Draft Pick Compensation must go

[House Of Cards]

Maybe I'm alone on this but it doesn't seem like anyone truly understands how this work. I know I don't, and I know the Commish doesn't.

Somehow the game made me give my 2nd round pick to the Reds - the first pick in the 2nd round. From talks, it seems like the draft pick compensation is a year behind, so its from last offseason (i.e., not this most recent offseason). That offseason I was just watching, and I did not sign any FAs. So how did this happen?

So how did I lose this draft pick? And, to be honest, why would a rebuilding team give up a 2nd round pick that is certain to be high for a mediocre FA?

Note that I am not attacking the Commish, but this draft pick compensation has to go.

[Commissioner/Reds]

Ray is a classy guy and a long time owner (previously in the MLML and now the PBA). He does bring up a good point. I've yet to edit anything in the game (except to add Managers each year). All edits are shown in the game and can be seen by everyone.

He is not the first to bring up the compensation pick. I personally like it, but it does have downfalls (which I hear were fixed in ver 10). I've stood by (and so has the rules) that we use this at our own risk. I've lost a pick before I wasn't sure I should have.


Do you guys want to ditch the draft pick or keep going and may upgrade to 10 soon?

[philsgm]

I've been "chirping" about this for many seasons now. I was in the minority for a long time, but it seems like my campaigning has finally helped! Compensation in my opinion "kills" free agency. Why the heck would I want to sign a half-assed 2B who at the time looked Ok, end up giving up a first round pick for him, he then bats .230, and then on top of that won't even give me a chance to resign him. If we were playing in the year 2009, maybe then I could see it, as this rule helps protect the small market teams like the Marlins, Royals, etc.

As the Phillies owner and having gotten burnt twice in each of the last two seasons, I made up my mind to never participate in free agency again in this league and just build from within. Now, the commish took to "posturing" and said I was tanking the season to get a good pick which offended me since I've been playing this game for over six years and am above that kind of play. When in fact, the Phillies hands were tied because we had little money to spend in free agency, and no first round picks for two years. He probably should have looked at that before making accusations. But the league is fun and I know he puts alot of time into it, so I overlooked that, and just figured he was acting "stupidly". lol

Bottom line, this rule blows, and to make it worse, the game does a piss poor job of deciding who is a Class A free agent, and who is a Class B. I don't pay a whole lot of attention to free agency in this league because of this rule.

[piratesgm]

Aug 2, 2009 14:16:51 GMT -5 philsgm said:

I've been "chirping" about this for many seasons now. I was in the minority for a long time, but it seems like my campaigning has finally helped! Compensation in my opinion "kills" free agency. [...] If we were playing in the year 2009, maybe then I could see it, as this rule helps protect the small market teams like the Marlins, Royals, etc.

In case anyone hadn't noticed, we are developing a set of "haves" and "have nots" in the PBA. Two of the three NY teams have 1906 budgets THREE TIMES the size of that in Detroit, and 50% higher than all but the top half-dozen teams (another of which is in NY). I'm fine with the compensation rule, although I do agree that the AI does an odd job of assessing Type A free agents sometimes. In any event, these are clearly marked and everyone has the infor necessary to make the value judgment as to whether it's worth the payoff to jump into the FA market.

[tiny]

I have been really adament about the need to redo or drop the compensation business ever since I signed Tommy Leach! I lost my 1st round pick and Leach has been less than super! What really galls me is that I've had three Type A players signed away from me and I've yet to see a draft pick of any kind! I don't want to change anything until I find out when I'm going to get those draft picks.

I also haven't played in the Free Agent market since the Leach signing because of the compensation issue. But I also haven't played because of the money free agents are asking for. As the Leach deal has shown me, too many times the free agent market is a crap shoot. And the small market teams like the Browns are limited by the size of the stadiums (the Browns is 8,000 seats) and even if you do well you can't draw like the big market teams. When i came into the league midway through the 1903 season the Browns finished third and drew 153,432. In 1904 the Browns finished tied for 1st (losing a one game playoff) and drew 115,692. This year the Browns are in 1st and we've drawn 1,512 per game! How am I expected to compete with the big money teams? I need to have a bigger stadium to have any hope but how do we expand our seating (I've already discussed this with the Commish and we haven't figured that out)?

So, yes, there are some problems but there are always problems and part of the challenge is to win despite them!

[House Of Cards]

Well, so far that's 3 against, the Commish seems to be against it as well, and then PIT seems neutral.

Its early but seems that the rule should be stricken...

[Commissioner/Reds]

1. Phillies. I'll be honest. I didn't really mean you were tanking. I saw your record and just wanted to inquire to your opinion on why you were playing so bad (after years of being one of the top teams).

2. I know it seems I make decisions slow, but I do try to balance all the different views from owners. In addition, I do have to balance the "large market" teams running away with the league to the occasional "lost" draft pick.

3. I hate the idea of people losing draft picks. I've been leary of doing any editing (in this case editing picks). I've seen it as we are all in the same boat. In addition, I really do not have the time to go through each teams transactions and try to find out where they lost a draft pick. I have to leave some things up to the game itself.

4. I'll post a vote to keep or get rid of it before the next free agency. Let's keep discussing it.

[piratesgm]

Aug 2, 2009 17:56:02 GMT -5 tiny said:

What really galls me is that I've had three Type A players signed away from me and I've yet to see a draft pick of any kind! I don't want to change anything until I find out when I'm going to get those draft picks.

You get a pick when another team signs a Type A (first round pick) or Type B (second round pick) free agent off of your roster, AND the team signing that player does not pick in the top half of the draft order. So if one of the worst eight teams in the PBA poaches your Type A/B stud, you get nothing -- this promotes competitive balance in that the overall cost to sign a top free agent (dollars plus compensation) is higher for the better clubs.

The Commissioner can turn this off entirely in the League financial options. Note that this has been improved (in the sense that it more closely matches modern MLB practice, so teams don't lose picks as part of the process) in OOTP10:

... players eligible for free agency need to be offered arbitration as well if the team wants to receive compensation once the player signs with a different team. Compensation now follows real major league rules, and a supplemental first draft round has been added to the first-year player draft.

[House Of Cards]

PIT, that can't be right because somehow the Reds got my 2nd round pick and I've been one of the worst teams for a couple years running.

But if that is the rule, then I really want to know how the commish got my pick! (And I want it back!!)

[bostonredsoxgm]

I like compensation, but I’m happy to go along with whatever Jayson feels is best for the league, especially given what some owners feel about it.

The Pirates GM has made a lot of very good points, although the compensation rules for bottom-half finishers aren’t quite so lenient. Teams in the bottom half of the standings (from the previous year) lose a 2nd round draft pick if they sign either a Class A or B free agent. The only safeguard is that no team is going to lose one of the top 8 picks. I lost my 2nd round pick this year – 20th overall, but I knew when I made the signing that it was going to happen.

Compensation applies from the immediately preceding free agent signing period. The Cards probably lost their second round pick as a result of signing Emil Frisk. Even though he hadn’t played in the majors recently, he had a good reputation, indicated in part by the fact that he got $10,000 a year.

The Browns mentioned they haven’t earned the compensation they thought they should. If a team finishes in the bottom half of the standings, they can only lose one second round pick, max. So, if somebody signs multiple compensation-worthy picks, it may be that only one team realizes any compensation from the deals. Also, FA designations change over time – your Class A free agent in November may become a no comp free agent by March, if he’s still on the market. The real MLB is very clear on this – no compensation for free agents signed after a designated date – typically in early December. OOTP 9 is murkier, but if you check, you can see when any player’s class designation changes.

The game doesn’t do a perfect job of assigning Class A and B free agents. But it’s not terrible. Designations are based on position strength ratings. MLB uses the same designations in the real free agent market, with a similar way of determining the ratings.

The most important point from the Pirates and the Browns, as far as I’m concerned (I’ve said the same in a previous posting): We are already a league of “haves” and “have-nots.” Free agent compensation helps reduce the gap, but only a little.

Whatever else, we should do what we want here, and make it as fun as possible for ourselves. If dropping compensation makes people happier, I have no big problem with that.

I’m in favor of doing what we can to make the financials more even. Attendance and park size isn’t really the answer: it’s an effect of market size (and to a degree performance) – not a cause. You can see market size impact most clearly in the media revenue each team generates – that’s by far our biggest revenue variable. Market size will only change with a long-term pattern of winning or losing, or commissioner intervention.

I’m in one league in which market size is permanently fixed and equal. In another league, the market size started even for everyone, but was then left to permit gradual changes over time. No model is necessarily better than any other – whatever works for us is best. In our league, however, teams like the Tigers are in a tougher position, and draft pick compensation doesn’t change that fact much at all.

Some form of luxury tax is another way to make finances more equal. Kind of interesting to note: the Senators have one of the league’s worst media revenue earnings, but they have a pretty high payroll and an OK cash balance, along with a 1905 PBA championship. In 1906, the three lowest media revenue franchises in the AL have the three worst records – and that includes the Senators. There’s still a lot of room for surprises in the game.

[tiny]

A Lot of good points! However, E. Beck was signed by the Giants and they were not in the top eight of the draft picks. So if the rules are as you all seem to say then I should have gotten their 1st round pick! That didn't happen. At this point all I can say is, 'whatever!'.

One of the leagues I play in (we're in 1929) starts everyone off with 65 million each year. It seems to work but those people who do a good job of managing their roster costs do tend to not benifit from this approach. I don't mind what we have going in this league but it does seem that free agents who are good and can help a club are going to sign with the big market teams because they have the money to sign them (and boy howdy, the salaries are way out of whack considering ticket prices)! I also think that this affects trading because wealthy teams can simply wait till a player they want becomes a free agent and buy the player they want.

What is the answer? I don't have one!

[bostonredsoxgm]

I'm no expert on the rules, so I could have some details wrong. I do know that the multiple-draft-pick issue doesn't only apply to bottom-half teams. If a top-half finisher signs two Class A free agents, only one team is going to get 1st round compensation.

The Giants had a 1st and 2nd round draft pick in their normal slot this year, so Beck was either a no-comp signing or a computer glitch.

I'm still OK with dropping compensation if others want it. And I agree that we should consider whatever solution to bring a little more parity, without doing too much to hurt those people who best manage their costs. A luxury tax is one thought.

The league I'm in that keeps market size equal, does not keep total revenue or balances equal from year-to-year. I probably shouldn't talk too much about other leagues, though. This league is fun, and Jayson deserves to have the final say in how we proceed. That, and I've already choked up enough type as is.

[Commissioner/Reds]

I appreciate everyone's comments. I must commend everyone because these comments have been so mature. I do want to keep an eye on revenue and spending and how this affects the balance. I'm a huge free market guy (in real life). In addition, I do realize some people like "the small market challenge" and don't need to win every year. Winning with a small market is fun in of itself. With that said, I've yet to see any large market teams "dominate". Every single year I've been amazed by who won the Series. The Highlanders do have two championships, but both times they were not the favorite, best in their division, or considered a lock. Both times, they came out of no where (by all accounts).

Please keep the comments coming.