Team Building and Trade Logic: Your Ideas

[2_headedmonster]

Re: Team Building and Trade Logic: Your Ideas

*Disclaimer, i have intertwined my ideas with some of the great ones presented in this thread

I believe that the current "Point of Emphasis" system can be mimiced and used for the GM's and their trade logic.
Several philosophies, mentalities and focus'can be can be combined to create realistic scenarios.

Example:

Team Philosophy: Rebuilding
Mentality: Cut costs
Focus: Acquire pics


Philosophies: Rebuild, Make playoffs, Build contender, Win now
Mentalities: Cut costs, Aggressive trades, Buy talent,Tread water
Focus: Acquire picks, Focus on FA's, Develop rookies,Increase depth, Upgrade line-up


There could be many intricacies coded into these potential Points of Emphasis like looking for expiring contracts
when "cutting cost" in an effort to eventually "buy talent" as they "Focus on FA".These points could change at predetermined
periods in a season based on performance, but also inconjunction with blockbuster trades, injuries or FA signings.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


-Another thing that would improve trade logic is for there to be a higher value placed on a player with sig-skills,
and an even higher value place on those players whose sig-skills are compatible with a coach's offensive and defensive philosophy


-Defensive Chemistry

Defensive chemistry is an idea I came up with to govern how well a team executes whatever scheme it employs. It drains throughout the game (a percentage is recovered through timeouts) and varies dynamically based on the line up on court and their stamina.

Example:

A line up of Rose, Butler, Deng, Boozer and Noah would have a defensive chemistry rating of 87.

Meanwhile a line up of Rose, Butler, Deng, Gibson would have a defensive chemistry of 93

In my perfect world where this rating exists, 'defensive anchors' and coaches also play a part in the rating as well as how fast it drains. Visual cues to it draining would be sloppier rotations, a lack of multiple efforts in rotations and a higher, less effective defensive stance.

Now that the concept has been explained, a teams offensive and defensive chemistry would determine how much a player is valued to a specific team.

[Smirkin Dirk]

Re: Team Building and Trade Logic: Your Ideas

Great idea.

[blackninja]

Re: Team Building and Trade Logic: Your Ideas

I had posted this in a different discussion before but since I stumbled on this I'll post it here.

The drafts are way to loaded. No way there should be 3, 4, whatever A potential players in every draft. The generational players popping up is 1 of my favorite additions to the game but it completely makes it irrelevant when there's multiple future superstars in every draft. There's nothing wrong with having an occasional draft happen where it is loaded but people at 2k need to realize there is also nothing wrong with having quality drafts of players who turn into B's and high C's. This could fix a ton of issues on its own such as insanely stack teams across the league by the time ur a few years deep, would help some with position stacking, raises the value of draft picks when a loaded class does come.

Since I'm already talking player ratings I guess should throw in the fact that all the ratings are to high on existing players. Lets be real, there's only about 8 or so true A rated players in the league, not to mention 2ks obsession with making role players B guys. I'll use Nate Robinson as an example though I'm sure there's probably even better 1 out there. Nates a real quality role player. A guy who can provide a spark with his streaky shooting, however he's a a below avg defenders, struggles mightily in tons of match up's due to his size alone. Yet he's an 81 rated player? So a quality role player who would not start on any playoff caliber team, hell he's maybe a 10-12 min a night guy on an even decent team, yets he's an 81. AN 81! I mean that's laughable and the game is loaded with these kinds of guys, not to mention since we can't even save custom rosters to the harddrive it makes it tough to even fix this ourselves but that's a discussion for another thread.

[Yeeezy]

Re: Team Building and Trade Logic: Your Ideas

Not sure if it has been said since I've last viewed this thread in its entirety, but adding an ability to buyout players mid-season or amnesty them come season's end, would be a nice addition of realism. Would also help with the unrealistic salary dumps we've all been guilty of at one point or another.

[mc_9]

Re: Team Building and Trade Logic: Your Ideas

One thing that I would like to see happen in Free Agency is I would like to see the big names sign first. Most teams would wait on a Lebron on Carmelo before moving on...

For example, in my current MyGm Carmelo waited pretty late into Free Agency, but ended up getting a realistic deal for around 4 years / 81 mill. Albeit, it was from Cleveland, but that's neither here nor there...

Now Lebron waited until the very last day to sign and I guess most teams already used their cap room because he ended up signing with Chicago for 4 years and just under 10 million.

If those guys signed in the beginning and dictated Free Agency rather than the other way around, then that should help alleviate situations like happened with Lebron.

I agree, and I think that Free Agency needs the most work. Its the part of My GM that annoys me the most.

Firstly I agree that the big name free agents should be the first agents to sign, as teams will make the majority of their moves after they know what the superstars will do.

But I think the biggest problem is the destination that these players go. For example in my first MyGM play through the Heat had just won there 3rd consecutive championship, but Lebron decides to become a free agent and then signs with Orlando Magic. There is absolutely no chance that would happen.

Any player with a rating over 90, really needs to be programmed differently. They will have 2 key priorities, winning (priority 1) and big market (priority 2). If a superstar is already in a very good team, they will not leave (Eg Lebron & Heat, the only exception is if he goes back to Cleveland). If a superstar is in a **** team in a small market, they are very likely to leave, and will likely go to a very good team with cap space or a big market team. They will not sign at Orlando or Bobcats, etc.

The other problem is when a team signs another superstar in a position that already has a player over 90. Like Cleveland signing Chris Paul, when they already have Kyrie Irving.

I can live with the trades, as most of the time they are not the superstars being traded. But when after only 1 year in MyGM the entire league landscape changes with the superstars changing team all over the place to teams that make no sense. It takes away from the immersion.

I agree with what others have said. Until 2k have completely perfected this, we should still have the option to have 30 team control, or at the very least the ability to have trade override to fix the anomalies. If people don't want that, they don't have to.

[mc_9]

Re: Team Building and Trade Logic: Your Ideas

Another point is the logic of teams, particularly in relation to their market.

History has shown us that, the big market teams will often shed significant amounts salary to be active in the Free Agency (when superstars are available). Teams like New York, Brooklyn, LA, Chicago, Dallas, Houston all usually will make moves to be players in Free Agency. As they know they can attract big name free agents.

Whilst small market teams know that they cannot attract the Lebron's and Carmelo's of the world, so they will concentrate on drafting. Teams like Charlotte, New Orleans, Milwaukee, Minnesota will make moves to position themselves well for the draft. The only exception being is once they have built themselves up well with a draft and have a contending team, they will then become a player in the Free Agency (win now) market. Eg Oklahoma.

So market size and team history should play major role in how teams will behave.

[threattonature]

Re: Team Building and Trade Logic: Your Ideas

Some things I don't believe I have seen mentioned yet that I would love to see.

1. Have multiple factors that players are weighing for free agency. The comparison I love to use is to NCAA Football's recruiting. I think it should use different factor's when free agents are deciding on a team. Things such as current positional depth, market size, available money, playing style, team history, location, front office strength, and coach with some weighted way higher than the others and some categories being absolute deal breakers if not met (usually money and positional depth to start with).

2. In conjunction with GM/team goals. Have teams that are planning to shed cap but also have a year that they are planning to shed cap. So a team like the Lakers that had a two year window that they refused to take contracts that went past 2014. Have it planned based on potential free agents as well. So if there was a weak free agent class not as many teams would be leaving cap open for that.

3. I would love to see different players have dynamic ratings depending on the coach's style, quality of team's scouts, team goals (championship contender will rate a veteran way higher). Make it so that the user can't see how the other teams rate your player.

[2_headedmonster]

Re: Team Building and Trade Logic: Your Ideas

Some things I don't believe I have seen mentioned yet that I would love to see.

1. Have multiple factors that players are weighing for free agency. The comparison I love to use is to NCAA Football's recruiting. I think it should use different factor's when free agents are deciding on a team. Things such as current positional depth, market size, available money, playing style, team history, location, front office strength, and coach with some weighted way higher than the others and some categories being absolute deal breakers if not met (usually money and positional depth to start with).

2. In conjunction with GM/team goals. Have teams that are planning to shed cap but also have a year that they are planning to shed cap. So a team like the Lakers that had a two year window that they refused to take contracts that went past 2014. Have it planned based on potential free agents as well. So if there was a weak free agent class not as many teams would be leaving cap open for that.

3. I would love to see different players have dynamic ratings depending on the coach's style, quality of team's scouts, team goals (championship contender will rate a veteran way higher). Make it so that the user can't see how the other teams rate your player.

Oh, thats good. I like that.

[frankwest718]

Re: Team Building and Trade Logic: Your Ideas

Some things I don't believe I have seen mentioned yet that I would love to see.

1. Have multiple factors that players are weighing for free agency. The comparison I love to use is to NCAA Football's recruiting. I think it should use different factor's when free agents are deciding on a team. Things such as current positional depth, market size, available money, playing style, team history, location, front office strength, and coach with some weighted way higher than the others and some categories being absolute deal breakers if not met (usually money and positional depth to start with).

2. In conjunction with GM/team goals. Have teams that are planning to shed cap but also have a year that they are planning to shed cap. So a team like the Lakers that had a two year window that they refused to take contracts that went past 2014. Have it planned based on potential free agents as well. So if there was a weak free agent class not as many teams would be leaving cap open for that.

3. I would love to see different players have dynamic ratings depending on the coach's style, quality of team's scouts, team goals (championship contender will rate a veteran way higher). Make it so that the user can't see how the other teams rate your player.

I hope it's okay to bump this, just wanted to add on to this.

I would like to see teams understand that X player may be a free agent in the offseason or the following year, and begin to clear cap space to offer an acceptable contract by packaging their most expensive guys, with picks, to teams with cap space who have no chance of getting that free agent.

Or maybe something where the cpu realizes that the average overall of the upcoming free agent class is 82, the team wants to get better and clears up space to sign a few guys.

As the quoted poster said, there needs to be some factors that help a player decide where to sign, and I would reference what madden is doing to help reorganize the nba 2k15 free agency.

If a player is a free agent, they should have a list of priorities that are ranked. The priorities will be standard for every player, but each player has their own ranking.

For example, a guy like Carmelo will have money as his top priority, market size as his second, and winning as his third.

The minimum amount of money he will accept should be based off of his overall. So if he's overall 93 or something, he should only accept contracts starting at 17million or whatever the number is. The higher you go over that number, the more likely he is to sign with you.

As for the priorities, let's use this example. Player X's top priority is financial security, and his second priority is to have some team success.

He is offered the exact same deal from two teams, but chosen to sign with the team with the higher average overall or you could set it up so he signs with the team who had a better record the previous year in this scenario.

Basically a formula that makes decisions based on how each player ranks their priority and placing a certain value for the absolute minimum amount a player of a certain overall will take at certain age levels will be able to prevent some questionable free agency decisions. So you would no longer see weird things like rajon rondo and Tony Parker on the same team, with Parker listed as the sixth man, and other things like that

[frankwest718]

Re: Team Building and Trade Logic: Your Ideas

What about different coaching philosophies? Defensive minded teams like the Bulls or Pacers would try to pick up defensive minded players in Free Agency or trades. Or teams that like to get out in transition would look for players that like to get out and run. Kind of like Madden with the schemes. Different types of players would fit different types of schemes. Maybe some players don't fit in well in a certain system. THATS when players would take morale and ratings hits.

So every coach would have a system, and players would either fit or not fit that system based on tendencies and ratings. AI controlled teams would go out and make trades and sign FAs to fit the system. The only exception would be Elite players, because I'm sure everyone would like to have a Lebron or KD on their team.

Id also like to see players market value be based on production, rather than OVR rating. Throw in advanced stats per 48 minutes, something to allow us to better see how a player is performing/underperforming, or even find diamonds in the rough that are ready to step into bigger roles. If there was a way that the script could evaluate a players production, and his temperament (as far as whether he wants crazy amounts of money or not) to determine his market value, that would be perfect. But I know thats probably insanely difficult.

Kind of a tough concept to explain.

I also like the idea of team goals. Rebuilding, Playoff Contender, and Championship Contender. Teams should evaluate themselves around the trade deadline based on where they are in the standings. Rebuilding teams would trade away their star talents to the Playoff and Championship contending teams for draft picks. Playoff contenders could go either way. Either trading away their star talent for picks if they aren't in a legit position to make the playoffs, or trading away their assets for players to help them make a playoff push. Title contending teams would trade away their assets to get talent to compete right away.

I agree, each coach should have a philosophy and the GM should make decisions based off of that.

If thibs is hired by the suns, they would look to find players that fit his scheme. He should also help his players increase their defensive awareness by about +3.

There would be certain requirements for certain positions for the free agents that team signs or players they trade for. For example. If there is a player with 80 on ball defense and 75 defensive awareness in free agency, that player should be a free agency target.

If mike dantoni is hired somewhere, he should look for players that can play up tempo, stretch bigs, etc. each coach should have a profile and that's now free agency should be dictated, from the perspective of the GM.

The team shouldn't only sign players that fit that profile, but they should be more likely to sign guys that fit the coaches profile than other guys

[turty11]

Re: Team Building and Trade Logic: Your Ideas

makes new account to double post bump 5 month old thread ..

i dont think this thread is relevant anymore, 2k15 is already out

[frankwest718]

Re: Team Building and Trade Logic: Your Ideas

makes new account to double post bump 5 month old thread ..

I remember reading something about posts having to be constructive from now on. Did you miss it?

[ffaacc03]

Re: Team Building and Trade Logic: Your Ideas

Hate to have missed this thread back then, apparently was when I had too much work ... will wait on what was implemented to 15 to post ... given how things have recently turned out, I might speak of things already within the game.

Go, Leftos (Simballer and all others), go !