Um - would you take this trade?

[SittingDuck]

So it is 1966 and I am the O's (yah, living in the past). Mid-June and I lead the division, and in particular the Yankees (3rd place) by 5 games.

So the Yankees want Stu Miller, my 39 year old reliever who, to his credit, is wielding a 1.67 ERA and 1.09 WHIP and 31 K's in 37 IP. Admittedly, the '66 O's have a crushing group of relievers (as imported). So what will the Yankees, who have initiated the trade, be willing to part with on a 1-fer-1 basis?

How about....

25-year-old Mel Stottlemyre (3.43 ERA), their #2 starter and a future workhorse and total stud.

Wowzers....

OK, I bring this up as an example that the reliever value needs to be addressed. I don't want to slag on the trade system - probably the hardest area to ever get proficient in a sim and Shaun has done and will continue to do good work in this area.

But that trade would hurt the Yankees for years! OK, in the real world I would love to see such a relative trade and would do some silly little naked dance on a car or whatever. But not in this game.

[Claymore Cut]

ORIGINAL: SittingDuck

So it is 1966 and I am the O's (yah, living in the past). Mid-June and I lead the division, and in particular the Yankees (3rd place) by 5 games.

So the Yankees want Stu Miller, my 39 year old reliever who, to his credit, is wielding a 1.67 ERA and 1.09 WHIP and 31 K's in 37 IP. Admittedly, the '66 O's have a crushing group of relievers (as imported). So what will the Yankees, who have initiated the trade, be willing to part with on a 1-fer-1 basis?

How about....

25-year-old Mel Stottlemyre (3.43 ERA), their #2 starter and a future workhorse and total stud.

Wowzers....

OK, I bring this up as an example that the reliever value needs to be addressed. I don't want to slag on the trade system - probably the hardest area to ever get proficient in a sim and Shaun has done and will continue to do good work in this area.

But that trade would hurt the Yankees for years! OK, in the real world I would love to see such a relative trade and would do some silly little naked dance on a car or whatever. But not in this game.

Wow, what build are you running?

[SittingDuck]

v1.18

[odellnolan]

Trades like this happen fairly often in baseball (think the Boston Red Sox trading a young Jeff Bagwell for a middle reliever (Mike Maddux? can't remember exactly who it was, which just goes to show how bad the deal was)) You have to remember, you have 40 years of history to base you judgement of Stottlemeyer on, the AI has one or two seasons.
When teams are in a pennant race, they often give up young, promising talent for old, established talent to make a one year run. Don't know if that is the situation in your league, but it is something to think about.

[lynchjm24]

It was Larry Anderson. They don't trade established starters for relievers - and they don't do it with the team they are chasing.

[SittingDuck]

Well, your point has some relevance, because sometimes lunatic trades do occur.

However, no one gives up an effective, super-rated #2 starter for an old geez (who admittedly still was hot). That's a one-way ticket out of a job.

Point taken, but in this case Stottlemyre was a core component of the starting rotation. Better to trade away two young Bagwells than a Stottlemyre. Understand that in his sophomore year (1965, the year previous to the season I am playing), Stottlemyre won 20 games and had a 2.63 ERA. Gads...

So the point I continue upon is that relievers are just too highly rated in the game for trade value.

[Tanaka]

I got this great team for my 46 Yanks...

Traded for 5 players:

Ted Williams, Stan Musial, Joe Garagiola, Warren Spahn, Bob Feller...

[Tanaka]

by trading away these 10 players....

...5 of which the AI put in the minor leagues...

What do you think? Fair or No? Opinions?

[Tanaka]

Who I traded for who...

Feller and Spahn I traded for using patch 1.1.

Musial, Williams, Garagiola I traded for using patch 1.18.

[SittingDuck]

Oooooooooooooooo..... Here's why they shouldn't have offered Stottlemyre (I didn't take him, though):

I led the AL from start to finish. In the last 10 games, the Yankees put on another historical charge for the top. Baltimore started to go cold-fish all over the place (historical also in that between some WS years they finished second a few times and lost first at the end of the season - go figure).

Anyhow, last two games of the season. McNally faces Fritz Peterson and gives it up, O's losing 7-2. This puts Baltimore and NY into a tie for first place with one game remaining in the season! Baltimore has gone 4-6 in the last ten; NY has gone 10-0.

Man, I really, really wish everyone could tune in for this final game:





Today's Starting Pitchers
Baltimore: Jim Palmer (18-8, 2.12 ERA)
New York: Mel Stottlemyre (16-12, 3.19 ERA, 8-4 w/ sub 3.00 ERA since the trade offer)





Dudes, this is what it is all about!!

[KG Erwin]

No, this is nuts (sorry, man).  Stan Musial for Mel Queen and Tiny Bonham?  You gotta be kidding me.  
 
It's the financial model -- that's what is screwing up the values here. 
 
Shaun really needs to take a look at this.  [X(]

[SittingDuck]

ORIGINAL: Tanaka

by trading away these 10 players....

...5 of which the AI put in the minor leagues...

What do you think? Fair or No? [:D]

I think we need to employ NSA wunderkinds to make this impossible.

Where is a vomit icon when you need one?

[Tanaka]

ORIGINAL: KG Erwin

No, this is nuts (sorry, man).  Stan Musial for Mel Queen and Tiny Bonham?  You gotta be kidding me.  

It's the financial model -- that's what is screwing up the values here. 

Shaun really needs to take a look at this.  [X(]

Oh no offense taken I quite agree with you. I feel like I can feel up my rosters with a select few hall of famers for lots and lots of nobody's...

...Just wanted to see what everyone's opinions were on this...

[SittingDuck]

Yeah, I actually ditched two 1966 assns because I couldn't hold back from acquiring some more star power.  That's when I figured I had better start using some house rules.

At this point, I am inclined to switch off the financials.  However, this is definitely a MAJOR area for work because so many guys want the financial aspect.  I want it, but I keep it at 5% of the normal range. 

Not only contract, but also age should be factored in.  For example, who trades a 25 yo for a 39 yo not named Ryan or Bonds?  I don't think age is being factored in, except in that 'Youth Hitter' parameter.  Which doesn't address 'Weezer Hitter' or the like.

[Tanaka]

ORIGINAL: SittingDuck

Yeah, I actually ditched two 1966 assns because I couldn't hold back from acquiring some more star power.  That's when I figured I had better start using some house rules.

At this point, I am inclined to switch off the financials.  However, this is definitely a MAJOR area for work because so many guys want the financial aspect.  I want it, but I keep it at 5% of the normal range. 

Not only contract, but also age should be factored in.  For example, who trades a 25 yo for a 39 yo not named Ryan or Bonds?  I don't think age is being factored in, except in that 'Youth Hitter' parameter.  Which doesn't address 'Weezer Hitter' or the like.

Another good point. It is definitely way easy to give away a 38 year old veteran with good stats but on his way out for young up and coming 20 somethings...

[Tanaka]

Anyone else have any other crazy trade examples to give??

[Tanaka]

bump

[Amaroq]

This is one reason I think the AI should evaluate trades in terms of 'immediate impact', '3-year-impact', and '5-year-impact'.

In this case, the Yankees AI *might* be considering this trade a minor positive in terms of 'immediate impact' (if, say, their #3-6 starters are all relatively close in ability, and not too far behind Stottlemyre's current ability).. but it should definitely be considering it a major negative in 3-year and 5-year terms, assuming Miller will retire and Stottlemyre will continue to improve. Even if they're desperate, that's not a move they should make.

Was that including your .XML tweak to relievers, or was it the stray that prompted you to start making the modifications?

Anyways, you left us hanging, my friend - how did the finale turn out?!?

[SittingDuck]

I think that was what prompted the interest.

The tweaks for relievers only make SPs more valuable in the overall talent list (top to bottom on the trade screen).  They don't, however, change the stated priorities for each team, which remain (usually): Closer, Relief Pitching, something else.  This, I've mentioned in another thread or two, will have to be addressed further by Shaun.  Either the AI is still too gung-ho on relievers, or the stated preference just isn't properly mentioned.  I tend to think the former rather than the later, however.  There is something going on that makes closer the #1 priority all the time.

Now I just had Boston OK a trade of Tony Conigliaro for California's Jose Cardenal.  Whaaat?  So, here's what I am going to do now.  I am going to take salary complete out of the equation (weight of zero for all lookup tables), except for teams looking to dump salary.  Hopefully this will make things a bit more clear.

There is one other concern, and that is how the AI perceives a player's position qualifications.  Both Cardenal and Conigliaro were rated for CF and RF (the inverses for Tony C, though).  Boston had absolutely no need for another CF - I can't for the life of me understand why Boston OK'd the deal.  TC was 5yr contract while Cardenal was 2yr, although TC had about 75% of Cardenal's annual contract.  Thus, I think I need to see salary wiped out of the equation for now.  I am not sure if a zero salary weight will do it or a negative value would get it done.  A negative value might improperly allow salary into the equation, so I think the answer here matters.

I don't mind simming and testing all this - it's of interest to me.  But if Shaun has any comments on this, it would really help.  Like his point that fielding ratings are not factored for pitchers.  That was good to know.  And I am looking into whether that affected the Conigliaro/Cardenal trade right now.

Soooo.... book it unfinished.  Tests are still being done.  If I can mute salary and get fielding to not affect stuff too much, then I think I have talent vs. talent worked out OK.  It just comes down to whether the AI analyzes position qualifications properly in roster management.

[SittingDuck]

Oh yeah, and I just realized that I'll have to weight PH even more.  If the sheer CH/PH of Cardenal vs Conigliaro had been weighed solely, then it would have never happened.  PH needs more weight.