Trading of draft picks...

snnort · 09-01-2009, 12:38 PM

A league I am in has a team that has dominated for decades and always manages to have young players coming up through his minor league system by making trades for them while they are young prospects as well as trading for draft picks. He's keen on trading for picks in the first few rounds (as anyone would).

In the 11 seasons simmed in the league so far, he has won his division every time. The last nine have been with at least 100 wins AND the last 7 have been with at least 110 wins.

Currently he has a uber 1st baseman that is almost Pujols good. He's not MVP yet, but certainly a .300/35/115 guy and is 29 years old and locked up for 3 more years at $2.5 million.

In triple AAA he has even a better 1B waiting that is only 22 and ready for his call up.

He just traded away the stud 29 year old 1B to another team for the following years ammy picks... picks 1 thru 4. The picks won't be all the early as the team trading them is a good team in his division too and should contend, if not win his division.

I say it's a win/win trade as the 1B is a stud to everyone but the uber team. To them, he is expendable.

BUT I also believe the evidence points to this being a bad trade for the league in that this uber team will continue to dominate with 110 win seasons each and every year. It's my biggest reason for not liking draft pick trading.

I'm interested in the opinions of others. They've broken no rules. BUT should the rules be changed? Or should the rest of the league learn to either live with it or should draft pick start flying as people can't trade them enough?

Corsairs · 09-01-2009, 12:49 PM

I don't think any rule changes are in order here. My opinion is that it's up to the rest of the league to take their game up a notch in order to compete. As you say, this owner has done nothing wrong. In fact he should be commended for building such a powerful franchise. If I were an owner in this league, I would study his methodology and see how I could replicate it myself.

kq76 · 09-01-2009, 12:55 PM

I can't say I understand the problem. I can sort of see it in real life as there's concern that trades including picks could be more financially driven than competitive driven, but you don't really have that concern with online leagues (it's only play money). Obviously the people trading away the picks and prospects think that it's worth it and it sounds like this guy is smart in trading away guys who are going to get expensive and old soon. We had a guy who did that and his team dominated its division like no other (in 23 seasons they finished 1st 20 times, close 2nds the other 3), but in his 20+ seasons in the league he only won one championship.

Anyway, I've never had an issue with the trading of picks and prospects. On the contrary, I think being allowed to trade picks and prospects is vital to keeping interest in the league for many. I certainly don't think I could stand not being allowed to trade for them. Along with drafting and FA, trading is probably one of the most fun aspects of participating in an online league.

Raidergoo · 09-01-2009, 01:37 PM

There's a couple ways to attack the issue.

The best is to get good GM's, and encourage low turnover in the league.

Let's stipulate for a second the sole issue is draft pick trading. What can you do?

You can turn draft pick trading off. That ends the problem, period. GM's who take over an established team hate missing their picks. Draft pick trading is prohibited by MLB.

The trouble with turning it off is that trading picks in an established league is fun to do. What is more important? Realism? Fun? Ensuring new GM's can get their club back on its feet quickly? Once that question gets answered, a solution will come to the forefront.

If draft pick trading is allowed, there are some ways to regulate it. You could allow only picks in the upcoming draft to be made. You could limit draft pick trading to the part of the season between Opening Day and Draft Day. You could have a draft review board that would review each trade proposal to ensure that the league's competitive balance is maintained. You could have a rule that a team must have a pick in either the first or second round in the draft, so they cannot trade away both.

Yeah, I cheated a little bit and copied these ideas straight from the eMLB rule book. Then again, this league has been around since 2001, so maybe you could draw on its experience. Yes, some of the ideas are hard to implement in practice. But, the payoff is pretty good.

If you're having an issue with ridiculous low extensions being accepted, you could more heavily weigh contract evaluations to current year stats, then prohibit the offering of contract extension offers until after the All Star Game, or trade dead line. Often, clever GM's will submit a couple offers trying to feel out the absolute minimum a player will take. They will spread offers out over a long period of time, as to not irk the player too much by lowballing him. If you make the time period for negotiations shorter, it makes gaming the AI harder to do.

snnort · 09-01-2009, 02:27 PM

LOTS of good pointers there, Raidergoo.

snnort · 10-24-2009, 01:15 PM

Corsairs and kq76:

In a perfect OOTP world... every GM in every league would make this type of effort and parity would never, ever be an issue. AND if every GM could "study" the stradegy of this GM and replicate (or attempt to) then it would not work for anyone, since everyone was doing it.

Solutions for one league are not necessarily solutions for all. Not every league is run the same OR managed by it's participants the same. Many leagues have to find a mixture of allowing the most active GMs to make all the moves necessary to bring their team to glory, but you still have to keep from some teams becoming so weak, that you've now limited them to only the ultimate OOTPers who live to create a pearl out of sand. Unfortunately... those kinds of GMs do not grown on trees.

kq76 · 10-24-2009, 08:48 PM

Understood. I'm just saying that while you may see a big plus with prohibiting trading, I, and I'm sure at least some in your league and probably some who might be interested in joining your league in the future, see a big negative with it too. You have to do what you have to do sometimes though.

09-01-2009, 12:38 PM	#1
snnort Minors (Triple A) Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 272	Trading of draft picks... A league I am in has a team that has dominated for decades and always manages to have young players coming up through his minor league system by making trades for them while they are young prospects as well as trading for draft picks. He's keen on trading for picks in the first few rounds (as anyone would). In the 11 seasons simmed in the league so far, he has won his division every time. The last nine have been with at least 100 wins AND the last 7 have been with at least 110 wins. Currently he has a uber 1st baseman that is almost Pujols good. He's not MVP yet, but certainly a .300/35/115 guy and is 29 years old and locked up for 3 more years at $2.5 million. In triple AAA he has even a better 1B waiting that is only 22 and ready for his call up. He just traded away the stud 29 year old 1B to another team for the following years ammy picks... picks 1 thru 4. The picks won't be all the early as the team trading them is a good team in his division too and should contend, if not win his division. I say it's a win/win trade as the 1B is a stud to everyone but the uber team. To them, he is expendable. BUT I also believe the evidence points to this being a bad trade for the league in that this uber team will continue to dominate with 110 win seasons each and every year. It's my biggest reason for not liking draft pick trading. I'm interested in the opinions of others. They've broken no rules. BUT should the rules be changed? Or should the rest of the league learn to either live with it or should draft pick start flying as people can't trade them enough?

09-01-2009, 12:49 PM	#2
Corsairs Hall Of Famer Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 2,360	I don't think any rule changes are in order here. My opinion is that it's up to the rest of the league to take their game up a notch in order to compete. As you say, this owner has done nothing wrong. In fact he should be commended for building such a powerful franchise. If I were an owner in this league, I would study his methodology and see how I could replicate it myself. __________________ Founder of the Planetary Extreme Baseball Alliance (PEBA) Premiere OOTP fictional league where creativity counts and imagination is your only limitation Check for openings - contact us today! Join the PEBA

09-01-2009, 12:55 PM	#3
kq76 Global Moderator Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 12,031	I can't say I understand the problem. I can sort of see it in real life as there's concern that trades including picks could be more financially driven than competitive driven, but you don't really have that concern with online leagues (it's only play money). Obviously the people trading away the picks and prospects think that it's worth it and it sounds like this guy is smart in trading away guys who are going to get expensive and old soon. We had a guy who did that and his team dominated its division like no other (in 23 seasons they finished 1st 20 times, close 2nds the other 3), but in his 20+ seasons in the league he only won one championship. Anyway, I've never had an issue with the trading of picks and prospects. On the contrary, I think being allowed to trade picks and prospects is vital to keeping interest in the league for many. I certainly don't think I could stand not being allowed to trade for them. Along with drafting and FA, trading is probably one of the most fun aspects of participating in an online league. __________________ My OOTP Wishlist \| My FAQ List OOTP Wiki \| Your Recommended Team Nicknames, By City (A Crowdsourced Project) For Beta/Devs: Full screen (1920x1080)

09-01-2009, 01:37 PM	#4
Raidergoo Hall Of Famer Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 9,005	There's a couple ways to attack the issue. The best is to get good GM's, and encourage low turnover in the league. Let's stipulate for a second the sole issue is draft pick trading. What can you do? You can turn draft pick trading off. That ends the problem, period. GM's who take over an established team hate missing their picks. Draft pick trading is prohibited by MLB. The trouble with turning it off is that trading picks in an established league is fun to do. What is more important? Realism? Fun? Ensuring new GM's can get their club back on its feet quickly? Once that question gets answered, a solution will come to the forefront. If draft pick trading is allowed, there are some ways to regulate it. You could allow only picks in the upcoming draft to be made. You could limit draft pick trading to the part of the season between Opening Day and Draft Day. You could have a draft review board that would review each trade proposal to ensure that the league's competitive balance is maintained. You could have a rule that a team must have a pick in either the first or second round in the draft, so they cannot trade away both. Yeah, I cheated a little bit and copied these ideas straight from the eMLB rule book. Then again, this league has been around since 2001, so maybe you could draw on its experience. Yes, some of the ideas are hard to implement in practice. But, the payoff is pretty good. If you're having an issue with ridiculous low extensions being accepted, you could more heavily weigh contract evaluations to current year stats, then prohibit the offering of contract extension offers until after the All Star Game, or trade dead line. Often, clever GM's will submit a couple offers trying to feel out the absolute minimum a player will take. They will spread offers out over a long period of time, as to not irk the player too much by lowballing him. If you make the time period for negotiations shorter, it makes gaming the AI harder to do. Last edited by Raidergoo; 09-03-2009 at 10:54 AM. Reason: eliminated misuse of an apostrophe

10-24-2009, 08:48 PM	#7
kq76 Global Moderator Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 12,031	Understood. I'm just saying that while you may see a big plus with prohibiting trading, I, and I'm sure at least some in your league and probably some who might be interested in joining your league in the future, see a big negative with it too. You have to do what you have to do sometimes though. __________________ My OOTP Wishlist \| My FAQ List OOTP Wiki \| Your Recommended Team Nicknames, By City (A Crowdsourced Project) For Beta/Devs: Full screen (1920x1080)

09-01-2009, 02:27 PM	#5
snnort Minors (Triple A) Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 272	LOTS of good pointers there, Raidergoo.

10-24-2009, 01:15 PM	#6
snnort Minors (Triple A) Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 272	Corsairs and kq76: In a perfect OOTP world... every GM in every league would make this type of effort and parity would never, ever be an issue. AND if every GM could "study" the stradegy of this GM and replicate (or attempt to) then it would not work for anyone, since everyone was doing it. Solutions for one league are not necessarily solutions for all. Not every league is run the same OR managed by it's participants the same. Many leagues have to find a mixture of allowing the most active GMs to make all the moves necessary to bring their team to glory, but you still have to keep from some teams becoming so weak, that you've now limited them to only the ultimate OOTPers who live to create a pearl out of sand. Unfortunately... those kinds of GMs do not grown on trees.