Salary Cap

[christoph]

I have yet to see a discussion on instituting a salary cap on this board. The current financial constraints are not enough to prevent gross overspending and debt accumulation. Besides preventing these things, I think a salary cap would give small market teams the ability to be competitive. Having economic parity would make small market teams more playable and thus increase the chances that leagues would be fully active. It would also safeguard (at least partly) against abuses such as stacking. The quality of gameplay and the quality of available players would not change -- i.e. teams could still post 100 wins, but with a salary cap this possibility would be extended to teams other than the Yankees and their big market cohorts.

[GFlook]

Salary has not even been instituted in real baseaball and Im sure thats why the small market teams mogul points are better in some instances than large market teams

[christoph]

Given the poor response I have gotten to this post, I now understand why there is no salary cap in baseball. The point is that a salary cap would not change the quality of players, but bring parity to the game. There was a quote awhile back that said that the Yankees don't rebuild, they reload. The big market teams have a significant advantage in this game. While I would not force the cap on this game, I think it should be an optional feature.

[christoph]

Vote!

[TGG]

Caps hurt small market worse then large market. I hate the idea of a cap an have posted on this many times. It is something that is very classic in sports an one of the best sports conversations you can have with people most times , but getting everyone to agree, or to even vote seems like a waste of time :(

[christoph]

How do you think caps hurt small market teams more that big ones? The big teams will always be able to pay more and this is why they are better and historically more prestigious to play for. Living in Canada I understand this well.

[TGG]

Ok this is very easy to answer..........


I was playing as the Twins, I had a very good pitching staff but no hitting, ok that is fine, so I saved, an saved , an saved. After 3 sim " Years" I had saved up 150 points to go bidding on FA, but by that time large market teams not only could have good players already, but had 250-500 points saved , so they easly went out an ( sometimes ) over bid, or just plain out bid myself, or anyone else with very limited room.


On the flip side of that, I am still stuck at 150-250 point "cap" so I could sign a good player ( still have money left over ) but I could not sign any more then that if they are at high pay rolls, ( this might not be true with everyone, but I have seen it with my team) Because of this cap thing, the computer does not like the idea of you losing money over the cap, so even saving does very little.


Gotta share the wealth, if you want it to be fun to play the game, other wise it is just the have an have nots.

[takaplan]

I think salary caps are anti-baseball. The dynamics between small and large markets are what make the game America's pastime. If all the financial aspects are neutralized, then it would take a lot of excitement out of the game.

Tom

[TGG]

I agree, but remember this is going to be sold on the net, not something that is just for home use. Even if I am in the best league here, playing as the Twins,Tampa, what ever crappy team year after year, losing, never really making it, would that be fun for you ? Would you want to spend ( add amount here ) of your money to play this game ?


While it is in beta it is fine. But once out there, just how many one or two man leagues are there going to be ? Where everyone can open their own league so they can get a good team or at least a team with some kinda fan / profit base. Even if there are just a few leagues, and alot of computer ones, am I to bounce from league to league untill I get a good team ? What then 2025 an not know a person on the team ? or be stuck in a league where very little people do anything ? Those all sound like things I would not want to pay for. I can set up those leagues myself on the net.


I am not saying to make all the cities equal, but like my other post states.

[avaynberg]

One of the great things in baseball for me have always been the Dynasty Teams, just ask the Yankees. These have historicaly been large market teams, but that's what makes it so fun to out think them. I had the Reds in a Beta league, I managed them from 2001 - 2017. After 17 seasons, they were the #1 rated team in baseball despite an average payroll of around 280 points. This team averaged around 95 wins a year and was consistently i the post season. Doing this despite teams like N.Y. (take you choice), Boston, Cleveland, L.A., and Colorado, among others, is what made it so much fun and such a chalange. This was done with a few stratagies. One, I accepted the fact that to build this team for the future I would need to make some sacrafices (Trading guys like Griffey, Harnish, and others, for solid prospects). Two, dropping my expences to a minimum and lowering ticket prices so I don't lose my fan base.) After building up a good point reserve (a lot of the trades included 5-10- 15-20 points) and getting a number of good prospects I started dumping money into my farm system. One point of advice is don't drop your scouting too low or your prized prospects may actually be just suspects. Now with a strong farm system and a good young nucleus, I had the point to go after a number of good free agents and sign them to longer term contracts, providing a good mix of veterans and kids to build a consistent contender with. If there was a salary cap none of this could of been done, because even though I had points to spare being a small market team, my cap would not be high enough to get the free agents or trade for stars.

[Slugger222]

One of the problems that I see with this game is that most people want to win and win now. They want to take their favorite team and players to the World Series, and hang the rest.

The result is that the ppl plays about 7 or 8 seasons, then bails for a new challenge - or to try and repeat the same one.

BBMOL is supposed to be a game that is played like a marathon, not a sprint. You build for the long haul. If you are Florida, you revel in 3rd place finishes. You celebrate finisihing .500. You collect your mogul points, and look for every opportunity to grab a stud at a bargain price. Then, you can make a run for the playoffs, grab some serious mogul points, and end up beating Atlanta and NY in Mogul points - despite the fact that they may have gone to the show 7 or 8 times !

The whole point is to manage a successful baseball franchise, and that is defined differently depending on what market you are in.

Unfortunately, I hear alot of people complaining that the small market teams are no fun to play because they don't feel that they can compete with the large market clubs.

In NABL, the commish is contemplating whole sale changes to try to equal things, despite the fact that a tier 5 team (Kansas City) is leading the mogul point standings, and in my opinion, WINNING THE GAME!

However, he is reacting to the very real problem of people quiting his league because they just are not having fun. And, no, losing is no fun. I don't care how many mogul points you pick up for 4th place, it is no fun finishing there consitantly.

[Godard]

I revel in constantly being disappointed in my teams.

Thus, I have San Diego and Minnesota in BBM.

If Clay markets this game in Philly, Boston and Chicago, I think we'll have plenty of masochistic managers.

On a more serious note, I think this game should strive for ultra realism. It's a fringe game on a fringe market. Compromising the game will turn off the core fans. It's not like all the twerps who love EA Sports' baseball games are gonna become BBM converts!!!