New Sticky Note

The new user interface is in preview!

Want to check it out? Click here! (If you don't like it, you can still switch back)

League Forums

Main - General MFN Discussion

Re: Trade Wieght Again

By WarEagle
11/16/2015 11:30 am
jdavidbakr wrote:
WarEagle wrote:
If a 100/100 player isn't worth a 1.1 (or even a possible 1.1 2 years in the future), who is?


Exactly - but should the system assume that a player with the #1 overall pick will still have the #1 overall pick in 2 years? Right now it maps the teams into quadrants, so the best future pick value will be considered as a top-8 pick, not a #1 pick.

I hate that I have to make this objective calculation that doesn't really fit especially at the top.


My point is that if this 100/100 player is not worth a top 8 pick 2 years from now, who would ever be worth it? Or a 1.1 for that matter?

I know this is an extreme example, but there should be somebody in the league worth the 1.1 pick, and especially a top 8 pick 2 years down the road.

The picks are way overvalued by the AI, or the players are way undervalued.

It almost seems the AI is assigning value to the privilege of picking high, and much less to the player you would actually be able to draft.

Instead of using some pre-defined value for the picks (like the chart you use), maybe the value should be done the same way that the AI calculates the value for players? If the actual in-league players are used to determine the value of a player, maybe you can use the past 4 draft pools to determine the values for draft picks based on the value of the player you would be able to draft with that pick (compared to in-league players)?

The value of the picks would increase/decrease based on recent history of the quality of players available in the draft.


To elaborate on the above:
If a 90 potential player is assigned a value of 1000 points for trade purposes

THEN

A draft pick where you would expect to be able to draft a 90 potential player (based on previous draft pools) would be worth 1000 points also.
Last edited at 11/16/2015 11:35 am

Re: Trade Wieght Again

By jdavidbakr - Site Admin
11/16/2015 12:19 pm
WarEagle wrote:
Instead of using some pre-defined value for the picks (like the chart you use), maybe the value should be done the same way that the AI calculates the value for players? If the actual in-league players are used to determine the value of a player, maybe you can use the past 4 draft pools to determine the values for draft picks based on the value of the player you would be able to draft with that pick (compared to in-league players)?


That is more or less what I plan to do.

Re: Trade Wieght Again

By Gustoon - League Admin
11/16/2015 12:54 pm
WarEagle wrote:
jdavidbakr wrote:
WarEagle wrote:
If a 100/100 player isn't worth a 1.1 (or even a possible 1.1 2 years in the future), who is?


Exactly - but should the system assume that a player with the #1 overall pick will still have the #1 overall pick in 2 years? Right now it maps the teams into quadrants, so the best future pick value will be considered as a top-8 pick, not a #1 pick.

I hate that I have to make this objective calculation that doesn't really fit especially at the top.


My point is that if this 100/100 player is not worth a top 8 pick 2 years from now, who would ever be worth it? Or a 1.1 for that matter?

I know this is an extreme example, but there should be somebody in the league worth the 1.1 pick, and especially a top 8 pick 2 years down the road.

The picks are way overvalued by the AI, or the players are way undervalued.

It almost seems the AI is assigning value to the privilege of picking high, and much less to the player you would actually be able to draft.

Instead of using some pre-defined value for the picks (like the chart you use), maybe the value should be done the same way that the AI calculates the value for players? If the actual in-league players are used to determine the value of a player, maybe you can use the past 4 draft pools to determine the values for draft picks based on the value of the player you would be able to draft with that pick (compared to in-league players)?

The value of the picks would increase/decrease based on recent history of the quality of players available in the draft.


To elaborate on the above:
If a 90 potential player is assigned a value of 1000 points for trade purposes

THEN

A draft pick where you would expect to be able to draft a 90 potential player (based on previous draft pools) would be worth 1000 points also.


Sorry I missed your point before.
I agree as well. I would like to add to this that you can draft a player in say the 4th round and in his 2nd year takes a 1st rounder to make the balance. I can understand possible futures being taken into account, but no 4th rounder is ever going to be valued as a 1st within 2 years, or at least in my book it shouldn't

Re: Trade Wieght Again

By Beercloud
11/16/2015 5:39 pm
Im sure the Patriots wouldn't trade Brady for all the picks in the world right now.

Some elite players at certain positions, certain points in their career and even certain points in their contracts can't and shouldn't be moved.

Re: Trade Wieght Again

By Chipped
11/16/2015 6:06 pm
But if the Saints were still losing they might've traded Brees. Some teams may need to trade their best players so that they can have a chance to be competitive in the future.

Re: Trade Wieght Again

By WarEagle
11/20/2015 7:30 am
I just had a situation in a league that is drafting now.

I had the 1.1 pick.

I tried to prepare an offer to move back to the 1.3 pick.

I was willing to accept much less, but the AI wouldn't even let me propose a trade to give up the 1.1 in exchange for the 1.3 and 3.3 saying it was too much in the other teams favor.

As soon as I drafted the best player in the pool (by my ratings), I was curious about what type of trade would be allowed.

Now, I cannot even offer this player for the 1.3 alone because it is weighted too much in MY favor.

This is exactly what I am talking about in regards to draft picks being WAY overvalued in comparison to the player you can get with them.

Re: Trade Wieght Again

By Gustoon - League Admin
11/20/2015 10:08 am
Very very annoying , I feel your frustration

Re: Trade Wieght Again

By jdavidbakr - Site Admin
11/20/2015 1:56 pm
It's like buying a new car, the moment you drive it off the lot it's lost half its value ...

I keep saying it but the problem is the impossibility to map players to picks in any kind of objective manner. I recently received a PM pointing out a possible owner being fleeced with what that user thought was an imbalanced trade.

I've got a few ideas to possibly help grade the player values (currently they are set from a large sample of drafts, which I know is inaccurate especially with the recent changes in draft talent) but ultimately this feels like it might be an impossible problem to solve. I still am trending toward allowing all trades and letting trades outside of the currently allowable range to be approved or rejected by the community in the league (but the trend bar, like the balance bar itself on late picks, is not swinging heavily in any direction)

Re: Trade Wieght Again

By WarEagle
11/20/2015 2:08 pm
I'm sure I'm missing something, or maybe I'm naive.

I just don't understand why we would want the trade "balance" bar to value a draft pick more than the player you could actually get with that pick (on average).

Re: Trade Wieght Again

By dmcc1
11/21/2015 1:25 pm
jdavidbakr wrote:


I've got a few ideas to possibly help grade the player values (currently they are set from a large sample of drafts, which I know is inaccurate especially with the recent changes in draft talent) but ultimately this feels like it might be an impossible problem to solve. I still am trending toward allowing all trades and letting trades outside of the currently allowable range to be approved or rejected by the community in the league (but the trend bar, like the balance bar itself on late picks, is not swinging heavily in any direction)


That would be too open to abuse and give those so inclined a reason to try and open multiple accounts.