2012 The Show Official Trade Discussion Thread

[brett the jet favre]

Re: 2012 The Show Official Trade Discussion Thread

u would trade Seager if ur the M's?...im a bit surprised

Hell no, but im not in his chise lol

[37]

Re: 2012 The Show Official Trade Discussion Thread

Hell no, but im not in his chise lol

lol..i didnt think u would

[Donalder]

Re: 2012 The Show Official Trade Discussion Thread

Oddly fascinated by this.

[bugle987]

Re: 2012 The Show Official Trade Discussion Thread

I'm only in mid-april, this is for future reference. But he has a .420 average with 5 homeruns and 14 RBI's so it is looking like a repeat from the last two years

Not just based on stats but in general probably 2 low B's

[AC]

Re: 2012 The Show Official Trade Discussion Thread

For the record, I'm saying A + B + C because that's what it'll take, not what he's worth. The Jays AREN'T giving up Drabek anytime soon.

[bugle987]

Re: 2012 The Show Official Trade Discussion Thread

For the record, I'm saying A + B + C because that's what it'll take, not what he's worth. The Jays AREN'T giving up Drabek anytime soon.

Well they couldn't give him up if They tried the dudes out til 2014

[bugle987]

Re: 2012 The Show Official Trade Discussion Thread

For the record, I'm saying A + B + C because that's what it'll take, not what he's worth. The Jays AREN'T giving up Drabek anytime soon.

And there's a difference between "what I'll take" and actually being realistic. This thread is looking for the realistic side of it. I could easily say oo id take 2 A's for Asdrubal, but obviously it's not realistic

[AC]

Re: 2012 The Show Official Trade Discussion Thread

Well they couldn't give him up if They tried the dudes out til 2014

You know what I mean, Bugle. He isn't out in this guy's game.

And there's a difference between "what I'll take" and actually being realistic. This thread is looking for the realistic side of it. I could easily say oo id take 2 A's for Asdrubal, but obviously it's not realistic

The realistic side is that you'd have to overpay for someone that the team doesn't want to part with....

[bugle987]

Re: 2012 The Show Official Trade Discussion Thread

You know what I mean, Bugle. He isn't out in this guy's game.



The realistic side is that you'd have to overpay for someone that the team doesn't want to part with....

I get it I'm just saying he's not worth an A, and I'd he's using Scotts rosters then he's out for the year

[AC]

Re: 2012 The Show Official Trade Discussion Thread

I get it I'm just saying he's not worth an A, and I'd he's using Scotts rosters then he's out for the year

He isn't, he's already started, I'm pretty sure.

Of course he isn't worth an A, that's my entire point. He'd have to overpay for Drabek, because they aren't giving him up anytime soon. But, if he doesn't want to play realistically, then two B's and a C would be fine, I guess...

[bugle987]

Re: 2012 The Show Official Trade Discussion Thread

He isn't, he's already started, I'm pretty sure.

Of course he isn't worth an A, that's my entire point. He'd have to overpay for Drabek, because they aren't giving him up anytime soon. But, if he doesn't want to play realistically, then two B's and a C would be fine, I guess...

You wouldn't overpay you'd just say no that's not realistic. We've gone by just the guys straight value, and his is probably 2 B's and aC. And I believe Drabek is out till next August but I could Be wrong

[sink4ever]

Re: 2012 The Show Official Trade Discussion Thread

I think maybe people are approaching "realistic" a couple of different ways. On the one hand, you can look at the value placed on a "name" in real life. You can say "Team X really likes Player Z therefore they would require A/B/C before they would think about moving him". Or even "Team X considers Player Z to be completely untouchable, so don't even think about it".

However, when it comes to evaluating these trades in a video game, there's another way to look at "realistic". Instead of looking at the value of a name, evaluate a player strictly on age, potential, ratings, performance, salary, team performance, team strategy, and positional depth.

The CPU doesn't see any value attached to one name over another, and I tend to think that for our purposes it doesn't make much sense to either. Yes, the players in the video game represent real life players, but as soon as you start a season or franchise, you're now in a "fantasy land".

For instance, Mike Carp IRL wouldn't be considered to be a very valuable asset. However, a youngish B-potential outfielder who's putting up very good numbers (.306/.386/.488 in 252 AB) is certainly worth something decent.

Just my thoughts (after keeping up with this thread since its beginning).

[bugle987]

Re: 2012 The Show Official Trade Discussion Thread

I think maybe people are approaching "realistic" a couple of different ways. On the one hand, you can look at the value placed on a "name" in real life. You can say "Team X really likes Player Z therefore they would require A/B/C before they would think about moving him". Or even "Team X considers Player Z to be completely untouchable, so don't even think about it".

However, when it comes to evaluating these trades in a video game, there's another way to look at "realistic". Instead of looking at the value of a name, evaluate a player strictly on age, potential, ratings, performance, salary, team performance, team strategy, and positional depth.

The CPU doesn't see any value attached to one name over another, and I tend to think that for our purposes it doesn't make much sense to either. Yes, the players in the video game represent real life players, but as soon as you start a season or franchise, you're now in a "fantasy land".

For instance, Mike Carp IRL wouldn't be considered to be a very valuable asset. However, a youngish B-potential outfielder who's putting up very good numbers (.306/.386/.488 in 252 AB) is certainly worth something decent.

Just my thoughts (after keeping up with this thread since its beginning).

I think we evaluate both ways, it just depends on the situation

[37]

Re: 2012 The Show Official Trade Discussion Thread

I think maybe people are approaching "realistic" a couple of different ways. On the one hand, you can look at the value placed on a "name" in real life. You can say "Team X really likes Player Z therefore they would require A/B/C before they would think about moving him". Or even "Team X considers Player Z to be completely untouchable, so don't even think about it".

However, when it comes to evaluating these trades in a video game, there's another way to look at "realistic". Instead of looking at the value of a name, evaluate a player strictly on age, potential, ratings, performance, salary, team performance, team strategy, and positional depth.

The CPU doesn't see any value attached to one name over another, and I tend to think that for our purposes it doesn't make much sense to either. Yes, the players in the video game represent real life players, but as soon as you start a season or franchise, you're now in a "fantasy land".

For instance, Mike Carp IRL wouldn't be considered to be a very valuable asset. However, a youngish B-potential outfielder who's putting up very good numbers (.306/.386/.488 in 252 AB) is certainly worth something decent.

Just my thoughts (after keeping up with this thread since its beginning).

like Bugle said, we usually take into consideration the stats in a gamer's particular franchise as well as using judgment on what type of player the guy really is in real-life...it all depends on the player being discussed really

[AC]

You wouldn't overpay you'd just say no that's not realistic. We've gone by just the guys straight value, and his is probably 2 B's and aC. And I believe Drabek is out till next August but I could Be wrong

August is optimistic. Doubt he'll even be back at all next year.

As I acknowledged previously, I agree with the value you're placing on him. However, if he goes by names, he won't trade for Drabek at all, and if he's being realistic, he won't trade for Drabek until May 2014.

Does anyone really care where I sent this from?