Online Leagues - "Rebuilding", Tanking, Win Later, Lose Now

Goody · 06-10-2003, 07:02 PM

It seems like a common tactic in online leagues. Somebody did it in my league from the initial draft and it is really hurting the league's realism now that that team is full of players who are awesome making 100k per year. The guy who originally drafted the team even expressed joy that his team was in last place halfway through the first season.

Everyone knows that losing for 3 seasons straight will make for a future dynasty more likely than not...but not everyone thinks it is "right". Its one thing to trade a 36 year old #2 starter for prospects....its another thing when you trade away the heart and soul of your team because you're not in first place.

It is slowly becoming less easy to do as prospects now have more talent changes and arbitration gives them less years at bargain prices...which is a good thing. But many people still like to "tank" if they don't think they have a chance to win it all.

I prefer baseball where everyone is trying to win. Field a good team and don't trade away your stars because you're not #1...do it out of pride that you're not in last place and that the fans have something to come watch. Tanking is unrealistic and it really is unfair to the teams that are trying to remain competitive year in and year out.

I've actually been thinking of making a system where if you trade away a star you loss some supstaintial fan interest. People don't come to ballgames to talk about how good the farm system is. Some leagues use a draft lottery...which is a good idea but somewhat unfair to a team that is genuinely trying to win but going through lots of hardships (we have one of those in my league too)..

Tanking is an even bigger problem for leagues that don't use financials...since there is absolutely no penalty for losing for 5 years straight....and draft picks are the only way to garuntee a good team with limited transaction options.

In the leagues I'm an owner in, I never think about rebuilding. I'm always trying to make my team stronger in its current situation even if they are 15 games out of first. I like the challenge of finishing second...or beating the first place team in a late season series. I like playing the game whether I win the World Series or not.

So what does everyone else think? Is tanking ok? What is the line between tanking and "rebuilding"? Does anyone else hate the idea of "rent-a-players"?

Anyone have any other ideas that they use or have thought of to discourage tanking or giving up?

It just seems too common and accepted. Everyone wants prospects...and that's not true in real life. An aging veteran with fan appeal is just as valuable to an organization in the real world.

Steve Kuffrey · 06-10-2003, 07:08 PM

If the league is using v5 then he has far from a sure thing winner in the future, atleast as far as I have seen. I've had more than one 1st round "sure thing" be average "at best" down the road a year or two.

While I do agree with what you are saying I wouldn't say it is a sure fire way to win.

You might try limiting the number of trades or require draftees stay with a team a year before being eligible for trade. Also, limit how far into the future teams can trade draft choices, etc can help.

Another thing is that IF he does build a winner down the road his payroll WILL be effected.

Goody · 06-10-2003, 07:14 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Steve Kuffrey
Another thing is that IF he does build a winner down the road his payroll WILL be effected.

Only thing is, they will get 3 years of service from all the rookies they got during their losing seasons...for next to nothing...while using the extra payroll to trade for star veterans. They will be trading with teams who are getting rid of their stars so they can get better draft picks and prospects....and the cycle continues. While the team that isn't participating in all this...and is making legitimate trades to win..... is stuck in 2nd or 3rd place for eternity.

Rockpile · 06-10-2003, 07:19 PM

One thing you might want to do is limit the number of Promos GMs can do...one league I am in has a limit of 5 per year.

This makes it hard to have a money making organization or even a fan base at all if a GM tanks year after year and forces GMs to at least think about trying to field a competitive team. Even those 5 promo days wont help the crap teams because they actually have to win.

I don' t like the fact that leagues turn into contenders and rebuilders either.

Goody · 06-10-2003, 07:23 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Rockpile
One thing you might want to do is limit the number of Promos GMs can do...one league I am in has a limit of 5 per year.

We don't don't use promos at all. I feel they are too much extra work for limited return. Good point though.

beorn · 06-10-2003, 07:25 PM

As Steve said, I think that half the problem is fixed by making drafted players of much less certain long term value. It is highly unrealistic to know you are getting three sure stars by tanking three years in a row.

Second, I know that in the DDBL, there is a provision for tanking teams to suffer severely at the ticket office. It is very unrealistic to think that fans will come out to watch a team that is making no effort to be competitive.

ChipperJones10 · 06-10-2003, 07:53 PM

Dude, just because not everyone shares your managing style doesnt mean they are wrong. If someone tanks and winds up with good young players, its not taking advantage of the game, its just another strategy and, evidently, a better one

Qrusher14242 · 06-10-2003, 08:04 PM

So your saying i should keep all my over-the-hill guys just to field 'a better team' instead of building for the future?

Goody · 06-10-2003, 08:07 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ChipperJones10
Dude, just because not everyone shares your managing style doesnt mean they are wrong. If someone tanks and winds up with good young players, its not taking advantage of the game, its just another strategy and, evidently, a better one

I like realism...after all this is a simulation game. Teams like to win in the real world..it sells more tickets.

Goody · 06-10-2003, 08:08 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Qrusher14242
So your saying i should keep all my over-the-hill guys just to field 'a better team' instead of building for the future?

Did I say that? No.

Thanks, drive through.

treedom · 06-10-2003, 08:12 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ChipperJones10
Dude, just because not everyone shares your managing style doesnt mean they are wrong. If someone tanks and winds up with good young players, its not taking advantage of the game, its just another strategy and, evidently, a better one

within the current constraints of the game, it is a better strategy, yes...and that's the problem, it doesn't accurately simulate reality...a team that tanks would not have any fans left...

pallison14 · 06-10-2003, 08:25 PM

Not completely related, but I had a suggestion of a player "Marquee" or "Star Power" rating, where players have a certain ability (similar to leadership, loyality) that can affect team interest. Ken Griffey Jr. is a player who comes to mind, as I seem to recall interest or buzz in Cincy jumped tremendously after he was traded there.

Anyhow, on the subject at hand -- it's a tough call. I'm in an online league where a team traded away anybody -- and I mean anybody -- who could net them the slimmest of prospects and/or draft picks. And while he'll likely be a dominant team in a few seasons, it's painful to watch this club lose 130 games. While I have some respect for what the owner is trying to do it, it really irks me to watch those 24-1 loses over and over.

-p

Goody · 06-10-2003, 08:29 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by pallison14
Not completely related, but I had a suggestion of a player "Marquee" or "Star Power" rating, where players have a certain ability (similar to leadership, loyality) that can affect team interest. Ken Griffey Jr. is a player who comes to mind, as I seem to recall interest or buzz in Cincy jumped tremendously after he was traded there.

Anyhow, on the subject at hand -- it's a tough call. I'm in an online league where a team traded away anybody -- and I mean anybody -- who could net them the slimmest of prospects and/or draft picks. And while he'll likely be a dominant team in a few seasons, it's painful to watch this club lose 130 games. While I have some respect for what the owner is trying to do it, it really irks me to watch those 24-1 loses over and over.

-p

I agree with the marquee player thing somewhat. I remember when Mark Langston was traded from the Mariners for some dopey prospects. We were a bit angry considering the Mariners always traded away stars in those days.

One of the prospects ended up being Randy Johnson...but he was just some chump to me as a kid. I wanted to see Mark Langston pitch...RIGHT NOW!

Then there are times when a player leaves like Griffey or A-Rod and you know the team did all they could to keep them.

Gotta love Karma....though.

Draft Dodger · 06-10-2003, 08:32 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Goody
I like realism...after all this is a simulation game. Teams like to win in the real world..it sells more tickets.

While I like your original sentiment (I always try to be competitive as well and don't like tankers), I've got some sad news for you.

In a couple of weeks, real teams in the MLB are going to "throw in the towel" for this season and start dumping salary and dumping players for prospects. I HATE this new "trading deadline" type of GMing, but it is very much a part of the real world. Selling tickets is secondary to cutting costs.

LedgerSko · 06-10-2003, 08:32 PM

Quote:

I prefer baseball where everyone is trying to win. Field a good team and don't trade away your stars because you're not #1...do it out of pride that you're not in last place and that the fans have something to come watch. Tanking is unrealistic and it really is unfair to the teams that are trying to remain competitive year in and year out.

The problem is this isnt real life, so people dont have to worry about being fired.

JAttractive · 06-10-2003, 08:34 PM

Here are my thoughts:

1. Punishing the team by lowering the fan base will only feed in to the problem. By reducing the fan base you will lower their revenue which only gives them more reason/incentive to trade away salaried players for prospects only now they have a more legitimate reason.

2. I think tanking in baseball is far less of a problem than we see in OOTP because in real life prospects are far less predictable and losing-as-a-strategy not such a viable tactic. OOTP actually is much more like the NBA in this regard where a few seasons of losing and netting top draft picks can make you a winner in no time.

3. Because of reason #2 I think the best tactic is to adopt the same strategy that the NBA uses to deter teams from doing this: the lottery draft. You have to weigh the system in favour of the lower teams but don't make it a sure thing...

Ex. For the LBA, with our 16 teams I would give the last team 16 tickets, 2nd last 15 tickets, 3rd last 14 etc... until the top team has 1 in the draw. I would then draw the picks randomly. Some other rules could be added in if needed but that would be my basic system.

I just don't think hurting a team who is making a loser (intentionally or not) makes sense but I still agree that something should be done to deter tanking. If the draft lottery is good enough for an established league like the NBA why not the LBA?

Goody · 06-10-2003, 08:35 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by pallison14
While I have some respect for what the owner is trying to do it, it really irks me to watch those 24-1 loses over and over.

-p

I don't see how you can respect what he's doing. Everyone knows the tactic...anyone could use it...if they had no respect for the league's or their own integrity being compromised.

Its not like they're the first person to think of the strategy of tanking....many people just find it to be a step away from outright cheating.

Goody · 06-10-2003, 08:39 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Draft Dodger
While I like your original sentiment (I always try to be competitive as well and don't like tankers), I've got some sad news for you.

In a couple of weeks, real teams in the MLB are going to "throw in the towel" for this season and start dumping salary and dumping players for prospects. I HATE this new "trading deadline" type of GMing, but it is very much a part of the real world. Selling tickets is secondary to cutting costs.

I agree with this...but I also think they leave themselves in a position to be competitive the very next year. They don't trade away 30 year old franchise players for 19 year olds unless they think it will help them compete in the short term.

bravezrool · 06-10-2003, 08:40 PM

I dont agree With you guys. Sometime I treade for a prospect and I win in the end. Why is it so wrong? when I end up th winner. Winner takes all, I say

Goody · 06-10-2003, 08:42 PM

Why are all the Braves guys the ones supporting tanking?

06-10-2003, 07:25 PM	#6
beorn All Star Starter Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: near Rochester, NY Posts: 1,269	As Steve said, I think that half the problem is fixed by making drafted players of much less certain long term value. It is highly unrealistic to know you are getting three sure stars by tanking three years in a row. Second, I know that in the DDBL, there is a provision for tanking teams to suffer severely at the ticket office. It is very unrealistic to think that fans will come out to watch a team that is making no effort to be competitive. __________________ Commish of Dog Days Baseball Commish Pennant Chase Baseball League (PCBL) Commish and Blue Jays GM Extra Innings Baseball

06-10-2003, 08:25 PM	#12
pallison14 Major Leagues Join Date: Mar 2002 Posts: 452	Not completely related, but I had a suggestion of a player "Marquee" or "Star Power" rating, where players have a certain ability (similar to leadership, loyality) that can affect team interest. Ken Griffey Jr. is a player who comes to mind, as I seem to recall interest or buzz in Cincy jumped tremendously after he was traded there. Anyhow, on the subject at hand -- it's a tough call. I'm in an online league where a team traded away anybody -- and I mean anybody -- who could net them the slimmest of prospects and/or draft picks. And while he'll likely be a dominant team in a few seasons, it's painful to watch this club lose 130 games. While I have some respect for what the owner is trying to do it, it really irks me to watch those 24-1 loses over and over. -p __________________ Commissioner, NGBL - Putting the FUNK in defunct. New York (AL), UBL

06-10-2003, 08:40 PM	#19
bravezrool Bat Boy Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 17	I dont agree With you guys. Sometime I treade for a prospect and I win in the end. Why is it so wrong? when I end up th winner. Winner takes all, I say __________________ Civic Nation. Represent.

06-10-2003, 08:42 PM	#20
Goody Hall Of Famer Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: South Korea Posts: 3,530	Why are all the Braves guys the ones supporting tanking? __________________ In the past: Laseron Baseball Association creator. Present: I am Rezulm on PT and OOTP Discord. Future: I wish it was the past.

06-10-2003, 07:02 PM	#1
Goody Hall Of Famer Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: South Korea Posts: 3,530	Online Leagues - "Rebuilding", Tanking, Win Later, Lose Now It seems like a common tactic in online leagues. Somebody did it in my league from the initial draft and it is really hurting the league's realism now that that team is full of players who are awesome making 100k per year. The guy who originally drafted the team even expressed joy that his team was in last place halfway through the first season. Everyone knows that losing for 3 seasons straight will make for a future dynasty more likely than not...but not everyone thinks it is "right". Its one thing to trade a 36 year old #2 starter for prospects....its another thing when you trade away the heart and soul of your team because you're not in first place. It is slowly becoming less easy to do as prospects now have more talent changes and arbitration gives them less years at bargain prices...which is a good thing. But many people still like to "tank" if they don't think they have a chance to win it all. I prefer baseball where everyone is trying to win. Field a good team and don't trade away your stars because you're not #1...do it out of pride that you're not in last place and that the fans have something to come watch. Tanking is unrealistic and it really is unfair to the teams that are trying to remain competitive year in and year out. I've actually been thinking of making a system where if you trade away a star you loss some supstaintial fan interest. People don't come to ballgames to talk about how good the farm system is. Some leagues use a draft lottery...which is a good idea but somewhat unfair to a team that is genuinely trying to win but going through lots of hardships (we have one of those in my league too).. Tanking is an even bigger problem for leagues that don't use financials...since there is absolutely no penalty for losing for 5 years straight....and draft picks are the only way to garuntee a good team with limited transaction options. In the leagues I'm an owner in, I never think about rebuilding. I'm always trying to make my team stronger in its current situation even if they are 15 games out of first. I like the challenge of finishing second...or beating the first place team in a late season series. I like playing the game whether I win the World Series or not. So what does everyone else think? Is tanking ok? What is the line between tanking and "rebuilding"? Does anyone else hate the idea of "rent-a-players"? Anyone have any other ideas that they use or have thought of to discourage tanking or giving up? It just seems too common and accepted. Everyone wants prospects...and that's not true in real life. An aging veteran with fan appeal is just as valuable to an organization in the real world. __________________ In the past: Laseron Baseball Association creator. Present: I am Rezulm on PT and OOTP Discord. Future: I wish it was the past.

06-10-2003, 07:08 PM	#2
Steve Kuffrey Administrator Join Date: Jul 1999 Location: S.E. TN - Georgia born and raised Posts: 17,022	If the league is using v5 then he has far from a sure thing winner in the future, atleast as far as I have seen. I've had more than one 1st round "sure thing" be average "at best" down the road a year or two. While I do agree with what you are saying I wouldn't say it is a sure fire way to win. You might try limiting the number of trades or require draftees stay with a team a year before being eligible for trade. Also, limit how far into the future teams can trade draft choices, etc can help. Another thing is that IF he does build a winner down the road his payroll WILL be effected. __________________ Steve Kuffrey DABS Atlanta Braves - 2008 Eastern Division Champ *DBLC Atlanta Braves - 2011, 2014 East Division Champ, 2012, 2013 NL Wildcard Baseball Maelstrom-Montreal Expos-2013 Tourney winner, 2014 WC Team Sparky's League - Tampa Bay D'Rays Epicenter Baseball League - Astros 2014 The CBL Rewind - Phillies '95

06-10-2003, 07:19 PM	#4
Rockpile All Star Reserve Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Colorado Posts: 620	One thing you might want to do is limit the number of Promos GMs can do...one league I am in has a limit of 5 per year. This makes it hard to have a money making organization or even a fan base at all if a GM tanks year after year and forces GMs to at least think about trying to field a competitive team. Even those 5 promo days wont help the crap teams because they actually have to win. I don' t like the fact that leagues turn into contenders and rebuilders either.

06-10-2003, 07:53 PM	#7
ChipperJones10 Minors (Rookie Ball) Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 32	Dude, just because not everyone shares your managing style doesnt mean they are wrong. If someone tanks and winds up with good young players, its not taking advantage of the game, its just another strategy and, evidently, a better one

06-10-2003, 08:04 PM	#8
Qrusher14242 All Star Starter Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: CA Posts: 1,253	So your saying i should keep all my over-the-hill guys just to field 'a better team' instead of building for the future?

06-10-2003, 08:34 PM	#16
JAttractive All Star Starter Join Date: May 2002 Location: St. Catharines, Ontario Posts: 1,135	Here are my thoughts: 1. Punishing the team by lowering the fan base will only feed in to the problem. By reducing the fan base you will lower their revenue which only gives them more reason/incentive to trade away salaried players for prospects only now they have a more legitimate reason. 2. I think tanking in baseball is far less of a problem than we see in OOTP because in real life prospects are far less predictable and losing-as-a-strategy not such a viable tactic. OOTP actually is much more like the NBA in this regard where a few seasons of losing and netting top draft picks can make you a winner in no time. 3. Because of reason #2 I think the best tactic is to adopt the same strategy that the NBA uses to deter teams from doing this: the lottery draft. You have to weigh the system in favour of the lower teams but don't make it a sure thing... Ex. For the LBA, with our 16 teams I would give the last team 16 tickets, 2nd last 15 tickets, 3rd last 14 etc... until the top team has 1 in the draw. I would then draw the picks randomly. Some other rules could be added in if needed but that would be my basic system. I just don't think hurting a team who is making a loser (intentionally or not) makes sense but I still agree that something should be done to deter tanking. If the draft lottery is good enough for an established league like the NBA why not the LBA?