From a thread recently started in L14, where we've just had a series of trades where one team has accumulated a high number of upper 1st and 2nd round picks in exchange for vastly unequal value in players/picks. Here is a copy of my most recent post about it..........

"The problem with all this is that the trade meter does not reflect "true" value of both players and picks. It has been brought to JDB's attn many times and has been adjusted but not anywhere near enough. A meter value of 2000 or higher should reflect a 1.1 to 1.15 draft pick or an elite player that is a 5 yr vet or less. Offensive linemen should not be worth more than 1500, and that would be for an "elite". The most important positions in this game are DBs and WRs. Thats followed by DL and LB. Defense is more important than offense. Until those values are reflected by the trade meter, there will be trades of 2000 rated RG's for two first round picks. Consistently sub-8 win/season GMs and teams will continue to make bad trades that hurt the competitive balance for the rest of the league."

You can agree or disagree with that, but my opinion on player/pick value is backed by a very successful winning record to date, if not the best in MFN over the last 4 months (7 out of 9 LCs), which does not include bleeding losing teams/gms for their first and second round picks, which they badly need to improve their teams. Dont get me wrong on this, I know a lot of gms are frustrated by the trade meter when it makes it difficult to do a deal. But, if the values were more accurate, that would go a long way to both making it easier to trade and help prevent wildly unbalanced trades that create a lot of controversy and complaint.

here is that thread you are refering to = https://cust14.myfootballnow.com/forums/thread/1/395?page=1#551

the 2 teams in question
Seattle = https://cust14.myfootballnow.com/team/view/20
South Boston = https://cust14.myfootballnow.com/team/view/4

btw if you go to the forums for that league = https://cust14.myfootballnow.com/forums/category/1?page=1

Seattle has 7 trades on the 1st page awhile on the 2nd page is when seattle got its owner.
South Boston was part of 2 of those trades and on the 2nd page is when South Boston got its owner

btw South Boston's owner joined the league 5 days after Seattle's owner so make with it what you will.

Needs to be a limit on the number of total draft picks a team has each draft.

Nope. It takes 2 to make a trade (you can add the duplicate and "friends" account argument here).

IRL, there is no limitations to number of picks a team can have. This is what this simulation is supposed to sim ...

Look, I get "IRL, teams don't have 4 first rounders" argument .. and I agree. It bothers me as well.

I just think capping picks is a kneejerk reaction and eliminates a fun part of the sim ..

Here is a post on the same thing, but I see alot,of angles he is using to curb the ability to build super teams, but I assumed this trade was pitched to me to quite my opinion of this part of the game.


Draft bug

By raymattison21
2/09/2017 7:54 am
Trade with Tampa Bay
Proposed: 7/15/2016 5:55 am
Processed: 7/18/2016 9:28 am
Status: Rejected


New Orleans
Players
#53 Leo Roberts (CB) (CB - 64/66) 435
Total: 435 (Needs 1065)


Tampa Bay
Draft Picks
2031 Round 1 Selection 1.....worth 3000!


I rejected this trade the because it seemed completely unfair and ruins parity. I knew I would get a great pick. But a 1.1 for a 5 .28. So unreal. The meter wouldn't even allow it now, but why before ?

If a team is a bottom dweller they should lose thier rights to trade away the future. Cause in no world is Leo Roberts ever worth a 1.1.

But routinely guys are making this a legit way to build a roster. It is like flipping houses in an inflated market...just too easy. We are not playing football we are playing who is the mark.

Eventually salaries might stop this but why not only allow one first rounder to every be traded?

As teams get worse each year or just sit at the bottom and give away great picks I will just continue to blame the weak demands of Rookies in the first place .

Please increase the salary of first round picks or drop the talent to match the actual price one might pay.

I was offered the number one pick for a slow player. My concern is not with the inexperienced player giving away the future , but protecting him and the teams right to such a valuable pick.

Also, if it were a dupe at least they couldn't trade away any more equity through that same account . If we're not dupes same .....the team lost their trade rights.

Perhaps trade sanctions could be tightened or loosened depending on how well they do after the trade. If they want to trade another possible high pick the team would have to win a few more games . If not they are sanctioned from trading away any more picks.


This trade was offered to me six months ago real time. After other not so smart trades. Why let this happen like a revolving door of high picks for predatory game traders looking for this exact trade.

I will not wait for users to smarten up on this one. A simple fix would be to increase the bust rate or make volatility fluctuate or hide it completely . .again.

The whole concept favors better gamers, but there no penalty until five years later at the resign. Just keep flipping those players and retain the low bonus offered out the gates.

With volatility shown less than 1/3 bust in round one and most still end up a C grade player like Leo Roberts. So safe, it's an actual strategy preyed upon by win at all cost owners.

I would much rather that user leave the league cause they have lost all the teams equity and have a new guy come in and do it all again. My bets are the new guy would not make the same mistake.....well at least it would increase my hope of that

I agree parsh, I dont have a problem with "cappin picks", just make the meter reflect a more accurate value for the player/pick. You know as well as I do that OL & TEs are not as important as DBs when it comes to a 2000+ meter value. A first round pick, even a 1.32 should not be 500 on the meter. That is what opens the door to trade abuse, cheating, and collusion.

The draft pick values reflect the actual values used by a lot of teams in the NFL. It has been discussed many times, and this is what JDB wants to use when evaluating trades involving picks.

Here are those values if you haven't seen them before:

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/draft/draft-trade-chart/

The issue is that the value assigned to players is not reflective of their actual worth in this game. Who determines that worth? You? Me?

It is determined by the Ai, and there have been just as many posts about how the Ai does not do a good job of evaluating players. I am in agreement there is a lot of improvement that could be done in this area, and JDB has even admitted that the Ai evaluations of players are not updated with code changes (for example in the current engine the Ai still thinks pass accuracy matters for QBs, or speed isn't the #1 priority for OL/DL).

But, no matter how much this is improved, we are never going to see eye to eye on every player (me and the Ai, or me and you, or me and anyone else).

Removing cheating from the argument, the main issue with trades are the owners.
Those who don't understand football in general (and MFN in particular), are more likely to make a bad trade.
Those who rely solely on the trade balance meter are more likely to make a bad trade.
Those that just "don't care" are more likely to make a bad trade.
Some owners see a trade as "bad" while others do not.

Nothing JDB can implement is going to prevent any of the above.

I don't see any questionable trades taking place in 75, which (to me) proves my point.

If I want to overpay for a player in the hope of improving my team, I should be able to.
If someone wants to overpay for a player of mine in the hope of improving their team, they should be able to.

I don't need more limits put on my ability to build my roster as I see fit.

I believe this will be a non-issue once the create a league feature is implemented (as long as you have the ability to restrict access to the league). Then, you will be able to ensure you are only in leagues with experienced owners who know what they are doing.

I used a 700 point full back to balance the trade meter In 75. No way someone going to trade for that junky full back. His only use is to balance the meter. It's a big joke to me As the full back has 100 intelligence discipline and strength And nothing else is above 69 . His value is a good 600 points off. Or the effect of those 100 rated skill are under valued by the engine. Severely. either way I still believe the meter should be changed.

And draft picks should use the teams past performance when given a worth. Trading a 2017 or 2018 or a 2019 . If a team is a perennial bottom dweller each future pick should increase in value for a constant loser. Almost making it impossible to trade that 2019 away. This would prevent garbage trades like Leo Roberts a 5.28 for a 1.1. I would have taken the trade for a 1.28. Still a rip off but it's those 1.1 to 1.15 that teams can stock up on,

Look at 75....I was only able to get picks later than 1.15, and that is if I get lucky. If I grease the wheel a bit more I could have done even better . .....in other words.....I could just use a silent dupe account and sneak guys in a Suttle way to build a super team. The league doesn't matter .......it is how dedicated the trader is. None of this has to do with fishing for newbs either....that a separate game.

jdb has said he likes the rookie salaries The way they are and the bust rate. I think they are the main culprit and until those are changed top 15 are gold and will always be . A team can hold over 30 of those guys under our system as long as the team garners the picks before the reneg.

if a high pick was more to begin with none of this would happen. It's quit simple and arcade like not very simulated. It's more of a system that good smart owners can exploit and doesn't really help the newbs at all

If they actually blocked they would be worth it .. lol