IAFA Signability & Nationality

the54effect · 04-25-2021, 10:03 PM

I'm not sure what goes into the Signability ratings for IAFA, but with the 5m cap on proposals it is a topic that is discussed in every online league I am in on an annual basis. Most people tend to think that IAFA signability (and whom a player ultimately signs with in the case of multiple max offers) is random, or worse, follows some pre-assigned but undetectable order.

I'd like to propose the following idea for consideration:

Using the existing "Nationality" system, IAFA's could be more signable for organizations that have more players of the same nationality in it. For instance, if the Arizona Diamondbacks have 50 Nicaraguan players in their system, while the average amount of Nicaraguan players in a MLB system is 20, the Diamondbacks would have an advantage in signability for Nicaraguan players. The rationale being, the organization is friendly/supportive of development in that country/has more clout among those prospects.

In conjunction with this, if scouts could have their focus set on specific countries (perhaps in some sort of tiered list, or just highlighting specific countries without precluding others) then the scouting trips they go on could be more targeted. While the International Complex seems mostly designed as a feeder for rookie league teams outside of the draft, it could gain some depth if organizations could use it to build allegiance in various corners of the world.

This system could become competitive- you would expect that the richest baseball playing countries would be the priority for most organizations, but then, if an organization has made in-roads in a less baseball dense environment (say Australia) then when the stud Australian IAFA turns up, they're favored to sign with the team that has been collecting Aussies over the years.

Because the role of Agents is all but written out of OOTP (and Agent representation is probably reality's closest approximation of signability) I feel like this sort of system would give the crapshoot of IAFA signing a strategic foothold. Maybe something like this already exists and I am just unaware! Perhaps a secondary system would be the 'best career team' of national icons, but I digress...

Obviously a 'national weighting system' could have an impact on other bidding systems (Free Agency, International Postings, Etc) however, since those competitions typically come down to the contract terms, it would be a secondary consideration. The 5m cap in IAFA is the one that really ends up SEEMING like a scattershot, so giving teams an opportunity to amass capital in a country and then, cognizant of that, go after the IAFAs from the countries they have invested in, expecting an advantage there, would seem like another level of GAME.

KBLover · 04-26-2021, 12:29 PM

I could see myself enjoying a system like that for sure. The international system is one of those "it's just there working in the background in isolation of everyone else."

Your ideas would give it more interaction with the rest of the league.

I especially like "sending scouts" by having a hierarchy for where you do your international scouting as well as the competitive jockeying that would take place in regions.

I could see giving "bonus points" to teams that raise prospects to the majors as well as lesser so for the high minors. Not only is the organization supportive of those prospects, it knows how to get them to the majors or close to it to where maybe another club can get them there (Rule 5, Minor league FA, etc).

And I always dread IAFA signing even in my solo games. Like you said, it seems like a total crapshoot on top of the usual total chaos of some kids signing ASAP, others taking a week and leaving you hanging lol while others are getting snatched up.

04-25-2021, 10:03 PM	#1
the54effect Minors (Double A) Join Date: May 2016 Location: New York Posts: 109	IAFA Signability & Nationality I'm not sure what goes into the Signability ratings for IAFA, but with the 5m cap on proposals it is a topic that is discussed in every online league I am in on an annual basis. Most people tend to think that IAFA signability (and whom a player ultimately signs with in the case of multiple max offers) is random, or worse, follows some pre-assigned but undetectable order. I'd like to propose the following idea for consideration: Using the existing "Nationality" system, IAFA's could be more signable for organizations that have more players of the same nationality in it. For instance, if the Arizona Diamondbacks have 50 Nicaraguan players in their system, while the average amount of Nicaraguan players in a MLB system is 20, the Diamondbacks would have an advantage in signability for Nicaraguan players. The rationale being, the organization is friendly/supportive of development in that country/has more clout among those prospects. In conjunction with this, if scouts could have their focus set on specific countries (perhaps in some sort of tiered list, or just highlighting specific countries without precluding others) then the scouting trips they go on could be more targeted. While the International Complex seems mostly designed as a feeder for rookie league teams outside of the draft, it could gain some depth if organizations could use it to build allegiance in various corners of the world. This system could become competitive- you would expect that the richest baseball playing countries would be the priority for most organizations, but then, if an organization has made in-roads in a less baseball dense environment (say Australia) then when the stud Australian IAFA turns up, they're favored to sign with the team that has been collecting Aussies over the years. Because the role of Agents is all but written out of OOTP (and Agent representation is probably reality's closest approximation of signability) I feel like this sort of system would give the crapshoot of IAFA signing a strategic foothold. Maybe something like this already exists and I am just unaware! Perhaps a secondary system would be the 'best career team' of national icons, but I digress... Obviously a 'national weighting system' could have an impact on other bidding systems (Free Agency, International Postings, Etc) however, since those competitions typically come down to the contract terms, it would be a secondary consideration. The 5m cap in IAFA is the one that really ends up SEEMING like a scattershot, so giving teams an opportunity to amass capital in a country and then, cognizant of that, go after the IAFAs from the countries they have invested in, expecting an advantage there, would seem like another level of GAME. __________________ OOOBL (BAL/KCR) 🏆🏆🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩2032-2053 & 2056-present TGS1.0 (WAS)🏆🏆🚩🚩🚩 2021-2035 TGS2.0 (NYY) 🏆🚩🚩 2022-present LTBNL (HOU)🏆🏆🏆🏆🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩🚩 2020-2043 The Dugout (BOS)🏆🚩 2179-2182

04-26-2021, 12:29 PM	#2
KBLover All Star Reserve Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 580	I could see myself enjoying a system like that for sure. The international system is one of those "it's just there working in the background in isolation of everyone else." Your ideas would give it more interaction with the rest of the league. I especially like "sending scouts" by having a hierarchy for where you do your international scouting as well as the competitive jockeying that would take place in regions. I could see giving "bonus points" to teams that raise prospects to the majors as well as lesser so for the high minors. Not only is the organization supportive of those prospects, it knows how to get them to the majors or close to it to where maybe another club can get them there (Rule 5, Minor league FA, etc). And I always dread IAFA signing even in my solo games. Like you said, it seems like a total crapshoot on top of the usual total chaos of some kids signing ASAP, others taking a week and leaving you hanging lol while others are getting snatched up.