Home | Webstore
Latest News: OOTP 25 Available - FHM 10 Available - OOTP Go! Available

Out of the Park Baseball 25 Buy Now!

  

Go Back   OOTP Developments Forums > Prior Versions of Our Games > Out of the Park Baseball 20 > OOTP 20 - General Discussions

OOTP 20 - General Discussions Everything about the newest version of Out of the Park Baseball - officially licensed by MLB.com and the MLBPA.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-27-2020, 09:38 AM   #1
SkoCubs
Minors (Single A)
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Posts: 53
Curious what you all would trade for my CFer. I'm disagreeing with the AI.

So Nate Scott. First round pick of mine in 2024. Shoots through the system and produces 3.0 WAR in 512 PA's in his first year. Unfortunately, I have a complete logjam in the OF with Juan Soto, Mike Trout, and another rookie who I think profiles better than Trout and Scott in CF.

Anyways, I've been dangling Nate Scott. Usually I'm able to get that 75-80 POT centerpiece I'm seeking, but the AI freaks out when I ask for another 65-75 POT.

I think that an MLB team would absolutely pay out the ass for a 23 year old CFer who rakes and has six years left. ****, look at what the Indians and Cubs are asking for Lindor and Bryant. I think one 75-80 POT, one 65-75 POT, and two 50-65 POT is an absolutely fair trade. AI does not.

I'm aware the best answer to this is play how you want, but I'd like to keep it realistic. Would it be cheesing to force trade the value I think Nate Scott is worth? I think the AI has this wrong, but I could also see an MLB team not wanting to destroy their farm system for one guy. Thoughts?


Also, if anyone is curious here is Soto/Trout/CF Prospect I like more. Plus, a Marlins dynasty. Sims starting with fantasy drafts are a fun time. https://imgur.com/gallery/BdXHgrn
Attached Images
Image 
SkoCubs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2020, 10:04 AM   #2
BIG17EASY
Hall Of Famer
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 3,291
So you're asking for one player better than your player, another player similar to your player, and two players slightly below but still projected to be big league regulars? Yeah, that seems like a lot for a player with 500 career plate appearances.

Remember, Lindor and Bryant are established stars while your player is not. Also remember, the Indians and Cubs have yet to get what they're asking for in trades for those guys. So perhaps your demands match the demands of the Indians and Cubs, but demands don't always match returns in the end.

Also, a lot depends on what your AI evaluation settings are at. If you have it set to favor or highly favor prospects, you're never going to get the AI to trade four future big leaguers, two who are projected to be all-stars.
BIG17EASY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2020, 10:45 AM   #3
Westheim
Hall Of Famer
 
Westheim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Germany
Posts: 11,806
Yeah, I'd totally sell the farm for a potential 200-K player that put up good, but not outlandish numbers at Zero Gravity Field...
__________________
Portland Raccoons, 83 years of excell-.... of baseball: Furballs here!
1983 * 1989 * 1991 * 1992 * 1993 * 1995 * 1996 * 2010 * 2017 * 2018 * 2019 * 2026 * 2028 * 2035 * 2037 * 2044 * 2045 * 2046 * 2047 * 2048 * 2051 * 2054 * 2055
1 OSANAI : 2 POWELL : 7 NOMURA | RAMOS : 8 REECE : 10 BROWN : 15 HALL : 27 FERNANDEZ : 28 CASAS : 31 CARMONA : 32 WEST : 39 TONER : 46 SAITO

Resident Mets Cynic - The Mets from 1962 onwards, here.
Westheim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2020, 10:57 AM   #4
redranger
All Star Reserve
 
redranger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Birmingham, Alabama
Posts: 517
Not enough career ABs and too many Ks upfront for me to make that deal. I don’t think the AI is unreasonable in this scenario

Also keep in mind, the AI will vary from team to team depending on scouting/needs of that team. Have you looked to all the other teams?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
redranger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2020, 11:30 AM   #5
TomVeal
All Star Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Spanaway, Washington
Posts: 1,181
A good, solid player but hardly a superstar. If you don't need him in your outfield, grab the 75-80 POT offer.
TomVeal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2020, 12:56 PM   #6
SkoCubs
Minors (Single A)
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Posts: 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by BIG17EASY View Post
So you're asking for one player better than your player, another player similar to your player, and two players slightly below but still projected to be big league regulars? Yeah, that seems like a lot for a player with 500 career plate appearances.

Remember, Lindor and Bryant are established stars while your player is not. Also remember, the Indians and Cubs have yet to get what they're asking for in trades for those guys. So perhaps your demands match the demands of the Indians and Cubs, but demands don't always match returns in the end.

Also, a lot depends on what your AI evaluation settings are at. If you have it set to favor or highly favor prospects, you're never going to get the AI to trade four future big leaguers, two who are projected to be all-stars.
I didn’t include this so that’s my bad, but I’d be looking for younger prospects rather than MLB ready or almost MLB ready. Plus, while yeah he doesn't have the MLB resume, he was a first rounder so he does that have top prospect doing what top prospects do going for him. Which IMO is different than a guy having a career year and getting a generous rating from OSA/Scouts.

If I were asking for MLB ready talent then yeah asking for a 75 POT and 65 POT x2 is absurd. But when you factor in the they’re young and raw component I’m not sure if it’s that crazy of a demand

Last edited by SkoCubs; 01-27-2020 at 12:59 PM.
SkoCubs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2020, 01:01 PM   #7
SkoCubs
Minors (Single A)
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Posts: 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by Westheim View Post
Yeah, I'd totally sell the farm for a potential 200-K player that put up good, but not outlandish numbers at Zero Gravity Field...
Didn't mention it in my original post so that's definitely my bad, but if I'm looking for younger prospects I definitely think you should be compensated a bit for the bust factor. Yeah I'd definitely be crazy to ask for MLB ready or almost MLB ready 80 POT guys for this dude
SkoCubs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2020, 01:04 PM   #8
BIG17EASY
Hall Of Famer
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 3,291
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkoCubs View Post
I didn’t include this so that’s my bad, but I’d be looking for younger prospects rather than MLB ready or almost MLB ready. Plus, while yeah he doesn't have the MLB resume, he was a first rounder so he does that have top prospect doing what top prospects do going for him. Which IMO is different than a guy having a career year and getting a generous rating from OSA/Scouts.

If I were asking for MLB ready talent then yeah asking for a 75 POT and 65 POT x2 is absurd. But when you factor in the they’re young and raw component I’m not sure if it’s that crazy of a demand
Still asking for too much even if all four prospects are only 19 or 20 years old. I think you're overvaluing your own player big time. It sounds like you're going to trade him, so I'd advise you to follow his career. I think you'll see in 15-20 years that he never turned into the player you think he is.
BIG17EASY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2020, 03:32 PM   #9
SpacePope
Minors (Single A)
 
Join Date: May 2019
Posts: 88
I like the guy a lot and agree he's proven himself to have a solid floor and unclear ceiling. Still, if I were to trade a potential centerpiece for him I'd either do an even trade (if Nate was a particularly good fit and the potential centerpiece wasn't) or I'd be the one asking for more.

There are so many reasons why you might not be getting what you're looking for. Scouting, league depth in OF, needs of other teams, skepticism about a couple of his tools, etc. Overall, I think you'll have more fun playing out the game without forcing the AI to behave the way you think it should and instead appreciate that a good sim is going leave you guessing sometimes - just like real life baseball.
SpacePope is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2020, 08:14 PM   #10
KBLover
All Star Reserve
 
KBLover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 580
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkoCubs View Post
I'm aware the best answer to this is play how you want, but I'd like to keep it realistic. Would it be cheesing to force trade the value I think Nate Scott is worth?
Regardless of the opinion of your prospect, yes it would be "cheesing" if you're playing for realism. One GM can not force another to accept a trade, nor can the Commissioner, afaik.

The other GMs don't want to pay your asking price. Even if it is completely fair and warranted. Accept that now may not be the best time to dangle your prospect if you want that return, try again later or make other plans and show them the folly of their ways.

Also, keep in mind that if you have scouting on, they may not see your kid as you do, assuming your scout sees him correctly-ish. So while they might see him worth parting with a top prospect that needs years to make it for your player that's viewed as an instant everyday talent, they might not see him as a potential stud.

To be fair, I doubt I'd trade four 60+ POT talents for one CF. I'd likely trade two for one that's a notch or so lower than yours and keep the other two kids, especially that 80 POT one.

Otherwise, if I'm trading an 80 POT prospect, I'm not adding anything else either. I agree with the AI on that.
KBLover is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-29-2020, 12:10 PM   #11
ThePretender
All Star Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,303
Looks more like a corner of platoon bat than a starting calibre CF. Which is useful, but I wouldn't necessarily pay as much as you're asking for.

I don't love his defence in CF. Probably would play him in LF.
ThePretender is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:09 PM.

 

Major League and Minor League Baseball trademarks and copyrights are used with permission of Major League Baseball. Visit MLB.com and MiLB.com.

Officially Licensed Product – MLB Players, Inc.

Out of the Park Baseball is a registered trademark of Out of the Park Developments GmbH & Co. KG

Google Play is a trademark of Google Inc.

Apple, iPhone, iPod touch and iPad are trademarks of Apple Inc., registered in the U.S. and other countries.

COPYRIGHT © 2023 OUT OF THE PARK DEVELOPMENTS. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

 

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.10
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright © 2020 Out of the Park Developments