Henry,
Umm....normally I would agree with just about anything you say, but not here.
Let's use an example player, John A. Smity, say age 30, has had 6 good seasons, maybe a couple of all-stars, and decent stats.
Why should he have additional trade value, based upon PAST performances?
Why should I have to pay for his PAST performance, when what I am interested in is what can he do for me now, and in the future?
The only way to use additional value is for the marquee status, i.e. additional fans in the stands. But the game does not use players to boost attendance figures.
It is tough enough to rate players, and to put together a decent package, without the extra baggage of estimating ADDITIONAL value of players past.
Another comment. Two players, one a rookie aged 23, another aged 33. Identical ratings. Which one would you trade for?
The 33 year old would have a higher trade value, due to his accrued statistics.
If anything, the computer should place additional value on the younger players...there is more production ahead for them.
In my current fictional league, I have a 21 year old MR with the lowest rating of 7 (era). He is on my major league roster, and will be for the next 18 years. He is by far the most valuable pitcher I have...even though I have another pitcher with era of "10" (First player ever taken in the league opening draft...7 years ago)
I don't have a problem with the way the trading is set up now....if there is a player you want badly, expect to give up good players in return.
The computer is at a tremendous disadvantage as it is...let's not compound it with changes to make trading easier for the humans.
Cheers
|