Master Index of Archived Threads


Change the draft order to discourage tanking?

41Forever Jan 31 2019 09:05 AM

Interesting Jon Harper column about the pace of free agent signings and some ways to encourage teams to spend more and tank less. [url]https://www.sny.tv/mets/news/with-mlb-players-fuming-over-stagnant-free-agency-can-a-strike-be-avoided/303348200 Also, I saw one intriguing idea from former Braves star Dale Murphy, who wrote a column in The Athletic proposing that the order of the amateur draft be re-structured so that the No. 1 pick would go to the team that finished closest to a postseason berth without making it, the No. 2 pick to the second-closest finisher, and so forth. The idea would be to reward teams for trying to win, which would encourage them to spend money on players. I don't know if I've ever heard that one before, and its interesting. But I don't know how the teams at the bottom ever get better if they aren't getting good draft picks.

cal sharpie Jan 31 2019 09:21 AM Re: Change the draft order to discourage tanking?

Yeah, Murphy's idea is problematic. You could also do a lottery for all teams that don't make the playoffs.

Centerfield Jan 31 2019 09:23 AM Re: Change the draft order to discourage tanking?

But I don't know how the teams at the bottom ever get better if they aren't getting good draft picks. They spend money on free agents. Poof. They're better. And now since they are more competitive, they place higher in the standings and get those higher draft picks. "Rebuilding" would mean that a team tries to win, rather than actively tries to lose. The order of draft picks, as FK and other have demonstrated, is largely not relevant. But the draft order is publicized as critical. Why? Because owners want you to think that. That way they can justify low spending. They say things like "Trust the process" or "This gives us financial flexibility". What they are really doing, is tanking under the guise of rebuilding, and pocketing profits the entire time. In 2018, each MLB team received a bonus check of $50 million. This is without selling a single ticket. The Rays had a payroll of $25 million. That's a joke. Murphy's idea is great. Not because it will do a lot for the actual rebuilding process, but that it will eliminate a long-held excuse for the owners to not spend money. Which is why it will never happen.

Edgy MD Jan 31 2019 10:13 AM Re: Change the draft order to discourage tanking?

Here's a way: Eradicate the draft.

Centerfield Jan 31 2019 10:15 AM Re: Change the draft order to discourage tanking?

That works too.

Willets Point Jan 31 2019 11:16 AM Re: Change the draft order to discourage tanking?

Edgy MD wrote: Here's a way: Eradicate the draft. Yes, but with a provision that the Yankees can't stockpile all the talent.

Willets Point Jan 31 2019 11:27 AM Re: Change the draft order to discourage tanking?

Willets Point wrote: Edgy MD wrote: Here's a way: Eradicate the draft. Yes, but with a provision that the Yankees can't stockpile all the talent. A promotion/relegation system would address this.

MFS62 Jan 31 2019 11:42 AM Re: Change the draft order to discourage tanking?

Willets Point wrote: Yes, but with a provision that the Yankees can't stockpile all the talent. Maybe this should be in the prospect list thread, but this might not be something to worry about. One of the respected prospect sources only had one MFY in their top 100. Later

Benjamin Grimm Jan 31 2019 11:45 AM Re: Change the draft order to discourage tanking?

Well, the Yankees aren't currently operating in a world where there's no draft.

41Forever Jan 31 2019 12:03 PM Re: Change the draft order to discourage tanking?

Murphy has a couple other interesting ideas, including compressing the free agent signing period and cutting prices for fans when teams are eliminated. [url]https://www.blessyouboys.com/2019/1/25/18197378/how-to-fix-baseball-in-the-next-cba 2. Reinvent Free Agency: "Baseball should implement some sort of free-agency window, ideally the week before, or after, the Super Bowl. That would allow MLB to take center stage and still give pitchers and catchers time to report to spring training by mid-February." Murphy cites the NBA's model for free agency as a gold standard that should be emulated. He notes that the lack of urgency in the market is what has turned the hot stove into a cold plate; once upon a time the Baseball Winter Meetings would toss some logs into the fire to keep things warm, but it has been nothing but chilly the past couple of seasons. Turning free agency into something of a sport of its own by adding a clock to the process seems like a sure way to spark contract signings and generate excitement. 4. Give Fans A Break: "Sometimes I wonder if baseball has gotten complacent with signing fat TV contracts and forgotten about its most important resource: its fans. So, how about this: If your team has been eliminated from the playoffs — or is, say, at least 15 games out after Aug. 1 — owners should cut ticket prices in half. Think of it as a more dramatic version of dynamic pricing." Murphy notes that attendance across all MLB teams dropped below 70 million for the first time in 15 years. Clearly there's a problem, and the cause of this problem is likely multifaceted. Basically, his idea here is to stop gouging fans at the gates—especially teams that are not putting a quality product on the field—and getting more people in the stadiums. A large percentage of people who fall in love with the sport are enamored by the experience of being at a baseball park, whether it's the sunshine and scent of fresh grass in the outdoor venues, or the fan experience provided by the franchise in the better-run indoor venues, regardless of the level of play. Those experiences are much more addictive than staring at a screen and following box scores, and a much better activity for family and friends to bond over. Given that the money generated by ticket sales pales in comparison to TV contracts and other revenue streams, it would behoove teams who have fallen out of contention to take a small loss to invest in its fan base. Not to mention, an empty stadium can be demoralizing to players; keeping butts in the seats could benefit the trade values of current team members and potentially make the team more appealing to free agents down the road. The free agency window is intriguing. Also eliminates agents dragging their feet. But what happens when the window closes and there are still guys unsigned? I guess there is a practical window now, sometime in early spring training, but this would compress. The ticket price thing is interesting. Back in 2009, I brought the kids home to New York. My Dad took me, my son and my cousin to Citi, and my Mom took my daughter, my aunt and my cousin's kid to see Mary Poppins on Broadway. Guess which outing was more expensive?

nymr83 Jan 31 2019 12:13 PM Re: Change the draft order to discourage tanking?

Willets Point wrote: Edgy MD wrote: Here's a way: Eradicate the draft. Yes, but with a provision that the Yankees can't stockpile all the talent. you can have the signing bonus count towards the luxury tax penalties or even institute a hard cap on amateur money - they basically have one now with the "slot" system - but it would still beat a draft - the amateurs could freely negotiate over who gets the X dollars and from which team rather than have the teams decide where they play and what they make.

Benjamin Grimm Jan 31 2019 12:18 PM Re: Change the draft order to discourage tanking?

Or each player can be drafted by up to five teams, and the five can all compete with each other. Anyone drafted by only one (or maybe two) teams would be free to negotiate with everyone.

41Forever Jan 31 2019 12:20 PM Re: Change the draft order to discourage tanking?

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Or each player can be drafted by up to five teams, and the five can all compete with each other. Anyone drafted by only one (or maybe two) teams would be free to negotiate with everyone. That sounds brilliant. Gives players leverage.

Lefty Specialist Jan 31 2019 12:37 PM Re: Change the draft order to discourage tanking?

Well, nobody drinks beer at Mary Poppins.

41Forever Jan 31 2019 12:43 PM Re: Change the draft order to discourage tanking?

Lefty Specialist wrote: Well, nobody drinks beer at Mary Poppins. Ha! Actually, that was just for the tickets.

Edgy MD Jan 31 2019 12:53 PM Re: Change the draft order to discourage tanking?

Let the Yankees try to stockpile all the talent. It's their money. Artificial constraints undermine the competitive nature of the game. The draft, the slot values, the international bonus pool limits, the luxury tax, the subsidiarization of the minor leagues, the years and years of control teams still get over minor- and major-league players, the territorial exclusivity. It's all exploitative and anti-competitive bullshit. Set competitiveness free. If the Yankees can prosper in that environment, more power to them. I think they'd fall like fools. #Amurricah

Frayed Knot Jan 31 2019 01:36 PM Re: Change the draft order to discourage tanking?

I don't know if I've ever heard [the anti-tanking] one before, and its interesting. It's been floated in the other sports where tanking is openly discussed if not flat-out bragged about by numerous teams. But the difference between a 9th pick and a 2nd pick is baseball isn't nearly as clear as it is (or as folks think) in hoops and football. Nor is tanking really a thing in baseball. Teams may deal off aging talent that won't help them the following year in order to get a jump on rebuilding but no baseball team openly tries to lose down the stretch in order to secure a specific draft pick (Suck for Sam!!) "Baseball should implement some sort of free-agency window, ideally the week before, or after, the Super Bowl. That would allow MLB to take center stage and still give pitchers and catchers time to report to spring training by mid-February." Murphy cites the NBA's model for free agency as a gold standard that should be emulated. Again here he's comparing things which don't really invite comparison. The NBA's FA period is essentially over before it begins as teams and players cut deals a week or more before the window even opens then only need to make sure to not illegally announce the deal even as details of them become public knowledge almost instantly. Also, the NBA is a salary cap league (I'm sure Murph isn't advocating that for baseball) so everyone knows ahead of time EXACTLY how much each team can offer so there's no point in shopping around for the best deal. In the NFL their FA period is mostly over quickly but that's a league where the players only sort of have true FA-gency and even though the individual salaries aren't capped each team's total is (even more rigidly than in the NBA) so for most FAs there's a rush to get a piece of the fixed amount of money before the till runs dry and you're the guy without a chair when the music stops. I'm open to any and all suggestions on how to "fix" MLB's FA system (even though I'm not completely sure that it's even broken). But it's too simplistic to say that something works elsewhere therefore it'll be good here too and, while I realize the drawn out process pisses off some fans and most writers, I don't think that that alone is reason to undo everything. Harper and Machado have both (by their own admission) received long-term offers but are choosing to wait. Not quite sure how forcing them to make a decision before they want to is helping them out. What, so fans can get their fantasy teams in line sooner? It's a process, why put an artificial constraint on how long it should take?

A Boy Named Seo Jan 31 2019 04:45 PM Re: Change the draft order to discourage tanking?

I think that might be a comparison to European football where there is a tight 30-day transfer window in January, and a defined, pre-season transfer window (which lasts, like 3 months). There is a hell of a frenzy the last couple of days before the window shuts. You can't drag into pre-season and still sign a guy on the cheap. You miss out and you're done until the next transfer window.

Frayed Knot Jan 31 2019 05:22 PM Re: Change the draft order to discourage tanking?

OK, except that that's a deadline governing transfers between leagues (as well as within) which may be on different schedules from each other, so it's not quite an apt comparison here either. And I guess I mainly don't get the purpose behind a deadline. It seems that fans -- and particularly writers -- want all this over and done as quickly as possible but it's not really clear as to why except for impatience. The WS was ending right about 3 months ago now. Would my life as a baseball fan be better if all FAs were all required to be signed in the first month (then what would we talk about in the interim?), or in the second, or by midnight tonight (1/31)? I dunno ... I can't see why I'm supposed to care. It seems like a solution in search of a problem; a deadline simply for the purpose of a deadline.

nymr83 Jan 31 2019 05:26 PM Re: Change the draft order to discourage tanking?

Edgy MD wrote: Let the Yankees try to stockpile all the talent. It's their money. Artificial constraints undermine the competitive nature of the game. The draft, the slot values, the international bonus pool limits, the luxury tax, the subsidiarization of the minor leagues, the years and years of control teams still get over minor- and major-league players, the territorial exclusivity. It's all exploitative and anti-competitive bullshit. Set competitiveness free. If the Yankees can prosper in that environment, more power to them. I think they'd fall like fools. #Amurricah I don't see why you always allow the ideal scenario to be the enemy of improvements on this issue. my suggestions would be substantial improvements to the current conditions suffered by amateurs subject to the rule 4 draft. "set competitiveness free" - sure, let a team move to Manhattan or North Jersey or Brooklyn. But until you do away with territorial exclusivity, you need to keep the Yankees "in-check" artificially. If the yankees "can prosper" in an environment where they DON'T have exclusive rights to a large populated area, then fine.

Edgy MD Jan 31 2019 09:53 PM Re: Change the draft order to discourage tanking?

I certainly don't want to discourage your ideas, but the draft is terrible. Whether I always do such a thing, I don't know. I apologize if I've been a bad rabbit.

nymr83 Jan 31 2019 11:37 PM Re: Change the draft order to discourage tanking?

Edgy MD wrote: I certainly don't want to discourage your ideas, but the draft is terrible. Whether I always do such a thing, I don't know. I apologize if I've been a bad rabbit. I agree the draft is terrible and I proposed doing away with it.

Edgy MD Feb 01 2019 05:11 AM Re: Change the draft order to discourage tanking?

#Amurricah

Johnny Lunchbucket Feb 01 2019 06:24 AM Re: Change the draft order to discourage tanking?

Clubs aren't tanking for draft positions. They're doing so just to save $$

Edgy MD Feb 01 2019 07:39 AM Re: Change the draft order to discourage tanking?

Yup. What's the downside? The league sharing revenue has guaranteed return on their investment, and the cities building superballparks for them has taken away much of the demand for capital investment. So teams like the Royals and the Padres and the Marlins and the White Sox, and even the Phillies and Astros, can take turns trying to win. While even the Red Sox and Yankees and Dodgers work to stay under the luxury tax threshold, which not only works as an artificial (but real) cap for them, it tells the rest of the league they don't have to spend more to stay on the field with those clubs. Derek Jeter can run his club like a punk and still make money like he's printing it. It's all bullshit. Promotion and relegation NOW!!!!

Centerfield Feb 01 2019 08:00 AM Re: Change the draft order to discourage tanking?

Johnny Lunchbucket wrote: Clubs aren't tanking for draft positions. They're doing so just to save $$ Yup. I'd shake up the draft order just to take this excuse away.

41Forever Feb 01 2019 09:26 AM Re: Change the draft order to discourage tanking?

Johnny Lunchbucket wrote: Clubs aren't tanking for draft positions. They're doing so just to save $$ I don't know if that's an absolute. At least one team, the Astros, tanked and draft-picked their way to a championship.

Johnny Lunchbucket Feb 01 2019 09:34 AM Re: Change the draft order to discourage tanking?

Well it was a lot more than draft picks that got them there, so that's not absolute either.

Centerfield Feb 01 2019 10:06 AM Re: Change the draft order to discourage tanking?

Johnny Lunchbucket wrote: Well it was a lot more than draft picks that got them there, so that's not absolute either. Not anything close to an absolute. They had three #1 overall picks in a row and only one of them (Carlos Correa) ended up a star. One is out of baseball and the other got hurt and is now in the Cleveland system. They also hit with their #2 pick overall (Alex Bregman), but their #11 overall is pretty good too (George Springer). All of which illustrates the point FK has made over and over, it's nice to pick first, but draft order is not nearly as important as the owners make it out to be.

41Forever Feb 01 2019 11:07 AM Re: Change the draft order to discourage tanking?

Presumably it's a combination of draft picks and the prospects you get by dealing your older and better players. I think some of these guys are tanking to win later and longer. Not that I endorse this approach. When people here wanted the Mets to do that last season, I opposed.

Centerfield Feb 01 2019 03:38 PM Re: Change the draft order to discourage tanking?

Yes. Draft picks were a big part of the rebuild, but tanking to get an early pick played a small role. Early picks were Correa and Bregman. That's it. Springer was 11th overall. Altuve dropped out of the sky. And Keuchel was a 7th rounder. None of the prospects used to get Verlander were early picks. McCullers was 41st. Morton was a journeyman who put it together late in his career and Gurriel is international. Did they tank? Absolutely. Did they tank their way to a championship? Hardly. They wasted away as many high picks as they capitalized on. Maybe if they picked 10th those years they would have been better. Rebuilding is crucial for a small market team. Tanking? Not so much.

Frayed Knot Feb 01 2019 06:39 PM Re: Change the draft order to discourage tanking?

=Centerfield post_id=2236 time=1549060717 user_id=65]Did they tank? Absolutely. Did they tank their way to a championship? Hardly.

I'm not totally sure they even tanked. They certainly sucked for a while but sucking and tanking aren't necessarily the same thing.

Now I suppose any discussion of this would need to involve a definition of what one means by 'tanking'. To me it means some form of intentionally losing as often as possible and doing so with the intent of becoming not just bad but bottom of the barrel bad with the idea that they would reap benefits from it later on.



In 2008 Houston won 86 games, their 7th winning season in eight years, but they did so with a negative run differential suggesting a sub-.500 (77 win) team.

And they were old. Every starting position player was over 30 except for Michael Bourn (25 y/o and not yet good) and Hunter Pence (also 25 and just starting to get good). The staff was mostly 30 and over also.

Over the next two seasons they dropped to 74 & 76 wins and again probably overachieved just to get there with pythag scores of 68 both times

By 2011, still with Bourn & Pence who were by now their best players at 28, the bottom fell out and those two were dealt at the deadline with the team already headed for a 56-106 record.

The record was essentially the same before the deadline as after suggesting the old adage of 'we can finish last without you'.



Was dealing those two (and nobody else of real significance) tanking? In my mind that's simply proper strategy as was not subsequently trying rebound immediately via FA signings in an attempt to go from 106 losses [then 107, then 111] directly to contending again.

I suppose one could call that a form of tanking but I don't and it's clearly different from the now commonplace and openly discussed NBA of essentially announcing that it's your intention to finish at or as near as possible to the bottom in every season for the foreseeable future because you see multiple, consecutive lottery picks is the only way out of your current state. Hell, the 76'ers would tank to get #1/1 picks and then trade off those guys for even more future #1/1 picks thereby delaying any improvement even further. Over a three-season span the 'Sixers played to a sub-.200 record.



And, as already mentioned, it's not like Houston's return to the top was done on the backs of three consecutive #1 overall picks.

It became almost a reflex for various sports-yakkers (who, I'll mention again, usually neither like nor understand baseball and therefore view it through the prism of football or hoops) to declare the ascension of both the Cubs and Astros as if the result of some sort of twisted strategy, but that doesn't make it accurate.