Trading Inactive Players

robotarozumrobotarozum New MemberRegistered Users 6 Posts
I enjoy this game very much, and one thing I was interested in was the points at which an inactive roster could be traded for a second or first round pick. I bought second round picks, kept track of their stars, and checked to see when the trade offer changed. Because I was only buying second round picks I never had 1 star players so I don't know how much they contribute. Here is what I found:

To get a second round pick, you need 16 points where points are defined as follows:
1.5 star player is worth 1 point
2+ star player is worth 4 points

To get a first round pick, you need 80 points defined as follows:
1.5 star player = 1 point
2 star player = 4 points
2.5+ star player = 16 points

This suggests a pattern for a #1 pick of 480 points (16 * 5 * 6, 3+ star players worth 64 points), which along with the second round pick distribution I've measured so far suggests we'd only need to buy on average 46 second rounders to trade for a #1 pick (vs. 12 for a first and 6 for a second). Obviously it's going to take a long time for me to test that, though.

Comments

  • robotarozumrobotarozum New Member Registered Users 6 Posts
    I tried for a #1 pick, and part of my guess is definitely wrong. If the point distribution is right, then at least 796 (probably 800) points are required, which changes the average price for buying a #1 pick through second rounders from 46 (184k blue dollars) to 73 (292k). If the point distribution is wrong, much more research will be required.
  • ReplicantsReplicants Experienced Member Registered Users 105 Posts
    Don't trade in inactives, get all the second rounders then all that's left in first round picks is 4.5-5* players.
  • WhorndawgsWhorndawgs New Member Registered Users 29 Posts
    I tried to do this once, but when I hit 30 inactives, my next 2 pickups didn't increase my number of inactives, so 2 of them must have gone back to player pool. Is there something that you have to do to not have a limit?
  • ReplicantsReplicants Experienced Member Registered Users 105 Posts
    Are you playing 2014 or 2015 version?
  • WhorndawgsWhorndawgs New Member Registered Users 29 Posts
    I'm playing 2015
  • ReplicantsReplicants Experienced Member Registered Users 105 Posts
    I don't think you can have as many inactives on that version. This is the 2014 forum. Go to the 2015 forum. I'm sure you'll find an answer there
  • robotarozumrobotarozum New Member Registered Users 6 Posts
    Replicants wrote: »
    Don't trade in inactives, get all the second rounders then all that's left in first round picks is 4.5-5* players.
    I respect that advice but I have read many horror stories about the game becoming laggy and unresponsive. Also, I was curious how the trading process works anyway, plus trading in allows one to acquire 5* players with blue dollars only, no gold bars. I don't know how it goes for anyone else, but I found that around the Hall of Fame level I had bought all the upgrades available via blue dollars while I was still thousands of gold bars away from having an excess there.
  • robotarozumrobotarozum New Member Registered Users 6 Posts
    Progress has been slow but I think I'm starting to narrow it down. I have four samples, and if I do...

    1.5 star & 2 star = 1 point
    2.5 star = 4 points
    3 star = 16 points
    3.5 star = 64 points
    4 star = 96 points

    ...then I get that a #1 pick requires exactly 390 points. It's tricky because in this methodology (buying 2nd round picks) the 3+ star player is quite rare. On that topic, I think I have also gotten pretty close to the 2nd round star distribution:

    35% 1.5 star
    30% 2 star
    25% 2.5 star
    3.3% 3 star
    3.3% 3.5 star
    3.3% 4 star

    Thus the $ price of a #1 pick is $286k. The underlying mechanics are still pretty vague, but I'm confident a ~$300k price point is correct.
  • robotarozumrobotarozum New Member Registered Users 6 Posts
    After an unbelievable cold streak today, I'm starting to think that there's a necessary but not sufficient condition involved: three or more 3.5*+ players. I had a 4* and 3.5* inactive, made 137 straight picks of 3* or worse, and on the 138th got a 3.5* and the ability to trade for a #1 pick. I've only made seven #1 trades before this, but every one of them had at least three 3.5*+. Even the run I had is still unlikely in this methodology because from 134 second round picks alone we would expect five 3.5*+ and I had 3 first rounders before that, but still, it exacerbates an underlying issue with the second round method: the distribution of expected picks necessary is not symmetrical. The scenario I experienced is not likely but it's a lot more likely than the scenario where you get 4* from every second round pick.

    I didn't save the order of picks before now but I have had #1 pick trades occur after a 2.5* and 3* player was drafted, so I'm reasonably sure those players are worth something in the formula. The only thing different is that in addition to the formula there's a binary requirement, which shouldn't change the average expected dollars at all but will increase the length of the tail of the maximum.
Sign In or Register to comment.