How To Rebuild A Disaster 2: Season 17-? Topic

Stewart_UK
Posts: 123 (0)
Hall of Famer
85 1 2 3 324
Prospect
Worst ive ever done is a 62 win season, Im sure i could be better than a .500 overall recored if id have rolled out a few 35 win seasons but whats the point of that? You have to be competitive at the ML level and try to win every game first to last there is no excuse at all.
9/21/2010 11:00 AM
torrone
Posts: 494 (0)
Hall of Famer
2 4 28 191
Prospect

Please take a look at the 2 most recent trades the thread author made. For a team that is supposed to be rebuilding I can't understand trading for a $6M 36 year old pitcher and trading away a 22 yr old potential superstar. Perhaps someone can explain the logic to me.

9/21/2010 8:01 PM
timb116
Posts: 204 (0)
Hall of Famer
321
Prospect
Posted by MikeT23 on 9/16/2010 2:36:00 PM (view original):
tankerwood, you don't play in a vaccum.   When you're losing 114, someone is winning those games.   You aren't competitive.   Teams that aren't competitive are bad for a world.  If 90 wins puts you in 1st place, you're in first place and the playoffs.   Winning 10 more or 20 more doesn't matter except for playoff seeding.  A bye is nice but not necessary. 

The difference between us is simple:  I think you should try to win BL games whether you're a contender or not.  You think it's only necessary if you can win enough to be a contender.    I'm sure I can win 70 today and 90 next season.  You're a lot more comfortable winning 50 today and 100 next season.  

Your way is fine.   Just don't think it's some noble way to build a team.  It's just tanking.  It's the easy way to build a team. 
Damn, you're extra special annoying on this thread.  I mean, usually you can get some leeway, because you are knowledgeable.  But, Jesus, you took obnoxious to new heights!
9/21/2010 9:16 PM
a_ersberg
Posts: 1363 (0)
Hall of Famer
2 75
Prospect
So if you're trying to 'rebuild'... is there a proper etiquette?  You'd like to get the high draft picks... but without tanking.  So do you fill your ML roster with guys that are ...decent, shoot for 65 wins and a top 3 pick?  Even that looks like tanking. 
9/21/2010 10:18 PM
deanod
Posts: 3152 (0)
Hall of Famer
115 18 1 119 1 52
Prospect
It's a lot better than refusing to allocate more than $20M to player payroll en route to 115 losses and destroying the parity of the league.
9/21/2010 10:32 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Rebuilding isn't an exact science.   There are hundreds of ways to build a team so there are hundreds of ways to rebuild a team.    But you don't have to trade away all your BL talent, strip your payroll down as far as possible and win 45 games.  If you're in a world where 60 wins gets you 10th pick, the world has problems you can't solve.  Personally, I think you can be competitive and rebuild at the same time.   By competitive I mean "not three days off for your opponent".  If teams are choosing you as a good spot in the schedule to give players a day off, you've done something wrong.    At the end of FA, you can take 10m and sign 4-5 FA that are legit BL players.  Or you can take that 10m and turn it into 5m of prospect money.   It's all about "How much do  I want to win BL games?" vs.  "How little do I care about today as compared to future seasons?"

The thing that gets me is when someone is 10-30 or 30-70 and they do nothing to make their team better.    If you say "There's nothing I can do", you're probably incompetent at HBD.   If you just do nothing, you're not interested in winning BL games.   A lot of us call that tanking.
9/22/2010 8:54 AM
csherwood
Posts: 533 (0)
Hall of Famer
12 116
Prospect
Posted by MikeT23 on 9/22/2010 8:54:00 AM (view original):
Rebuilding isn't an exact science.   There are hundreds of ways to build a team so there are hundreds of ways to rebuild a team.    But you don't have to trade away all your BL talent, strip your payroll down as far as possible and win 45 games.  If you're in a world where 60 wins gets you 10th pick, the world has problems you can't solve.  Personally, I think you can be competitive and rebuild at the same time.   By competitive I mean "not three days off for your opponent".  If teams are choosing you as a good spot in the schedule to give players a day off, you've done something wrong.    At the end of FA, you can take 10m and sign 4-5 FA that are legit BL players.  Or you can take that 10m and turn it into 5m of prospect money.   It's all about "How much do  I want to win BL games?" vs.  "How little do I care about today as compared to future seasons?"

The thing that gets me is when someone is 10-30 or 30-70 and they do nothing to make their team better.    If you say "There's nothing I can do", you're probably incompetent at HBD.   If you just do nothing, you're not interested in winning BL games.   A lot of us call that tanking.
I just started a new team (sorta - it was the same franchise I had 12 seasons ago, just reclaimed it) in Mays. the team is a nightmare (had 2 legitimate big league bats and one legitimate pitcher) and I budgeted 65 million to player payroll. I could have jacked payroll up to about 100 million and, with the guys I had, maybe won close to 80 games, but instead I decided to rebuild, trade the few worthwhile veterans for prospects with the goal of contending for a playoff spot by my second or third season in the league. After my trades, a few option buyouts, and siging 4-5 cheaper free agents to one or two year contracts, I have 1 million left in excess payroll. If my team does start off 10-30 or 30-70 (I think it is better than that but I have not scouted my opponents so I do not know), am I tanking if I decide to spend my prospect payroll bonus on a couple of internationals instead or wasting half the money in a transfer and getting another marginal big league player so I can win an extra 5 games in a season that is already toast? Or maybe I should tade away my top prospect who is a year away form the bigs for 3 marginal big leaguers that may win me an extra 10 games?

If this was called Hardball Season and you played only one season with each team, I would absolutely do that. But my goal is to win championships, not have 85 win teams that miss tha playoffs each year with 100 million dollar payrolls.
9/22/2010 10:21 AM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect

So, you're saying if you start 10-30 or 30-70, you'll be saying "There's nothing I can do"?

I think I answered that question already.

9/22/2010 10:28 AM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect



NEXT QUESTION!
9/22/2010 10:32 AM
csherwood
Posts: 533 (0)
Hall of Famer
12 116
Prospect
Posted by MikeT23 on 9/22/2010 10:28:00 AM (view original):

So, you're saying if you start 10-30 or 30-70, you'll be saying "There's nothing I can do"?

I think I answered that question already.

Yes, there is something I can do that would be bad for the long term success of my team. You look at each season oin a vacuum - that is fine if that is how you want to play the game. I look at each team with one question in mind: how do I win a championship as fast as possible. And if that means being content with 55 wins instead of sacrificing my future to win 65, so be it. In Mikey's little world that he lives in all alone, I am a tanker.
9/22/2010 10:33 AM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
When was the last time you won a championship?  Season 4 on NABCL.   They're almost done with SEASON 17.   So don't give me any "championship" talk.

I assume you consider yourself to be a good owner.  You know when you've built a turd(90 game loser).   If you don't leave yourself some room to avoid losing 100, you're incompetent.   You've accepted the "I'm doing the best I can with what I've got without hurting the future of my team" motto because you're frustrated that you haven't been able to update the "Most Championships" thread in 3 1/2 years.  That's fine.   Just don't be shocked when you're called a tanker.  Because you are very comfortable not winning games at the BL level.
9/22/2010 10:40 AM
csherwood
Posts: 533 (0)
Hall of Famer
12 116
Prospect
Cooperstown CHR Charge 12 $81.0M 78-84 (.481) 3 -
Cooperstown CHR Charge 13 $62.5M 73-89 (.451) 3

You cut 20 million of salary - if you had increased it 20 million you could have won 85 or 86 games. You obviously did not do everything you could to win as many games as possible that season.
9/22/2010 11:08 AM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
73 wins = competitive.   49 wins = giving games away(i.e. tanking)   24 win difference.   Understand?

All along I've said I only care about wins/losses.   If you win 65 games with a 31m payroll, well, you avoided 100 losses and were at least competitive.   When you win less than 1/3 of your games, you're not competitive.    As for that team, I got old in S10.   I kept putting band-aids on amputated limbs.   Wasn't working.   Unlike someone who joins a world and wins 49 games in his first season, I knew I could continue the same path and keep winning 70-80 games for eternity.   Or I could quit buying 35 y/o FA for a season and make my team better. I had 12 seasons of experience in the world so I had a feel for it.  Nonetheless, I wasn't going to drop to 49 wins at any point. 
9/22/2010 11:18 AM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
By the way, 73 wins got me 10th pick.   The best IFA I got was 2.8m.     Not exactly on par with your 49 win season.

You're comparing apples to boats.
9/22/2010 11:20 AM
csherwood
Posts: 533 (0)
Hall of Famer
12 116
Prospect
Comparing saving 40 million at the cost of 20 wins to saving 40 million at the cost of 20 wins. Definitely apples to boats.
9/22/2010 11:28 AM
◂ Prev 1...7|8|9|10|11|12 Next ▸
How To Rebuild A Disaster 2: Season 17-? Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2026 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.