|
|
#1
11-13-2007, 02:41 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Would this work?
This probably has a lot of holes, but why wouldn't this system work in pro sports?
The basics: Assign monetary value to certain stats. In baseball, say runs are worth $200, RBI $200, HR $350, etc etc. All players have a base salary, something like $200k. This could go up by $50k or something every year they are in the league. Maybe a bonus for staying with the same team for x amount of years. This rewards players who perform, for example if it was set up right then ARod would make MVP type money. If someone was injured, they would still receive their base salary, plus perhaps some other compensation (maybe players can "take insurance" on themselves for like 1% of their total pay or something). Basically, the system would encourage performance at all times. It would eliminate a lot of problems in the NFL as far as the guaranteed pay thing goes. If a player gets hurt and misses games, he still gets paid, but this way owners protect against players slumping. However, it works both ways. A rookie or 2nd year player who stands to earn $400k currently, could possibly earn more than established vets with good enough stats. This system could be tweaked every year or every 5 years or whatever works best. I guess this works best for owners, because under this system no one would get paid $10m if they had a .220 season. I think it's fair though, players should have to earn their pay. However, if I was a player I'm not sure I would like this system. Questions/comments/insults time. I want to learn why this wouldn't work in theory. It's probably something really simple that I'm missing. 
|
|
#3
11-13-2007, 02:58 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Would this work?
[ QUOTE ]
You are from Pittsburgh, so let's use the Pirates as an example... What if one year all the players super overachieved and the team couldn't afford to pay them? [/ QUOTE ] I guess you would need to have owners who are willing to commit the money necessary for a winning team. If the Pirates were doing well, the team would make so much more money it's not even funny. Now, having the owner who would pay for it, is another story. The Pirates lose every year but still make a healthy profit. So, either find an owner (or group of owners) willing to pay, or make it so that anything over say $100m would come from leaguewide revenue. Saying, the max liability for any owner is 100m (could change from team to team as markets are obv very different.)
|
|
#5
11-13-2007, 03:02 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Would this work?
How many guys are gonna sac bunt when a homer is worth much more? Maybe a bad example, but it pretty much eliminates the team aspect of the game. It would work far better in baseball than football or basketball, though.
|
|
#6
11-13-2007, 03:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Would this work?
This is pretty much what happened a few years ago with the Los Angeles Clippers. If I remember correctly, everyone in their starting lineup was up for free agency so they all tried to pad their stats instead of playing as a team. The result was that a team predicted by many people to challenge for a playoff spot ended up being one of the five worst teams in the NBA.
|
|
#7
11-13-2007, 03:08 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Would this work?
[ QUOTE ]
How many guys are gonna sac bunt when a homer is worth much more? Maybe a bad example, but it pretty much eliminates the team aspect of the game. It would work far better in baseball than football or basketball, though. [/ QUOTE ] Yeah I guess there would have to be a bonus for wins or something to help people play more team oriented. Or make 10 sac bunts/flies worth a bonus. Teams could even set their own barometers, for example if you want a more small ball type squad then reward steals and sacs more than HR if you want. Just throwing something new out there, I'm pretty sick of people complaining about ARod and other "high priced" athletes. Yes, $30m+ per year is outrageous, but he definitely deserves whatever the market will pay him. If teams don't want to pay players $30m per year (with no guarantee of performance) they should try to change the system.
|
|
#8
11-13-2007, 03:31 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Would this work?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] How many guys are gonna sac bunt when a homer is worth much more? Maybe a bad example, but it pretty much eliminates the team aspect of the game. It would work far better in baseball than football or basketball, though. [/ QUOTE ] Yeah I guess there would have to be a bonus for wins or something to help people play more team oriented. Or make 10 sac bunts/flies worth a bonus. [/ QUOTE ] my head just exploded.
|
|
#10
11-13-2007, 04:07 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Would this work?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] How many guys are gonna sac bunt when a homer is worth much more? Maybe a bad example, but it pretty much eliminates the team aspect of the game. It would work far better in baseball than football or basketball, though. [/ QUOTE ] Yeah I guess there would have to be a bonus for wins or something to help people play more team oriented. Or make 10 sac bunts/flies worth a bonus. [/ QUOTE ] my head just exploded. [/ QUOTE ] seriously. this would just be ridiculous. Maybe we can add an extra $1-million bonus for each triple so that every time a guy hits a double he will pretty much always ignore the coaches and just go for the extra-base. Would be even more entertaining to watch the guy being intentionally-walked go diving across the plate ala Kelly Leach to try to get a hit. Trying to turn baseball into some sort of elaborate skins-game would be pretty silly. Hitting behind the runner to try to advance him a base and little things like that which aren't generally measured in traditional stats are kind of important to the game too. The object of the game is to win by scoring more runs than the other team.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
