The new way to run small market teams

[Obechkinsbuddy]

The Braves kinda started it but teams are starting to gamble and sign guys w 3-4 years of arbitration left to like 10 year deals to pay more up front but get them at a cheaper rate in their prime and get them longer. In the past I feel like guys werent willing to negotiate or would just want like 30 mil a year for 7-8 years instead of the gradual salary incline. I havent tried yet on this game but plan to start a GM sim w/ a small market. Any success with this method on this version?

[Dijon-Main]

I've heard from a few people on here that extensions are more balanced this year. Last year it was too easy to lock up a young star for an absurdly team-friendly contract.

[eriqjaffe]

Originally Posted by Obechkinsbuddy

The Braves kinda started it but teams are starting to gamble and sign guys w 3-4 years of arbitration left to like 10 year deals to pay more up front but get them at a cheaper rate in their prime and get them longer.

The White Sox did a lot of this kind of thing too and it has not worked out terribly well for them. I mean, Yoan Moncada is the 4th-highest-paid third baseman in MLB.

[locuspc]

Just like in real life you're gambling on the player living up to how they're playing now later in their career. Sometimes it works out sometimes not.

[AB42]

Scott Kingery says hi.

[slugga27]

Originally Posted by AB42

Scott Kingery says hi.

As does Jon Singleton.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LeftyNate]

I tend to not take the gamble in most saves. Helps keep it challenging not having so many guys on team-friendly contracts. If I do it, I only do it with one or two players.
This year in 25 for the first time, I did it with two players on the Cardinals, Winn and Walker. Trying to be kinda realistic in the sense that the real Cardinals will plan to build around these guys. But in the past, if guys aren’t producing, I’ll trade them before they get to “overpaid veteran” status.

[CBLCardinals]

With very rare exceptions, it seems OOTP produces “more realistic” contract extensions for players that have at least ~ one year (or close to it) of service time.

Players with zero experience but high potentials still seem a bit light on their asks. It’s as if they don’t understand they may have the potential of 60-65FV or higher type player.

If you are playing a solo league and want more of a challenge I’d suggest following above.

[Pelican]

Well first thing, Atlanta is not a small-market team. They are one of the wealthiest franchises in baseball, and in fact virtually bought a World Championship a few years back, at the trade deadline, acquiring a new outfield. Small market teams cannot or will not do that.

Second, I agree with the posts that question whether long-term contracts for pre-arbitration players at modest (by comparison to post-arbitration) amounts can backfire badly. As a Phils' fan, I was totally in favor of Kingery's contract (in his case, after a tremendous Spring Training, and before his rookie year) as a smart investment. And people forget that his second season, in 2019, was very solid [.258/.315/.474 with 34 doubles, 19 HR, 55 RBI, and 15 SB]. But since then the Fightin's have been paying him to play at AAA.

I think the best thing teams with limited funds can do is offer long-term deals to their existing players, not just those who are pre-arbitration, in the hope of retaining them and building around them. The Pirates have done this.

One thing you might try in OOTP financials is to give a team like Oakland or KC or Miami the payroll of Atlanta or the Mutts or Yanks - or yes my Phillies. It's all good. They can compete for the best free agents, they can pump money into player development, they can risk long-term contracts, they can give huge bonuses.

I know I sound like a baseball socialist; but the best way to parity is to give all teams the same amount of money to spend. You can try to reverse-engineer parity with schemes like salary caps or luxury taxes, but teams will work around those. Come on, at the blackjack table you wouldn't let one player start with three or four times as many chips!

[md40022]

It's not quite as bad as Scott Kingery, but David Bote did similar for the Cubs. He wasn't projected as an MLB player at all. Only got called up as an injury fill in. To his credit he played somewhat acceptable baseball and immediately got himself a 5 year, 15 million contact....... and ever since then has been a minor league level player, spending more time in AAA than in MLB.

The bizarre thing in that situation though is it was supposedly Bote who approached the Cubs about negotiating a contract right after he had the first little bit of success. IMO that should have been a huge red flag from the Cubs point of view - like, this guy has no confidence in his own ability, trying to cash in after a small bit of success as opposed to doubling down on it and then really looking to get paid.

[Baconi]

For people playing this version, how easy is it to get young players on cheap extensions? I'm still on 24, and tbh it feels like you can sign them pretty cheap most of the time

[progen]

Originally Posted by Pelican

Well first thing, Atlanta is not a small-market team. They are one of the wealthiest franchises in baseball, and in fact virtually bought a World Championship a few years back, at the trade deadline, acquiring a new outfield. Small market teams cannot or will not do that.

Second, I agree with the posts that question whether long-term contracts for pre-arbitration players at modest (by comparison to post-arbitration) amounts can backfire badly. As a Phils' fan, I was totally in favor of Kingery's contract (in his case, after a tremendous Spring Training, and before his rookie year) as a smart investment. And people forget that his second season, in 2019, was very solid [.258/.315/.474 with 34 doubles, 19 HR, 55 RBI, and 15 SB]. But since then the Fightin's have been paying him to play at AAA.

I think the best thing teams with limited funds can do is offer long-term deals to their existing players, not just those who are pre-arbitration, in the hope of retaining them and building around them. The Pirates have done this.

One thing you might try in OOTP financials is to give a team like Oakland or KC or Miami the payroll of Atlanta or the Mutts or Yanks - or yes my Phillies. It's all good. They can compete for the best free agents, they can pump money into player development, they can risk long-term contracts, they can give huge bonuses.

I know I sound like a baseball socialist; but the best way to parity is to give all teams the same amount of money to spend. You can try to reverse-engineer parity with schemes like salary caps or luxury taxes, but teams will work around those. Come on, at the blackjack table you wouldn't let one player start with three or four times as many chips!

Besides a huge baseball fan, also a huge soccer(football) fan, following Manchester United. Read a book recently about "the big six" in the Premier League, and as one of the Directors at a smaller club stated, "It's not how much money those clubs have to spend, it's how much money those clubs have to waste." Same holds true in baseball.