Monday, September 15, 2008

Point - Counter Point

. Monday, September 15, 2008


In this weeks installment of PCP we will delve into a subject that has been the subject of scorn in many a world.
It has placed a irreversible strain on leagues.
Forced owners to tear each other down to the point where a
simple discussion turns into a disagreement. Then it further breaks down into a situation so horrific that three year olds seem more mature. It might be the quickest way to get the 'Tard label slapped upon your world.

Loyal readers the subject we are about to dive into the deep end of the ocean on is none other than ... Cash used in trading.

The opposing side of the argument see it as a severe end run around the imposed salary cap.

Every team starts out with the same amount of money to slice into 9 pieces of the same pie.
The game shows you what's taken in current payroll, as well as potential arbitration and free agent demands. Now knowing this ahead of time in addition to being able to see the potential class of free agents. Some would very likely say that you should set aside enough in payroll to cover free agent signings, arbitration cases as well as future salary crunches should you need to chase a international free agent and need to shift some money to sign your draft class.

So if Team A has set up a prospect payroll of $20,000,000 then goes out and signs a IFA for $18,000,000, this will leave them with $2,000,000 to spend on their potential draft class.
Let us assume that Team A has the #3 pick in the 1st round as well as the #18 and #25 picks as compensation for Type A free agents.

Draft Picks Preview
1. #3
1. #18
1. #25
2. #45
2. #60
2. #67
3. #80

Once the draft rolls around Team A finds that it has drafted a 95 projected SS, a 84 projected SP, a 79 projected C, a 78 projected RF, a 76 projected SP ,a 75 projected LF and finally a 71 projected closer.

Seeing this draft haul the owner calculates how much he will need to sign his draft class. After review he concludes he will need an additional $6,000,000 to sign a class requiring $8,000,000 to sign all.

Team A then initiates 3 trades to ensure he will have the money to transfer over to prospect payroll.
1st Trade
Team A trades Player X($2,500,000) to Team B for Fringe Prospect Y and $5,000,000 cash
2nd Trade
Team A trades Prospect F to Team C for Fringe Prospect G and $2,500,000 cash
3rd Trade
Team A trades Prospect H to Team D for Frine Prospect I and $2,500,000 cash

Doing these 3 trades has now allowed Team A to create $12,500,000 in cap space and after transfer $6,250,000. Or $250,000 more than need to secure all draft choices.

After review the prospects brought in Through this method show as this.
Team A signs:
IFA Prospect Projected 98 SP - $18,000,000
Draft Class including 95 projected SS, a 84 projected SP, a 79 projected C, a 78 projected RF, a 76 projected SP ,a 75 projected LF and finally a 71 projected closer. -$8,000,000
Team A has now added 8 future major league prospects while violating the $20,000,000 imposed prospect cap by $6,250,000.

This sets up Team A for a very nice future and potentially gives them a distinct advantage in trades or ML talent in the future. In short an unfair advantage.

However on the other side of the arguement it can be said like this.
The programmers of this game put in not only the ability to transfer payroll but also gain cash in trades as a legitimate venue for acquiring value.

In other words the game does not have a true hard cap so there is no end around of it by using this method. Moreover all trades can be vetoed for any reason so if enough owners find fault in this method then it can never be approved nor employed.

So if seen this way Team A was in complete compliance with the rules, maybe not the spirit of the rules but the rules as outlined in penned form. So if this is indeed the case then how can it be seen as improper, unfair or even "cheating"?

Well that my friend is up to you the individual to figure out. Much like beliefs,views and opinions everyone's take is different and should be respected as equal.

Til' next time my friends


- Signing off

0 comments:

 

ESPN.com

CNN.com