California Offseason Block - Now with Working Links!

[Ted]

bump for whining

[bschr682]

free bump! Womack is 8/6/6 not 8/7/6 which in our post OOTP 19 conversion world happens to be a big deal.

[Ted]

free bump! Womack is 8/6/6 not 8/7/6 which in our post OOTP 19 conversion world happens to be a big deal.

THanks, man. I just forgot. I'll fix.

[bschr682]

Id like Sullivan myself if he wasn't switchy. I don't have room for Bud and Womack is ok I guess. Also with Womack you should mention whether he is tagged as a starter or reliever. If he is 10/6/6 out of the pen that might grease some wheels.

I swear html is useless for making informed decisions these days.

[bschr682]

And another free bump. why are your prospects so angry? what did you do to them?

[Ted]

Prospects or the guys on the block? Bud and Sullican are pissed that they aren't getting PT. Everyone below AA is pissed because those teams always lose, because I don't have players with 6 and 7 ratings or 25 year olds in R and SA. And everyone is AAA is pissed because I consistently have team full of AAAA players who think they should be in the bigs. So AA is happy most of the time. That's about it.

[bschr682]

Clearly OOTP needs to add a therapist position to the coaching staff.

[agrudez]

I know where your frustration is generally coming from Ted (we've talked enough about it in private) and I won't beat the trade culture this league has to death any more than I already have in the past, but I just wanted to chime in with something publicly about negotiation tactics.

For me, I *hate* making cold offers because I have no way of knowing how you value the prospects I am going to offer - and assuming you value them the same as me (maybe especially in my case since my tastes in players are so specific) is a good way to make an ass out of u and me. Most times, I feel like all a cold offer leads to is a misunderstanding with the other GM and/or someone getting insulted. Everyone has different things they look for in a player - and few (maybe none?) vocalize their preferences (constantly) like I do for mine (LH power bats and high MOV arms - in case you haven't heard me mention that in the last 20 mins or so) and if I offer something you don't value as much as me we run the risk of you getting annoyed about a perceived 'lowball' and shutting down (as an aside, I am speaking on the latter part from experience because I do this ALL THE TIME with other GMs trying to offer something to me, because... as I mentioned briefly above, our league's trade culture sucks balls and so its generally easier to just assume the worst in someone's intentions [because more often than not its true] when they make an outrageous [to me] offer, but I digress...). So, my preferred trade communication goes like this:

(first PM - from the pursuing team): Hey, I'm interested in player X. I assume you want prospects for him - I'm open to moving any of the players in my system other than prospect Y or Z.

(second PM - from the dealing team): I looked your system over and I like prospects H, I, J, K alot... and am a little interested in M, N, O and P.

Now we both know exactly what we're starting with in negotiations - you like this, I like that... now we just have to agree on price. If the dealing team wants to include an "and I'll take 1 of H,I,J,K and 2 of M,N,O,P to get it done" even better, but you don't have to feel obligated to do that - leaving the opening salvo to me instead (if that is your preference).

[Rubaboo]

I'm just gonna +1 what Stever said.

It's hard to wade in without some idea of what exactly guys are after, especially with guys you don't have a good rapport with. I'd rather have a 'Watchoo want 4 dat guy?' PM than an offer that starts negotiations out on a bad note and, as such, I often send the 'Watchoo want' PM.

[RonCo]

At the end of the day, the most important to me is that folks get back to me if I send something.

It's easier if you give me players in an offer, I'm not worried that you assess my guys as whatever value because I'm a big boy most days. The worst case I just say no.

Bottom line to me: Don't sweat the evaluations. If we can make a deal it'll work out, if not it's still fun to talk.

[RonCo]

I admit I don't understand the idea of why anyone says the trade culture is bad here. It doesn't seem much different from any other league... though our league's got a lotof talent spreed around so I find it hard to find things guys need.

I also note that with the v19 flattening of ratings, the use of pure stars as a differentiator is less valuable than ever...especially in the 2-3 star zone.

[ae37jr]

I think the trade culture here is good. Better then the previous league I was in. There are probably 4-5 teams I will never end up trading with cause our valuation of players are totally different. Maybe another 4-5 that I'll trade with most because we have good trade chemistry and each side will give and take to make it work. Then the other 20 or so teams will depend on the situation. I tend to take mental notes of previous trade talks. Like any league, there are the sharks that feel the need to dominate and squeeze every ounce of value out of every single trade. That life isn't for me. So even if there is a player on the block that I'm in love with, I generally will not even ask and say I'm not interested if they proactively shop the player to me.

My biggest pet peeve is when teams offer trades without even taking 2 seconds to think about the other teams needs or situation. Like say you had a 24 year old beast catcher and absolutely no pitching. Then you get a trade offer asking for your best pitcher in exchange for a catching prospect. The trade may be perfectly fair talent wise, but your still like, "Why would I do that?". Then the other team continues the pursuit and asks what it would take. You tell them that the player is very valuable to you since you have no pitching and already have a stud catcher, so it would take 2-3 pitchers to get said pitcher cause I can't really afford to lose him. Other GM responds back countering with the same catching prospect and a worse pitcher then you would give up. Ok, you want to move this catcher and get my pitcher. I get it. Why not find a team that needs a catcher and has what I need and then come back to it?

But it's always fun when you find good trade partners. There have been times that I have had a player in limbo and offered him to a team that either needed him or just liked that style of player. I'll just pm them and be like... throw me a couple of names that you think is fair and I'll pick one. Then hopefully when the situation is reversed they will do the same.

[Ted]

There's a couple pieces I want to pull from Alan and Stever's responses that I think are important. First, Stever's model of " I like this guys you have, here's how I value him/here's what I'd be willing to move, etc," is perfect. Maybe, "Make an offer" was a little demanding on my part, because it doesn't indicate how I value a guy. But the point is that his model allows for give and take. The second thing I'd like to point out is Alan's point about offers where people don't bother to even in a cursory sense at your needs. Yes, making cold offers is rough. But when people just respond, "I'm interested in so and so" you're then asking the person on the block to scour YOUR entire system and make an offer.


I suppose my biggest frustration with the "I'm interested" and that's all responses is that they each require a TON of work on my part. First I have to figure out what is in your system. Then I have to figure out how you value my player. Then I have to figure out who is available in your system that is worth that to you. then I make an offer to you, then ...

This is supposed to be a two way thing (Stever's framework is exactly how is should go), and I think, after a night of sleep and reflection, this is why I was so frustrated last night after the 15th straight cursory response. Part of this is probably my own inexperience in trading (I'm not one of the most active guys). Thanks to all of you for thoughts. So many next time I get a cursory response, I'll have a better place to go with it. I have some idea's of how I can modify my block in the future to perhaps fast track some of this.

[RonCo]

I suppose my biggest frustration with the "I'm interested" and that's all responses is that they each require a TON of work on my part. First I have to figure out what is in your system. Then I have to figure out how you value my player. Then I have to figure out who is available in your system that is worth that to you. then I make an offer to you, then ...

Not really. If you have time and it's fun, then yes you can and should do that. But you can also send the work back to them by just replying. "I haven't really seen your team and I'm open to whatever, but my goal in that kind of deal would be to improve my [*]"

* minor league depth and catcher or the middle infield,
* top end bullpen
* rotation
* major league corner outfield
* any one of however many things

Then see what happens.

"Why would I do that?".

This is a deeper question than is sometimes thought. Maybe the biggest thing here is to accept what the other guy thinks. I know I have some very weird evaluations of guys relative to some others. I also look at a team and say "what would I do in their shoes." Put these two things together and sometimes I'm sure you get some odd offers. Example, after a series of go-arounds, I gave Brett what I thought was an all-in offer for Augie Plascencia only to be told "your other offers were a lot better." I think he's considerably wrong, but it doesn't matter. I just shrug and move on. I don't attribute malice on Brett's part, nor do I think he's out of line to view players as he does. That's his job, after all.

Every negotiation is different.

The Stever method works sometimes. It doesn't others.

I also think there's a push to say certain teams should or should not be trading or playing certain guys. I think this push is bothersome, but shrug. Let a GM keep his stars if he wants. Offer him something else.

Blah, blah, blah.

[Ted]

bumpage for Sullivan gone.

[Ted]

near as free players

[udlb58]

I know where your frustration is generally coming from Ted (we've talked enough about it in private) and I won't beat the trade culture this league has to death any more than I already have in the past, but I just wanted to chime in with something publicly about negotiation tactics.

For me, I *hate* making cold offers because I have no way of knowing how you value the prospects I am going to offer - and assuming you value them the same as me (maybe especially in my case since my tastes in players are so specific) is a good way to make an ass out of u and me. Most times, I feel like all a cold offer leads to is a misunderstanding with the other GM and/or someone getting insulted. Everyone has different things they look for in a player - and few (maybe none?) vocalize their preferences (constantly) like I do for mine (LH power bats and high MOV arms - in case you haven't heard me mention that in the last 20 mins or so) and if I offer something you don't value as much as me we run the risk of you getting annoyed about a perceived 'lowball' and shutting down (as an aside, I am speaking on the latter part from experience because I do this ALL THE TIME with other GMs trying to offer something to me, because... as I mentioned briefly above, our league's trade culture sucks balls and so its generally easier to just assume the worst in someone's intentions [because more often than not its true] when they make an outrageous [to me] offer, but I digress...). So, my preferred trade communication goes like this:

(first PM - from the pursuing team): Hey, I'm interested in player X. I assume you want prospects for him - I'm open to moving any of the players in my system other than prospect Y or Z.

(second PM - from the dealing team): I looked your system over and I like prospects H, I, J, K alot... and am a little interested in M, N, O and P.

Now we both know exactly what we're starting with in negotiations - you like this, I like that... now we just have to agree on price. If the dealing team wants to include an "and I'll take 1 of H,I,J,K and 2 of M,N,O,P to get it done" even better, but you don't have to feel obligated to do that - leaving the opening salvo to me instead (if that is your preference).

[Ted]

Bump for Basaglia

[Ted]

snort

[Ted]

2036 bullpen landmine