FA Logic just as bad as trade logic?

[TrufflesEater]

Quote: Originally Posted by countryboy

I would say that he decided to play for Toronto thinking he had a better opportunity to be an everyday player then. I for one like the idea that players just don't always sign for the most money on the table, and have other factors on their mind.

Sounds like an excuse for poorly programmed logic to me. Not to mention that the distinction between small and large market teams is lost. Makes it less of a challenge to win with a small market team.

[countryboy]

Quote: Originally Posted by TrufflesEater

Sounds like an excuse for poorly programmed logic to me. Not to mention that the distinction between small and large market teams is lost. Makes it less of a challenge to win with a small market team.

How is it poorly programmed logic?

Giving a player a sense of personality so that he chooses where he wants to go, or what he's looking for in a club is poorly programmed logic?

What would be the fun in players always signing with the highest bidder?

And how is the distinction between small and large market teams lost? Its not like because Stanton signed with the Blue Jays that all of the sudden they have unlimited resources of money to spend.

---

And in any event, if you read through the entire thread, you'll see where the OP spoke of whom the Jays had in their outfield vs who he had as the Dodgers and that Stanton was seeking 4-6 years in a contract and the OP offered 7 years, thinking that if he through more money that signing him to a longer term contract than he was wanting would sway him to sign the dotted line.

[Mrmagoo]

Quote: Originally Posted by countryboy

How is it poorly programmed logic? Giving a player a sense of personality so that he chooses where he wants to go, or what he's looking for in a club is poorly programmed logic? What would be the fun in players always signing with the highest bidder? And how is the distinction between small and large market teams lost? Its not like because Stanton signed with the Blue Jays that all of the sudden they have unlimited resources of money to spend. --- And in any event, if you read through the entire thread, you'll see where the OP spoke of whom the Jays had in their outfield vs who he had as the Dodgers and that Stanton was seeking 4-6 years in a contract and the OP offered 7 years, thinking that if he through more money that signing him to a longer term contract than he was wanting would sway him to sign the dotted line.

So now we KNOW that this is the reason behind certain signings or non signings??
Seems to me some of you are simply apply your opinion on these situations and saying it's the truth.
If I'm wrong I apologize, but I didn't see anywhere where it said anything of the sort. All I remember was that it (AI) only looked at the possible starters in the position be considered.

[Knight165]

Quote: Originally Posted by countryboy

See quote above. And if you believe that Knight is simply applying opinion in this situation, I'll let you know that he has worked closely with the development team for the past few years as a regular attendee of the community day events.

Caveat though countryboy.....

I remember Kolbe(so this is quite a while ago) saying that some coaches/managers won't sign with you.(and it's not a set thing....it could just be a dice roll)
I'm not certain if it pertains to players as well.

M.K.
Knight165

[Knight165]

Sorry if I caused confusion with that.

M.K.
Knight165

[rjackson]

I thought that I'd post this question here instead of making a new thread as it seems closely related:

In the offseason, how can you tell which free agents have gotten a qualifying offer? There is a column that states "qualified" as in they qualified for free agency but when the qualifying offer is 9MM+ and they are asking for 1MM, I'm sure that they didn't receive one yet I'd assume that Jon Lester at least did but nothing designating that I'll be giving up a draft pick for him (as an example).

[countryboy]

Quote: Originally Posted by Knight165

Caveat though countryboy..... I remember Kolbe(so this is quite a while ago) saying that some coaches/managers won't sign with you.(and it's not a set thing....it could just be a dice roll) I'm not certain if it pertains to players as well. M.K. Knight165

Ahh...my bad. I thought you meant that it was tied into players and managers alike.

[Padgoi]

Quote: Originally Posted by Knight165

Caveat though countryboy..... I remember Kolbe(so this is quite a while ago) saying that some coaches/managers won't sign with you.(and it's not a set thing....it could just be a dice roll) I'm not certain if it pertains to players as well. M.K. Knight165

If this is true and actually applicable in the game, kudos to the developers because we all know this happens in real life. David Price said he would never sign with the Yankees because of their "no beards" policy. But if it's just random and the logic isn't built it, I don't see anyone throwing out that much money. Trout re-signed with the Angels because he's been in L.A. his entire career and by braves94's logic, he didn't really give them a discount. In the situation in this topic, Stanton is going to another team. That's the difference. You're not going to give up $15M per year to sign with another team and not the team you've been with.