Do you like the current Free Agent Bidding system?

[khan]

Just wondering how many people like the current FA bidding system. In my opinion, it does not simulate real life. In real life, when you make a good offer to a player, the player either accepts it or rejects it.

The player does not wait until the end of the sim to decide. And his price doesn't triple in the last 10 seconds of the sim.

Any ideas?

[shanrocks]

You are right in that it doesn't simulate real life very well. But IRL, there are a lot more factors at play than can be contained in a simulation like this. Team loyalty, home town, a consistently winning team - these factors aren't considered in the game at this point.

So, what it basically comes down to is the highest bidder, and the amount of time left in the off-season. I can't say I agree with your point of how once a good offer is made to a player, they take it. Look at Glavine this year - he told teams exactly what kind of offer he was looking for. Obviously, if no one took him up on it, he would have lowered his demands. But he set the expectations, not the teams. I think he was simply looking for the best offer out there, and would have signed with any team that was willing to pay him for it.

A-rod is another great example. He said it wasn't about money - but everyone knows that's baloney. He demanded a clause in his contract that he must be the highest paid player on the Rangers while he plays for them. Even team loyalty (staying with the team that drafted him) or being on a winning team in Seattle didn't keep him there - he went with the best offer he got.

When a player gets an offer from a team, they are not going to immediately accept it. You know that word of the offer gets out to the other teams (mostly through that player's agent), just to see if something better comes along. After a few days, if nothing does and the player likes the deal, he signs. You always have to give a guy time to think about it.

I'm not saying that the current system is the best, but I think it works pretty good.

[khan]

I don't really see your point on Glavine or AROD. I agree with you that the players accept the best offer. They have an asking price and it keeps dropping until someone accepts that asking price.

In BMO, the price drops until a bidder accepts that price. Then, at the end of the simulation, 12 other guys jump in and bid 20 points more than the asking price. Thats not very realistic.

[monte]

In BMO, the price drops until a bidder accepts that price. Then, at the end of the simulation, 12 other guys jump in and bid 20 points more than the asking price. Thats not very realistic.

Looks to me like you are saying we need a change in the owners who play this game more than a change in the actual game.

Its a simple bidding system, why complicate it? Its perfect for a game like this where owners log in at all different times.

What kind of solution are you looking for? You offer no suggestions so it just looks like another pointless rant from one of our resident ranters.

[khan]

I suggest that we keep the Free Agent signing system the same during the off-season as it is during the season.

The asking price keeps dropping every sim. When you see a guy you think is worth their asking price, you sign him. If I remember correctly, this is how it was in the first Baseball Mogul game.

Pointless Rant? Resident Ranter? You're right. I would like to see people like you out of the game. What reason did I give you call my rant "pointless"? But then again you and your "manager" rank are probably high and mighty so if you don't agree with me, my posts must be pointless.

[monte]

The asking price keeps dropping every sim. When you see a guy you think is worth their asking price, you sign him. If I remember correctly, this is how it was in the first Baseball Mogul game.

Exactlly....so what you are saying is that if 2 owners are waiting for a FA to drop to the same price, then the one who happens to wake up at 6AM and logs on first should get him? That's the beauty of the system as it is, is that it gives *all* the owners a fair shot at any free agent inbetween sims. If the bidding price goes up during that time, big deal....haven't you ever seen a FA where you said, 'I'd be happy to get this guy at <whatever> points, but I'll wait to see if I can get him cheaper.', only to have to bid up when others try to grab him cheap too?

So, sorry if you are offended that I called your rant pointless but to criticize a system without really thinking it out and to offer no suggestions of your own...well, that's pointless.

I get a kick out of you making fun of my 'manager' rating. If only I too had 567 posts, of which 523 are critical of some part of the game, then maybe you would take me more seriously. Oh well, I guess I won't post anymore and instead I will sit back and wait for you to write 'Khan Baseball Mogul' with all these wonderful features you have ideas for. Please contact me when it is time to beta it....I want to be the first to sign up.

[dturkenk]

This is kind of an interesting auction system. It combines a Dutch auction and an English auction, but doesn't really seem to resolve the problems inherent in them.

I guess the first thing to do is lay out terminology here

Dutch auction: price starts out high and then drops. the first person willing to pay the price wins

English auction: price starts out low, winner is the person willing to pay the most at the end of a set time period, once a reserve price is reached

Reserve price: the lowest possible price the seller will accept


This system most nearly represents an English auction. Price starts out low (1 pt per year) and rises as people out bid each other. There are a few major differences though. (1)The auction ends on the hour immediately after the reserve price is met. (2) The reserve price drops over time (this is the part similar to a Dutch auction).

As many people have demonstrated on eBay, the optimal way to win an auction with a set end time is to "snipe" - or to sweep in the last few seconds with a higher bid - in order to guarantee that no one can outbid you. This behavior has caused some auctioneers (not sure about ebay) to extend bidding if a bid has been placed in the last 5 mins of the timeframe. Otherwise, you are rewarding the people who can continuously check the auctions.

There's an argument that says you should set your max bid and don't complain if that gets beaten - whether it's with 5 days to go or with 5 seconds to go. And that argument holds water when the value of the item is known. However, many of the items on auction do not have well known values - because they're unique. Auctions lead to price discovery in these cases - value is determined by how much a person is willing to pay.

And my willingness to pay can depend on many factors that can change up until the end of the auction. Probably the biggest determinant to my willingness to pay is the available substitutes. To put this into baseball terms, I'm not going to pay 80 points for Derek Jeter when Nomar is available for 25. But take away Nomar (and Tejada and A-Rod, etc) and leave me with Rey Ordonez as my only other option, and I might be willing to pay 80 points for Jeter.

Since these auctions aren't discrete, my willingness to pay varies on how the other auctions are going. And if I can't watch the auctions every minute, then I can't determine my price. So that means setting my max bid with any sort of accuracy at any point in the future is a very difficult task.

Ok, so I've covered why things don't seem to work now - basically the advantages go to the people who can sit in front of the computer all the time and protect their bids or who can snipe (nothing derogatory here, just the term).

Now, here's an alternative. And I don't think it would take much changing the code since FA signing during the season already works this way. Make it a strict Dutch auction. Set the asking price and have it drop throughout the offseason. First person willing to pay that much gets the player. It still gives some advantage to the players who can get in right after the prices drop, but that advantage is mitigated by not having to protect your bids. Sure, you could argue it's not realistic, but it's been pointed out many, many times what's not realistic about the current process. To me, if we're not going to go for full realism in this case (which admittedly is hard if not impossible), then why should we go for flawed realism. Which I think it's pretty clear it is flawed - from the current vote (100% saying they weren't happy with the way things were when I started writing this long post).

And by the way monte...


What kind of solution are you looking for? You offer no suggestions so it just looks like another pointless rant from one of our resident ranters.

you had some good points in your first post, and it looked like there was going to be an intelligent discussion, but it really just takes a lot away when you make ad hominen attacks and don't stick to the points.

[khan]

The reason that I play BMO is because it simulates real-life baseball. Thats also the reason Sports Mogul pays $$$ to the MLBPA to use real player names. They pay that money because they know more players will play BMO if it uses real player names. Thats also the reason BMO uses 9 innings, strikes and balls, three outs per inning, etc. They do it to simulate real life baseball.

In that real life baseball, Free Agents sign with whoever gives them the $. The players don't wait till the end of the simulation to accept. If the Giants offered David Bell $20 Million dollars per year on the first day of FA, he would have signed with them. So I'm asking why we can't have the FA system in BMO simulate real-life FA.


Originally posted by monte
That's the beauty of the system as it is, is that it gives *all* the owners a fair shot at any free agent inbetween sims.

In regards to this comment, the current system does not give everyone a fair shot. It only gives a fair shot to the guys who are online at the end of the simulation. Lets use an example- I want Barry Bonds. He's asking for 100 points per year. I make my bid 110 just in case someone else decides they want Barry too. Then I leave. Towards the end of the sim, someone decides to offer 200 points per year and they sign him.

Is that a "fair shot" for everyone? The fact that I wasn't around at the end of the sim penalizes me and gives an advantage to whoever is online at the time.

[monte]

Set the asking price and have it drop throughout the offseason. First person willing to pay that much gets the player.

But by doing this, you don't allow all the owners the oppurtunity to get in on the low bid, only the one who logs in first, which I think is a worse solution than the system we currently have.

Also, I agree that sniping is a potential problem although it doesn't seem to be a widespread one because atleast there is a check in there. Having the max bid option eliminates being able to come in and pick off a FA in the last seconds with a +1 point bid.

I'll be interested to hear some of the suggestions but this is one area I really think Sports Mogul got it right. They created a FA system that gives all the owners an equal chance and at the same time does its best to eliminate any potential cheating. Why change it?

[monte]

He's asking for 100 points per year. I make my bid 110 just in case someone else decides they want Barry too. Then I leave. Towards the end of the sim, someone decides to offer 200 points per year and they sign him.

Exactlly right that's a fair shot...you prove my point exactlly because atleast under this system you had a shot to make a bid. The fact that someone ended up outbidding is just tough luck but the max bid option was there to protect your original bid...it just wasn't high enough.

I think the point about realism is a bit of a grey area....we all want realism, that's what makes the game fun, but we all want fairness too. With that being said, I'd be willing to bet that if a free agent in real life said 'I want $20 million a year' and 5 minutes later, team A showed up and said here you go, that player wouldn't sign right away....he'd wait to see if he could squeeze $25 million out of Team B. Who knows though?

[dturkenk]

Exactlly right that's a fair shot...you prove my point exactlly because atleast under this system you had a shot to make a bid. The fact that someone ended up outbidding is just tough luck but the max bid option was there to protect your original bid...it just wasn't high enough.

And you would have had a fair shot to get Bonds with Khan's suggestion too - you just weren't willing to pay the price the previous sim before it dropped.

The issue here - which admittedly got lost in my way too long post - is that it's hard to determine willingness to pay. I can't accurately set my max bid 4 hours in advance. But I can tell when I'm faced with a price whether I want to pay it. To me, that's what makes this system more palatable. Yes, there are the same advantages to people who can be online all the time - but this is less unfair to the people who can't be.

[monte]

But dturkenk, isn't the max bid there to help you determine *exactlly* how much you would be willing to go to pay for a player? If an owner determines that he can't pay more than 110 for a player and sets his max bid for that, then if that player goes for 200, why get upset? (well....except owners like that run their teams into the ground causing financial ruin and throwing off the competativeness of the entire league out the window but that could be an entirely seperate thread.) :P

[dturkenk]

I agree with you about the purpose of a max bid. I just disagree with you about how easy it is to figure out the max bid.

A max bid is dependent on many things including (but not limited to):

1. Team's needs - I'll pay more for a player if I don't have anyone to fill his position - this can change over the course of an offseason (although not likely between visits to the site, unless a proposed trade has been accepted)

2. Salary constraints - if I'm 200 points below budget, I might be willing to pay more for a player than if I'm 20 below - this can change drastically over the course of an offseason based on how successful my other bids are and if there were any trades

3. Potential substitutes - as I stated above, if Nomar and Tejada are available, I'll pay less for Jeter than I would if only Rey Ordonez were available. Obviously this changes over the course of the offseason as players are signed from Free Agency.

Yes, I can evaluate all these things at the beginning of the offseason (or whenever I can check) and set (or revise) my max bids. But I can't do it when I'm not online, which other people can do when they're online.

Let's work with the SS example. I'll make some simplifying assumptions: We have 4 shortstops available: A-Rod, Jeter, Nomar, and Ordonez. I value them in that order, and I'll show their relative value on October 31 in a moment. Let's assume I have 100 points of salary room and I'm trying to fill one other position, which I will pick up in a trade that will take 35 points of salary in March.

October 31:
I value the 4 SS at the following prices:
A-Rod 75
Jeter 50
Nomar 25
Ordonez 0

I know I need a second position, and I want to stay within my budget. I'm worried about having to pay for more than 1 SS, but I'd still love to get A-Rod.

So I'd set my max bid for A-Rod 75. I'd potentially set Nomar to 25, but that would leave me 0 points for my other position if I win both SS.



December 31:
A-Rod went for 100 points - over my max bid. That's fine. So Jeter, Nomar and ReyRey are still out there. But because there's less depth, it's now more important for me to get Jeter and Nomar. So I bid 60 for Jeter and 30 for Nomar, plus I make a 10 point bid for my other position.


February 1:
Jeter's gone. Went for 70 points. My 10 point bid wasn't enough for the other position. So I still have 100 points to fill two positions. But for SS, there's only Nomar and Ordonez left. I really don't want Ordonez. He would hurt my team more than if I moved Jim Thome there (check out the bidding finals for that one). Ordonez is still worth 0 points to me. I decide Nomar is now worth 80 points to me. So that's my new max bid on Nomar. I also make a trade offer for the 35 point player.

March 1:
The trade is accepted. I now only have 65 points to spend on a SS. My new max bid is 65 for Nomar, and still 0 for Ordonez.


So my max bids have progressed:

A-Rod 75, Jeter 0, Nomar 0, Ordonez 0
Jeter 60, Nomar 30, Ordonez 0
Nomar 80, Ordonez 0
Nomar 65, Ordonez 0

If I know I'm going to be away from the computer all offseason, what do I make my max bids?

If I'm there when I make my trade offer, and gone the rest of the offseason, what should my max bid be?

If I can only check in at certain times, I can make a decision then, without having to worry about how things might change that could change my max bid.

[monte]

Well, I'm not sure quite how to respond to this. The scenario that you just laid out was a perfect example of why it is fun to play this game with the way the system is. The planning, the decisons, the anxiety of finding out if you will land the FA you want and the resulting happiness or pissed-off-ness. I agree it definitely isn't easy to determine where and when to spend the money.

It is an online game and as such, you need to be online to play it. That's why I like the daily sims more because I just check my teams in the morning when I get to work and again at night when I get home. (except for days like today when I have seemingly endless time to post to threads) The days I can't be on-line...oh well, what can I expect? Granted, it blows when those days fall during the off-season but I can't expect the system to stop and I don't think the system should change for those cases....it is an online game after all.

[dturkenk]

Hey, I'm the first to support being online to check the game. But it does punish the people who can't check in all the time because of work or school or etc. They might like the fast paced game because otherwise the seasons go too slowly, but it really hurts them in the FA.

I'm around a lot (well most offseasons), so I manage to do pretty well for myself, but it doesn't mean I think it's the fairest way to proceed.

Anyway, I don't think there's a single right answer - there's always room for improvement and we're just trying to suggest some to get some feedback.