Question about the GM AI

[filihok]

Does anyone know what "motivates" the computer GM's to propose trades?


I haven't done a scientific study of computer trades, which I would do if I didn't have to waste 8 hours a day at work, but observations have lead me to believe the AI doesn't fully consider its team before proposing a trade. It is possible the AI sees its team differently that I do. But I've seen plenty of trades where the AI will make a trade that weakens a position only to add to a position that already appears to be a strength (ie trading it's only plausible catcher for an outfielder when it already has 3 strong outfielders).

There's been a lot of discussion about how the computer GM's evaluate talent well, but do not evaluate a team well. So how does the AI iniate a trade?

Does the AI "look" at its team to determine an area of weakness and try to upgrade that position? Does the AI find players that appear to be de-valued by their current team and try to trade for them? (I get a lot of offers for starting players when I have them in AAA, which I do when a player is coming back from a lengthy injury-I think it adds some realism to the game) I'm sure the AI will try to shed salary as I get a lot of offers involving multiple high-priced players for clearly unequal talent.

I'm sure someone has the knowledge and information that I'm seeking, so if you could share with me or point me to it. I simply don't have the time, or mental fortitude, to reinvent a wheel that is probably already rolling.

[HoustonGM]

See Computer Trades for a lengthy thread, mostly regarding computer-to-computer trades.

While I do not know exactly how it intiates offers to human-controlled teams, you are exactly right when you say that the AI does not consider it team much, if at all, when making trades and free agent signings. The AI does a very good job of evaluating individual player value, and the trades it makes are usually balanced in overall value on both sides, but make no consideration for the value to that specific team...For example, say Derrek Lee has equal value to Carlos Beltran. A team might trade Lee for Beltran, even though it has an outfield of Carl Crawford, Grady Sizemore, and Vladimir Guerrero. The trade looks good because it has equal value on both sides, but no consideration is given to the fact that Beltran is not valuable to that team becuase there is no place for him to play.

[ohms_law]

Yup, exactly.

[kingdomk]

See Computer Trades for a lengthy thread, mostly regarding computer-to-computer trades.

While I do not know exactly how it intiates offers to human-controlled teams, you are exactly right when you say that the AI does not consider it team much, if at all, when making trades and free agent signings. The AI does a very good job of evaluating individual player value, and the trades it makes are usually balanced in overall value on both sides, but make no consideration for the value to that specific team...For example, say Derrek Lee has equal value to Carlos Beltran. A team might trade Lee for Beltran, even though it has an outfield of Carl Crawford, Grady Sizemore, and Vladimir Guerrero. The trade looks good because it has equal value on both sides, but no consideration is given to the fact that Beltran is not valuable to that team becuase there is no place for him to play.

That is another part which Clay should improve significantly if you ask me... but who does?

Martin

[HoustonGM]

That is another part which Clay should improve significantly if you ask me... but who does?

Martin

It's perhaps the one area where nearly everybody here agrees on exactly what needs to be done...

Which is odd, because when you click on hint, it shows you what the GM thinks his team needs.

Yeah, good point, didn't even think about that. Maybe it "calculates" that information, but doesn't actually use it.

[OldFatGuy]

which I would do if I didn't have to waste 8 hours a day at work,

Wanna getaway?? Southwest Airl..........

[filihok]

I'm going to NY to catch the Mets and Dodgers series next weekend. Not on Southwest though...