Depth Trades

[Kent814]

In OOTP 16 and previous versions, Ive noticed its very hard to trade for depth. For example, I had a Yankees franchise and wanted to call up Gary Sanchez, since he was tearing up AAA, and I needed depth for my pitching staff so tried manually trading John Ryan Murphy away for pitchers to a team that needed a backup C, but they wouldnt take anything. I offered JRM for one of their worst, 30 something RP and they wanted Miguel Sano and JRM for him. It just seems impossible to trade for depth.

[olivertheorem]

Out of curiousity, how much is JRM making?

[Kent814]

Hes making the league minimum

[actionjackson]

What difficulty level are trades set to?

[Kent814]

My league is in default setup except for a feeder league

[actionjackson]

Originally Posted by Kent814

My league is in default setup except for a feeder league

That means your league is using 100% ratings in its AI evaluation. What are the ratings of JRM, the crappy 30 year old reliever, and Miguel Sano and are you using scouting in your game?

[Kent814]

Its the year 2015 jrm is like a 30/80 sano's potential is 78/80 and the reliever is a 20/80. I also included salary relief for jrm in the deal and they still wanted my top prospects.

[actionjackson]

Originally Posted by Kent814

Its the year 2015 jrm is like a 30/80 sano's potential is 78/80 and the reliever is a 20/80. I also included salary relief for jrm in the deal and they still wanted my top prospects.

Since your league is on default settings, you are using scouting and therefore those ratings may not be what they appear to be. There is a "fog of war" applied to the scouting system that means that all three of those players could be different from the way your scout sees them. Therefore, you could be proposing a trade to the AI that is lopsided in your favour and thus the AI correctly asks you for more.

[Kent814]

I was just using this one specific trade proposal as an example ive had many like this before so its not every time that they see the journeyman as an MVP and my players as ****

[actionjackson]

Originally Posted by Kent814

I was just using this one specific trade proposal as an example ive had many like this before so its not every time that they see the journeyman as an MVP and my players as ****

The point is you can't tell who's a journeyman and who's an MVP when scouting is turned on. There's a fog of war that's part of the scouting system.

[olivertheorem]

Unless the AI thinks that JRM is worse than the reliever they'd be giving up and/or the reliever is going to be the next coming of Mariano Rivera, that's an upgrade for the AI. "You'll give me a journeyman-ish RP for this guy who'll never amount to anything?......Okay!"

[Kent814]

But youd think that theyd expect maybe another journeyman RP with JRM for the original RP. I also went into commissioner mode and they like jrm (a lot) and they thought even less of their RP than i did

['94 EXPOS]

Have to agree with Kent on this one.

It can be a mild pain when you are trying to even out your high minors depth. I have even struggled with trying to move decently rated (albeit with scouting on) RP's (on the 40 man or not). I would be willing to take next to nothing back (I am just trying to find a home for one of 'my guys') yet I get no offers back when trying to shop them and the AI won't budge even when I load the offer in their favour.

To make sure '16 didn't change things I just tried moving a decent (by AAA standards) SS and couldn't move him for anything. I tried three different organizations (Neutral, Win now, Rebuilding). I then added a good AAA reliever making it 2 for 1 and still all absolute refusals. I was only trying to acquire each organizations worst asset at either AAA or AA (we are talking over 27 year old poorest rated players). It has been this way since I can remember.

I understand the scouting argument but I don't think it holds water. It seems the AI won't deal in depth scrap players. As the AI continues to improve (it already is fantastic) maybe this will be addressed some day.

As for the original MLB 40 man scenario originally posted.....I found the same thing when trying to move a scrub MLB infield reserve. Nobody would budge. I couldn't get another similar type player or the poorest of prospects. I added some lower rated prospects to the deal but still nothing. If I took on a horrible MLB contract then the AI was just fine with the deal!

I am ok with the MLB scenario as I think it minimizes the chance of the AI's corresponding roster move (by adding my poor player) being a clunker ie: dumping a good player off the 40.

Hope that all made some sense!

[Fyrestorm3]

Rich had a pretty good post on a similar topic a while back:

Originally Posted by RchW

That's the problem though. You want the AI to act as illogically as you would think it if the roles were reversed. If that trade is allowed then you would have to accept AI teams giving up similar assets with no return as SOP. I think most of us would not like that module. Like it or not Markus must program some strict controls into the logic to counter exploits. Unfortunately that includes a prohibition on certain giveaway attempts by human players.

Having said that the AI will take a seriously good player for a poor return as long as the actual trade satisfies "needs" for each team. The threshold is fuzzy. Try the trade for a player who actually meets your team needs or take some salary back.

Keep in mind that if you have a very good team with few or no needs the AI is predisposed not to trade with you. The reasons are obvious.

And one point from me, from the same thread:

Originally Posted by Fyrestorm3

Depends on a lot of variables, actually. Maybe the other team doesn't view your guy as highly as you do. Or they view their prospect more highly than you do. Maybe they've deluded themselves into thinking they don't need a new relief staff. Or the GM considers relievers ultimately worthless in general. Hell, maybe their owner is Rachel Phelps and she's looking to move the team to Miami.

Basically, yeah, you're going to encounter situations that don't always make perfect sense when it comes to trade AI. There are just too many variables to take into account. And I'm willing to shrug those off most of the time, because that's how it often works in real life.

In regards to your specific situation, I would view it this way: the GM of the other team fully realizes you have a young catcher tearing it up in the minors. Why would he part with ANYONE - even a back-of-the-bullpen guy - for the backup catcher that you might have to waive anyway? Now, obviously, this would be giving the AI too much credit; I doubt it thinks that way yet. But that's how I'd rationalize it if it were my game. The other GM doesn't want Murphy. All there is to it.

[atl_braves]

In my experience, one-for-one trading simply is not designed to work with most minor leaguers.

The AI trade logic is entirely centered on active roster players and a handful of very top prospects. Thus, AI will only suggest players from this "pool" at the "make it work now" screen.

To illustrate this, try to trade for a total non-prospect*. When you use the "make it work now" button, the AI suggests your studs and top prospects. There has to be some semi-lively minor leaguer that would make this deal work, but said minor leaguer is outside of the "realm" of players from which the AI will choose to include in a one-for-one trade.

*It would make some sense if a team's scouts vastly overrated ONE player, but after attempting trades with dozens of obvious organizational soldiers, you will see that teams ask for a king's ransom every time. So I have to write off the idea that teams "overvaluing" players is causing this issue - rather, it's the AI that has no idea how to deal with such players in a one-for-one trade.

[Kent814]

How can we make Markus aware of this issue?