What is the general rule for newbies and trades what if they like to trade

I like to trade. I hate when people restrict others. But I do understand some reasons why people bark.

Because you don't trade in a vacuum.

Unless you have a mentor it is easy, very easy, to get ripped off which is bad for the whole world.

If you make a bad trade then your trading partner gains an unfair advantage over the rest of the world, and your franchise is in even worse shape and much harder to fill if you decide not to return.

But everyone's view of need or talent is different. So that is not even really a great way to handle things a 59 ovr guy could be more valuable to me then a 80 ovr guy. A big contract maybe a negative to someone but not another. A high draft pick does not guarantee the player to be great. Lots of examples. A mentor may be a veteran but does not mean they know what they are doing as far as team building. A mentor is a great idea overall but take it with a grain of salt.

Posted by brianp87 on 8/28/2019 7:41:00 PM (view original):
But everyone's view of need or talent is different. So that is not even really a great way to handle things a 59 ovr guy could be more valuable to me then a 80 ovr guy. A big contract maybe a negative to someone but not another. A high draft pick does not guarantee the player to be great. Lots of examples. A mentor may be a veteran but does not mean they know what they are doing as far as team building. A mentor is a great idea overall but take it with a grain of salt.

Yes and very often the new guy is the one trading away that more valuable 59 OVR player for the overpaid 80 OVR player. OR he's the guy trading a strong player for a dud 1st rnd pick with little value.

I would guess that in 75% + of all trades involving newbies, the newbie gets the worst of it. If it isn't terrible I won't veto and hope it is a learning experience.

Best case scenario you get in an engaged world where the owners care enough to veto lopsided trades as opposed to banning new guys from trading.

That is a rule for a world full of lazy owners.

True story:
Newbie owner in a veteran league, in the third season of a rebuild from scratch, drafts the best position player and hitter in the draft third overall.

Next season, in preseason, newbie owner trades this player - after an allstar and silver slugger in his debut - to the team in the league that's won the most world series, never drafts high, and always trades for everyone else's prospects - for a couple of older, overpriced, declining rating all star veterans.

I hit the newbie up in trade chat - "cmon man, why, he's taking you for a ride!"

Newbie responds "I don't think the player's going to reach his projections as a true shortstop anyway. And besides, I'm tired of losing."

Newbie plays one more season in the league, leaves, never heard from again.

The player goes on to 440 HRs, 1200 RBI, three all star games, one silver slugger, and three WS wins with that team that traded for him.

I definitely got killed in my first trades, but I learned from it. I valued my projections WAY too much, despite only having a 6mil budget in advanced scouting. Which I now realize is useless lol.

It's take a long time imo to figure how to value things in this game, I still feel like I'm learning.

Don't want to sound like I think I know things, but I'm saying this objectively: The number one thing in learning this game is learning how to value players. It's brianp87's example, the real difference between the 59 overall guy and the 80 ovr guy. It affects how you allocate budgets. And all these forums are about veteran owners continuing to deal with it - "why isn't this guy performing", etc.

The only problem with trades - like bj said, the number one source of drama - is that there will be owners who will exploit their experience over others' inexperience. Which of course happens in real life, real life GMs get Milbury'd all the time.

Ultimately, the owners in the world decide what kind of world they want to play in.

The issue I have is people vetoing trades because they think it is not fair. Then I look at there previous trades and signings and see how they value talent band think how are they one to decide what someone else does. Why not let a new guy trade? There are plenty of not new guys who are not any better at evaluating talent how long you have played should be irrelevant.

Posted by bripat42 on 8/29/2019 11:34:00 AM (view original):

Posted by Vitamin_C on 8/28/2019 7:14:00 PM (view original):
Because you don't trade in a vacuum.

Unless you have a mentor it is easy, very easy, to get ripped off which is bad for the whole world.

If you make a bad trade then your trading partner gains an unfair advantage over the rest of the world, and your franchise is in even worse shape and much harder to fill if you decide not to return.

You're absolutely correct that trades don't happen in a vacuum. However -- people protesting trades often view them in a vacuum.

For example, let's say I have a glut of quality catchers and a significant need for pitching help. If the market is such that none of the best arms available for trade have as much value as the catcher I'm offering, the pitcher I'm acquiring still has more immediate value to me than the excess catcher I'm giving up.

Bottom line -- team needs, team priorities, market demand (or lack of demand), and other factors play a huge role in trades getting done, but then protesters swoop in and say, "Wait a minute, player X is better than player Y in a vacuum, so this trade should be vetoed."

Spot on

I rarely consider the experience of those trading. If I think the trade is bad for the world I will veto, i dont care if both owners have 100 sesaons under their belt. If enough other owners agree then it probably was not a good trade.

Honestly the problem is owners who do not win at a consistent level or even championships often trying to tell others what is good or not. Chit I do not tyr to and I feel I have a pretty good grasp on things.

For my first season or two, I honestly thought the projected ratings were what their actual ratings were definitely going to be. I mean I am dumb but I'm sure there are newbies who think the same. So every new owner I try to talk to, I stress not to trust projected ratings at all. I think that is the biggest problem when newbies are trading is that they see someone with projections of 90 and think that will come true. That's what I thought my first season

Posted by kartchy on 8/29/2019 4:25:00 PM (view original):
For my first season or two, I honestly thought the projected ratings were what their actual ratings were definitely going to be. I mean I am dumb but I'm sure there are newbies who think the same. So every new owner I try to talk to, I stress not to trust projected ratings at all. I think that is the biggest problem when newbies are trading is that they see someone with projections of 90 and think that will come true. That's what I thought my first season

Can be even more misleading when the player is 25 or 26 and will not develop much more if at all, but their projections are much higher than actual current ratings.

Often see newbs trading quality proaspects for those types.

I'd like to see tiers of worlds one day (if they ever do any updating), where certain worlds are for newbs and others require x number of seasons worth of experience.