First Candidate For MLB 13 The Show Cover is Bryce Harper, More Details Revealed

[seanjeezy]

Quote: Originally Posted by Falcon999

After Harper now comes CC !!! http://mlb.mlb.com/covervote/ sounds we'll have 3 candidates !!

Wait, so that's it? three choices, two of which weren't even close to being the best player in the league last year? The third player better be from a west coast team at least...

[fnz21]

Quote: Originally Posted by seanjeezy

Wait, so that's it? three choices, two of which weren't even close to being the best player in the league last year? The third player better be from a west coast team at least...

Mike Trout?

[ADA885]

Looks like Posey and Cabrera are candidates as well. Replaced Sabathia's image url with their names and both came up with something but Trout, nothing.





Add Kemp and McCutchen too:

[bp4baseball]

Interesting and sneaky...what url did you use?

Edit: I got to the url using your images, but how did you get it orignially? I can't seem to right click on the website and get the image url

[tabarnes19_SDS]

Quote: Originally Posted by dlk90514

I'm pretty sure that I have read this in the past Knight, but aren't you a fan of the GM getting fired/having goals to meet? I was just curious if this is something that we might see the team implemented again in the future. I always liked having that variable in the game.

I am!! And I have asked about it. Aaron wants to get them back in at some point and have them relevant to what a real GM would be evaluated on, instead of goals like have a cy young winner.

[Knight165]

Quote: Originally Posted by Bobhead

The trades that have happened in real life have been crazy, but I would not call them incomprehensible. I think the guy was more referring to how the CPU settles in terms of benefit, and offers trades that do not benefit them at all. For example, I got offered a trade last month where I got Brandon League, Miguel Olivo, and Brendan Ryan (a shortstop), in exchange for 1 single, average, shortstop prospect. Obviously I took it. If you simply take Ryan out of the trade, it looks a lot more realistic, since you can argue they need a shortstop for the future or something, but Ryan is a pretty young guy, and he's a shortstop, so literally they accomplished nothing at all. All they did was hurt themselves. That's where I think the most objective issue with the trade logic can be identified. There definitely exists an objective separation between a poor trade, and a pointless trade. A poor trade I'd define as one where you trade something you don't need for something you want, but the values don't match. I can pay 3000 bucks for a toaster. That would be an extremely bad purchase. However, regardless of what I paid for it, it is by no means a pointless purchase. I had the 3000 to spend, and got something I value: a toaster. A real-life example would be the Miami blockbuster trade. You can argue Miami got less than they could have, but at the end of the day, they traded what was of no value to them (failing, expensive superstars) and received something they valued highly (multiple prospects). We can argue all day about how "good" the trade is - that is, whether the benefits outweigh the cost - but I don't think it matters. At the end of the day, it matters only that there ARE benefits to the trade. A pointless trade would me trading my toaster for another toaster of lesser quality, design, or whatever else. Or me trading my only toaster for a blender, when I already own a blender. I gave up something I value, in a toaster, and received something of no value, in the blender I don't need. These are the types of transactions I think people have the most problems with, and the type that I'd like to see diminished or protected against in future games. To summarize: I think the issue in the trade logic is that the AI seems to only exclusively compare one side of the trade to the other. Is what I'm receiving greater than or equal to what I'm giving up? What the AI needs to evaluate more profusely, is comparing what you receive to what you already have, eg: making the trade vs making no trade at all.

So when the CPU dumped aging do nothing money players for the sake of dumping salary and getting a younger(I'm guessing...you said average prospect) SS that they can control $$$/contract wise without paying out it's no good....but when Miami does it IRL it makes sense?

Hmmm......let me think about that.

Okay...I thought about it.


M.K.
Knight165

[Knight165]

Quote: Originally Posted by tabarnes19

I am!! And I have asked about it. Aaron wants to get them back in at some point and have them relevant to what a real GM would be evaluated on, instead of goals like have a cy young winner.

I am too!

I REALLY hope they make it back in ....in a future version(I think it will)...but it won't be '13 I would say.

I actually would like to have a GM set of goals and a manager set of goals and you choose to be one/the other or both.....and if say if you get fired as GM, you would no longer have control over the roster moves...trades etc. Fired as manager and you would have no control in game on subs/pinch hits etc.

Like tbarnes stated......it would have to be more realistic in goals as well.


M.K.
Knight165

[Bobhead]

Quote: Originally Posted by Knight165

So when the CPU dumped aging do nothing money players for the sake of dumping salary and getting a younger(I'm guessing...you said average prospect) SS that they can control $$$/contract wise without paying out it's no good....but when Miami does it IRL it makes sense? Hmmm......let me think about that. Okay...I thought about it. M.K. Knight165

Well for starters, Miami dumped hundreds of million dollars AND got prospects (plural). The team in my game didn't dump much money - Brendan Ryan made 800K, Olivo, 700K, and League 4 mil, and only got one mediocre prospect. If they simply wanted to dump money they could have just as easily offered League for the prospect straight-up.

And second, and most importantly, money doesn't actually mean anything in The Show, and there are no payroll constraints... so I don't think it's fair to compare dumping money in The Show to dumping money in real life.

I feel like the trade logic is decent at deciding what trades to accept, but it fails to discern which trades are worth initiating in the first place. I've noticed that more often than not it's usually the initiating team that gets shafted in AI trades.