Player accepts way below market extension in beginning of May??

[bababui]

I always thought that that was a case of the AI having some insider information. Im OK with it because its hard for a team of programmers to come up with an AI that will challenge a normal person; let alone 1 man. And the 15% cap is kind of unfair because it would make it impossible to bring back some much loved but declining players to their original team. Im not sure there really is an easy way to fix this.

[Matter2003]

Originally Posted by bababui

I always thought that that was a case of the AI having some insider information. Im OK with it because its hard for a team of programmers to come up with an AI that will challenge a normal person; let alone 1 man. And the 15% cap is kind of unfair because it would make it impossible to bring back some much loved but declining players to their original team. Im not sure there really is an easy way to fix this.

Actually it wouldn't prevent it at all. It would just make the team that wants to offer him a nonsensical extension compete with the 29 other teams because the player would go to free agency. If they made a better or comparable offer, the player could always choose to go back to them... It would just force the AI to behave like things do in real life...

Think about it...what if your boss called you in the office today and said "We would love to have you here for a while, and we know you are a valuable part of the team. We know you are making $50,000 in salary this year, but moving forward, we are only able to offer you $7,000 per year for the next 5 years. What do you say?"

If you didn't get up and punch your boss right in the face for even suggesting this to you, you would probably tell the guy to go kick boulders, only in not so nice language...

This is the exact same situation that just occurred in what I brought up. The team offered the player an extension for 5 years at 14% of his current salary, and the player said YES!!...

The only place where something like this would be considered acceptable is the Twilight Zone, and it might even be a stretch for them to think its OK...

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by Matter2003

Actually it wouldn't prevent it at all. It would just make the team that wants to offer him a nonsensical extension compete with the 29 other teams because the player would go to free agency. If they made a better or comparable offer, the player could always choose to go back to them... It would just force the AI to behave like things do in real life...

Think about it...what if your boss called you in the office today and said "We would love to have you here for a while, and we know you are a valuable part of the team. We know you are making $50,000 in salary this year, but moving forward, we are only able to offer you $7,000 per year for the next 5 years. What do you say?"

If you didn't get up and punch your boss right in the face for even suggesting this to you, you would probably tell the guy to go kick boulders, only in not so nice language...

This is the exact same situation that just occurred in what I brought up. The team offered the player an extension for 5 years at 14% of his current salary, and the player said YES!!...

The only place where something like this would be considered acceptable is the Twilight Zone, and it might even be a stretch for them to think its OK...

You are right on with this debate. The biggest decline in salary I can every remember(which is VERY rare) was Bernie Williams taking a pay cut from around 12 million to 1.7 million(not exactly sure) but I would be all for you system to eliminate this ridiculous stuff like the Bonderman and Jeter examples.

Bernie was 37 and coming off a season where he had an OBS+ of 85. Basically it was his only chance to still play.

[spitfire]

Originally Posted by Matter2003

Any way you look at it, it is ridiculous for this to be happening at this point in OOTP's development...just my 2 cents...yes it was pretty strongly said, but the standard this game should be held to is pretty high...it does a lot of things tremendously well. Its simple things like this that drive player's nuts because it is so far from reality that it is just silly.

I agree with this sentiment completely. As much enjoyment as we derive from OOTP, we still come across issues like this and the injury substitution problem detailed in another thread. These are issues that make you sit up and say "Hey, that isn't right!". As a product that aims to be a serious simulation of baseball, there shouldn't be any room for problems like this to be left in the game. They may be a P.I.T.A. to get rid of, but that's no excuse for not tackling them.

[Matter2003]

Just had another news story about a MR accepting a 1 year 1.77 million extension when he is making 3.5 million this year. He also has a 2.13 ERA currently, so there is no excuse that he is performing poorly in the current season. And what is up with all these below market extensions being for the same 1.77 million per year?

Something is broken with extensions and it needs to be addressed urgently...

[jasonn29tn14]

Originally Posted by Matter2003

Just had another news story about a MR accepting a 1 year 1.77 million extension when he is making 3.5 million this year. He also has a 2.13 ERA currently, so there is no excuse that he is performing poorly in the current season. And what is up with all these below market extensions being for the same 1.77 million per year?

Something is broken with extensions and it needs to be addressed urgently...

They're all for 1.77 million? Sounds like a bug.....

[bababui]

May we please keep in mind that the finances of the league/teams will dictate the contracts. If there is a lot of unspent money floating around, the AI asks for big contracts..and visa versa.

[Biggio509]

Originally Posted by Matter2003

Why on earth would a player who is having a bad start to the season sign an extension that was heavily based on those stats when they could just wait til the end of the season and hopefully have much better stats by then?

Go to the AI options tab under league setup. You have to go to global options. Default settings are
Ratings weight 40%
Current year stats weight 40%
Previous year's stats weight 15%
2 years ago stats weight 5%.

As you will notice this setting means the AI looks at current year's stats as heavily as ratings. This is great in July for deadline trading but sucks for early extensions.
To fix this you might want to try something like this.
Ratings Weight 40%
Current year 20%
last year 20%
2 years ago 20%.

This, I assume, would make the AI evaluation based on the average of the current year and last 2 years. Here is the rub with veterans often the last 2 years are more important than the current year. With rookies the current year is often more important. So you can iron this out for mid career players and throw rookies a little out of whack due to lack of stats.

Alternative, ratings could be more important. I believe the game uses true ratings here and not scouted ratings.
You could try something like
Ratings weight 60%
current year 0%
last year 30%
2 years ago 10%.

This would put no weight on the current year. Great for April and May but it could lead to some weird trades in July.

There are some suggestions. I would suggest you play around with these numbers and find what make sense to you. You may not have to wait for a patch to fix this problem.

[Eumel]

Just to make sure:

Is it known that AI evaluation settings also affect the player's decisions when signing extensions? For some reason I always though they only applied to the way the AI manages teams.

[oman19]

Originally Posted by Matter2003

Just had another news story about a MR accepting a 1 year 1.77 million extension when he is making 3.5 million this year. He also has a 2.13 ERA currently, so there is no excuse that he is performing poorly in the current season. And what is up with all these below market extensions being for the same 1.77 million per year?

Something is broken with extensions and it needs to be addressed urgently...

You know what I'm sitting here doing a 100 year test run of my league to see how I like the settings and I'm watching the news report go by and I'm seeing a wierd amount of 1.77 million dollar deals as well. Wierd.

[BusterKing]

This bug needs a fix a.s.a.p.

It takes the enjoyment out of the game. I'm sure Markus can find a quick fix for this, we shouldn't have to tweak player evaluation to get proper results.

[jmknpk2]

I'm curious to hear how these players turn out. I usually take these low salary demands as an indication that the player's quality has greatly diminished and he knows it (but I can't see it yet). I don't really know yet, but if I find a guy with good ratings and good stats and he isn't asking for what his appearance demands, I skip him over.

[Biggio509]

Originally Posted by Eumel

Just to make sure:

Is it known that AI evaluation settings also affect the player's decisions when signing extensions? For some reason I always though they only applied to the way the AI manages teams.

From the manual.

"These options control how the game's artificial intelligence evaluates players.
...


In OOTP 10, the computer considers both a player's ratings and his statistical performance over the past 3 years when evaluating players. By changing the values here, you can adjust the formula the computer uses to evaluate players.
I assume it does AI evaluation does affect how much teams will offer a player. "

I does not say that it affects contracts. However, I would think that AI evaluation should have an effect on what the computer offers for a player. I can not confirm this though. If that is true then player demands should be a function of average salary in the league and the player's evaluation of himself. So ratings and performance should have an impact on demand.

I am not sure that player demands work like initial contracts but I have a suspicion they might. From the manual.
"To calculate initial contracts, the league calculates the average player quality at each position. Then it compares each player to that baseline, and based on the difference assigns a contract that is based on the salary steps (above average, good, star, and so on) in the league financial rules. Also factored in are service time (which is generated randomly), age, and a certain amount of randomness. Arbitration-eligible players get less money, and players who are eligible for the league minimum get that amount.Warning! Due to the flexibility of the financial model, player contracts might be structured differently from what is written here, depending on which financial options are enabled.:"


So if player demands are similar to this then AI evaluation would affect the demand. It would affect where players stand in the step system. So if a player's average quality declines then he would demand less. That still leaves an open question as to how average quality is calculated. Hopefully, this gives some insight but I could be grasping at straws here because there is little documentation, in the manual on how this works.



So I guess that is the next question where are the player's stats and ratings rankings as compared to the league. If you have actual stats turned on for overall evaluation then you can easily see if the player is a star or slightly above average, according to ratings if you use the 20 to 80 ranking scale and have compare overall rating by position turned on. It is a lot harder to tell if stars are on. Some 5 stars are superstars and some are a tier below and really close to be being 4 stars. Just as some 3 stars are close to 4 stars and some close to 2 stars.

[Mike Lowe]

Giving this a bump to see what the latest is...

[BusterKing]

Originally Posted by Mike Lowe

Giving this a bump to see what the latest is...

Nice bump but in deaf ears. Swept under the carpet like many other bugs that re-appears in every version, yet never fixed.