in the game too.

Maybe taking this a step further - an email from your coach (or hitting/pitching coach) with a specific free agent in mind that they'd like for you to acquire. For example, and email from the team Manager saying something like, "I've always been real impressed with Eric Davis' leadership qualities. I think we can find a place for his bat in RF next season".

I think this would improve on some of the immersion of really feeling connected with the game.

[simcrazy]

Originally Posted by Cras

I would not have a problem seeing a guy sit in FA until spring training because he is holding out for a long term deal.

This really happens for top free agents. Most of the big guys are signed by the end of January. Off the top of my head, Edwin Jackson is probably the biggest name out there now.

[Cinnamon J. Scudworth]

Originally Posted by Jeffy25

Speaking of targets. I think it would be neat if you could have a blank notes page when entering free agency where you type in, or maybe the scout makes suggestions for team needs every off-season. Something like a list of 5 notes. 1. Upgrade at CF. 2. A new number 3 starter 3. etc etc etc etc. That might be a little much, but it's something I always do any way off screen, could be cool if it was in the game too.

I realize you are asking for a notes space, too, but on the scout suggestion, doesn't something like this already exist in the home screen in the comment about your owner noting that you are, for example, weak at first base, slightly weak in the bullpen, etc? Or does that only show up in preseason? I can't remember.

[John Madden]

You can always use the positional strength report, but I think he's looking for something different.

[Syd Thrift]

I'd like to see the earned run thing fixed too. Ideally you'd want earned runs to be calculated at the end of each inning. It is a little issue in the modern day game but a pretty big one if you use OOTP in error-high environments such as the 19th century.

[silvam14]

I guess it would be cool if you say signed a great manager like Tony LaRussa, that it would somehow affect the level of interest that someone like Albert Pujols would have in your organization from a free agent standpoint.

You could get an e-mail from Tony suggesting you "go get him" or even get an e-mail from Albert stating his desire to play for Tony.

That would be sweet

[simcrazy]

Originally Posted by Syd Thrift

I'd like to see the earned run thing fixed too. Ideally you'd want earned runs to be calculated at the end of each inning. It is a little issue in the modern day game but a pretty big one if you use OOTP in error-high environments such as the 19th century.

How are they calculated now? I mentioned this in my thread.

[dave1927p]

Originally Posted by Erik

Maybe taking this a step further - an email from your coach (or hitting/pitching coach) with a specific free agent in mind that they'd like for you to acquire. For example, and email from the team Manager saying something like, "I've always been real impressed with Eric Davis' leadership qualities. I think we can find a place for his bat in RF next season".

I think this would improve on some of the immersion of really feeling connected with the game.

my response to my Manager or coach would be to bug off - I get the players and you COACH

[Syd Thrift]

Originally Posted by simcrazy

How are they calculated now? I mentioned this in my thread.

After each individual at-bat, and at that it reaaaaally gives guys the benefit of the doubt. Like if a guy reaches with no outs, the next guy reaches on an error, and the third guy homers, in game neither of the two guys on base would count as an earned run. IRL the first runner's run scored wasn't affected by the error so he should also be counted as earned.

The other issue I see is the two out rule. If a guy gets 2 outs, gives up an error and a hit, and then is replaced by a guy who gives up a home run, I am almost positive that the game will grant all 3 of those runs as unearned when irl the second pitcher's run should be earned.

Again, in the modern context you might see this come up every 5 games at the most. 100+ years ago, you get situations where if you start a league in 1876 and okay to today, the top 20 guys in your league history in lifetime and single season ERA will almost all be 19th century guys.

[simcrazy]

Originally Posted by Syd Thrift

After each individual at-bat, and at that it reaaaaally gives guys the benefit of the doubt. Like if a guy reaches with no outs, the next guy reaches on an error, and the third guy homers, in game neither of the two guys on base would count as an earned run. IRL the first runner's run scored wasn't affected by the error so he should also be counted as earned.

The other issue I see is the two out rule. If a guy gets 2 outs, gives up an error and a hit, and then is replaced by a guy who gives up a home run, I am almost positive that the game will grant all 3 of those runs as unearned when irl the second pitcher's run should be earned.

Again, in the modern context you might see this come up every 5 games at the most. 100+ years ago, you get situations where if you start a league in 1876 and okay to today, the top 20 guys in your league history in lifetime and single season ERA will almost all be 19th century guys.

That should definitely be fixed. It basically means almost all pitcher's ERAs - a very basic stat - aren't calculated correctly.

You are wrong about your example. The inning reconstruction does not change for when there is a pitching change - all of those runs should be unearned.

Every 5 games, to me, is significant.

[Biggio509]

Originally Posted by Syd Thrift

After each individual at-bat, and at that it reaaaaally gives guys the benefit of the doubt. Like if a guy reaches with no outs, the next guy reaches on an error, and the third guy homers, in game neither of the two guys on base would count as an earned run. IRL the first runner's run scored wasn't affected by the error so he should also be counted as earned.

The other issue I see is the two out rule. If a guy gets 2 outs, gives up an error and a hit, and then is replaced by a guy who gives up a home run, I am almost positive that the game will grant all 3 of those runs as unearned when irl the second pitcher's run should be earned.

Again, in the modern context you might see this come up every 5 games at the most. 100+ years ago, you get situations where if you start a league in 1876 and okay to today, the top 20 guys in your league history in lifetime and single season ERA will almost all be 19th century guys.

I thought this was fixed in 12. I remember a long discussion and at some point Markus had said he hadn't figured out how to do it yet and I thought later said it was fixed. If it hasn't been fixed it is something Markus has been trying to fix.

So far I have seen the 19th century ERAs be a lot higher than 11. Still a few guys with .91 seasons though. In some ways the discussion is kind of strange because ERA did not exist in the 19th century and scorers did not differentiate between earned and unearned runs. By the 1880's and 1890's when you start to see 140 game seasons I haven't seen these miniscule ERAs. Those 1871-early 1880's guys just don't have the qualifiers to reach leader boards because of the few games. You don't get over 100 games until 1884 if you play with real schedules. By that point the ERAs are low by modern comparison but not below 1 like some of the guys pre-1880 who don't have the IP to qualify. It is really hard to get anyone who comes close to qualify for the HOF prior to the 1890's because of the small number of games each season. Even in 1879, the NL barely had a modern rookie league number of games.