Where have you gone?

[Riverman]

It depends on what you mean by "have the money". I have no idea why my owner lets me spend as much as he does. He gives me a budget that is about $15 million over my projected revenue and then he even allows me to exceed that. I'm not sure if he just can't do arithmetic or he has confidence in my ability to manuever to keep us in the black.

Apologies if I'm completely off base on this, but I think you're supposed to manage that. That is to say, you're not supposed to rely on the "Your owner has given approval for this deal" to manage your budget. You're supposed to manage your budget.

I was pretty new to this game when I first started in this league and didn't understand that part of it. Based on what I have seen since then, I'd say that you are right.

[Dave]

That is the case currently, but something I'm thinking about changing for next year. Currently it's set to "entire budget available" but I'm thinking about setting it to "owner controls budget".

It just seems to keep things more in check during my testing. I'm going to look at this quite a bit over the next couple weeks and hopefully get Markus to make some major changes to the financial system in OOTP 2007

I would highly advise changing this, as some owners appear unable to control their budgets and some other owners have happily bailed them out of financial trouble by moving money for players.

Having the owners control the budgets would remove that whole messy ordeal.

[Andrew]

I would highly advise changing this, as some owners appear unable to control their budgets and some other owners have happily bailed them out of financial trouble by moving money for players.

Having the owners control the budgets would remove that whole messy ordeal.

Yah, just ask Clay. Giggas didn't leave him with a good financial situation at all.

One thing I'm trying to get Markus to change for next year is when this option is selected, the profits don't go right back into the team. For example, if your owner gives you a budget of $90 mil and you only spent $60 mil, you'd have $30 mil extra in cash. I'm proposing that the $30 mil extra disappears (into the owners pocket, jewelry for his mistress, whatever). Under this situation the budgets would remain somewhat static rather than changing drastically from year to year. I think this would eliminate the need for the cash max if implemented.

[liquidcrash]

Re: Where have you gone?

Joe Reyes?

http://ootp.oldredboat.com/news/html...layer_575.html

This guy was an absolute beast in Pittsburgh, arguably the best hitter in the league. He put up mediocre numbers last year...terrible by his standards, and he's practically disappeared this season.

He sucks, nothing else to say. That deal has been absolutely horrible for me, I clearly lost it at this point as Gremades has done much better than I expected him to. To make matters worse, Reyes contract is difficult to work around. If anyone wants him, I'd be willing to part with him for cheap.

[Khrog]

First sim of .500 ball for California so something to be happy about and I get to toss out some minor league garbage making room for the draft. Hopefully my scouts were on the ball.

[Riverman]

That is the case currently, but something I'm thinking about changing for next year. Currently it's set to "entire budget available" but I'm thinking about setting it to "owner controls budget".

It just seems to keep things more in check during my testing. I'm going to look at this quite a bit over the next couple weeks and hopefully get Markus to make some major changes to the financial system in OOTP 2007

I would highly advise changing this, as some owners appear unable to control their budgets and some other owners have happily bailed them out of financial trouble by moving money for players.

Having the owners control the budgets would remove that whole messy
ordeal.

Good one, but we added a rule several months ago dealing with this as I am sure you know. Somehow, you managed to last three months without your usual snide remarks but I see your underlying personality finally got the best of you. Give it a rest.

[Dave]

Good one, but we added a rule several months ago dealing with this as I am sure you know. Somehow, you managed to last three months without your usual snide remarks but I see your underlying personality finally got the best of you. Give it a rest.

I was giving it a rest until you started talking about resigning Lacour with money you don't have when you're already operating well into the red. If you're referring to the "cash in trade" rule, that doesn't completely solve the problems we're seeing with people overrunning their budgets. And given that you've already admitted that you were relying on your owner to mange your budget, and given that I already told you that owner budget management isn't even implemented in this league, I'm not really sure what you're complaining about.

You have the 6th highest payroll in the league ($81.5M) while sporting the league's second smallest budget ($65.7M). If a team with your budget, in real life, thinks they "can't contend" without resigning the highest paid player in the league, guess what happens. They don't sign that player and they don't contend.

If you want to play the "everyone overruns their budget with no consequences" game, we can play that game. But rest assured that given what my budget is, and given what your budget is, you will have exactly zero chance of signing anyone that I want each offseason.

I'm not trying to be some kind of ass about this, but the budgets exist and are different for a reason. If people pay them no heed and there's no real reward for being responsible enough to manage a budget, then there's really no incentive to do so on anyone's part.

[Dave]

And by the way, you should really look at developing a thicker skin. All I said was that some owners appear to be unable to control their budgets. That kind of falls into the category of indisputable fact at this point. But if you can find me a financial analyst who thinks overrunning a budget by almost $16M is a good example of "controlling a budget," be my guest.

Until then....

[Andrew]

Guys can we move this discussion into the thread for Off-season rules changes. No need to hijack Sully's thread.

[Guest]

Re: Where have you gone?

Joe Reyes?

http://ootp.oldredboat.com/news/html...layer_575.html

This guy was an absolute beast in Pittsburgh, arguably the best hitter in the league. He put up mediocre numbers last year...terrible by his standards, and he's practically disappeared this season.

He sucks, nothing else to say. That deal has been absolutely horrible for me, I clearly lost it at this point as Gremades has done much better than I expected him to. To make matters worse, Reyes contract is difficult to work around. If anyone wants him, I'd be willing to part with him for cheap.

Not to mention Abe has been pitching extremely well, especially this season.

[rubisco43]

Re: Where have you gone?

Not to mention Abe has been pitching extremely well, especially this season.

Just gonna add to the hurt huh?

[liquidcrash]

I knew Abe was good when I traded him, so that doesn't bother me as much. I'd say my starting rotation has survived losing him anyway. I will say if Latham goes the way Reyes has I'll be looking for a cliff to jump off.

[Pat]

I knew Abe was good when I traded him, so that doesn't bother me as much. I'd say my starting rotation has survived losing him anyway. I will say if Latham goes the way Reyes has I'll be looking for a cliff to jump off.

I highly doubt that happens.