New Sticky Note

NOTICE: This league is using the BLEEDING EDGE game engine. For more information, click here.

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)

The draft is underway!

Click here to go to your war room, or visit the war room item in the draft menu.

League Forums

Main - General MFN Discussion

Re: Trade Wieght Again

By Davesgang
11/10/2015 2:34 pm
Just wanted to revisit this after a bit of use.

Obviously everyone has different values, but the player for player trades and player for pick trades seem to be somewhat realistic.

I just got a offer for my (1.15 pick and a late 3rd) in exchange for a (future 1st and a 5th). The other team just had a 1.10 season and a new owner. Clearly any trade involving future firsts are a huge gamble, but to me this trade looked fairly favoring the other team. Given future pick devaluation, expectation to perform same or better. The trade guideline said this was clearly in my favor. What am I missing? or does this need some tweaking?
Last edited at 11/10/2015 2:35 pm

Re: Trade Wieght Again

By dmcc1
11/10/2015 4:37 pm
You're not missing anything. I had something very similar where I was basically giving up a rd 3 for a rd 5 and it still showed the balance 90% in my favour as the rest of the trade was their rd1 pick 1 for my rd1 pick 2.

Needless to say I got the player I wanted at pick 2 anyway.

It definitely needs tweaking.

Re: Trade Wieght Again

By Gustoon
11/15/2015 2:50 am
Surely this is not right? To make that needle move I have to get a 2nd in return which I think is too much.

Anyone wondering, no I can't offer a trade
Last edited at 11/15/2015 2:50 am

Re: Trade Wieght Again

By WarEagle
11/15/2015 6:00 pm
No way this trade should not be allowed.

It's a shame the balance bar is so screwed up and restrictive.

Re: Trade Wieght Again

By WarEagle
11/16/2015 8:30 am
I don't actually want to make this trade, but I was curious to see if it would be allowed.

I was offerring a 100/100 DE for a future first round pick. The team I was offering it to had the #2 overall pick LAST year, but I was asking for ONE first TWO YEARS in the future.

The AI would not even let me propose this deal.

Ridiculous.

Re: Trade Weight Again

By Gustoon
11/16/2015 8:50 am
I've almost given up on this. Sometimes trades that I think will not be accepted as balanced do and then the opposite happens. I thought that maybe my player weights screwed it up but then cleared them and the problem is still there. It also doesn't seem to be isolated as many (if not all?) of the leagues I'm in have the same problem.

Re: Trade Wieght Again

By jdavidbakr - Site Admin
11/16/2015 10:12 am
I'm going to revisit this, the biggest issue is the top-tier players - again, if a player is worth a 1.1 then he's going to be impossible to trade for if you are a better than average team. It's going to take some work on my end to come up with a more robust formula, so it will probably be a little bit but know that I am aware of the need to work on this.

Re: Trade Wieght Again

By WarEagle
11/16/2015 10:20 am
If a 100/100 player isn't worth a 1.1 (or even a possible 1.1 2 years in the future), who is?

Re: Trade Wieght Again

By jdavidbakr - Site Admin
11/16/2015 10:30 am
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.

Re: Trade Wieght Again

By Gustoon
11/16/2015 10:33 am
I think the example that I've given (above) is a good example of what's wrong. The type of trade that (with respect) WarEagle is using is not a common trade.
The strange thing is that like with that trade above, sometimes the other team is able to offer the exact same trade.