New franchise trade logic

[Mackrel829]

Re: New franchise trade logic

I saw a move happen at the deadline that I loved and would never have seen in previous years.

The Rangers traded Jack Leiter, Josh Jung and Bubba Thompson to the D-Backs for Zac Gallen. This is a pretty major overpay on BTV but we're usually complaining about the exact opposite.

Maybe Zac Gallen is lighting it up, maybe Josh Jung isn't looking good in the minors, and maybe the Rangers are getting itchy knickers like they seem to be in real life.

I thought this was a really fun trade and I've not really seen anything like it before.

[Unlucky 13]

Re: New franchise trade logic

On a related note, is there a hidden progression factor/rating in players and prospects that the CPU knows about but is invisible to us? Over the years, I've often noticed that some minor leaguers have a MUCH higher trade value than others do for reasons that aren't clear.

For example, I might have three SS/2B in my system who are all 19 years old, all A potential, and all 65 OVR. But the CPU teams are absolutely drooling over the chance to trade for one of them, while not really caring about the others. Why else would this be the case?

[jcar0725]

Re: New franchise trade logic

On a related note, is there a hidden progression factor/rating in players and prospects that the CPU knows about but is invisible to us? Over the years, I've often noticed that some minor leaguers have a MUCH higher trade value than others do for reasons that aren't clear.

For example, I might have three SS/2B in my system who are all 19 years old, all A potential, and all 65 OVR. But the CPU teams are absolutely drooling over the chance to trade for one of them, while not really caring about the others. Why else would this be the case?

Maybe its the built in ratings, like one A player might be a 90 potential and another might be a 99 ? I know that when doing a fantasy draft, the 99 potential young guys go quickly.

[tessl]

Re: New franchise trade logic

On a related note, is there a hidden progression factor/rating in players and prospects that the CPU knows about but is invisible to us? Over the years, I've often noticed that some minor leaguers have a MUCH higher trade value than others do for reasons that aren't clear.

For example, I might have three SS/2B in my system who are all 19 years old, all A potential, and all 65 OVR. But the CPU teams are absolutely drooling over the chance to trade for one of them, while not really caring about the others. Why else would this be the case?

That's an interesting question. I don't know the answer but no doubt potential is highly valued by the cpu in trades but the flaw is the implementation of performance being a factor in progression/regression and the limited number of draft rounds.

I have a Pirates relocated franchise and Henry Davis - A potential catcher - is dropping like a rock because he isn't hitting. The cpu over values that type of player in trade deals. At one time when progression was more linear that made sense because A potential guys always progressed nicely. That's no longer the case.

As to your question perhaps the cpu values potential and certain attributes. Maybe look at the attributes of those players and see if the highly valued guy has certain attributes higher than the other two. I have self imposed trade restrictions and one of them is durability has to be over 50% before I will trade a player because the cpu for many years paid no attention to durability. You could trade a player with a durability below 10 to the cpu for a good player if potential, age and other attributes were high.

Gameplay has been improved - no question about that - but I'm not seeing what exactly was improved in trade logic.

[DelishattheDish]

Re: New franchise trade logic

It wouldn't have been worse than what we have now, which is a roster with maybe two long term position players in MLB (Horner and Suzuki), and only one top prospect anywhere close. If you're going to blow the thing up, then just do it.

When would you have sold off, during the shortened covid season when they were a wildcard team? lol Not happening. So in your opinion they did it 3 months too late? I'm confused by the last part, they didn't actually blow up anything, they gave them the chance to compete until the end.

[Unlucky 13]

Re: New franchise trade logic

When would you have sold off, during the shortened covid season when they were a wildcard team? lol Not happening. So in your opinion they did it 3 months too late? I'm confused by the last part, they didn't actually blow up anything, they gave them the chance to compete until the end.

After 2019. Just before Covid happened. It seemed clear at that point that there was little progress being made on extensions, and I wanted them at minimum to choose who they were commiting to and who they were moving on from. I absolutely wanted to trade away Bryant and Schwarber post-2019.

[DonkeyJote]

Re: New franchise trade logic

After 2019. Just before Covid happened. It seemed clear at that point that there was little progress being made on extensions, and I wanted them at minimum to choose who they were commiting to and who they were moving on from. I absolutely wanted to trade away Bryant and Schwarber post-2019.

Yeah, and there were a lot of people that thought that was going to happen. At least to a degree. It was a surprise that they ran it back, most of the chatter was that AT LEAST one of Rizzo, Bryant, or Baez would be moved that offseason because that combo obviously wasn't working. But then they kept everybody.

Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk

[DelishattheDish]

Re: New franchise trade logic

After 2019. Just before Covid happened. It seemed clear at that point that there was little progress being made on extensions, and I wanted them at minimum to choose who they were commiting to and who they were moving on from. I absolutely wanted to trade away Bryant and Schwarber post-2019.

You don't trade Schwarber when he's only making 3 million dollars and he's projected to be a 2 war player because there's a very slim chance you're actually going to be able to get that value back for him, unless you get a great offer. They were trying to trade Schwarber before that even and the offers weren't good enough. Just because you don't plan on keeping borderline all stars (at that point) beyond arbitration doesn't mean you have to trade them, I don't get that perception at all. The cubs tanked for how many years to build that core and you think giving them 3 years together is worth tanking that long for? lol I don't.

[Therebelyell626]

Re: New franchise trade logic

I am officially out on this years trade logic. It’s actually quite terrible. Here’s the one I saw last night and it’s a real doozy.

So get this. The Toronto blue jays, second place in the AL east, back 2.5 games, and in the #1 wild card spot. Decided to Trade Bo Bichette to Cleveland (3rd place in AL central, and 6.5 out of the wild card), for Emanuel Clase and 2 C rated prospects. This is absolutely no joke. This happened!

This absolutely killed the franchise I was running, and made me pine for an option like 2k myleague has where I can approved, or decline CPU trades. I mean in what world?

[forme95]

Re: New franchise trade logic

I am officially out on this years trade logic. It’s actually quite terrible. Here’s the one I saw last night and it’s a real doozy.

So get this. The Toronto blue jays, second place in the AL east, back 2.5 games, and in the #1 wild card spot. Decided to Trade Bo Bichette to Cleveland (3rd place in AL central, and 6.5 out of the wild card), for Emanuel Clase and 2 C rated prospects. This is absolutely no joke. This happened!

This absolutely killed the franchise I was running, and made me pine for an option like 2k myleague has where I can approved, or decline CPU trades. I mean in what world?

This right here is the perfect justification for why 30 team control is needed.

[Unlucky 13]

Re: New franchise trade logic

You don't trade Schwarber when he's only making 3 million dollars and he's projected to be a 2 war player because there's a very slim chance you're actually going to be able to get that value back for him, unless you get a great offer. They were trying to trade Schwarber before that even and the offers weren't good enough. Just because you don't plan on keeping borderline all stars (at that point) beyond arbitration doesn't mean you have to trade them, I don't get that perception at all. The cubs tanked for how many years to build that core and you think giving them 3 years together is worth tanking that long for? lol I don't.

Well, I just strongly disagree.

If you aren't contending for the WS right now, and you aren't keeping the guy when he's a free agent, then you move him for someone who you have signifigantly more team control over. Period, in my book.

I don't get WAR being a controlling factor there. Who gives a crap whether a player concievably/allegedly adds a few wins to a low 80s roster? Think about the future.

[DelishattheDish]

Re: New franchise trade logic

Well, I just strongly disagree.

If you aren't contending for the WS right now, and you aren't keeping the guy when he's a free agent, then you move him for someone who you have signifigantly more team control over. Period, in my book.

I don't get WAR being a controlling factor there. Who gives a crap whether a player concievably/allegedly adds a few wins to a low 80s roster? Think about the future.

There's plenty of teams don't actually do that, at least not in the position that the Cubs were in, being a large market team. Not every team has to play it like Tampa Bay or Kansas City. I don't know maybe you should become a fan of one of those kinds of teams I don't think the Cubs are really ever gonna be like that, they handle their resources differently.

WAR is a factor when determining a player's overall value, that and projections are how teams determine what a player is worth. It's why Bryant is making 25 million a year now, because in terms of WAR that's exactly what his market value probably actually is. How is that not relevant to trading/signing players? lol

Cubs in 2020 were projected to be an 82 win team, within the margin of error that's still potentially a playoff team. I know now we're sitting here with the benefit of hindsight but management obviously had a different perspective at the time.

How this ties into the franchise trade logic I don't know. Look at it however you want, sometimes teams do dumb stuff. Everything is always dumb in someone's opinion, if you're paying the bills I guess you get to make the decisions lol

[ThePride1987]

Re: New franchise trade logic

One of the problems I have with the trade logic of this game is players cannot have negative value. I can shop Miggy around and actually find teams willing to take his $30M on despite not being up to MLB standards. Granted....I won't get anything useful back, but to take a minor league player to dump that contract? Yea.....not realistic in the slightest.

I know, "well that's why you gotta play 30 team control, yada yada". I don't want to babysit my video game, thank you very much. I don't think I'm asking for too much out of the devs.