Nice.  And he's the commish of that world as well.

He's fielding a AAA team at the ML level.  And not a good AAA team

I thought surely this would be a thread about sculley.

Also.. Here's a worst case of tanking in a world that you run...

http://www.whatifsports.com/HBD/Pages/Popups/FranchiseProfile.aspx?fid=2067

How can you tell he is tanking "blatantly" by looking at the history or payroll, or won/loss?  Tanking isn't necessarily winning 45 games in a season at the ML level.  Tanking would be:
Having fully (or very close to it) projected players sitting in AAA for the sole reason of losing ML games.
Playing obvious DH types at SS or other areas of the field at the ML level way below the recs.

He could have a 80/80/80/80 SS at he ML level with a 22 year old SS in AAA that is 95/95/95/95, if the 22 year old still has another year or two to develop, he does not HAVE to bring him up just because the AAA guy happens to be better now.  You don't have to bring up last season's IFA bonus baby because he is OVR 82 as a starting pitcher, especially if he projects to 95 OVR.  That is just wasting years on him.

In short if you field the proper defensive recs at the ML level and don't run guys out there fatigued at zero and don't have better, fully developed guys languishing in the minors, you can do whatever you want.  That isn't tanking.  

I know several of you will grill me down claiming I am a tanker as well under this theory.  I just think you don't have to make every attempt to win at the ML level, if it sets back a rebuilding effort.  This game is supposed to be modeled after real ML baseball and teams do this in real life as well.  They don't put Big Papi at SS, but they also don't bring up future talent until they are ready either.  I am not saying he is doing or not doing any of these, just wondering how you can make a blanket statement without fully knowing either.

So you think a team winning 64 is the same as a team winning 42?

Reducing payroll by 90m and playing .250 ball is a pretty good indicator of tanking.

Posted by MikeT23 on 6/11/2012 4:40:00 PM (view original):
So you think a team winning 64 is the same as a team winning 42?

Depends on what you you need to lose to get the 1st pick..  

I actually agree with that.    But one is blatant(.250 ball, 90m payroll reduction) and the other is not.       That's the difference.   Maybe the meaning of "blatant" is what you're missing. 

It's a sore subject I know, and one hard to define.  I just think there is a difference between rebuilding and losing and trying to lose.  But a lot of guys say you should have to 'try' to win, meaning spending FA money in years you know you don't have a legit shot at a title and whatnot.  I don't think you have a responsibility to try to win.

Yeah looks like his team is the shyts right now.  But if his guys are not fatigued and he isn't flubbing the system by playing guys grossly out of position, or leaving better veterans in the minors, he doesn't 'have' to do much of anything to win.

To clarify....is he obviously doing what he can within the rules and his own ethical code to ensure a high draft pick?  Hell yeah he is.  And I would do the same in that same position.  But is he courting the Devil and doing the 'tanking' word with all it's nasty connotations within HBD?  Depends on who you ask, and what definition you go by.  I have not looked at this specific team and minors to think so....but just seeing his payroll reduction and games won doesn't tell the story.

Yea I'm in Field of Dreams and I think I'm leaving at the end of season because of the commish's team's payroll combined with the record.