Trades

[Surefire]

Its now practically impossible to trade for a good player down the stretch. For example, the computer won't even take 5 players with 80'ish rating for 1 player with a 90'ish rating. I think the trade algorithm might be off a bit. Anyone have similar experiences with BM 2007?

[EricL]

Its now practically impossible to trade for a good player down the stretch. For example, the computer won't even take 5 players with 80'ish rating for 1 player with a 90'ish rating. I think the trade algorithm might be off a bit. Anyone have similar experiences with BM 2007?

Thats the point. the players who are rated 90 + now are RARE. They are supposed to be the guys who are untouchable unless the other team is blown away. I have made trades for good players, just took a lot of work.

Eric

[Clay Dreslough]

I agree with Eric. If you had Albert Pujols (a 90+ player) and I offered 5 "regular starters" like Coco Crisp, Mark Loretta, Bill Mueller, Kevin Youkilis and Tim Wakefield. Would you take the deal?

Difficulty level also has a big effect on what trades are accepted. If you think the computer GMs are too stingy, you can go down a level in League Options.

Clay

[Surefire]

Okay, I didn't know this was an intentional feature. I see what you are saying, its more realistic this way.

[HoustonGM]

Definitely more realistic. Im sure the Cardinals wouldnt trade Albert Pujols for anybody. it also prevents you from making trades like that. No team in real life would trade 5 decent players for 1 superstar.

[pzk2wkz]

I have run into the problem where the "other GM" will make suggestions and I offer those suggestions and he still won't bite. I have yet been able to make a trade that is good for me.

[rshackelford]

Usually the majority of trades I make are for straight up cash and I usually get what Im looking for.

[Galatine]

I can see how offering just cash would have an strong versatility advantage.

A trade is a measure of value lost over value gained. VORP style, isn't it?

But if this is on a postion-by-position basis, you'd have to offer the AI you want a to deal with a sufficient level of improvement over the players he already has to make up or exceed that of the players he's lost. You have to match his particular needs with your particular offers, position by postion..

Just offering 'good' players isn't always enough. They have to better players than the ones he has, and better than the potential alternatives he could use. In the case of superstars, they have to be vastly superior in that one area or greatly superior in a number of them, to make up for the loss.

But I guess Cash doesn't have the mix and match problem! It's value is utility. Every team can spent a dollar pretty much for the same value, regardless of their particular needs or deficit's.

In short: Not everyone is always going to want another contact hitting shortstop or utility outfielder or another middle reliever, but EVERYONE could find a use for an extra couple of million bucks!