Trade AI change - Page 2

Sweed · 03-03-2003, 11:10 PM

I've made a couple of trades and like the new harder system at least so far. I imported my v4 season and in manager mode took the Cubs job. Went to extend Sammy and guess what he doesn't like my team anymore

He's 36 and coming off a .320\53HR\150rbi season and contract up at end of season so...guess it's time to move him. Offer him to Toronto for J Cruz Jr. who's also coming off a 50 HR season but .280 avg. and the will do the trade. Toronto also has a young CF that would be a good bench player and defensive sub so I ask for him and they will do the trade. Now I've got Darren Lewis on my bench making 2.8 mil so I figure I'll move his salary and... it's a deal breaker, they'll give me the two for just Sosa but they won't take Lewis in the deal. I end up getting the deal to go through by taking there has been LF making about 800,000 \yr. I'd have to pay him if I cut him so I've got him at AAA in case of injury and I don't want to rush one of the youngsters to the show.

I thought this whole deal was pretty good. I know in v4 I could have easily unloaded Lewis and his salary. I think this is much more real.

gamadict · 03-04-2003, 12:24 AM

It's not so much about the trade AI being hard or easy...It should strive to be realistic. For example, I was messing around with it the other day...

I offered Mike Williams, Pokey Reese, Aramis Ramirez, Brian Meadows and Randal Simon. Not exactly a cadre of talent, but whatever. I tried to get some generic prospect from them, I think T Lindon or Damien Moss, and they rejected it. That's reasonable. Then I offered it for one Barry Lamar Bonds...'That's a good offer!.' Even got them to throw in a middling prospect. So now I thought, great, I have the best player in baseball. Time to flip him for some real prospects.

Absolutely nobody in the league would deal for him...'We won't take Barry Bonds, he just eeats$$!.' Now, come on, I know he's 38, but he's the best player in the game by far. You'd think the high-payroll teams would be willing to give up SOMETHING for him, but no.

So then, I decided to fire up the old editor and make him 20 again. Still had the $14 million contract, but I figured a 20 year old Babe Ruth/Ted Williams combination would be able to get some value. I offered him to the Rangers for Textiera, and they decline...Not based on his contract, just saying that they 'need a little more.'

Based on my limited experience thus far, I think the AI overrates prospects and underrates developed players over the age of 26 to an unrealistic extent. I'm all for a challenging AI, I'm just looking for a little realism.

Disclaimer: I like the game, I think the .400 team did a very good job, but this is a real issue for me...

I Am The Game · 03-04-2003, 12:58 AM

While I do agree that the AI may need some tweaking, the fact remains it's SUPPOSED to be stingy. Everyone cried out for the trading AI to be a little more realistic then taking 37 year olds who make 8Million for two good prospects and a good young regular in return. Now it is more realistic and you want it to be toned down.

This forces you to build more around the draft, and Free Agency, like it is in MLB. You can't just go out and trade 3 or 4 mid-tier players for a star to bat cleanup because your cleanup hitter isn't hitting what you want him to hit for a leadoff hitter. Or you can't trade a couple of backups and your starting 2B for Roberto Alomar because you want the star 2B. You have to put more detail into managing your money so you have some to spend in the offseason. While I have noticed the AI is pretty lenient when they offer trades, so take "advantage" of that. When they offer you prospects, grab them, develop them. Use your money wisely, that stuff. The stuff MLB teams actually have to do to maintain a winning organization.

The point is supposed to be that you can't go out and deal your spare parts to plug a hole. Again, I do agree it does need some tweaking (like it was mentioned, offering 2 or 3 all stars to the CPU for one almost won't ever be done), but not as much as some are making it out to be.

MrWorkrate · 03-04-2003, 02:55 AM

Started off with Tampa Bay, figuring that I wanted a challenge right off from the start. Last year, with OOTP4, I have fond memories of taking the Expos and turning them around in two years, so I figured maybe I could with Tampa in OOTP5.

I haven't, at least not yet, and I'd like to credit the Trade AI. As people have said before, it was too easy last year to take a player who was making too much money and ship him somewhere for the same exact player who is just less expensive. Now, moreso (although it isn't totally gone), this isn't the case. Teams seem to seriously take into consideration the player salaries just as they would ratings for the player. Also, age does play a serious role in trade talks. True, in "real life", the likelyhood of getting a Barry Bonds for several starting players is pretty much nil. But when you look at the two trades that were done, it's easier to see why the group of Pirates wouldn't be taken. When you're trading five players making decent sized major league salaries and try trading them for a cheaper prospect, it's not going to happen. As nice as it would be to fill 5 holes in your lineup, taking on $15 to $20 million isn't always looked upon in a positive way, especially depending on the team you're dealing with. Good pitchers making the minimum are going to be worth as much as great pitchers making $7 million+. Why? Simply because taking the good pitcher and the minimum allows you to help your team going into FA, etc.

Then, add onto that the second deal. Sure, you get Bonds, but lets pretend it wasn't Barry Bonds for a minute, and just assume it's an all-star top 5 caliber 38 year old outfielder. Chances are, he's making a fortune, and depending on the length of his contract, might be collecting it long after he's worth it. When a team sees the chance to fill five holes by making one, and in contrast take on say $5-7 million in salary, they're more likely to do it.

Sure, in a pure player sense, the outfielder is a better player than the prospect, and can help right away. But the AI in OOTP5 is finally thinking ahead instead of seeing trades as a "today" thing, and although it makes it tougher to build a good team from less now, I think we're better off because of it.

MrWorkrate · 03-04-2003, 03:08 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Jays9293
Yankees STILL HAVE Mondesi? Do you even watch MLB Baseball. They just traded FOR him last season. I get your point, but that was a horrible example.

Not really.

Mondesi was a good example of a dump last year. Toronto wanted him gone, and the Yankees got him for pretty much nothing. Having served his purpose (or lack thereof) last season, the Yankees would love to dump his salary now. However, it really doesn't look like they're going to.

Millwood was a straight out dump, while the Ortiz deal wasn't really a dump to me, at least in my eyes. Damian Moss pitched as well as Ortiz did last year.

Qwizzikal Kook · 03-04-2003, 05:02 PM

I agree with all of those who think the trade AI should be harder than in 4. I also like the gentleman's idea of a slide bar for difficulty, much like every other game setting.

But, getting back to the point of this thread, I think the trade AI in it's current incarnation in 5 "hurts" your play. As one example, I have a 2 year all-star 1B who hits .380 and makes 500k. I want to trade him because I brought up the real prospect (like a .340 guy who hits 50hrs). The best the AI would offer me in return was a 2 star prospect. I checked about 12 teams. All the same.
I also have another decent 4.5 star 1B prospect (yes, I have too many 1B). He's at triple A, making nothing, ready to play in the bigs. I tried to trade him for a 4 star player on any team at any position that I do not have a decent player in. Result, best player offered was a 3 star or a backup ML player making 2-4mil/yr.

I don't know about you all, but I think that's pretty F'd up. Assume I had A-Rod at short, Tejada in the minors for trade, and then the best I could get in return was <insert not so good prospect here or permanent backup, say Ray Sanchez>. I think most teams in RL would be willing to part with something decent for a Tejada caliber player, and I actually don't think he would be a 4.5star prospect anyway (but that's besides the point).

The GMs of pro ball always talk about all the deals that are floated to them that they pass on. I get nothing floated to me in 5. About 5 deals offered last season, compared to about 30 a season in OOTP4. I think they may have toned it down a bit too much.

Mainly, I just wanted this point to be heard as perhaps it is something that could be tweaked or at least made so it can be tweaked in an upcoming patch.

Thanks for listening and have fun,

QK

floorman81 · 03-04-2003, 07:13 PM

At first I thought the AI was worse in OOTp5 than 4, however with some time, I think it's just about right.

The thing is, if you want to dump an overpriced player, or maybe a player who is expendible, you have to work a little harder for it in this game. I can't count how many times I've looked through 10-15 different teams, and offeres just to get rid of a guy. But I think this is what GM must do everyday, you never know who is looking, and to tell you the truth, most teams probaly AREN'T looking.

But with work, I've managed to trade:

Nomo and Ashby for Van Hekken, who was brilliant as a starting pitcher for me for about 2 years, then he fell on his face.

I just now traded
LoDuca and Van Hekken for a Short Stop with a .300 average, I realized I didn't need Lo and he was eating up too much money,

Both helped my teams, but it took work.

Much like life, if you really want it, you have to go after it!

Kyle

03-04-2003, 02:55 AM	#24
MrWorkrate All Star Starter Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Raleigh, NC Posts: 1,262	Started off with Tampa Bay, figuring that I wanted a challenge right off from the start. Last year, with OOTP4, I have fond memories of taking the Expos and turning them around in two years, so I figured maybe I could with Tampa in OOTP5. I haven't, at least not yet, and I'd like to credit the Trade AI. As people have said before, it was too easy last year to take a player who was making too much money and ship him somewhere for the same exact player who is just less expensive. Now, moreso (although it isn't totally gone), this isn't the case. Teams seem to seriously take into consideration the player salaries just as they would ratings for the player. Also, age does play a serious role in trade talks. True, in "real life", the likelyhood of getting a Barry Bonds for several starting players is pretty much nil. But when you look at the two trades that were done, it's easier to see why the group of Pirates wouldn't be taken. When you're trading five players making decent sized major league salaries and try trading them for a cheaper prospect, it's not going to happen. As nice as it would be to fill 5 holes in your lineup, taking on $15 to $20 million isn't always looked upon in a positive way, especially depending on the team you're dealing with. Good pitchers making the minimum are going to be worth as much as great pitchers making $7 million+. Why? Simply because taking the good pitcher and the minimum allows you to help your team going into FA, etc. Then, add onto that the second deal. Sure, you get Bonds, but lets pretend it wasn't Barry Bonds for a minute, and just assume it's an all-star top 5 caliber 38 year old outfielder. Chances are, he's making a fortune, and depending on the length of his contract, might be collecting it long after he's worth it. When a team sees the chance to fill five holes by making one, and in contrast take on say $5-7 million in salary, they're more likely to do it. Sure, in a pure player sense, the outfielder is a better player than the prospect, and can help right away. But the AI in OOTP5 is finally thinking ahead instead of seeing trades as a "today" thing, and although it makes it tougher to build a good team from less now, I think we're better off because of it. __________________ I used to come here a lot. Now, not so much.

03-04-2003, 05:02 PM	#26
Qwizzikal Kook Bat Boy Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 3	Back to the "problem" I agree with all of those who think the trade AI should be harder than in 4. I also like the gentleman's idea of a slide bar for difficulty, much like every other game setting. But, getting back to the point of this thread, I think the trade AI in it's current incarnation in 5 "hurts" your play. As one example, I have a 2 year all-star 1B who hits .380 and makes 500k. I want to trade him because I brought up the real prospect (like a .340 guy who hits 50hrs). The best the AI would offer me in return was a 2 star prospect. I checked about 12 teams. All the same. I also have another decent 4.5 star 1B prospect (yes, I have too many 1B). He's at triple A, making nothing, ready to play in the bigs. I tried to trade him for a 4 star player on any team at any position that I do not have a decent player in. Result, best player offered was a 3 star or a backup ML player making 2-4mil/yr. I don't know about you all, but I think that's pretty F'd up. Assume I had A-Rod at short, Tejada in the minors for trade, and then the best I could get in return was <insert not so good prospect here or permanent backup, say Ray Sanchez>. I think most teams in RL would be willing to part with something decent for a Tejada caliber player, and I actually don't think he would be a 4.5star prospect anyway (but that's besides the point). The GMs of pro ball always talk about all the deals that are floated to them that they pass on. I get nothing floated to me in 5. About 5 deals offered last season, compared to about 30 a season in OOTP4. I think they may have toned it down a bit too much. Mainly, I just wanted this point to be heard as perhaps it is something that could be tweaked or at least made so it can be tweaked in an upcoming patch. Thanks for listening and have fun, QK

03-04-2003, 07:13 PM	#27
floorman81 Minors (Double A) Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: at the Max... Posts: 117	I don't think it's that bad At first I thought the AI was worse in OOTp5 than 4, however with some time, I think it's just about right. The thing is, if you want to dump an overpriced player, or maybe a player who is expendible, you have to work a little harder for it in this game. I can't count how many times I've looked through 10-15 different teams, and offeres just to get rid of a guy. But I think this is what GM must do everyday, you never know who is looking, and to tell you the truth, most teams probaly AREN'T looking. But with work, I've managed to trade: Nomo and Ashby for Van Hekken, who was brilliant as a starting pitcher for me for about 2 years, then he fell on his face. I just now traded LoDuca and Van Hekken for a Short Stop with a .300 average, I realized I didn't need Lo and he was eating up too much money, Both helped my teams, but it took work. Much like life, if you really want it, you have to go after it! Kyle

03-04-2003, 12:24 AM	#22
gamadict Minors (Single A) Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Pitsburgh, PA... Posts: 50	It's not so much about the trade AI being hard or easy...It should strive to be realistic. For example, I was messing around with it the other day... I offered Mike Williams, Pokey Reese, Aramis Ramirez, Brian Meadows and Randal Simon. Not exactly a cadre of talent, but whatever. I tried to get some generic prospect from them, I think T Lindon or Damien Moss, and they rejected it. That's reasonable. Then I offered it for one Barry Lamar Bonds...'That's a good offer!.' Even got them to throw in a middling prospect. So now I thought, great, I have the best player in baseball. Time to flip him for some real prospects. Absolutely nobody in the league would deal for him...'We won't take Barry Bonds, he just eeats$$!.' Now, come on, I know he's 38, but he's the best player in the game by far. You'd think the high-payroll teams would be willing to give up SOMETHING for him, but no. So then, I decided to fire up the old editor and make him 20 again. Still had the $14 million contract, but I figured a 20 year old Babe Ruth/Ted Williams combination would be able to get some value. I offered him to the Rangers for Textiera, and they decline...Not based on his contract, just saying that they 'need a little more.' Based on my limited experience thus far, I think the AI overrates prospects and underrates developed players over the age of 26 to an unrealistic extent. I'm all for a challenging AI, I'm just looking for a little realism. Disclaimer: I like the game, I think the .400 team did a very good job, but this is a real issue for me...

03-04-2003, 12:58 AM	#23
I Am The Game All Star Reserve Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Red Sox Nation Posts: 691	While I do agree that the AI may need some tweaking, the fact remains it's SUPPOSED to be stingy. Everyone cried out for the trading AI to be a little more realistic then taking 37 year olds who make 8Million for two good prospects and a good young regular in return. Now it is more realistic and you want it to be toned down. This forces you to build more around the draft, and Free Agency, like it is in MLB. You can't just go out and trade 3 or 4 mid-tier players for a star to bat cleanup because your cleanup hitter isn't hitting what you want him to hit for a leadoff hitter. Or you can't trade a couple of backups and your starting 2B for Roberto Alomar because you want the star 2B. You have to put more detail into managing your money so you have some to spend in the offseason. While I have noticed the AI is pretty lenient when they offer trades, so take "advantage" of that. When they offer you prospects, grab them, develop them. Use your money wisely, that stuff. The stuff MLB teams actually have to do to maintain a winning organization. The point is supposed to be that you can't go out and deal your spare parts to plug a hole. Again, I do agree it does need some tweaking (like it was mentioned, offering 2 or 3 all stars to the CPU for one almost won't ever be done), but not as much as some are making it out to be.