Two trading questions

crossthebreeze · 07-31-2009, 07:54 PM

1) Why can't we trade players who are on the DL? Hearing about today's Jake Peavy trade got me thinking about this...

2) Why are teams so weary of taking on "an overpaid veteran"? I can understand it in most cases, but I recently tried trading a $4m reliever with a 4.00 ERA to another team for a $6m reliever with a 6.00 ERA I was quickly denied for the aforementioned reason. Don't you think the other team would at least entertain the idea of saving $2m that year? Both relievers had expiring contracts, so it's not like they would have to worry about paying more in the future.

crossthebreeze · 08-03-2009, 03:00 PM

anyone?

SteveP · 08-03-2009, 04:24 PM

I don't have definitive answers to either question, but I'll speculate FWIW:

1. This may have more to do with game design and programming complications than anything to do with realism. Unfortunately, a computer sim runs into blank walls sometimes. This may be one of those times.

2. The AI is clearly programmed to put a dollar value on players, and it probably does that pretty well most of the time -- that is, the AI won't overpay for someone. The programming that lies behind the AI's ability to evaluate a team's financials is ... rudimentary, shall we say. Your ability to make a holistic assessment of what's in the best interest of a team financially is going to be better than the AI's. The AI just spends money until it can't spend money any more.

My best guesses.

07-31-2009, 07:54 PM	#1 (permalink)
crossthebreeze Minors (Rookie Ball) Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 21 Thanked 2x in 2 posts	Two trading questions 1) Why can't we trade players who are on the DL? Hearing about today's Jake Peavy trade got me thinking about this... 2) Why are teams so weary of taking on "an overpaid veteran"? I can understand it in most cases, but I recently tried trading a $4m reliever with a 4.00 ERA to another team for a $6m reliever with a 6.00 ERA I was quickly denied for the aforementioned reason. Don't you think the other team would at least entertain the idea of saving $2m that year? Both relievers had expiring contracts, so it's not like they would have to worry about paying more in the future.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

08-03-2009, 03:00 PM	#2 (permalink)
crossthebreeze Minors (Rookie Ball) Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 21 Thanked 2x in 2 posts	anyone?

08-03-2009, 04:24 PM	#3 (permalink)
SteveP Moderator Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 2,768 Thanked 260x in 197 posts	I don't have definitive answers to either question, but I'll speculate FWIW: 1. This may have more to do with game design and programming complications than anything to do with realism. Unfortunately, a computer sim runs into blank walls sometimes. This may be one of those times. 2. The AI is clearly programmed to put a dollar value on players, and it probably does that pretty well most of the time -- that is, the AI won't overpay for someone. The programming that lies behind the AI's ability to evaluate a team's financials is ... rudimentary, shall we say. Your ability to make a holistic assessment of what's in the best interest of a team financially is going to be better than the AI's. The AI just spends money until it can't spend money any more. My best guesses.