I probably am going to keep harping about this...

I have advocated for the empirical, rather than the doctrinal approach in forming an opinion about the re-pricing in 9, and have tried to socialize the experiment of building a (presumably competitive) team in 8, then attempting to switch the roster to 9 and how, each time I have attempted to do that (at least 15 by now), I have been prevented, with the message that my team would be over cap

this morning I repeated the exercise with a team that was 1.6M UNDER cap in v8 and got the same failure message/reason when I tried to change it to 9


sorry, the game already has plenty of frustrations, and the new pricing is one more - I have no problem upping the salaries of the super-relievers, but surely the desired effect of that move is adulterated considerably by also raising prices on virtually all of the hitters also.

That's OK harpy, we all have our harp-able issues

There were some aspects of the pricing I didn't get, and it resulted in a Who Moved My Cheese moment.
But another angle is we all had to adapt strategies to affordable constructs.

The cards in the online version have an added element of value--their price. The value of a $3M card could be just as high as a $10M card in a relative sense, compared to what you get per each dollar. Factor in scarcity for a given player capability at the price, and a cap, and now you have a multi-variable problem. Which is the fun part. Finding those optimized sets of value.

I think we have all had to translate our strategy to ATG9 in a way we didn't expect, so I am not arguing with you there. A small ball 80M team in ATG8 looks different than one in ATG9. The underlying strategic concept is the same, but the players and where the money is invested looks different.
Hopefully you continue to stick it out--or harp as necessary--and find a new way to win that suits both you and the ATG9 pricing.

*Disclaimer: I am not arguing for or against ATG9 pricing,I was not on the pricing committee, have no influence on the pricing committee, and don't even know what the complete stratagem of the committee was.

I probably am going to keep harping about this...

Harp on brother! I agree with you 1000%

Here's an example of why some of the best hitters and the super relievers had to have price adjustments:

This is a Dream Team League, where first pick gets to pick his entire lineup, then pick 2 goes, etc...

You'll see this group is almost entirely made of the underpriced superrelievers, the underpriced lowball SPs, and the most underpriced version of all the top stud hitters. This same lineup would be almost 15M more in ATG9, and for good reason.

https://365.strat-o-matic.com/league/stats/teams/449486
https://365.strat-o-matic.com/team/1588994

In actuality, over 50% of hitters had price reductions - but the bulk of the top guys who are used in almost every league had some increases. Injury risks like Beckwith and underperformers like Trout, Luis Gonzalez, etc, experienced price reductions. Overall, I feel like the repricing was executed pretty well, though I do think the settings change on superrelievers along with huge price increases may have double dipped on those a bit too much.

... I do think the settings change on superrelievers along with huge price increases may have double dipped on those a bit too much.

Agree completely with this.It is something we all have to deal with, but it made stud relievers into a little used commodity except at the highest caps.

And with the concept of relief pitching being so different today vs most ATG eras, it is a little more difficult to use a stud S6 if you can't afford a suitable relief corps that would usually be paired up with him, at the cap you're at.

Everyone has their own valid peeves, but there is no such thing as perfect pricing by any objective standard.
To be universally perfect, it would have to apply to every cap, park, etc and that just doesn't exist.