OOTP4 Free agent/extension house rule suggestion (your opinion)

OOTP Rocks · 05-07-2002, 11:57 PM

I just wanted to know what you guys think about this little house rule I put for myself.

-Anybody that I've just signed as a free agent, I cannot trade them that year.

My reason for doing that is, I'm looking at it like I won a bidding war. Since I outbidded the other teams for his services, that usually means I was willing to pay the highest price to obtain him. So why would some other team want to acquire him in a trade, when they could've spent the money to get him when he was a free agent, without having to give up anybody in return? If they wanted him, they would've bid for him and spent the money to get him in the first place. Why would he have value in a trade?

Now of course, there are those occasions in OOTP4, where you wanted to bid for a player, but he seemed to push the button too quickly and sign with another team before you could put your next bid. However, I try to ignore that fact in doing this.

The main reason for doing this is to present more of a realistic challenge. The truth is, when you attempt to sign an extension to one of your players or attempt to sign a free agent, you tend to not care to spend too much. Sometimes you may go overboard to sign, then you realize that you bid too high, and then you get stuck with the contract you bid for (sometimes you're too late to withdraw, or perhaps you just don't want your opponent getting the player, no matter the price). I believe that we should have to suffer the consequences of having to eat the contract, since we bid for it (that's the price we gotta pay). Unfortunately in OOTP4, you can always trade away the player if you feel you signed him for too much. So at least you get something in return through trade value. So you never end up regretting signing somebody to too high of a contract because you can always trade them away.

This is especially important in signing extensions. Sometimes I will sign my players to an extension even if I don't want to pay them that amount. Sometimes I just do it, so that I won't lose the player without getting anything in return (which would be the case if they became a free agent). So by signing them to an extension even if you think the price is too high, you can always trade them afterwards, so you never have to worry about signing too expensive of a contract (because you can always trade away your mistakes).

I believe this is an "exploit", that is why I feel you shouldn't be able to trade away the players whom you've just signed that year (or to an extension). You should have to "live and die" with the contracts that you've signed.

There was a mechanism like this in Front Office Football. Everytime you attempted to trade a player whom you just signed that year, the dialogue would say "will not accept a player whom you just signed as a free agent".

How long should this mechanism last for? Perhaps just that year, and then next year it returns back to normal where you can trade the player if you desire? Not sure, what do you guys think?

[ 05-11-2002, 09:19 PM: Message edited by: OOTP Rocks ]

Desert Dweller · 05-10-2002, 07:37 AM

For signing free agents, I would tend to agree with that. However, with signing extensions, I'm not so sure. I rarely make trades, so perhaps my opinion wouldn't be worth as much, but I would look at it as a "sign and trade" situation. I don't think it happens as much in baseball, as in the NBA. Just my 2 cents.

JAttractive · 05-10-2002, 12:08 PM

I agree. I MAY consider trading them late in the year if a situation completely changes (ie. I started as a contender and dropped out) as I figure the player may want out anyway. 99 percent of the time though I force myself to keep them for a year or more for exactly that reason. GMs don't do this in baseball or players would snub them in future years as they would fear they would be traded after signing. Right now I am making about 16 million per season in profit (very low payroll) but I refuse to buy a bunch of free agents and just trade them away to improve my team. To me that would be exploiting and would cheapen any accomplishments.

BoSox Win · 05-10-2002, 04:09 PM

I would disagree with the self-imposed restriction, but that is the beauty of OOTP, you can do what ever you want to. It's your league. My reasons for not limiting trading newly signed or extended players is that it does happen in baseball. Anyone remember the Sirotka / Wells drama between the Chi-Sox and Blue Jays? Sirotka was signed to an extension and then got traded to Toronto for Wells. Now, you may get some bad blood from the players if you ever try to sign them again, but it has happened. In a recent Free Agency period, I was looking to replace my retired catcher and had the best offer on the table for a guy for the first seven days of the period. On day 8, I get 2 e-notes from the guy: 1st one says another team has a better offer now, can you offer anything better? 2nd one says that he has decided to take the offer and now is off the market. I was not even given a chance to improve my offer. So, I got on the phone and traded to get his butt on my roster. Also, I do not mind trading away minor leaguers to sweeten the deal on a trade even if I just signed them. That happens all the time in the real world. A more recent example, how about Pokey Reese this past offseason? It may not suit the baseball purists, but when you need to fill a hole in your roster, anyone is fair game to be traded. Again, though, in the grand scheme of things it is completely up to your individual tastes. To DH or not DH, that is the question that will never be answered. Enjoy.

[ 05-10-2002, 10:11 PM: Message edited by: BoSox Win ]

JAttractive · 05-10-2002, 05:56 PM

Good points and I don't adhere to any set rules for myself. If something just feels "cheap" I won't do it is all. However odd things have and do happen so my decision is usually based on a gut feeling and reasoning about the situation.

OOTP Rocks · 05-11-2002, 12:02 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by BoSox Win:
 My reasons for not limiting trading newly signed or extended players is that it does happen in baseball. Anyone remember the Sirotka / Wells drama between the Chi-Sox and Blue Jays? Sirotka was signed to an extension and then got traded to Toronto for Wells. Now, you may get some bad blood from the players if you ever try to sign them again, but it has happened. <hr /></blockquote>The problem in OOTP4 is, this "bad blood" doesn't exist in this game. If doing this, activated some mechanism which causes other players to get more skeptical during contract talks (penalty for trading players who were recently signed), then that would regulate this exploit just fine. However, as I've said, this "bad blood mechanism" doesn't exist in OOTP4. So in the current build of OOTP4, I see it as an exploit.

Bald Eagles · 05-11-2002, 03:52 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by OOTP Rocks:
-Anybody that I've just signed as a free agent, I cannot trade them that year.

I'm looking at it like I won a bidding war. Since I outbidded the other teams for his services, that usually means I was willing to pay the highest price to obtain him. So why would some other team want to acquire him in a trade, when they could've spent the money to get him when he was a free agent, without having to give up anybody in return? If they wanted him, they would've bid for him and spent the money to get him in the first place. Why would he have value in a trade?<hr /></blockquote>If you get an offer for him via email, did the offering team lose this position to an injury (usually a long one) and/or has no depth at this position? Did the offering team even offer a contract to him (you'd have to lookup the txt file for FA offerings, if it is saved)? Did one of your minor leaguers mature quicker than expected and is ready for the show? There are a number of reasons why a recently-signed FA is ready for a trade (usually at the deadline, and this DOES happen in MLB).

Are there house rules against signing someone near their preferred amount just to trade for prospects if you have no or few good prospects (I think your team scout picks the best top 10 young guys you have, even if they are all Average and Fair). This could be used to raid a team's prospects, but there are times when you team is broke and needs young depth.

OOTP Rocks · 05-11-2002, 07:32 AM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Bald Eagles:
 <blockquote>quote:<hr /><hr /></blockquote>If you get an offer for him via email, did the offering team lose this position to an injury (usually a long one) and/or has no depth at this position? Did the offering team even offer a contract to him (you'd have to lookup the txt file for FA offerings, if it is saved)? Did one of your minor leaguers mature quicker than expected and is ready for the show? There are a number of reasons why a recently-signed FA is ready for a trade (usually at the deadline, and this DOES happen in MLB).

Are there house rules against signing someone near their preferred amount just to trade for prospects if you have no or few good prospects (I think your team scout picks the best top 10 young guys you have, even if they are all Average and Fair). This could be used to raid a team's prospects, but there are times when you team is broke and needs young depth.[/QB]<hr /></blockquote>This is what I said:
"Now of course, there are those occasions in OOTP4, where you wanted to bid for a player, but he seemed to push the button too quickly and sign with another team before you could put your next bid. However, I try to ignore that fact in doing this."

Yes, I do realize that there are this and many other exceptions to giving recently signed players trade value. However, this still doesn't avoid the exploit of signing a player strictly for the purposes of worrying about not getting anything in return. So you might as well use up all your "money left for extensions". Even if you don't want to spend the money on a particular player (meaning you want to let them go to become a free agent and save cash in the process), you might as well spend it, and just trade him. There would be little point in letting somebody go to be a free agent. Because if you do this, you'll be getting nothing in return. Whereas, if you resign the player, then you will at least get something in a trade.

I am simply asking that other players should take notice of you're little "strategy" the next time, so you won't be able to do it quite so frequently. If you continually keep signing players, then trading them, I believe other players who get in contract negotiations with you remember this, and hold it against you when thinking about signing a contract with you. The way the game is right now, there is no point in letting any of your players go to be a free agent. You might as well use up all your "money left for extension". There is no point in saving money. If you need money later, you can always trade away whatever extensions you've just signed because there will always be some computer team out there that will take the player.

joshuaaaaaa · 05-11-2002, 06:50 PM

We've been having a spirited discussion about trading recently signed free agents in the FBBL. Several people are sure there is some restriction on trading them in the Major Leagues. I'm sure its in the Collective Bargaining Agreement, however I have been unable to find a copy of the darn thing. Does anyone know where its stored online? Or IF its stored online?

OOTP Rocks · 05-11-2002, 11:05 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by joshuaaaaaa:
We've been having a spirited discussion about trading recently signed free agents in the FBBL. Several people are sure there is some restriction on trading them in the Major Leagues. I'm sure its in the Collective Bargaining Agreement, however I have been unable to find a copy of the darn thing. Does anyone know where its stored online? Or IF its stored online?<hr /></blockquote>In online leagues where there are strictly only human managers, I wouldn't worry about it too much. For one thing, it isn't guaranteed that you'll be able to trade the player away. What happens if you sign the player, and then no human manager wants him? However, with computer GMs, you're almost more than likely to find at least several teams that would be interested in the almost any player (with the exception of old players with huge contracts).

Still, I will try to search for the collective bargaining agreement or some reference to see if you are correct about this restriction.

OOTP Rocks · 05-11-2002, 11:10 PM

Well at the very least, in real life they have "no trade clauses", so that would in part, get rid of OOTP4's "guaranteed" ability to trade a player after signing a contract.

05-07-2002, 11:57 PM	#1
OOTP Rocks Minors (Double A) Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 119	OOTP4 Free agent/extension house rule suggestion (your opinion) I just wanted to know what you guys think about this little house rule I put for myself. -Anybody that I've just signed as a free agent, I cannot trade them that year. My reason for doing that is, I'm looking at it like I won a bidding war. Since I outbidded the other teams for his services, that usually means I was willing to pay the highest price to obtain him. So why would some other team want to acquire him in a trade, when they could've spent the money to get him when he was a free agent, without having to give up anybody in return? If they wanted him, they would've bid for him and spent the money to get him in the first place. Why would he have value in a trade? Now of course, there are those occasions in OOTP4, where you wanted to bid for a player, but he seemed to push the button too quickly and sign with another team before you could put your next bid. However, I try to ignore that fact in doing this. The main reason for doing this is to present more of a realistic challenge. The truth is, when you attempt to sign an extension to one of your players or attempt to sign a free agent, you tend to not care to spend too much. Sometimes you may go overboard to sign, then you realize that you bid too high, and then you get stuck with the contract you bid for (sometimes you're too late to withdraw, or perhaps you just don't want your opponent getting the player, no matter the price). I believe that we should have to suffer the consequences of having to eat the contract, since we bid for it (that's the price we gotta pay). Unfortunately in OOTP4, you can always trade away the player if you feel you signed him for too much. So at least you get something in return through trade value. So you never end up regretting signing somebody to too high of a contract because you can always trade them away. This is especially important in signing extensions. Sometimes I will sign my players to an extension even if I don't want to pay them that amount. Sometimes I just do it, so that I won't lose the player without getting anything in return (which would be the case if they became a free agent). So by signing them to an extension even if you think the price is too high, you can always trade them afterwards, so you never have to worry about signing too expensive of a contract (because you can always trade away your mistakes). I believe this is an "exploit", that is why I feel you shouldn't be able to trade away the players whom you've just signed that year (or to an extension). You should have to "live and die" with the contracts that you've signed. There was a mechanism like this in Front Office Football. Everytime you attempted to trade a player whom you just signed that year, the dialogue would say "will not accept a player whom you just signed as a free agent". How long should this mechanism last for? Perhaps just that year, and then next year it returns back to normal where you can trade the player if you desire? Not sure, what do you guys think? <small>[ 05-11-2002, 09:19 PM: Message edited by: OOTP Rocks ]</small>

05-10-2002, 04:09 PM	#4
BoSox Win Minors (Rookie Ball) Join Date: May 2002 Location: Chicago Posts: 24	I would disagree with the self-imposed restriction, but that is the beauty of OOTP, you can do what ever you want to. It's your league. My reasons for not limiting trading newly signed or extended players is that it does happen in baseball. Anyone remember the Sirotka / Wells drama between the Chi-Sox and Blue Jays? Sirotka was signed to an extension and then got traded to Toronto for Wells. Now, you may get some bad blood from the players if you ever try to sign them again, but it has happened. In a recent Free Agency period, I was looking to replace my retired catcher and had the best offer on the table for a guy for the first seven days of the period. On day 8, I get 2 e-notes from the guy: 1st one says another team has a better offer now, can you offer anything better? 2nd one says that he has decided to take the offer and now is off the market. I was not even given a chance to improve my offer. So, I got on the phone and traded to get his butt on my roster. Also, I do not mind trading away minor leaguers to sweeten the deal on a trade even if I just signed them. That happens all the time in the real world. A more recent example, how about Pokey Reese this past offseason? It may not suit the baseball purists, but when you need to fill a hole in your roster, anyone is fair game to be traded. Again, though, in the grand scheme of things it is completely up to your individual tastes. To DH or not DH, that is the question that will never be answered. Enjoy. <small>[ 05-10-2002, 10:11 PM: Message edited by: BoSox Win ]</small>

05-11-2002, 12:02 AM	#6
OOTP Rocks Minors (Double A) Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 119	</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by BoSox Win: <strong> My reasons for not limiting trading newly signed or extended players is that it does happen in baseball. Anyone remember the Sirotka / Wells drama between the Chi-Sox and Blue Jays? Sirotka was signed to an extension and then got traded to Toronto for Wells. Now, you may get some bad blood from the players if you ever try to sign them again, but it has happened. </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">The problem in OOTP4 is, this "bad blood" doesn't exist in this game. If doing this, activated some mechanism which causes other players to get more skeptical during contract talks (penalty for trading players who were recently signed), then that would regulate this exploit just fine. However, as I've said, this "bad blood mechanism" doesn't exist in OOTP4. So in the current build of OOTP4, I see it as an exploit.

05-11-2002, 03:52 AM	#7
Bald Eagles Major Leagues Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Waveland & Sheffield Posts: 402	</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by OOTP Rocks: <strong>-Anybody that I've just signed as a free agent, I cannot trade them that year. I'm looking at it like I won a bidding war. Since I outbidded the other teams for his services, that usually means I was willing to pay the highest price to obtain him. So why would some other team want to acquire him in a trade, when they could've spent the money to get him when he was a free agent, without having to give up anybody in return? If they wanted him, they would've bid for him and spent the money to get him in the first place. Why would he have value in a trade?</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">If you get an offer for him via email, did the offering team lose this position to an injury (usually a long one) and/or has no depth at this position? Did the offering team even offer a contract to him (you'd have to lookup the txt file for FA offerings, if it is saved)? Did one of your minor leaguers mature quicker than expected and is ready for the show? There are a number of reasons why a recently-signed FA is ready for a trade (usually at the deadline, and this DOES happen in MLB). Are there house rules against signing someone near their preferred amount just to trade for prospects if you have no or few good prospects (I think your team scout picks the best top 10 young guys you have, even if they are all Average and Fair). This could be used to raid a team's prospects, but there are times when you team is broke and needs young depth.

05-11-2002, 07:32 AM	#8
OOTP Rocks Minors (Double A) Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 119	</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by Bald Eagles: <strong> </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"></strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">If you get an offer for him via email, did the offering team lose this position to an injury (usually a long one) and/or has no depth at this position? Did the offering team even offer a contract to him (you'd have to lookup the txt file for FA offerings, if it is saved)? Did one of your minor leaguers mature quicker than expected and is ready for the show? There are a number of reasons why a recently-signed FA is ready for a trade (usually at the deadline, and this DOES happen in MLB). Are there house rules against signing someone near their preferred amount just to trade for prospects if you have no or few good prospects (I think your team scout picks the best top 10 young guys you have, even if they are all Average and Fair). This could be used to raid a team's prospects, but there are times when you team is broke and needs young depth.[/QB]</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">This is what I said: "Now of course, there are those occasions in OOTP4, where you wanted to bid for a player, but he seemed to push the button too quickly and sign with another team before you could put your next bid. However, I try to ignore that fact in doing this." Yes, I do realize that there are this and many other exceptions to giving recently signed players trade value. However, this still doesn't avoid the exploit of signing a player strictly for the purposes of worrying about not getting anything in return. So you might as well use up all your "money left for extensions". Even if you don't want to spend the money on a particular player (meaning you want to let them go to become a free agent and save cash in the process), you might as well spend it, and just trade him. There would be little point in letting somebody go to be a free agent. Because if you do this, you'll be getting nothing in return. Whereas, if you resign the player, then you will at least get something in a trade. I am simply asking that other players should take notice of you're little "strategy" the next time, so you won't be able to do it quite so frequently. If you continually keep signing players, then trading them, I believe other players who get in contract negotiations with you remember this, and hold it against you when thinking about signing a contract with you. The way the game is right now, there is no point in letting any of your players go to be a free agent. You might as well use up all your "money left for extension". There is no point in saving money. If you need money later, you can always trade away whatever extensions you've just signed because there will always be some computer team out there that will take the player.

05-10-2002, 07:37 AM	#2
Desert Dweller Minors (Single A) Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Tucson, AZ Posts: 54	For signing free agents, I would tend to agree with that. However, with signing extensions, I'm not so sure. I rarely make trades, so perhaps my opinion wouldn't be worth as much, but I would look at it as a "sign and trade" situation. I don't think it happens as much in baseball, as in the NBA. Just my 2 cents.

05-10-2002, 12:08 PM	#3
JAttractive All Star Starter Join Date: May 2002 Location: St. Catharines, Ontario Posts: 1,135	I agree. I MAY consider trading them late in the year if a situation completely changes (ie. I started as a contender and dropped out) as I figure the player may want out anyway. 99 percent of the time though I force myself to keep them for a year or more for exactly that reason. GMs don't do this in baseball or players would snub them in future years as they would fear they would be traded after signing. Right now I am making about 16 million per season in profit (very low payroll) but I refuse to buy a bunch of free agents and just trade them away to improve my team. To me that would be exploiting and would cheapen any accomplishments.

05-10-2002, 05:56 PM	#5
JAttractive All Star Starter Join Date: May 2002 Location: St. Catharines, Ontario Posts: 1,135	Good points and I don't adhere to any set rules for myself. If something just feels "cheap" I won't do it is all. However odd things have and do happen so my decision is usually based on a gut feeling and reasoning about the situation.

05-11-2002, 06:50 PM	#9
joshuaaaaaa All Star Reserve Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Las Vegas, NV Posts: 633	We've been having a spirited discussion about trading recently signed free agents in the FBBL. Several people are sure there is some restriction on trading them in the Major Leagues. I'm sure its in the Collective Bargaining Agreement, however I have been unable to find a copy of the darn thing. Does anyone know where its stored online? Or IF its stored online? __________________ Baltimore Monarchs-GUBA Baltimore Orioles-ORB2 "One of the greatest discoveries a man makes, one of his great surprises, is to find he can do what he was afraid he couldn't do." ~Henry Ford ~

05-11-2002, 11:05 PM	#10
OOTP Rocks Minors (Double A) Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 119	</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by joshuaaaaaa: <strong>We've been having a spirited discussion about trading recently signed free agents in the FBBL. Several people are sure there is some restriction on trading them in the Major Leagues. I'm sure its in the Collective Bargaining Agreement, however I have been unable to find a copy of the darn thing. Does anyone know where its stored online? Or IF its stored online?</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">In online leagues where there are strictly only human managers, I wouldn't worry about it too much. For one thing, it isn't guaranteed that you'll be able to trade the player away. What happens if you sign the player, and then no human manager wants him? However, with computer GMs, you're almost more than likely to find at least several teams that would be interested in the almost any player (with the exception of old players with huge contracts). Still, I will try to search for the collective bargaining agreement or some reference to see if you are correct about this restriction.

05-11-2002, 11:10 PM	#11
OOTP Rocks Minors (Double A) Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 119	Well at the very least, in real life they have "no trade clauses", so that would in part, get rid of OOTP4's "guaranteed" ability to trade a player after signing a contract.