Tanking regulation Topic

MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Posted by arcticlegend on 7/23/2014 4:57:00 PM (view original):
Posted by stews_blues on 7/23/2014 3:40:00 PM (view original):
Are the rules the same for private and public leagues?

We have a couple of teams that have their best players in the minors while their major league teams run about .300.  It appears to me that they are stock piling top 10 draft pick players in the minors.   
I'd say as Long as the players in the minors haven't had more than 4 years of development, this isn't blatant tanking. It makes sense to keep them down until their development is peaked if the team isn't going to be competitive. Of course, if you have a 85 overall shortstop in AA while the guy in the majors is like 50 overall, that's never okay.
Not in every case.   As I've stated time and time again, we have control of a player for at least 10 seasons(11 if you play the bullshit 20 game call-up).   A player drafted at 22 and held back for four years will begin his BL career at 26.   If his value is tied to physical skills, he'll be well into his decline if you kept him for 10 seasons.   I wasted this guy in the minors for a couple of seasons.   Hardball Dynasty – Fantasy Baseball Sim Games - Player Profile: Casey Terry

7/23/2014 5:07 PM
stews_blues
Posts: 125 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 65
Prospect
One of the problems with HBD is that there is no real incentive to try to win 70 or 80 games with a below average team. If you don't have a 100+ win team the incentive is to win 50 games and get a top 10 pick in the draft.

The definition of tanking is arbitrary and truly difficult to enforce.

My solution is to look to the real world. Tanking is allowed in the MLB, but why don't they? 1. Draft picks are less certain in the real world therefore less valuable. 2. Financial if a team is not competitive fans stop showing up at the gates and advertisers drop out.
 
So let teams tank, but your number 1 pick might blow out his elbow in spring training and instead of everyone starting with 185M if you tanked your revenue went down and you start with 115M.
7/24/2014 3:40 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
That's not practical for gameplay.   The objective of FOX is to sell games.    Tell an owner he gets to play with 60% of the resources that everyone else has and he'll do one of two things:   
1.  Say "Screw this" and find another world(or quit HBD).
2.  Create an alias and take his team back after rollover.

Or, if he chooses to stay, he'll just tank it up for another season and say "****, guys, I had 70m less than you.  How in the hell did you expect me to compete?"

You lay out minimum win requirements and you boot people who miss them.  No "Well, you did have a lot of injuries.  We'll give you another season to right the ship."   Or "I just don't think you were ready for this level of competition.  You've learned a lot.   We'll let you put that to good use next season."    And, finally, if you have someone who wants in your world who has a history of 40 win seasons, tell him "no thanks".    It works.
7/24/2014 3:49 PM
stews_blues
Posts: 125 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 65
Prospect
But then you can't really boot an owner that hits the MWR regardless if he is tanking or just has a horrible team. 

This season my team was at best a 500 team, knowing that I tried some unconventional pitching and lineup tactics. I was not really tanking, but I was also not really trying to maximize my wins.  Had I an incentive to win I probably could have finished up with 5-10 more wins.   

I am to saying that the penalty be 70M.  I was thinking everyone start with 150M and 50M based on a 4 year weighted moving average winning percentage.  If you were a 500 team you would start with 175M if you were a 600 team 180M.  To make people pay attention to their minor leagues you could do the same in the minors say 500k, 50k,5k for AAA, AA, HiA.  So the biggest difference between a team that was undefeated for 4 years and one that lost every game ML to HiA would be 50,555,000.  I admit I am making up numbers, but something could be done to punish tankers and reward the effort of those coming in 7th.  Maybe a lottery for draft picks so tanks with 30 wins don't always get the first pick.  

I just don't think setting an arbitrary standard for tanking works (If someone get 50 or more wins they aren't tanking?) , because you can't enforce it.  kitkit is still not trying to win he is just not trying to be so obvoius about losing.   
7/24/2014 5:30 PM
stews_blues
Posts: 125 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 65
Prospect
I do agree about being more selective about letting people into your league, but it is hard when you want to get your league to roll.
7/24/2014 5:32 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect

kitkit is being pretty obvious(or was) about losing.   The details are in this thread.

And, yes, I think he would have been booted had he continued down the same path. 

7/24/2014 8:06 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
I suggested, long ago, that reversing the bottom ten, then 11-16 would help.   10, 9.....1, 16, 15.....11.     You'd still have people manipulating win totals but that 56 win team is picking 10th. 
7/24/2014 8:08 PM
stews_blues
Posts: 125 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 65
Prospect
Kitkit is the exception by admitting to tanking, most have explanations for why they lose 125 games.  

He is still going to finish in the bottom 10 in his league.   

I still think the answer to the tanking problem is to encourage winning not discourage losing.

What is the difference in having 75 wins or 85 wins? 
7/24/2014 9:54 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
75 wins won't get you in the playoffs.   85 might.

Ever saw an 82 win team win the WS?
7/24/2014 10:49 PM
smoelheim
Posts: 406 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 1 38 79
Prospect
Posted by MikeT23 on 7/20/2014 7:49:00 AM (view original):
FWIW, smoelheim basically did what you admitted you're doing. 
That situation proved that you don't need to break any rules in order to be removed from a WIS world. I had broken exactly ZERO rules. I was hitting minimum win rules and had my best players playing. WIS didn't want to remove me. It wasn't until Mike thru his hissy fit and made everyone quit the world (in order to make a point) that they apologetically removed me from Coop.

Moral of the story? Yes, WIS can remove you for any reason they want.
7/25/2014 12:19 AM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect

I made no one quit the world.  I offered to transfer commissioner to anyone who wanted it because I would not hit approve with an admitted tanker still in the world.   Someone else suggested abandoning the world to make WifS take notice.

Moral of the story?   If 25+ owners don't want you in the world, you did something wrong and should probably just man up. . 

7/25/2014 7:02 AM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
At the end of the day, you and kitkit joined worlds that weren't interested in your "rebuilding" efforts.    There are around 170 worlds.   Not all of them work for everyone.
7/25/2014 9:04 AM
stews_blues
Posts: 125 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 65
Prospect
Posted by MikeT23 on 7/24/2014 10:49:00 PM (view original):
75 wins won't get you in the playoffs.   85 might.

Ever saw an 82 win team win the WS?
In the world I play in you better have 95+ wins to make the play offs. (One of our wild card teams had 108 wins.) 

I think the reason for the spread between the top teams and bottom teams is the lack a reason to win if you are in the middle of the pack as well as the teams that are "rebuilding their franchise". 

Given the tiny amount of revenue HBD provides Fox Sports I also realize that fundemental fixes (rebuild) to the quirks in HBD (designed by baseball fans that would never have thought about tanking) is just not going to happen, so we are stuck with the work arounds.
7/25/2014 10:08 AM
tecwrg
Posts: 18995 (0)
Hall of Famer
4 1 152 32 129
Prospect
Posted by stews_blues on 7/25/2014 10:08:00 AM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 7/24/2014 10:49:00 PM (view original):
75 wins won't get you in the playoffs.   85 might.

Ever saw an 82 win team win the WS?
In the world I play in you better have 95+ wins to make the play offs. (One of our wild card teams had 108 wins.) 

I think the reason for the spread between the top teams and bottom teams is the lack a reason to win if you are in the middle of the pack as well as the teams that are "rebuilding their franchise". 

Given the tiny amount of revenue HBD provides Fox Sports I also realize that fundemental fixes (rebuild) to the quirks in HBD (designed by baseball fans that would never have thought about tanking) is just not going to happen, so we are stuck with the work arounds.
Yep, your world had six 100 game losers, including a 130 loss team and a 118 loss team.

All those losses are going somewhere.  It's the teams that are trying to win who are getting them.
7/25/2014 10:16 AM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Posted by stews_blues on 7/25/2014 10:08:00 AM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 7/24/2014 10:49:00 PM (view original):
75 wins won't get you in the playoffs.   85 might.

Ever saw an 82 win team win the WS?
In the world I play in you better have 95+ wins to make the play offs. (One of our wild card teams had 108 wins.) 

I think the reason for the spread between the top teams and bottom teams is the lack a reason to win if you are in the middle of the pack as well as the teams that are "rebuilding their franchise". 

Given the tiny amount of revenue HBD provides Fox Sports I also realize that fundemental fixes (rebuild) to the quirks in HBD (designed by baseball fans that would never have thought about tanking) is just not going to happen, so we are stuck with the work arounds.
Without looking, I can guarantee you have a shitload of "rebuilding" teams.    My world's last playoff:

Coop: 2x82 wins teams, 1x83, 4x85-87
MG: 1x81, 3x85-86
Mantle:  1x82, 1x86

MG had two 100+ win teams
Mantle and Coop had 1 each

MG and Coop have 4 season MWR of 55/125/195/280
Mantle is 55/120/185/260

So, what have we learned today?
7/25/2014 11:45 AM
◂ Prev 123456 Next ▸
Tanking regulation Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2024 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.