BSL Modifications for 2024 Season (Pending)

cjay101

Active member
602
5.00 star(s)
Staff member
This thread will track changes proposed and effectual for the 2024 season.

1. All BSL teams are capped at 15 trades total from End of World Series to End of World Series (1 league year) (APPROVED AND FINAL)

2. All team's media revenue will be reduced back to pre-raise levels (roughly a loss of 3 million per franchise) (APPROVED AND FINAL)

3. Luxury tax cap and tax amounts will be reviewed for effect. (Tabled for next year)

4. Possible creation of a manual Type-A system for the compensation of free agents that are lost to other teams. (APPROVED AND FINAL)

5. Ballpark Renovations (Tabled for next year)

6. Playoff Format Revision (Tabled for next year)

If you have other things you would like reviewed and/or suggested changes, please share them in this thread. I am planning on making these sticky so they are referable down the line.
 
Last edited:

HeboAlan

New member
256
4.90 star(s)
What do you mean by type A compensation(manually)

How would you determine a type A guy? How well he produces or just if its a super star? Also I paid 14 mil in Revenue last year I sure better get some of that luxury tax this year
 

cjay101

Active member
602
5.00 star(s)
Staff member
What do you mean by type A compensation(manually)

How would you determine a type A guy? How well he produces or just if its a super star? Also I paid 14 mil in Revenue last year I sure better get some of that luxury tax this year

I am still putting together a proposal to mull over on the manual stuff. It would require some sort of threshold to earn a type A status.

The luxury tax is unchanged for this COMING offseason (end of 2023) as that is being earned now. The bottom 1/3 of the league in payroll splits whatever luxury tax is totaled together by the teams that are assessed tax. I think last year the teams got around 4-5 million, and would have had about 2.5 if you hadn't dropped the bomb on your payroll.

The theory behind the luxury tax should be to keep the higher end teams from being flush with cash and constantly outspending everyone with zero consequence. Hence, that is why I am looking at the options we have available.
 

abncal

New member
139
5.00 star(s)
Cash does NOT = a team can spend whatever... both of my teams have $100 mil + in cash, yet Miami couldn't sign Aranceta to anything longer than 1 yr. The limfac was my future budget, which gets me everytime... the CPU calculates budget even with team options and goes against your projected budget and then your owner says heck to the no based on what's left. I don't know if that comes down to a straight up cpu limitation or based off of owners character (spender vs frugal). I personally hate it... if I have $100 mil plus in cash reserves I'd like to reserve the right to go over my "projected" budget in future years if it means I could sign a quality FA... anyway to change that?
 

HeboAlan

New member
256
4.90 star(s)
If 3 mil is leaving from all teams it really shouldn't hurt anyone with those huge cash overflows. Only teams might hurt is a poor team like mine lol 3 mil is slot when your negative as is lol I need more not less;)
 

cjay101

Active member
602
5.00 star(s)
Staff member
P
Cash does NOT = a team can spend whatever... both of my teams have $100 mil + in cash, yet Miami couldn't sign Aranceta to anything longer than 1 yr. The limfac was my future budget, which gets me everytime... the CPU calculates budget even with team options and goes against your projected budget and then your owner says heck to the no based on what's left. I don't know if that comes down to a straight up cpu limitation or based off of owners character (spender vs frugal). I personally hate it... if I have $100 mil plus in cash reserves I'd like to reserve the right to go over my "projected" budget in future years if it means I could sign a quality FA... anyway to change that?

The computer owner wil not allow you to exceedprojected budget woth guaranteed money. No way aroun that. Even without araceta, you hve 130+mil tied up for 2024. It doesnt account for team options in this calculation.

what would the reason be to cut back the media money ?
just curious really

The entire league is flush with cash and it removes a lot of the strategic financials from the league. I would like to bring the high payroll temas down a notch and increase output for lower budget franchises.
 

stephj24

Active member
392
4.90 star(s)
Staff member
The entire league is flush with cash and it removes a lot of the strategic financials from the league. I would like to bring the high payroll temas down a notch and increase output for lower budget franchises.

I had the same question, Pat. Thanks for clarifying.
 

tglg

Active member
1,074
5.00 star(s)
To me, there are a couple of things.....the media budget isn't a big thing. But I just got a raise in mine this year, and it went to $18.5M, which is still just 19th in the league. But the difference in the "haves" and "have nots" isn't mearly based on something Cory can control. Not trying to knock anyone and/or pat myself on the back, just stating....when I took over Oakland, our budget wasn't a lot, and we had very little in cash. But it is about managing all aspects of the team, financials, talent, and minors. If an owner can build his minor league system, that will help them keep spending down in years to come. I hate Cory's rule on the 2 years for draft picks, but hopefully that rules helps teams long term in their talent and their budgets. In 2019, Oakland won a title with a payroll of $54M, so it can be done. I do plan my extensions differently than most. Teams tend to sign the player cheap up front and then escalate in the back end. Problem is, players talents tend to decline with age, and you may be stuck with a player you are paying way to much ( I remember the Marlins with Hanley Ramirez I think). The other aspect of that is that it handcuffs you in the future, as I think team options count against your budget in the future, as it seemed that way when I used to do it with backloaded contracts. I know front load my contracts, as I know what I have right now, and can account for it. And younger players tend to sign that extension quicker if you throw money to them early, and then decline their contracts. I have had great success at signing players to a large contract in the upcoming year. Give a player a 10M contract next season, as I have the budget to do so, and then go 20% of that in the remainder ($2M per) and it gives me the flexibility to manage my money and allow me the chance at grabbing other players who come available, or signing that rookie long term who got a major ratings increase.

I know some owners out there really dislike me, and so be it. I am used to them by now. But every team has the potential to be a cash cow. When I took over a team in the middle of the 2013 season, I found players who were popular and making no money. Brought them in to help my attendance. Then brought in some good players. Then when attendence was rising, slowly raised ticket prices. It all goes hand in hand. But teams need to focus on 2 to 3 years away, not just focus on the now. And also realize that if their team is 2 to 3 years away, what are their financials going to be like then. And, will the key players you have now still be key players then, or should you be realistic and move them. MAKE A PLAN. Even if it takes 5 seasons, a team can get that and that time passes fairly quickly, as I have now been in the BSL 2.0 for 10 seasons.
P

The computer owner wil not allow you to exceedprojected budget woth guaranteed money. No way aroun that. Even without araceta, you hve 130+mil tied up for 2024. It doesnt account for team options in this calculation.



The entire league is flush with cash and it removes a lot of the strategic financials from the league. I would like to bring the high payroll temas down a notch and increase output for lower budget franchises.
 

cjay101

Active member
602
5.00 star(s)
Staff member
I know some owners out there really dislike me, and so be it. I am used to them by now. But every team has the potential to be a cash cow. When I took over a team in the middle of the 2013 season, I found players who were popular and making no money. Brought them in to help my attendance. Then brought in some good players. Then when attendence was rising, slowly raised ticket prices. It all goes hand in hand. But teams need to focus on 2 to 3 years away, not just focus on the now. And also realize that if their team is 2 to 3 years away, what are their financials going to be like then. And, will the key players you have now still be key players then, or should you be realistic and move them. MAKE A PLAN. Even if it takes 5 seasons, a team can get that and that time passes fairly quickly, as I have now been in the BSL 2.0 for 10 seasons.

If every one of the struggling franchises operated by this suggestion, we would have crazy league parity and almost everyone would contend semi-annually. Too many teams that are 10 players+ away from serious contention blow their prospects or young controllable superstars for overpaid or too-expensive-for-them players that are studs but can't carry a team all by himself. Others sign players just to spend money at times it seems. I have always welcomed my honest advice to help any team that wants it and very few people take me up on the offer anymore.
 

cjay101

Active member
602
5.00 star(s)
Staff member
Anyone have any ideas or thoughts on a manual Type A system? It would obviously be for an exclusive club of players each offseason.

I have considered taking some of the most veteran owners and having them submit a list of players they deem eligible for the designation.

I have also considered possibly making it statistical (y amount of years x WAR ratings those years, etc)

I have also considered a scenario like real life where the team would make a qualifying offer, but I don't like the random accept/decline being up to luck essentially.
 

Meliah

New member
1,792
5.00 star(s)
Anyone have any ideas or thoughts on a manual Type A system? It would obviously be for an exclusive club of players each offseason.

I have considered taking some of the most veteran owners and having them submit a list of players they deem eligible for the designation.

I have also considered possibly making it statistical (y amount of years x WAR ratings those years, etc)

I have also considered a scenario like real life where the team would make a qualifying offer, but I don't like the random accept/decline being up to luck essentially.

That option seems to be quite fair..but would that just put more work on your plate?
 

cjay101

Active member
602
5.00 star(s)
Staff member
That option seems to be quite fair..but would that just put more work on your plate?

It would be entirely manual. Which is why I am leaning towards that actual 'nominating & voting' process if I go forward with it at this point.
 

cjay101

Active member
602
5.00 star(s)
Staff member
Ballpark Renovations added to pending projects.

Keep in mind, a lot of these may never see light of day. I am simply throwing ideas around publicly. I have done this in the past internally.
 

chaplain11

Active member
602
5.00 star(s)
My owner sucks at life and I am in the same situation as Miami. I can't sign any of the true star players because I don't have the future budget and none will sign a one-year deal. I have tried time and time again. I have money go to waste every year it seems and end up getting the lower end guys.

As for the other ideas. I am good with whatever the group wants to do. I am not as "active" as other owners when it comes to trades and posting stuff but I do put effort into my team. I like the break the league gives from the monotony of life and if something will improve the experience go for it.
 
Last edited:

tglg

Active member
1,074
5.00 star(s)
Dewayne, if it were me, I would take care of my in house guys. You have some talented players due arbitration. Buy out those years. And if you want to use some of that money, front load the contacts, and before long, you will be able to sign players to those long contacts because your future years wont be carrying large arbitration numbers and/or large options. Just my thoughts as it allows you to better manage the money that you have in the now, and everything in the future will fall in line.
My owner sucks at life and I am in the same situation as Miami. I can't sign any of the true star players because I don't have the future budget and none will sign a one-year deal. I have tried time and time again. I have money go to waste every year it seems and end up getting the lower end guys.

As for the other ideas. I am good with whatever the group wants to do. I am not as "active" as other owners when it comes to trades and posting stuff but I do put effort into my team. I like the break the league gives from the monotony of life and if something will improve the experience go for it.
 

pltcards

New member
398
5.00 star(s)
Cory, is it possible to add another wild card team to each league and have the play in game like the ML does now? Not sure if you can but it might keep a little more interest at the end of the seasons. With Heath done trading by Mid April next season it will get a little boring for many teams. Thanks Pat
 

cjay101

Active member
602
5.00 star(s)
Staff member
Cory, is it possible to add another wild card team to each league and have the play in game like the ML does now? Not sure if you can but it might keep a little more interest at the end of the seasons. With Heath done trading by Mid April next season it will get a little boring for many teams. Thanks Pat

I will look at the playoff formats and what capabilities we can add to a 28 team league without screwing up the schedule.
 

HeboAlan

New member
256
4.90 star(s)
I have a idea how about having a system in place for teams struggling financially it use to be listed in BSL rules can't find anything on the cash awarded and draft picks lost that use to be in there. Also I think until revenue sharing takes place a bottom feeder shouldn't be punished on draft picks until the $ is dispursed . Selfishly this is what I would like as there are no set info in rules anywhere about this unless I'm missing something?
 
Top