Trading prospects for cash - Page 18 - Hardball Dynasty

Posts: 58012 (0)

Hall of Famer

87 1 47 1 189

Prospect

Posted by jvford on 4/11/2011 3:27:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 4/11/2011 3:12:00 PM (view original):
Posted by isack24 on 4/11/2011 2:12:00 PM (view original):
But aren't you basically telling someone that he's not allowed to shed bad contracts in an effort to rebuild because it makes it more difficult for someone else to make the playoffs?

I guess that really does just come down to a philosophical difference, but it seems a bit restrictive for my taste.
I'm of the belief that you shouldn't have bad contracts and, if you do, you can suffer thru them. Or you can trade them and not pay the salary. Because, when you pay the salary, you haven't shed anything.
Other than future season's salary.

Except when they don't have one.

4/11/2011 3:28 PM

tecwrg

Posts: 18997 (0)

Hall of Famer

4 1 166 32 129

Prospect

Posted by MikeT23 on 4/11/2011 3:15:00 PM (view original):
Posted by jtrinsey on 4/11/2011 3:05:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 4/11/2011 2:03:00 PM (view original):
I think what bothers me is the possibility that an owner can bust his balls for 120 games to maintain a slight lead in his division only to have that snatched away from him by the 2nd place team who trades two middling prospects for a couple of old studs whose salary will be covered by their old team. As I said earlier, it's less about the team getting the players and more about the team giving them up. They're not contending and the money is spent. Trading away an older player for a 20th man on a BL roster makes perfect sense for them. If they're in no danger of failing to reach MWR, wins are a problem for their "rebuilding" efforts.
In a purely theoretical sense, this doesn't bother me at all. If I'm in second place and I make a deal to pass up the first place team, I should be commended for that. I've made a deal to make my team better and I used resources to do it. Maybe I took the time to manually rank 150 prospects, so I picked up a borderline ML guy in the 3rd round that I used to make a late-season deal for that "old stud." Maybe I managed my budget optimally and freed up an extra 2M to transfer into IFAs to grab a 3M pitcher who I believed into a middling prospect to trade for a stud at the deadline.

In theory, there's nothing wrong with that.

My issue, in an applied sense is that there really isn't a purely "free" market like there is in real life. In real life, when Lance Berkman is on the trade block, it is well-known and the GM of his team is not going to panic and take the first deal that is thrown his way. In practical application, I have found that these deals often involve one (or multiple) owners saying, "this is bullshit I would have given up way more had I known that guy was available and the owner was willing to pay his salary."

And, as mentioned previously, it is often the noob owner who screams the loudest, "it's my team I can do what I want with it!" while running their team into the ground.
It largely comes down to owners being free to not suffer the consequences of their actions. It was probably back on page 1 when I said I could sell all my prospects for 3-4 seasons, jack up my payroll and jump ship before any of those prospects make the bigs. This is a game where you're free to leave when you want. And, quite honestly, that's the best way because the last thing you want is an owner who's forced to play when he doesn't want to. But that's one of the problems with HBD.

Good point. In MLB, if a team screws itself over to the point where ownership wants to bail, they have to sell the team. Theoretically, poor decisions could bring down the value of a team. The consequences of their actions manifests itself as a lower sale price.

In HBD, if you think about it, nobody really owns a team. You just rent it season-by-season. You can leave at the end of your season (i.e. "lease") and just walk away. There's not even a deposit to lose.

4/11/2011 3:31 PM

MikeT23

Posts: 58012 (0)

Hall of Famer

87 1 47 1 189

Prospect

I'm sure every world has a team with a high payroll and no prospects of note. When the owner leaves, it's a tough sell if you don't have people waiting to join your world. And there are probably only 15-20 worlds with more on the waiting list than openings.

4/11/2011 3:37 PM

mbriese

Posts: 1091 (0)

Hall of Famer

227 75 121

Prospect

I trade cash for prospects sometimes, if I've got the cash. The playing field is level; anyone could do this only a lot of teams don't have the cash or don't have the prospects.

4/11/2011 3:50 PM

MikeT23

Posts: 58012 (0)

Hall of Famer

87 1 47 1 189

Prospect

It's level until you start giving other teams more budget space. That's what this is about.

4/11/2011 3:54 PM

silentpadna

Posts: 980 (0)

Hall of Famer

148

Prospect

Posted by MikeT23 on 4/11/2011 2:03:00 PM (view original):
I think what bothers me is the possibility that an owner can bust his balls for 120 games to maintain a slight lead in his division only to have that snatched away from him by the 2nd place team who trades two middling prospects for a couple of old studs whose salary will be covered by their old team. As I said earlier, it's less about the team getting the players and more about the team giving them up. They're not contending and the money is spent. Trading away an older player for a 20th man on a BL roster makes perfect sense for them. If they're in no danger of failing to reach MWR, wins are a problem for their "rebuilding" efforts.

It's more than that Mike. If the guy is not going to get the "old studs" back, he has to figure out his options. His "opportunity cost", so to speak.

Option 1 - Let their contracts expire and get whatever compensation back he happens to luck out with (like by 6th rounder from you for a Type A a few seasons ago).

Option 2 - Resign the players - if they fit into his plans

Option 3 - Trade them for the best price he can get. His market is then going to consist of whatever people are willing to offer to get the pieces.

In every case, he gets something of value in return and every single other owner has the opportunity to determine that value.

In option 1, he receives cap room in the following season, plus prospects that may or may not contribute, depending on luck and draft.

In option 2, he gets the aging vets possibly in decline.

In option 3, he receives cap room in the following season, plus prospects that may or may contribute, plus some amount of certainty.

Cash to you in the deal is worth it to him if he perceives it to be the best of the options. He uses the cash to provide certainty for his return. You use the cash for whatever you need. In any case, it's an exchange of value. Theoretically, the amount of cash he needs to add to get the deal done is based on whatever market he can generate from the "studs". It's incumbent on the traders to figure out what market for each commodity is.

4/11/2011 3:55 PM

MikeT23

Posts: 58012 (0)

Hall of Famer

87 1 47 1 189

Prospect

You fail to acknowledge that the market in HBD is not like the market in MLB. Someone mentioned it earlier that when Lance Berkman is available, everyone knows it. And, because of that, Houston isn't trading him to the first team thats makes an offer. In HBD, an owner says "Jimmy Joe is available. Will cover salary" and the first to reply often gets him. As an example, when you got those two pitchers, I had no idea he was going to trade them. Had I known, I'd have made a bid if for no other reason than to keep you from getting them. I'd have known two things in an open market: 1) He was moving them and was willing to pay their salaries 2) He was planning on moving them to a division rival. Maybe I wouldn't have had the goods to get them but I'd have had the opportunity. Now, last season, did you know I was getting the two pitchers I got?

4/11/2011 4:04 PM

MikeT23

Posts: 58012 (0)

Hall of Famer

87 1 47 1 189

Prospect

Anyway, HBD trades often finish with "first offer" rather than "best offer". And, like it or not, owners tend to gravitate towards owners they've worked with before. But that's for another thread.

4/11/2011 4:08 PM

deathinahole

Posts: 4139 (0)

Hall of Famer

76 2 1 42 1 75

Prospect

With you, it's gravitate away.

4/11/2011 4:10 PM

MikeT23

Posts: 58012 (0)

Hall of Famer

87 1 47 1 189

Prospect

Says the dumbass who offers some overpaid 39 y/o for a 21 y/o who was the 10th pick in the draft. And we KNOW you aren't covering any salary.

4/11/2011 4:13 PM

MikeT23

Posts: 58012 (0)

Hall of Famer

87 1 47 1 189

Prospect

Or three 50 innings RP with 55 splits for the 24 y/o DH leading the world in OPS.

4/11/2011 4:24 PM

silentpadna

Posts: 980 (0)

Hall of Famer

148

Prospect

Posted by MikeT23 on 4/11/2011 4:04:00 PM (view original):
You fail to acknowledge that the market in HBD is not like the market in MLB. Someone mentioned it earlier that when Lance Berkman is available, everyone knows it. And, because of that, Houston isn't trading him to the first team thats makes an offer. In HBD, an owner says "Jimmy Joe is available. Will cover salary" and the first to reply often gets him. As an example, when you got those two pitchers, I had no idea he was going to trade them. Had I known, I'd have made a bid if for no other reason than to keep you from getting them. I'd have known two things in an open market: 1) He was moving them and was willing to pay their salaries 2) He was planning on moving them to a division rival. Maybe I wouldn't have had the goods to get them but I'd have had the opportunity. Now, last season, did you know I was getting the two pitchers I got?

I didn't fail to acknowledge it, Mike. I just hadn't gotten there yet. But since your are referencing those two pitchers I traded for, I'll remind you that they were not only on the trading block, but they were posted in chat. Could the trading partner have advertised more than he did? Yeah, probably, but I wasn't going to do that for him. Everyone has an opportunity to bid on guys on the block.

As far as your guys go, I would have bid against you if I had the need, but my pitching was the best in the league overall (or very close) and my bullpen was rock solid. For me, all I could do was hope someone else bid against you. The market is always as open as you want it to be.

Now, I will acknowledge that most owners are impatient and accept deals too quickly. In regards to my deal on the ones in question, I was not willing to pay more than I had to. I would have paid plenty more if he had demanded more from me or if I knew that there were others competing for his guys.

4/11/2011 4:24 PM

MikeT23

Posts: 58012 (0)

Hall of Famer

87 1 47 1 189

Prospect

For the record, I was certainly interested in the pitchers he gave up. I'll trust your word that they were on the trade block and posted in the WC. I miss stuff. However, after I vetoed the first version(more cash than salary), I wasn't going to jump in with a better offer. I find that unacceptable. As for my two pitchers, I'm not sure if they were on the trade block but I know both owners offered them up in the WC. And I know I quickly locked in a deal because that's how trading works. I suspect you did the same with your deal.

4/11/2011 4:34 PM

tufft

Posts: 959 (0)

Hall of Famer

65

Prospect

>> With players, I can say "He's this and he'll be that" without hesitation. <<

Mike, no you can't.

If you think you can, you're just making up a story in your own head projecting potential future value. Just like can be done with cash.

You don't know how the player will be developed. If it's a young prospect, that can be done well or screwed up.

You don't know if they'll get a major injury that turns them from a stud into an average player or an average player into a career MinL.

You don't know how much they'll play. Owner might decide to platoon them. Or play them at a position that underutilizes good def skills. Or play them at a position that exposes more of their def liabilities.

They might be traded to another team for a different mix of players and money.

The player might be a stud for the team in the trade, raising the team from 65 to 75 wins which might (I mean might) be worse for the team in the long run.

You don't know any more about the value that player will produce than you know about how the money will be spent. For some reason, you like the story you make up about the future of the players better than you like the stories you make up about the future of how the money will be used.

4/11/2011 4:59 PM

MikeT23

Posts: 58012 (0)

Hall of Famer

87 1 47 1 189

Prospect

Yeah, I can. They have these little numbers next to their names. Because of that, I can determine if they're of somewhat equal value. I'm not too bad at this game because I can do that.

4/11/2011 5:01 PM

Forums

Trading prospects for cash Topic

Search Criteria