As mentioned in the pass, Ottoneu is a fantastic, deep yet enjoyable baseball economics game, perfectly suited for the FanGraphs player. However, the learning curve in the first year can be steep, so consider this point as an introduction to how “loans” work in the Ottoneu leagues.
All Ottoneu teams, regardless of format (5 × 5, 4 × 4, FGPTS, SABR) are tied to both a 40-player cap and a $ 400 salary cap applied between the annual league player auction and the end of the season regular MLB (these caps do not apply in the off season). Exceeding either of these caps will result in a “frozen” list preventing the owner from bidding on players, making trades, or even setting queues until the issue is resolved. be resolved, by Rule 1b. In other words, your only option when faced with an illegal roster (“over-cap”) is to reduce players until you reach 40 players or less or $ 400 or less in total salary. For new Ottoneu players, keep in mind that you should never voluntarily exceed these limits (e.g. Rule 1c), and each of your 40 roster spots inherently costs $ 1 each, so you actually only have $ 360 of “free” roster pay to play (see 1bi rule) at any given time (including during the annual auction).
As with almost everything in life, however, there are exceptions.
For example, you can exceed 40 registered players if one of your players lands on the LD 60 days (Rule 4c), and you can also exceed the $ 400 salary cap when salary caps are traded between teams in the form of “loans,” which we’ll look at today.
Through Rule 6c: “Salary cap dollars can be exchanged between teams (ie Team A can agree to count half of a player’s salary traded against their cap). However, these loans will not stay in place after the regular season ends. “
Let’s take a practical example, then we’ll highlight some important points about how Ottoneu loans work and how they affect your strategy.
- This transaction took place on May 1st, 2015 in League 530 (FGPTS).
- This trade could be described as “Lucky Strikes trades Corey Seager ($ 8) and Jurickson Profar ($ 1) at Floyd’s Bucco for Giancarlo Stanton and a loan of $ 47”. In other words, Bucco loaned Hit the $ 47 needed to cover the cost of integrating Stanton into their budget (a loan that will disappear, with all salary caps, off season).
- To keep things simple, let’s say both teams had both 40 players and $ 400 in roster pay at the time of the trade. In practice, this means that after the trade, Lucky Strikes owned Stanton for $ 58 by increasing his salary cap from $ 400 to $ 447 with the loan, and Bucco voluntarily reduced his salary cap from $ 400 to $ 363 in the aim to acquire the two cheaper future assets in Seager and Profar.
- Here is the calculation:
- Strokes of luck: Salary of $ 400 + loan of $ 47 = total salary of $ 447 and 39 players including Stanton
- Floyd’s Buccos: Salary of $ 400 – loan of $ 47 = total salary of $ 363 and 41 players, including Seager and Profar.
What is happening now? Some key points to remember:
- With 41 players in total, Floyd’s Bucco would have to remove a player to go under the 40-player cap (unless he has a player on the 60-day DL)
- With 39 players in total, Lucky Strikes can add one player (up to 40)
- The $ 47 loan makes Ottoneu’s $ 400 salary cap a ‘soft’ cap in practice, as the loans allow teams to trade cap space to make room for expensive players and help out. other teams to sell expensive players for cheaper future assets.
- At the end of the season, the 40-player cap and the $ 400 salary cap disappear, so Lucky Strikes will still have to cut enough players to get a total salary of less than $ 400 before they enter the Spring Auction Player Draft. following.
- Lucky Strikes will own Stanton at the price of Seager + Profar ($ 9 + actual player ‘value’) for the remainder of the season (or until he is cut or traded), essentially acquiring current value for value. future (Seager / Profar).
What I have described here are the mechanisms of the loans to Ottoneu, but it only remains to discuss the value of loans in Ottoneu. Ceiling space (flexibility) certainly has value for owners, but in general, owners of expensive players (i.e. Stanton) will often (by assumption) cover the entire pay gap (i.e. through a loan) in a trade as long as both parties agree that there is an equal amount of future value exchanged for present value. In other words, it’s not uncommon to see teams at the top of the rankings with large loan balances (and total salaries exceeding $ 500 or $ 600), as rebuilding teams are generally willing to facilitate the process. transfer of one or two expensive veterans to a competing team in exchange for cheaper, future “surplus“Active (often in the form of multiple prospects or players in small groups). The loan enables these transactions and helps balance the economy of the league as the season unfolds.
As you might expect, not all owners see player value in the same way, and trying to get everyone in your league to see transactions backed by large loans through the same lens is especially good. difficult when it is clouded by the subjectivity of the future in relation to the present. value of specific actors. As an example, this trade above was almost vetoed, but a little over a year later you can imagine how a little different it is (which side would prefer- you today?). Hopefully, an understanding of the mechanics of Ottoneu loans will better prepare you to debate the value of Ottoneu players in your league as well.
Commercial advice: As with all trades in the Guardian / Dynasty Leagues, time plays a key role in assessing the gain / loss of value in player trades. For those in the Ottoneu leagues, we’ve created a place where you can post your league trades and the rationale behind them so you can track over time to gauge how well they have worked for (or against) you. . you can post them here.