Some thoughts for the RC - and rest of the league

[Colby]

What do you mean by the "highest payroll in real-life 2012 MLB"?  I did not think there was a correlation between our teams and MLB teams.  Perhaps, that is what confused Dan Wood as well.

From the chat
rcankosy: we need the layman's explanation for all this
Delete Today at 04:51:05 PM
rcankosy: I'm afraid no more than 5 people may understand all this
Delete Today at 04:51:27 PM
shooter47: Haven't the orioles come pretty close to bottoming out their cap...if you finish 30th every year the only fluctuation in the cap would be what the lowest team in the majors has spent?
Delete Today at 04:51:59 PM
shooter47: I understand the cap system...its not that bad
Delete Today at 04:52:10 PM
ProFSL: there is no layman's explanation other than this... you win, and your caps two years out will increase a bit
Delete Today at 04:52:25 PM
ProFSL: sound logic was developed to put it together, it doesn't replicate revenue sharing or ownership, but it is a great cap adjustment formula
Delete Today at 04:53:02 PM
rcankosy: the logic is sound
Delete Today at 04:53:46 PM
rcankosy: the effect are not predicatble (at least not to me)
Delete Today at 04:54:01 PM
rcankosy: asked another way
Delete Today at 04:56:38 PM
rcankosy: how many years of winning the WS would it take for the As to "inherit" the Yanks' real life MLB payroll?
Delete Today at 04:57:12 PM
rcankosy: 5, 10, 25 years?
Delete Today at 04:57:23 PM
rcankosy: ever?
Delete Today at 04:57:26 PM
shooter47: a long time...
Delete Today at 04:57:45 PM
rcankosy: understood
Delete Today at 04:58:22 PM
rcankosy: define long time
Delete Today at 04:58:26 PM
ProFSL: a long time
Delete Today at 04:58:40 PM
rcankosy: if it's more than 5 years, something is wrong
Delete Today at 04:58:45 PM
ProFSL: I can break out a spreadsheet for this one
Delete Today at 04:58:55 PM
rcankosy: we should not be wed to our real life counter-parts for that long
Delete Today at 04:59:02 PM
ProFSL: cap is at $81m, and say the highest payroll + $20m is $230m
Delete Today at 04:59:06 PM
rcankosy: that defeats the premise of winning
Delete Today at 04:59:14 PM
shooter47: It's designed to make the changes to the salary cap smoother and not raise or fall by huge amounts
Delete Today at 05:00:23 PM
rcankosy: I know we capped it at 20M per season
Delete Today at 05:01:00 PM
rcankosy: I mean 20%
Delete Today at 05:01:10 PM
ProFSL: got the answer...
Delete Today at 05:01:38 PM
ProFSL: if they win world series every year
Delete Today at 05:02:31 PM
ProFSL: their caps for 2012/13 are set
Delete Today at 05:02:38 PM
ProFSL: 2014 is at $90.5m right now
Delete Today at 05:02:46 PM
ProFSL: but looks like it will go to $102m
Delete Today at 05:02:52 PM
ProFSL: In 2017, it will be $148.6m
Delete Today at 05:03:07 PM
ProFSL: In 2019, it is no longer affected by the 20/20 smoothing adjustment and the cap is $184.0m
Delete Today at 05:03:42 PM
rcankosy: wow
Delete Today at 05:04:33 PM
ProFSL: 2020-2024, $195.5m, $204.1m, $210.6m, $215.4m, $219.1m
Delete Today at 05:04:37 PM
ProFSL: the increases slow down since they are so close to the top
Delete Today at 05:04:46 PM
rcankosy: effectively, they would become the Yankees if they continue to win
Delete Today at 05:05:09 PM
ProFSL: note that if all of a sudden they start losing big time, worst in the league, that there will still be two years in which their caps would increase based on the past
Delete Today at 05:05:19 PM
ProFSL: Of course... but it doesn't happen overnight, it takes up to a decade of dominance for a small market team to turn into the Yankees
Delete Today at 05:05:52 PM
shooter47: eventually yeah...this is assuming that the spending in MLB baseball stays similar to what it currently is.
Delete Today at 05:05:58 PM
ProFSL: also, those #'s aren't set
Delete Today at 05:06:03 PM
ProFSL: they are assumptions based on the $230m figure
Delete Today at 05:06:12 PM
ProFSL: MLB inflation will drive these numbers higher
Delete Today at 05:06:19 PM
ProFSL: and affect our market prices for players
Delete Today at 05:06:24 PM
ProFSL: We thought about all of this when the rules were developed
Delete Today at 05:06:32 PM
rcankosy: gotcha
Delete Today at 05:06:32 PM
ProFSL: As opposed to a simple layman's way which will turn the A's into the Yankees within a few years

[rcankosy]

You can just send me the spreadsheet (or Howe or whoever has it) and I will update the info.  Essentially, if the A's win the World Series then the highest payroll in real-life 2012 MLB will be applied to their future caps (two years out, and used for three years).  There is a stipulation that prevents volatile cap swings of more than 20%, so that is regressed against the current caps.

What do you mean by the "highest payroll in real-life 2012 MLB"?  I did not think there was a correlation between our teams and MLB teams.  Perhaps, that is what confused Dan Wood as well.

[Colby]

Colby,

Could you please provide a re-fresher course on how team salary caps are computed?  I too am curious when my own team's cap will be re-calculated and how it will be done.   

You can just send me the spreadsheet (or Howe or whoever has it) and I will update the info.  Essentially, if the A's win the World Series then the highest payroll in real-life 2012 MLB will be applied to their future caps (two years out, and used for three years).  There is a stipulation that prevents volatile cap swings of more than 20%, so that is regressed against the current caps.

[rcankosy]

Colby,

Could you please provide a re-fresher course on how team salary caps are computed?  I too am curious when my own team's cap will be re-calculated and how it will be done.   

[Brewers GM]

Just what I was told

Fair enough.  Colby, can you clarify?

[Dan Wood]

Just what I was told

[Brewers GM]

As far as #5 goes, I spoke with Colby because I was confused about why my cap was dropping every year, and he said because the Reds in real life made the play-offs and I had not. His Pirates had a poor 2010 and a good 2011 and his cap climbed both years. Why? Because the real life Pirates suck, that is until this season. So no, the cap influences aren't totally based on what happens in this league. If I finished 16th of 30 teams, and in my mind my cap shouldn't have gone up or down. I also apologize for talking about my team, but it is what I know best, not really familiar with how everyone else feels about their cap situation.

I'm confused here, because I did not think there was any tie between your MLB team's performance and your FGM salary cap.  The payroll from MLB teams is currently used, but not one to one with your FGM team.  If you finish 5th in FGM, then your STAND will include the 5th highest MLB payroll in your future salary cap calculations.  There should not be any tie to your MLB team's actual performance or directly to their payroll (at least no more than to any other team's payroll).

Now, we include a rolling three year average in the calculations, meaning performance from the previous three years will impact your current cap.  Since prior to 2009 we did not have FGM standings, MLB performance was used.  This would impact numbers up until 2012, which included 2009, 2010 and 2011 performance numbers.  However 2009 was the last year of MLB data so starting in 2013 it should be purely FGM based.  Also, no MLB performance for 2010 or 2011 should have impacted the cap.

What am I missing?

[Brewers GM]

1) Change the FA compensation system. It's harder for teams like and myself to dominate the draft if we don't have 10 picks in the first round. Ben brought up using the top 150 players by VORP. The problem with this approach is that there VORP does not correlate perfectly with our scoring system. Preferably, the top players are identified using our own scoring system

To clarify, I meant someone calculating VORP for our league, our scoring system.  This is no different than setting up a value based draft calculation.

[Dan Wood]

So that is

3 for cap - Colby, Me, Mike
1 for keep - Ben
1 for spreadable bonus - Howe

Need votes from rest of RC...Shooter, Kungfuwig, and Roy I believe (unless you voted and I missed it)

[h4cheng]

I really don't think that is the solution at all. Because then you have to make drastic changes in the salary structure. Right now, we are discussing a minimal change in the draft structure. And using MLB as an example, that is how lower to mid level teams maintain a level of balance. The Yankees are always at the bottom of the draft, but they remain good because of their budget. No one goes to see the Rays, but they are good because of Price, Longoria and some very good drafts. But even a low level team like the Rays wouldn't balk at the cost of Price because he was who they considered the best player in that draft. But in our version of the draft he might fall to 29.

On a different subject, I did argue at the beginning if this post, what is considered success in order to elevate one's payroll. But even that comes down to be difficult to quantify and qualify. I think the best way to maintain a balance in this league is to not have a team spend an enormous chunk of their budget on a bonus. It's not even a choice because do most people want to head into the season as a "loser"? That may be feasible in MLB, but here it affects activity which then affects overall league satisfaction.

To me at least there's more work in implementing a new cap compared to changing the numbers to an existing cap. I think I prefer the option of spreading out the bonus over a new cap.