Possible Fool-Proof Solution for Tanking

[CSCommish]

I was talking to Matt from HFC and he gave me the idea of utilizing the wheel-based system: grantland.com/the-triangle/the-nbas-possible-solution-for-tanking-good-bye-to-the-lottery-hello-to-the-wheel/

What this will attempt to do is guarantee a top pick every 26 seasons; top-5/6 pick every 5/6 years and at least a top-12 pick every 4 years ... but the real crux is that this will guarantee picks going forward (no more guessing at value) and is designed to eliminate the link between being very bad and getting a high draft pick.



I can articulate it further, but I wanted to get some thoughts on this.

[CSCommish]

The order could be something like this ... still needs tinkering I'm sure.

1
26
14
13
7
20
4
23
10
17
8
19
11
16
2
25
6
21
5
22
9
18
3
24
12
15

[Spencer]

Do you think tanking is an issue here?

[Spencer]

The Contract year was always the best solution to tanking. Developed that in my basketball leagues. Essentually you have a window to rebuild or youre fired.

In the basketball league it worked well. Wed obviously need more gms to do it here.

[Spencer]

Obviously modifications would be made. Window could be 5 instead of 3. Losing your job is usually incentive to be proactive tho.

Personally im way more concerned with the 8 or so gms that are passive then tanking in general. The passive gms are in that 80 win limbo. The tankers are aggressive at least.

[Sha-Le Unique]

Yeah I don't see tanking as too much of a big deal. No reason to win if you're not competing full force or are close to it. It's either win or prepare for the future. No one wants to go 81-81. That gets you nowhere.

Teams really just need to play their best guys at all times and Chris should make edits to teams that are playing people out of position or are intentionally putting better players in roles they shouldn't necessarily be in. Beyond that, I don't see a reason to alter anything about the draft. Bbsbl's old tanking system was enough of an enforcement for my liking. This just sounds too random and doesn't look too reliable.

[bigmark]

Why does this sound like it also gaurantee good teams better picks they don't deserve?

[Boston Red Sox]

I hate wheel systems. It's an opportunity for teams to rip off other teams even worse that don't keep up with the wheel.

[Sha-Le Unique]

Jul 30, 2018 23:49:03 GMT -5 bigmark said:

Why does this sound like it also gaurantee good teams better picks they don't deserve?

That I don't like either

[Boston Red Sox]

Jul 30, 2018 23:49:03 GMT -5 bigmark said:

Why does this sound like it also gaurantee good teams better picks they don't deserve?

Because it's a system that works better when it's started right away and not added to a league that's already got 30+ years of parity

[Spencer]

Jul 30, 2018 23:49:03 GMT -5 bigmark said:

Why does this sound like it also gaurantee good teams better picks they don't deserve?

Its about the opportunities being equal. Essentially all teams get equal draft value.

[Spencer]

Jul 30, 2018 23:51:25 GMT -5 Spencer said:

Jul 30, 2018 23:49:03 GMT -5 bigmark said:

Why does this sound like it also gaurantee good teams better picks they don't deserve?

Its about the opportunities being equal. Essentially all teams get equal draft value.

In real life it wouldnt work because bad gms make bad picks at 1 or 15 or 30. Here it won't work because for the most part it isnt about tanking making things uneven its about certain gms being aggressive and others being passive.

[bigmark]

Plus with fpr. A good team like nyy...could get the 1st overall one year and then use his fpr on his bad pick year the next.... No thx

[Spencer]

Jul 31, 2018 0:08:13 GMT -5 bigmark said:

Plus with fpr. A good team like nyy...could get the 1st overall one year and then use his fpr on his bad pick year the next.... No thx

And then you could do the same thing eventually. Its a completely even scenario

[bigmark]

Jul 31, 2018 0:20:13 GMT -5 Spencer said:

Jul 31, 2018 0:08:13 GMT -5 bigmark said:

Plus with fpr. A good team like nyy...could get the 1st overall one year and then use his fpr on his bad pick year the next.... No thx

And then you could do the same thing eventually. Its a completely even scenario

It shouldn't that even...I don't see as fair if I get the 1st overall randomly then for Frank Thomas the next year.

[bub6708]

Jul 30, 2018 23:49:47 GMT -5 Boston Red Sox said:

I hate wheel systems. It's an opportunity for teams to rip off other teams even worse that don't keep up with the wheel.

 

I don't see how that's an issue? The picks would be set beforehand. If anything, teams would know which picks each team has.

[dougiejays]

It works well in HFTC but it seems like a lot of work to roll it out...not that I have any issues with that since I wouldn't be doing it.

I voted "Yes" but I don't have strong feelings. I kind of like the assurance of a good pick when you're bad...but in a way it's even nicer to have a guaranteed good pick when you're good.

[dougiejays]

Wow, I just read the responses in this thread and I think people are totally missing the point. The wheel is an EQUAL system on balance. It doesn't matter that a good team will occasionally get a good pick and a bad team will occasionally get a bad pick, because every team will get an equal opportunity over the long haul. And having set draft poisitions actually makes it easier to deal future picks because you're not always worrying, "what if my team has a terrible second half?"

I think people are married to the status quo, and that's fine, but the responses in this thread are way overblown IMO.

[tadontask]

I'll echo the question that was asked earlier in the thread - is tanking a big problem? In my opinion, there is getting high picks because you're rebuilding, and getting high picks because you're an inactive owner. It's the second scenario that you want to avoid. Teams trading away veteran talent for prospects or draft picks is going to result in some bad teams. And since baseball prospects often need years in the minors, and then likely even a couple of years in the majors before contributing, a team can be bad for a number of seasons, accumulating high picks. As long as the manager is active, I have no problem personally.

Anyway, I'm one of managers who is probably stuck in 80-win limbo. I was very upfront when I joined. I told Chris that I'll manage the team, I'll be very active (I didn't miss an export last season, and I make every one of my draft picks) and I'll make the occasional trade. But I'm probably not taking the time to go ahead and try and build a super team. If that means my winning percentage falls between .450 and .550 every season, so be it. I'm enjoying this. I think active managers are hard to find, but if Chris wants to replace me then I've said he's welcome to do so.

[Darryl]

Sorry not a fan. If tanking is a big concern do a lottery involving the bottom five teams. This way the talent still goes to the most needful teams.

[bub6708]

Jul 31, 2018 12:36:29 GMT -5 Darryl said:

Sorry not a fan. If tanking is a big concern do a lottery involving the bottom five teams. This way the talent still goes to the most needful teams.

I'd be open to this also.

[dougiejays]

Jul 31, 2018 12:34:44 GMT -5 tadontask said:

I'll echo the question that was asked earlier in the thread - is tanking a big problem? In my opinion, there is getting high picks because you're rebuilding, and getting high picks because you're an inactive owner. It's the second scenario that you want to avoid. Teams trading away veteran talent for prospects or draft picks is going to result in some bad teams. And since baseball prospects often need years in the minors, and then likely even a couple of years in the majors before contributing, a team can be bad for a number of seasons, accumulating high picks. As long as the manager is active, I have no problem personally.

Anyway, I'm one of managers who is probably stuck in 80-win limbo. I was very upfront when I joined. I told Chris that I'll manage the team, I'll be very active (I didn't miss an export last season, and I make every one of my draft picks) and I'll make the occasional trade. But I'm probably not taking the time to go ahead and try and build a super team. If that means my winning percentage falls between .450 and .550 every season, so be it. I'm enjoying this. I think active managers are hard to find, but if Chris wants to replace me then I've said he's welcome to do so.

That’s not tanking. Tanking is deliberately rolling out the worst conceivable roster, I.e. keeping developed guys in AAA, playing guys out of position, and generally TRYING to finish last. I’ve got no problem with rebuilding and landing a top-ten pick in the process.

[Spencer]

I dont think tanking is an issue tbh. Im gonna probably tank in 3 or 4 years. My team is as good as it is now because I took a longer rebuild and tabked previously. Its part of the game.

[CSCommish]

WOW, OK people, dial it back a notch. No one is going to quit over this, right? RIGHT?

First of all, I am just looking for input. Tanking can be a problem and I would like to address this. The Wheel is just ONE idea. I agree with Spencer, this would probably make more sense in a non-historic or non-modified league, but that means it might be a good idea in the future, when we catch up with real time and do not already have pre-ordained ratings for players who are not even born yet.

And break, this is not about you per se, but about the concept of tanking.



So while the wheel is not popular, just note that it has 40% support. I'll revisit this later.

So let's look at a lottery at the bottom 4-6 picks then.

[Reddington]

Jul 31, 2018 0:06:32 GMT -5 bigmark said:

Jul 30, 2018 23:51:25 GMT -5 Spencer said:

Its about the opportunities being equal. Essentially all teams get equal draft value.

Some teams also can't afford a big budget and have to do the long term rebuild. 

market sizes should all be the same imho...