Player Potential - Inflated Team Salaries

[TheRobSorensen]

Hey. I skimmed through the forums to see if this has ever been addressed, but I don't think it has.

I'm the type of person who likes to play 10-20 years into a franchise. I play 10-25% of the games and simulate the rest. This is my first year playing the show (I had a 360 prior to PS4), and I've noticed a few things that really ruin the mode for me.

First off, I have downloaded the OS rosters, and I'm still having these problems. I consider myself pretty "baseball-savvy." I understand the MLB offseason and how/why teams manage their money.

Problem 1 - Too many players have unrealistically high potential.

I have taken a few different franchises into years 6,7, and 8, and in all instances every team in the league was over saturated with talent. Where as most teams in 2014 have 4-5 starters rated in the 70's, there are almost no starters rated in the 70's 5+ years down the road. Every team is loaded with position players with overall ratings from 80-95. There are close to no starting pitchers with overall ratings below 80. Most teams have 2 starting pitchers with 90+ overall ratings and some have 3. Realistically, any given year, there should be only 10-15 pitchers rated 90+.

I guess you could say this isn't that big of a problem. You could just say that an 82 in 2020 is equivalent to a 76 in 2014, however I think the inflated ratings ruin the sim engine. I'm big into the statistics of baseball, and unrealistic stats take me out of the experience. By years 5 and 6 Miguel Cabrera was striking out 150 times a year and taking below 70 walks despite maintaining a 99 overall rating and having little change in his more specific ratings like vision and discipline.

Problem 2 - Teams have too much money, Players ask for too little

Another big problem I've noticed is that by year 3 every team's available budget is much higher than it originally was. The A's have around an 85 million dollar budget in 2014, but by 2017 it was 120 million. What is the appeal of playing with a small market team like the A's or Rays if, by year 3, you can spend like you are the Red Sox or Yankees?

To compound this, players settle for too little money in contract negotiations. In real life the Braves recently signed Chris Johnson (rated 78 in The Show) to a 3 year 23.5 million dollar extension. Disregarding the way his contract is structured, that's roughly 8 million a year. That's a pretty significant chunk of the Braves ~100 million dollar payroll. In The Show he only asked for a 1.9 million dollar contract. So in the The Show I could sign 4 ~78 rated players for what it took the Braves to realistically sign 1. I know this isn't as much of a problem with the big name high 90's free agents who ask for 40 million a year, but all players rated in the 70's and 80's ask for way too little.

These problems ruin the entire reason I like playing franchise modes in sports games. I like being constrained by a budget and struggling to find appropriately priced talent like the real clubs have too. In The Show there is too much talent and too much money.

Am I crazy? Does anyone else have these complaints? Should I stop caring so much about the franchise mode of a video game? Thanks!

[HighCmpPct]

This is why almost all of us on OS use 30 team control, that way you can control things like contracts and such to your liking.

Also if your having an issue with potentials just edit some of them down every off-season or so.

[tabarnes19_SDS]

Are you playing on the ps4? If so the budgets are better, not perfect, but better. I use 30 team control and prevent long term cheap signings of arbitration eligible players and renewable players. I also have edited some potentials up, because that affects contracts.

Another tip, is get more players to hit the open market. Use 30 team control and put contracts on manual to start the offseason. A day before the exclusive period is over put contracts back on auto.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Heroesandvillains]

Quote: Originally Posted by tabarnes19

Are you playing on the ps4? If so the budgets are better, not perfect, but better. I use 30 team control and prevent long term cheap signings of arbitration eligible players and renewable players. I also have edited some potentials up, because that affects contracts. Another tip, is get more players to hit the open market. Use 30 team control and put contracts on manual to start the offseason. A day before the exclusive period is over put contracts back on auto. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Could you write a small guide on how you handle the offseason? Pretty please!

[tessl]

Quote: Originally Posted by TheRobSorensen

Hey. I skimmed through the forums to see if this has ever been addressed, but I don't think it has. I'm the type of person who likes to play 10-20 years into a franchise. I play 10-25% of the games and simulate the rest. This is my first year playing the show (I had a 360 prior to PS4), and I've noticed a few things that really ruin the mode for me. First off, I have downloaded the OS rosters, and I'm still having these problems. I consider myself pretty "baseball-savvy." I understand the MLB offseason and how/why teams manage their money. Problem 1 - Too many players have unrealistically high potential. I have taken a few different franchises into years 6,7, and 8, and in all instances every team in the league was over saturated with talent. Where as most teams in 2014 have 4-5 starters rated in the 70's, there are almost no starters rated in the 70's 5+ years down the road. Every team is loaded with position players with overall ratings from 80-95. There are close to no starting pitchers with overall ratings below 80. Most teams have 2 starting pitchers with 90+ overall ratings and some have 3. Realistically, any given year, there should be only 10-15 pitchers rated 90+. I guess you could say this isn't that big of a problem. You could just say that an 82 in 2020 is equivalent to a 76 in 2014, however I think the inflated ratings ruin the sim engine. I'm big into the statistics of baseball, and unrealistic stats take me out of the experience. By years 5 and 6 Miguel Cabrera was striking out 150 times a year and taking below 70 walks despite maintaining a 99 overall rating and having little change in his more specific ratings like vision and discipline. Problem 2 - Teams have too much money, Players ask for too little Another big problem I've noticed is that by year 3 every team's available budget is much higher than it originally was. The A's have around an 85 million dollar budget in 2014, but by 2017 it was 120 million. What is the appeal of playing with a small market team like the A's or Rays if, by year 3, you can spend like you are the Red Sox or Yankees? To compound this, players settle for too little money in contract negotiations. In real life the Braves recently signed Chris Johnson (rated 78 in The Show) to a 3 year 23.5 million dollar extension. Disregarding the way his contract is structured, that's roughly 8 million a year. That's a pretty significant chunk of the Braves ~100 million dollar payroll. In The Show he only asked for a 1.9 million dollar contract. So in the The Show I could sign 4 ~78 rated players for what it took the Braves to realistically sign 1. I know this isn't as much of a problem with the big name high 90's free agents who ask for 40 million a year, but all players rated in the 70's and 80's ask for way too little. These problems ruin the entire reason I like playing franchise modes in sports games. I like being constrained by a budget and struggling to find appropriately priced talent like the real clubs have too. In The Show there is too much talent and too much money. Am I crazy? Does anyone else have these complaints? Should I stop caring so much about the franchise mode of a video game? Thanks!

What are you seeing 6,7 & 8 years in advance regarding older players regressing?

[TheRobSorensen]

There are definitely some players that regress. It always happens at 35 years old. So from about ages 18-30 players only improve (unless they get injured), and from 30-35 they stay the same. Then after 35 they regress pretty quickly. But it doesn't balance out with the number of players coming into the league with B or better potential.

Also, I'd like to see some players regress earlier in their careers or realistically age more. I'm a Braves fan, so as an example of what I mean look at Chipper Jones. He would have high power numbers early in his career, and he regressed as he got older, but the game would regress all of his ratings, where as in real life his vision, discipline, and contact would stay about the same, but his power would drop.

[HozAndMoose]

I dont think team budgets is to bad.

In real life the A's budget has went up 30 million in two years since winning the West in 2012. In 3 years its went up about 18.

2017 in my franchise they have a budget of 119 million. 34 million more. And they have made the playoffs every year so far.

The more you win the more money fans will spend. And winning usually results in players having good years and getting more money in arbitration.

And plenty of teams will have new TV deals paying much much more than they get now. KC's and Pittsburgh's expires in 2019, STL get a new one in 2017, Cincy and Tampa in 2016. Arizona 2015. Now Oakland cant opt out of theirs until 2024. But by then i expect their budget to be at least 120 million if not more. KC had a 70% increase in TV ratings last year. When it comes time teams will be payed very well.

I do think there should be a cap as to how much higher a team can go budget wise though.

And teams budgets have went down as well to be fair. Phillies are down to 125 million. Dodgers down to 218 million. Yankees 213. Angels 133. Giants 136.

But players are signing contracts way lower than they should be.

Trout signed a 6 year deal for 2.5 million per year.

Sonny Gray signed a 7 year deal for 1.1 million per.

George Springer 4 years 2 million dollar total.

Carlos Correa 4 years less than 1 million per year.

Jose Fernandez 2.1 million per year for 6 years.

Matt Harvey 7 years 1.79 per year

The issue is players signing deals during arbitration. If they make it to fee agency they are paid fine.

[cardinalbird5]

Has offense gone down every year then (like IRL)?

What is the top offensive team's numbers look like? OBP, SLG, OPS, Runs, etc