OOTP Developments Forums - View Single Post

ThePretender · 02-13-2016, 01:43 PM

The financial/salary system is easy enough to abuse right now without editing players. In fact, I'd argue arbitration and contract extensions are too low to begin with. I've got a guy who has good ratings and ranked top 2 in Cy Young votes last year and this year, and is set to make $5.5M in arbitration. That's way too low if you ask me.

I have to create rules when I play or else all my players will be signed to $20M/10 year deals (total, not AAV) if I sign them pre-arb. And if I sign them during arb, I can get superstar calibre guys to sign for 55/5 (total, not AAV) buying out 2 FA years, when their FA salaries would be 20-30M each.

So while I agree in real life it should be based on stats, here it should be based by a minimum of ratings, and if two players with identical ratings have different performance, the guy with the ratings + stats should get an even higher arb value. This is to ensure that players are not getting ridiculously low salaries like the ones I've mentioned before.

The salary/financial/extensions is poorly done and easy enough to abuse without having access to the editor. It got to the point in an online league where I could spend $50M a year on two separate players, and still have a payroll under 155M and not go over my budget. So this is definitely something that needs to be improved. But I disagree with your comment, because if it's done the way you suggest it would be even easier to abuse the financial/extension/contract system.

02-13-2016, 01:43 PM	#2
ThePretender All Star Starter Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 1,324	The financial/salary system is easy enough to abuse right now without editing players. In fact, I'd argue arbitration and contract extensions are too low to begin with. I've got a guy who has good ratings and ranked top 2 in Cy Young votes last year and this year, and is set to make $5.5M in arbitration. That's way too low if you ask me. I have to create rules when I play or else all my players will be signed to $20M/10 year deals (total, not AAV) if I sign them pre-arb. And if I sign them during arb, I can get superstar calibre guys to sign for 55/5 (total, not AAV) buying out 2 FA years, when their FA salaries would be 20-30M each. So while I agree in real life it should be based on stats, here it should be based by a minimum of ratings, and if two players with identical ratings have different performance, the guy with the ratings + stats should get an even higher arb value. This is to ensure that players are not getting ridiculously low salaries like the ones I've mentioned before. The salary/financial/extensions is poorly done and easy enough to abuse without having access to the editor. It got to the point in an online league where I could spend $50M a year on two separate players, and still have a payroll under 155M and not go over my budget. So this is definitely something that needs to be improved. But I disagree with your comment, because if it's done the way you suggest it would be even easier to abuse the financial/extension/contract system. Last edited by ThePretender; 02-13-2016 at 02:09 PM.