Projected Payroll / Front Office Question

Qrashman · 10-10-2010, 03:58 PM

I run a sim league and I'm trying to figure out how the game comes up with next year's projected payroll. See the following image of Detroit's front office screen:

The following is their salary report

You can see their projected payroll according to the front office screen is $83m. But according to the salary report, it's $61.5m. That's a huge difference. The problem is that because their projected payroll is so big, the game is not letting them sign any player extensions.

Does anyone know where the game gets the projected payroll figure? According to the manual:

Quote:

Projected Payroll (next year) This is the projected player payroll for the next full season, excluding possible arbitration awards.

If it excludes arbitration, shouldn't the projected payroll most likely be LESS than the salary report, not way above?

I'd appreciate any assistance.

Tony M · 10-10-2010, 04:11 PM

Are you running on the latest Beta patch?

If not, are you awaiting any responses from players regarding extensions who are arby-eligible?

If so, it'll be fixed with the upcoming patch. The projected payroll figure includes the arbitration amount (estimate) plus the offered extension figure so if you've offered those 6 players contracts near their arby offer that would explain the $22m or so.

If not, I'm not sure why that's happening.

Qrashman · 10-10-2010, 04:18 PM

No contract extensions have been offered. This is the case with every team in the league, not just the tigers. I only put the Tigers here because they are the most drastic case.

We are not using the beta patch.

Flying Dutchmen · 10-10-2010, 04:42 PM

The game doesn't take the payroll costs of players off the projected payroll unless it is guaranteed they will not be on the roster/payroll next year. This is notable in the case of players who have not accumulated 6 years of MLB experience, which is what I'm guessing the issue is here. I'd be quite willing to wager that Villa and Reyna (along with probably 1 or 2 others) are players who will cross that threshold by the end of the year, but might not if they are removed from the active roster. If you look in their player pages, I'd bet you'd see an estimated arbitration value under their contract tab. If it isn't this, I have no idea what's happening there.

Qrashman · 10-10-2010, 05:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flying Dutchmen

The game doesn't take the payroll costs of players off the projected payroll unless it is guaranteed they will not be on the roster/payroll next year. This is notable in the case of players who have not accumulated 6 years of MLB experience, which is what I'm guessing the issue is here. I'd be quite willing to wager that Villa and Reyna (along with probably 1 or 2 others) are players who will cross that threshold by the end of the year, but might not if they are removed from the active roster. If you look in their player pages, I'd bet you'd see an estimated arbitration value under their contract tab. If it isn't this, I have no idea what's happening there.

You're correct. Reyna has an arby estimate of $7m and Villa has an arby estimate of $11.25m. Moreno is an extra $3m. So thats basically it right there.

Pretty unfair financial AI.

mrbill · 10-19-2010, 02:50 PM

Bumping this.

This is a pretty significant finance bug, the game shouldn't count a player's arbitration estimate against you when you're offering him a *replacement* contract extension.

Any chance this can get fixed or is already reported?

10-10-2010, 04:18 PM	#3
Qrashman All Star Reserve Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: NY Posts: 651	No contract extensions have been offered. This is the case with every team in the league, not just the tigers. I only put the Tigers here because they are the most drastic case. We are not using the beta patch. __________________ ------------------- Montreal Expos / Calgary Storm, HBL HBL Baseball - Founded March 2001. HBL Waiting List

10-19-2010, 02:50 PM	#6
mrbill All Star Reserve Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: LA, CA Posts: 982	Bumping this. This is a pretty significant finance bug, the game shouldn't count a player's arbitration estimate against you when you're offering him a replacement contract extension. Any chance this can get fixed or is already reported? __________________ UBL - Best Online League Evar! - Los Angeles Dodgers: 25 seasons, 13 NL West titles, 4 WC, 8 NL Titles, 5-time Champs LBB v5 league (retired) - Detroit Tigers/Commish: 19 seasons, 18 straight AL Central titles, 2006, 2008, 2014, 2015 Champs! NGBL v6 league (dead) - Texas Rangers: 10 seasons, 4 AL South titles, 2 Wild Cards, one WS app

10-10-2010, 04:11 PM	#2
Tony M Global Moderator Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Here Posts: 6,156	Are you running on the latest Beta patch? If not, are you awaiting any responses from players regarding extensions who are arby-eligible? If so, it'll be fixed with the upcoming patch. The projected payroll figure includes the arbitration amount (estimate) plus the offered extension figure so if you've offered those 6 players contracts near their arby offer that would explain the $22m or so. If not, I'm not sure why that's happening.

10-10-2010, 04:42 PM	#4
Flying Dutchmen Minors (Triple A) Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 213	The game doesn't take the payroll costs of players off the projected payroll unless it is guaranteed they will not be on the roster/payroll next year. This is notable in the case of players who have not accumulated 6 years of MLB experience, which is what I'm guessing the issue is here. I'd be quite willing to wager that Villa and Reyna (along with probably 1 or 2 others) are players who will cross that threshold by the end of the year, but might not if they are removed from the active roster. If you look in their player pages, I'd bet you'd see an estimated arbitration value under their contract tab. If it isn't this, I have no idea what's happening there.