11.19 Computer Trades

[dizzyorange]

I'm a newbie but I agree the computer trade AI is a bit easily fooled. For example, started a new season with Tampa Bay and immediately made this trade:

Troy Percival
Al Reyes
Dan Wheeler
Carlos Pena (making 8.5 million)
Trever Miller
Gary Glover
Rocco Baldelli (out for the season)
Cliff Floyd
Jeremy Hellickson
Kurt Birkins (injured for 50 days)
Chad Orvella (injured for 40 days)

FOR

Joba Chamberlain
Ian Kennedy
$8,500,000

[GreenDiamond2]

Seems like the AI doesn't consider the impact of injured players as much as it should, in weighing a trade.

In 2008, I think it is too ready to part with large sums of cash for players ... or take on large salaries in a trade deal. I think the AI should add some more weight when taking on these liabilities, when acquiring them. (not necessarily when trading them away).

Sure a hot prospect may be worth 15-20 million dollars, or there may be salary room for an 8 million dollar bench contract, but the AI should be deciding whether that money would be better spent in scouting or farm development, or as a reserve for a future stadium improvement.

[MizzouRah]

I'm not seeing any of this.. although I've been using Houston's 2007 rosters and transferred my franchise from BM 08.

[ohms_law]

I'm pretty sure AI teams can't nor need to save cash to build stadiums. I think they just pop up in the correct year.

correct

[GreenDiamond2]

I'm pretty sure AI teams can't nor need to save cash to build stadiums. I think they just pop up in the correct year. I'm a proponent of having the stadiums upkeep as a tax and money sink for big market teams.

I haven't really paid much attention to when the new stadiums pop up, but in long sims starting in the current year, I doubt long term data is available beyond 2012 or so for stadiums under construction.

Using the stadiums as a money sink is good. This idea might be applied to stadium maintenance, future stadium funds (possibly as a budget slider which sets the funds aside and doesn't penalize the team's attendance for reserving cash), or for minor stadium improvements.

Smaller market teams would tend to build multi-use facilities (soccer/football/concert events) and might get some financial assistance when looking to build/upgrade a stadium.

[ohms_law]

There is no data going into the future. The only stadium changes taht happen are those that already have.

[GreenDiamond2]

Especially if the price of beer is cheap

Any mechanism which creates a money sink or redistribution for high attendance teams is good. Also good if the lower level teams have a means of improving their stadium or marketability over a period of time. Possibly a gradual increase in the amount that cities are willing to finance stadium renovations/upgrades as they decay. When a stadium gets too old the city should either pony up the cash (if the team doesn't have financial reserves) or a new city should provide incentives to move.

I also liked the idea of variable city growth on an annual basis. Which would keep markets relatively stable. While population decline is a factor in some areas, these are often temporary and over time population definitely trends towards increasing. While this isn't always in the cities, it probably tends to affect suburban areas significantly.

(Us population by year) http://www.npg.org/facts/us_historical_pops.htm

[HoustonGM]

Just had another gigantic Hanley Ramirez trade, this time coming in the offseason after 2008...sending Ramirez, Mark Hendrickson, and Lee Gradner to the Giants for 10 players....

[Arctic Blast]

Really, the biggest issue with trades seems to be that the AI simply equates quantity with quality, like they're one and the same. Throw enough chunks of tin foil at it for that diamond it's hording, and soon it just sees you offering a whole lot of shiny stuff for its' one piece.

[ohms_law]

Yup

[GreenDiamond2]

There is no data going into the future. The only stadium changes taht happen are those that already have.

There is available data (outside of the game) on stadiums that are in construction or planned.

Really, the biggest issue with trades seems to be that the AI simply equates quantity with quality, like they're one and the same. Throw enough chunks of tin foil at it for that diamond it's hording, and soon it just sees you offering a whole lot of shiny stuff for its' one piece

Generally true, although a lot of players in the farm system are likely to yield an occaisional surprise benefit, particularly if the players are fairly young (thus the reports of trades involving "four players to be named later..." ).

The AI does protect itself by adding fairly significant value (in 08) when it is asked to part with several prospects from a human player, this should probably not be reciprical.

It may be applying that logic in its own trades as well, thus the presence and frequency of large multi-player deals. This may actually be heightened by the AI not using cash in its internal deals at all, as it will require more complex deals to create what it percieves as balanced trades.



Scouting accuracy may be a factor in some cases.

[FRENCHREDSOX]

Generally true, although a lot of players in the farm system are likely to yield an occaisional surprise benefit, particularly if the players are fairly young (thus the reports of trades involving "four players to be named later..." ).

The AI does protect itself by adding fairly significant value (in 08) when it is asked to part with several prospects from a human player, this should probably not be reciprical.

It may be applying that logic in its own trades as well, thus the presence and frequency of large multi-player deals. This may actually be heightened by the AI not using cash in its internal deals at all, as it will require more complex deals to create what it percieves as balanced trades.



Scouting accuracy may be a factor in some cases.

The trading is extremely lop sided even amongst itself -----------many multiple player trades during the season in which BOTH teams "rip" up their Opening Day line ups & even then,they "flip off" the "prize" acquisition within 24 hours.

I am not saying that teams don't trade but in 90% of cases the 25 man roster on OD is the same as the end of season roster with 2 or 3 changes through trades.The rest of the changes are call ups or pick ups in FA.For example the only "big deals" during the 07 season were the 2 Texas deals with Boston & Atlanta........

[GreenDiamond2]

There are the occaisional "three way deals" which is essentially what a quick flip represents. Major trades involving a number of starting players are fairly rare though.

Most of the bigger trades are a couple of big names and some minor league players/prospects as "currency" since the league limits cash deals.

The game only models the better minor league talent, some deals involving lesser talents are almost like trading farm system development points, strange idea, just popped into my head, so its not thought out at all.

Large power deals have probably occoured, but definitely not common.

[FRENCHREDSOX]

Large power deals have probably occoured, but definitely not common.

That is the point BM has multiplicity in this domain,even Division leaders rip up their team which although logical in BM (get a 89 instead of your 87 position player) never happens IRL.

Teams that win IRL stick together (team spirit/cohesion) it is the 24 others WHO try either :

a) improve to get into the playoffs or
b) "sell off" veterans at their peak value (trade deadline deals to (a))

[CatKnight]

(Referencing ohms' comment there's no stadium data going into the future)

There is available data (outside of the game) on stadiums that are in construction or planned.

I'm fine with no future stadium data. Stadiums that are under construction or planned...don't exist. We don't know if they'll be finished, or if they'll open on time, or if rabid woodchucks won't chew their way through the support pillars and it'll collapse after two weeks. They don't need to be in the game.

Regarding trades, the computer is MUCH better than it has been in the past. Yes, it'll still pull some really weird..stunts...but it seems to be doing better.

I've turned off winter trades (by reducing Trade Freq to -100% then re-upping it in April) though. There are teams that are trading like it's July: Dumping prospects to 'win now', or vice versa.