Trade Logic Broken?

[NYBorn81]

In both cases mentioned, the one on this page and the first, the trade logic isn't broken. These trades are nonsense. Carolina wouldn't trade their franchiseQB, regardless of how bad he's played for the first half of this season, which doesn't translate to Madden. Fact is, he puts Carolina in a position they wouldn't be without him.

As far as trading first round picks, it depends on the team. If you're trying to trade for #1 overall, then its obvious the team with that pick needs it, and aren't willing to trade it away. You have a better chance making the trade happen by trading away your highest rated player and not the three draft picks.

[Trelocke]

Quote: Originally Posted by Sturzinator

It's a looooong way from number one to number 29 and 30. If you were to simply consult a draft pick value chart, your 29 and 30 this year fall around 1000 points short of the value for the number 3 overall pick this year, and still further behind (about 1700 points) the next higher two picks.

This actually makes the most sense. I'm typically aware of things like this but never knew a chart such as this existed. I still have a hard time believing a team trying to rebuild would pass up three first rounders for a single one (regardless of position), but from an algorithm standpoint, it does make sense. Gonna try out some wheeling-and-dealing with this chart and see if it's even remotely close. (I have a plethora of draft picks this year.)

Quote:

You make compelling argument with this scenario, but there are always a lot of variables to consider. This game is brimming with flaws, and I have never been one to defend them, but the trade logic simply does not rate near the top of the list. I would rather it be too conservative than too loose. I like a challenge.

I tend to agree. Mostly. When I trade I typically go after players on the block since I know they are open to negotiating with them. I usually get who I want. I also do a lot of trading of my high rated backups for more draft picks which I then trade away in the draft for better draft picks the next year. So I'm certainly not whining that it should be a priority to be "fixed" in Madden. My main complaint with trading is that you can only trade up to three players/picks.

Quote:

Would you trade your entire draft (all your picks-assuming you could in Madden) for this one guy? Sound ridiculous? Mike Ditka did it for Ricky Williams when he was coaching the Saints. How many people would have said "that would never happen" before it actually happened?

Yeah, to be honest. I would have kept adding picks until I got the pick I wanted. But you can't in Madden which is one of the reasons I think the trade logic is busted. You've given me something to play with though, so maybe it is simply a point-value assigned algorithm. Gonna play with it some and report back.

[GlennN]

Quote: Originally Posted by NYBorn81

In both cases mentioned, the one on this page and the first, the trade logic isn't broken. These trades are nonsense. Carolina wouldn't trade their franchiseQB, regardless of how bad he's played for the first half of this season, which doesn't translate to Madden. Fact is, he puts Carolina in a position they wouldn't be without him. As far as trading first round picks, it depends on the team. If you're trying to trade for #1 overall, then its obvious the team with that pick needs it, and aren't willing to trade it away. You have a better chance making the trade happen by trading away your highest rated player and not the three draft picks.

I agree. In the OP's trade, I do not see any way Carolina accepts that deal. As others have said, franchise QBs do not get traded IRL.

In the second, the trade logic sounds pretty good. In 2012, the Colts would not have taken any offer for the first overall pick. StL got the 6th pick in that draft, I believe a second rounder in 2012 and first rounders in 2013 and 2014, all to let Washington move up to second overall. And you think it is shockingly unrealistic that a team would not take two late first round picks this year and one future first rounder for the top pick? I think a deal could be possible, if the team wanted to trade down, but I would hardly call it shocking that your proposal was rejected.

[friscob]

Quote: Originally Posted by Mizzou24

No way the rams would trade Bradford either. They all believe in him.

I bet they're kicking themselves for not getting rid of him earlier when he still had value. Should have drafted RG3

[Trelocke]

Quote: Originally Posted by Sturzinator

...If you were to simply consult a draft pick value chart...

So, kudos to you for bringing this up. I'm going to continue to play with it but I've completely reversed my original thought that it's broken and now believe it to be (probably) strictly algorithm based. Which makes sense from a computing standpoint as well as a real life standpoint (assuming the draft value chart is an actual thing GMs use...if it is the Redskins/Rams trade discussed in this thread was waaaaaay in the favor of the Rams).

I actually got the overall #1 pick, and ended up giving up less than I was planning. I went through and found which was the first team drafting that had RB listed as one of their 5 needs. This turned out to be pick #12 (1200pts). So I put together a 1355pt (1st #30, 2nd #42, and 3rd #67) package for the #9 pick. But I wanted to see if I could get a pick higher than that first. So I went to the #4 pick (1800pts and the first one I hadn't tried to give the 3 first rounders to) and offered it to them. They declined, wanting just a little more value. So I went to the #5 pick team (1700pts) and they accepted! Then, I took that #5 pick, added a 6th round (the lowest round pick I had) and offered it for the #1 overall and they also accepted!

So, while the algorithm isn't taken verbatim from a draft value chart, it's probably a rough approximation, skewing lower round picks with a higher value and not having such a huge dropoff from #1 overall to the rest of the top 5 or 10. I'd imagine they did this because of the limited players/picks that you can offer. So in all, I gave up a low 1st, high 2nd, high 3rd and low 6th to eventually get the #1 overall. If anything that's probably a bit less than I would expect.

So, in conclusion, I would bet that getting any player/pick in the game is simply a matter of figuring out a rough "value" placed on players/picks and maybe having to trade between a few different teams to get the necessary picks/players. Frustrating perhaps, but certainly not broken.

[Sheba2011]

Quote: Originally Posted by TreyDobbs

Alright so I'm the Cardinals. I did everything in my power to acquire Marshall Yanda (RG - 99 overall), Brian Orakpo (ROLB - 97 overall), and I already have Patrick Peterson (CB - 97 overall). These are all GREEN on the Panthers interest level and all are of the age of 28 or younger, so age isn't a big factor. I offered all three players for Cam Newton and the Panthers said no. This is unbelievable. If I was able to throw in two more first rounders I would, but it only allows me to offer up to three things. This seems broken to me. I offered three Pro-Bowl players that are elite at their position for Cam.

There is not a GM in the world (accept maybe Matt Millen) that would trade away a franchise QB, without having a replacement already waiting. That is not broken trade logic, it is realistic trade logic. QB is the single most important position to any NFL team.

[Sheba2011]

Quote: Originally Posted by Trelocke

So, kudos to you for bringing this up. I'm going to continue to play with it but I've completely reversed my original thought that it's broken and now believe it to be (probably) strictly algorithm based. Which makes sense from a computing standpoint as well as a real life standpoint (assuming the draft value chart is an actual thing GMs use...if it is the Redskins/Rams trade discussed in this thread was waaaaaay in the favor of the Rams). I actually got the overall #1 pick, and ended up giving up less than I was planning. I went through and found which was the first team drafting that had RB listed as one of their 5 needs. This turned out to be pick #12 (1200pts). So I put together a 1355pt (1st #30, 2nd #42, and 3rd #67) package for the #9 pick. But I wanted to see if I could get a pick higher than that first. So I went to the #4 pick (1800pts and the first one I hadn't tried to give the 3 first rounders to) and offered it to them. They declined, wanting just a little more value. So I went to the #5 pick team (1700pts) and they accepted! Then, I took that #5 pick, added a 6th round (the lowest round pick I had) and offered it for the #1 overall and they also accepted! So, while the algorithm isn't taken verbatim from a draft value chart, it's probably a rough approximation, skewing lower round picks with a higher value and not having such a huge dropoff from #1 overall to the rest of the top 5 or 10. I'd imagine they did this because of the limited players/picks that you can offer. So in all, I gave up a low 1st, high 2nd, high 3rd and low 6th to eventually get the #1 overall. If anything that's probably a bit less than I would expect. So, in conclusion, I would bet that getting any player/pick in the game is simply a matter of figuring out a rough "value" placed on players/picks and maybe having to trade between a few different teams to get the necessary picks/players. Frustrating perhaps, but certainly not broken.

Most real life GM's use some sort of the draft value chart but they only use it as a rough guide. It fluctuates every year as well based on numerous factors such as strength of the draft class, strength of key positions (QB, LT, DE). For instance with the RG3 trade, the value of the second overall pick was much higher that year than it would have been this year because there were two very good QB's available. It is actually a very good guide to use in the game as most of the time you can workout trades (especially draft picks) in the range of the chart.

[steelcitycobra]

Quote: Originally Posted by Trelocke

Further anecdotal evidence that trade logic is broken. I'm not trying to trade for any player. I want a draft pick, the #1 overall to be specific. It's my fourth year of an owner sim league I'm playing and I need to replace my RB. The RB I want is slated to go mid-1st but he's also the highest rated RB in the draft so I'm pretty sure he'll go before that. So I'm trying to assure I get him. I have offered the first three teams to draft (all CPU controlled) all three of my 1st round picks (29th and 30th overall this year and a 1st in next year's draft) for only their current 1st round pick. All of them want significantly more value. Sorry, but there isn't a GM on the planet that wouldn't take that trade.

If you are desperate for that running back, my advice is wait until after the draft. Try and trade out of the first round for a first rounder next year. The guy almost certainly ain't going number 1 overall anyway so why trade three 1st rounders for him? You are reaching. Wait until pre-season and trade for him then - I guarantee it won't cost you three 1st round picks. If you are desperate to draft him, try and trade up after the top 10 are gone. He may still be there at 11 or so and you stand a much better job at securing that pick. GL!