2013 The Show Official Trade Discussion Thread

[AC]

I'm sure the Mets, Yankees, Phillies, Indians, Mariners, or Pirates wouldn't mind Reddick.

[WaitTilNextYear]

Quote: Originally Posted by Trojan Man

Yeah, I can see that point. I may be able to retain Reddick and Anderson and will certainly let Crisp walk. Regarding my record, I'm surprised at it because I play 1 and sim 4-6, depending on the starters, so many of my wins are CPU simulated wins. Even so, when I do play, I'm murdering the CPU hitters. I may look at HOF sliders, but I may also see if I've just gotten lucky this year or during the first half. If I lose 2 starters or 2 of my three good hitters I'm toast. I'm currently using an All Star set that's pretty good. Those don't affect sim wins, do they? And as for running the franchise, when you have a player like Reddick who is hitting HR (15 after 90 games) but is only hitting .225, do you send that guy down for a bit, bench him for a bit, play him through and hope he figures it out, or try to trade him while the rating and potential are high? I have so many guys @ .250 or so that I really want a .300 guy or two.

Quote: Originally Posted by 24

Try to deal Reddick to another contending team for prospects. Their has to be a team around the league that is in contention that needs some power. Despite his low average Reddick is still a good trade chip He's hitting for decent power has a high potential and is young. Let Crisp walk after the season their is no real need to retain him you can always scout draft and develop another outfielder.

I'd venture that a 66-26 record has very little to do with luck. You could say the same about any juggernaut team, that if they just lost 2 hitters and 2 pitchers, they'd be worse.

Teams that are 40 over .500 really never trade vets for prospects regardless of performance. Ever. Teams actually rarely get to 40-over, let alone so far before the deadline. I'd suggest that dealing Reddick is not realistic.

If you still do want to deal him, I'd ask first, how well do you hit with him in USER games? Is his low average a product of your sim method? If so, I'd lean even more strongly toward keeping him.

If you have a tough time hitting with him manually, then you could toss realism out the door and deal him for a pretty nice haul to almost any team in baseball. Maybe a couple of very nice B prospects. That could help you with your cash flow and farm system.

[AC]

ughhh multi quotes

Quote: Originally Posted by WaitTilNextYear

I'd venture that a 66-26 record has very little to do with luck.

We'd need to see his pytho for that to be a reasonable assumption.

Quote: Originally Posted by WTNY

You could say the same about any juggernaut team, that if they just lost 2 hitters and 2 pitchers, they'd be worse.

Good teams like the Rays and Cardinals have consistently avoided losing despite the losses - whether it be permanent (Pujols, Crawford, Shields) or temporary (Longoria, Carpenter) - of their best players.

Quote: Originally Posted by WTNY

Teams that are 40 over .500 really never trade vets for prospects regardless of performance. Ever. Teams actually rarely get to 40-over, let alone so far before the deadline. I'd suggest that dealing Reddick is not realistic.

Agree with everything except that I could see a contending team trading a vet for an MLB ready youngin. Like the Shields/Myers trade.

Quote: Originally Posted by WTNY

If you still do want to deal him, I'd ask first, how well do you hit with him in USER games? Is his low average a product of your sim method? If so, I'd lean even more strongly toward keeping him.

I think he stated he does play 1/sim 5 or something to that effect, so I don't think user games will matter very much at all.

Quote: Originally Posted by WTNY

If you have a tough time hitting with him manually, then you could toss realism out the door and deal him for a pretty nice haul to almost any team in baseball. Maybe a couple of very nice B prospects. That could help you with your cash flow and farm system.

He could always trade him to a team on the cusp. I think a trade to the Mets involving Daniel Murphy, Bobby Parnell and Jeurys Familia could work, as all those guys are rumored to be dealt (Parnell if they were blew away but obviously this qualifies). Parnell would be a key addition to a contending team down the stretch, Murphy solves the 2B problem I *think* he mentioned, and Familia is a solid young pitcher. He could do something like:

Reddick
Weeks

FOR

Murphy
Parnell
Familia
bad reliever

This is assuming the Mets are middle of the pack / out of it. It's not 100% completely totally undeniably realistic, but I think it's pretty decent all things considered.

[WaitTilNextYear]

Quote: Originally Posted by ACMilan99

We'd need to see his pytho for that to be a reasonable assumption. Not really for 40 over. I think it's a reasonable assumption that the run differential is ok. Good teams like the Rays and Cardinals have consistently avoided losing despite the losses - whether it be permanent (Pujols, Crawford, Shields) or temporary (Longoria, Carpenter) - of their best players. Outliers... Agree with everything except that I could see a contending team trading a vet for an MLB ready youngin. Like the Shields/Myers trade. Not in-season... I think he stated he does play 1/sim 5 or something to that effect, so I don't think user games will matter very much at all. But, the sim games are more "dice roll." If he plays good with Reddick manually, why not keep him? Then the sim engine might have him play more up to potential in sim game too if given time. He could always trade him to a team on the cusp. I think a trade to the Mets involving Daniel Murphy, Bobby Parnell and Jeurys Familia could work, as all those guys are rumored to be dealt (Parnell if they were blew away but obviously this qualifies). Parnell would be a key addition to a contending team down the stretch, Murphy solves the 2B problem I *think* he mentioned, and Familia is a solid young pitcher. He could do something like: Reddick Weeks FOR Murphy Parnell Familia bad reliever This is assuming the Mets are middle of the pack / out of it. It's not 100% completely totally undeniably realistic, but I think it's pretty decent all things considered. I think that's fair, but unrealistic.

[RogueHominid]

You guys are great--I appreciate the knowledgeable and thorough responses!

I don't know what a pytho is...

I do play 1 and sim 5 or thereabouts, sometimes a game more and sometimes a game less.

I hit some HR with Reddick, but I struggle at hitting consistently for average with him. Lefties are tough for me to pick up the ball with, especially against lefties and especially if they're tall and take up some of the screen.

He's such a good player in the field and has nice power; I just can't hit with him. I do, however want to maintain some realism.

As for the overall record, my team stats that might contribute are:

.251 team average, 21st OVR
469 runs, 4th OVR
125 HR, 4th OVR
465 RBI, 4th OVR
320 BB, 5th OVR
3.45 ERA, 3rd OVR
36 Saves, 1st OVR

In my user games I normally win; I'd say 2/3 of the time, definitely over half.

But with OAK, which I don't see as a stacked team, I'm really not sure how my team stats are so good. We hit for a lot of power and don't give up many runs. Not a high average team and not consistent with getting guys on base, but when we do, we slug and hit HR and score runs that way.

I kind of want to move away from that model toward something more consistent on offense. I'd like to be more of a doubles team that hits in the .260s or better overall.

[kmoser]

Quote: Originally Posted by Trojan Man

Not a high average team and not consistent with getting guys on base

I wonder how Billy Beane feels about his Oakland A's bad consistency of getting on base lol

[RogueHominid]

Quote: Originally Posted by kmoser

I wonder how Billy Beane feels about his Oakland A's bad consistency of getting on base lol

Ha!

So in my user games, it literally goes like this: nothing, nothing, nothing, hit batter/walk, single, 2 run HR, great pitching, end of game.

Slight variations on that theme. Maybe throw in a double or two to drive a run in, but it's station to station with low batting averages and lots of dingers.

[bwoodring9]

Do you guys think the White Sox would move Addison Reed if they are struggling in game? They aren't quite as bad as in real life, but they still look to be out of contention. I get that irl they said they would move anyone but Sale or Konerko, although I have heard they'll listen to offers for Sale now too, but would Reed be someone they'd move for a few prospects if they're struggling a little less than irl?