AI in trading and drafting

[Mr. Capo]

I know that the mechanics of trading will be improved in 2007, but what about the AI as applied to trading and drafting?

In my experience, computer managed teams presently over-value starting pitchers relative to other players. If you’re trying to trade a position player for a starter, you’ll have a hard time getting fair value. Vice-versa, you can do OK. And the bias is even more apparent in drafting; average starters will be drafted ahead of superstar batters and closers.

Also, computer managed teams under-value draft choices in trading. My friend and I have come to refer to a particular strategy as the “sucker trade.” That is, shortly before the rookie draft, trade with the teams that have the first or second overall pick. They don’t seem to know how high a pick they have, and will trade it away too cheaply ...say, for a backup outfielder or minor league starter. I’ve acquired so much talent by this ploy that I finally had to take my own advice (which I’ve suggested in the past in this forum regarding bad AI applied to trades) ...just exercise personal restraint, and don’t do it.

Having the discipline to not instigate the “sucker trade” is one thing, but when I have the 24th pick in the draft, and 23 starting pitchers have been drafted while Ty Cobb is still available, I don’t have the will power to pass him up.

[Raidergoo]

Originally Posted by Mr. Capo

Also, computer managed teams under-value draft choices in trading.

I reported that one, it is claimed fixed. I'll try to rip off the AI in this manner once I get a new build.

[typewritermender]

On the same token, can we get some trade-deadline philosophy in the game? That is, at the deadline, teams in contention should be more willing to get rid of prospects for sure-thing veterans, and teams out of contention should be more willing to part with their overpriced vets to get some young talent.

[lewis31lewis52]

I would think that it would be in with the team rebuilding / contending mentality in the game, but I'm not sure.

It definately should be in, though.

[BusterKing]

Originally Posted by typewritermender

On the same token, can we get some trade-deadline philosophy in the game? That is, at the deadline, teams in contention should be more willing to get rid of prospects for sure-thing veterans, and teams out of contention should be more willing to part with their overpriced vets to get some young talent.

Excellent point.

Can this be done?

[DCG Moo]

Originally Posted by BusterKing

Excellent point.

Can this be done?

Most definitely agreed. It should probably be a part of the GM philosophies concept being used... as different GM's do react differently (Billy Beane rarely moves heavily at the deadline, while Brian Cashman and Theo Epstein would be on the other side of the page)... but anything resembling increased trade deadline activity would be a very welcome addition.

Any insider comments?

[rasnell]

I believe OOTP 2007 is much better in human trading with the AI when you set trades to hard and favor young prospects.

However, there are still weaknesses with how easy the draft is for the human vs. AI.

Overall, improvements are very good.

I disagree with your premise about the way starting pitchers are regarded. There's nothing more valuable or more important to a team. Look at real life, there are very few strong starters. Even finding an average #3 starter in a rotation would be extremely more valuable than higher-ranked position players. I think OOTP is about right compared to modern-day real-life baseball.

[DCG Moo]

Originally Posted by rasnell

I disagree with your premise about the way starting pitchers are regarded. There's nothing more valuable or more important to a team. Look at real life, there are very few strong starters. Even finding an average #3 starter in a rotation would be extremely more valuable than higher-ranked position players. I think OOTP is about right compared to modern-day real-life baseball.

Agreed here... look no farther than my Atlanta Braves this offseason to see a great example of this. They've acquired two solid, top-flight setup men this offseason in trade, Rafael Soriano and Mike Gonzalez. Though very different style pitchers, both have been in trade discussions for at least a year and have had fairly similar values.

So, their respective prices? Gonzalez cost us Adam Laroche, a talented young power-hitting 1B batted fifth for us much of last year and who'll be in the league for 12 years. For Soriano (though we did steal him a bit), we only paid Horacio Ramirez... who might've been our #4 starter this year. Maybe.

Reliable, quality starting pitching (especially ace-quality) is infinitely more valuable (and harder to find and judge) at a younger age than a potential stud cleanup hitter. And draft runs on pitchers happen quite frequently, especially in the top 20 picks. I don't think OOTP should treat things too much differently, in the interest of realism.

[sfeldkamp]

It's been said (okay, by Dayton Moore) that "Pitching is the currency of the game." and it's also been said that "there is no such thing as a pitching prospect."

I think an over-valuation of pitching versus position players and prospects is right in line with reality.

[Mr. Capo]

Originally Posted by DCG Moo

Reliable, quality starting pitching (especially ace-quality) is infinitely more valuable (and harder to find and judge) at a younger age than a potential stud cleanup hitter. And draft runs on pitchers happen quite frequently, especially in the top 20 picks. I don't think OOTP should treat things too much differently, in the interest of realism.

I'm not intending to underestimate the value of starting pitchers, but reliable and quality are the operative words. I keep seeing pitchers who don't show signs of becoming either getting drafted high in the first round, ahead of clearly superior position players. And I also agree that young pitchers are harder to judge, but that makes me less likely to stick my neck out for them with my first draft choice.

I will say this, though, in opposition to my own premise: I wouldn't mind seeing more late round draft picks develop into good or great players in OOTP, and maybe a bias on the part of the computer managers, or even a flaw in the AI drafting logic, is a way to achieve this. As a human baseball fan, most of these historic names are familiar to me and carry expectations. Not so with the computer, and the AI is not (and should not be) effected to see Ty Cobb's name still in the draft pool after the first 23 choices, all starting pitchers.

As the game promises to become more historically accurate — meaning in this case that the guys who were stars in real life are more likely to be stars in OOTP — then in a sense the draft will become less like real life, because in real life, we don't know.

[dcpcarmona]

it would be cool if we could have GM's who are just plain cheap and are unwilling to dish out the big bucks (ala Cubs) and are content with building from within. This would add another level of realism which most of us are looking for.



dcc

[TwinMonster]

What I'm wondering (and forgive me if this was fixed in other versions of OOTP) if you can still trade free-agent-to-be players and get a top-notch player/prospect in return?

[johneh]

Originally Posted by TwinMonster

What I'm wondering (and forgive me if this was fixed in other versions of OOTP) if you can still trade free-agent-to-be players and get a top-notch player/prospect in return?

Agreed - the "renting a player for 3 months" thing that a contender will do to try to make a push.

[JHruska]

Trading a free agent to be for a top notch prospect is a very common practice IRL. I don't see how that is something that needs to be 'fixed.'

[Mike D]

Originally Posted by dcpcarmona

it would be cool if we could have GM's who are just plain cheap and are unwilling to dish out the big bucks (ala Cubs) and are content with building from within. This would add another level of realism which most of us are looking for.



dcc

Apparently someone wasn't following the offseason...

[NomarHits400]

Originally Posted by Mike D

Apparently someone wasn't following the offseason...

No kidding...Not sure he could have picked a worse example for 2007 (but I still understand his point).....

[dcpcarmona]

Thanks for seeing past the one year aberration!