Fortunately, Im enough of a newb here that I havent really seen the tanking up close and personal (or at least I dont think I have). However, I have a couple of ideas that could help. I thought this would be a good thread that those of us who have thought about it could throw down their ideas....

First, I think it would be a good idea for WIS to have a fun little ranking system for owners. Give owners plus points for a certain number of wins, improvements year over year, playoff appearances, etc and give them negative points for the opposite. I think that would work at some owner's egos to keep them wanting to win rather than lose. Think something like the ladder system for yahoo! games. Easy to implement and would keep the competition going more years than not.

Second, I think maybe there should be some tweaking to the rewards structure. Obviously, some owners feel its better money for them if they tank for several years and put something together in hopes of winning a couple of world series to get some free seasons. Why not cut that reward a certain percentage and increase those that make the playoffs a certain percentage so that WIS still sees the same return and players are more likely to fight for making the playoffs rather than have 3 or 4 losing seasons in a row to build a super team.

Third, I think the diamond in the rough thing should be looked at more. I think its a great part of this game to get those emails mid season. I think you should also have some sort of disappointment/letdown feature for prospects. "This guy has really let us down" email to let you know that the studly prospect with a crappy attitude decided to get high and screw around rather than hit the cages. I think that would help a lot more and I think you could work that into the prospect budgets. Maybe teams that have 15+ advanced scouting "Can see some upside potential" or "future concerns us". You can take a page from GD in this regard or tie it to temper or something else. In both cases, multiply the number of these types of prospects by 3 or 4 times the current number and things would get much more interesting. Teams would be less likely to pin their future on prospects only and maybe other teams would be willing to keep lots of money in training and advanced scouting to study potential DITR's for the future. Plus, it would certainly be closer to real life without losing the great thing HBD has right now.

Those are just my ideas. I never have the desire to tank teams because I have no patience for losing like that. I would rather carry a $130 million budget and see where that gets me.

Quote: First, I think it would be a good idea for WIS to have a fun little ranking system for owners. Give owners plus points for a certain number of wins, improvements year over year, playoff appearances, etc and give them negative points for the opposite. I think that would work at some owner's egos to keep them wanting to win rather than lose. Think something like the ladder system for yahoo! games. Easy to implement and would keep the competition going more years than not.

Not sure this would work as enduring 4 seasons of - points and tanking towards a super team could earn you 6+ years of + points in the other direction.

While I kind of like the idea about prospects being fuzzier in general (so that teams can't stake EVERYTHING in them and veterans with their solid current values are worth more than prospects), it would make the game feel more like an exercise of luck than skill.

This is what would work:

Face it.. you will never stop tanking.. But you can stop tanking in YOUR world if you kick out the morons that do it.. If that's an issue for you.

then why weren't the tampa bay rays kicked out of MLB, they had 8 top 4 picks between 1999-2008.

the prospects being fuzzier is a good idea, it is way more realistic.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/draft/

case in point, who the hell is bryan bullington?

Topic: My ideas to address the tanking issue

Let 'em. Who cares? If you're not a good enough manager to beat a tanker then you need to improve, not rag about it in the forums.

Proceed with your ragging.

Quote: Originally posted by snake_p on 1/27/2010Topic: My ideas to address the tanking issueLet 'em.  Who cares?  If you're not a good enough manager to beat a tanker then you need to improve, not rag about it in the forums.Proceed with your ragging.

Even if they trade rape newbies? How is that fair to compete against? I understand your point, if it was just "tanking" but doing what the owner in Foxx did, and possibly PVC in New Guys.

Bad trades can – and should – be vetoed. Point out questionable trades in the world chat and ask the owners to explain how they would benefit. If unfair trades go through – particularly between experienced owners taking advantage of newer ones – you probably need to find a new world.

Commissioners can replace owners who don't make an effort to compete. If yours doesn't take any steps to ensure competition, then you may need to find a new world.

But I do agree the rewards structure should be changed.

Quote: Originally posted by travisg on 1/27/2010Bad trades can – and should – be vetoed. Point out questionable trades in the world chat and ask the owners to explain how they would benefit. If unfair trades go through – particularly between experienced owners taking advantage of newer ones – you probably need to find a new world.

Commissioners can replace owners who don't make an effort to compete. If yours doesn't take any steps to ensure competition, then you may need to find a new world.

But I do agree the rewards structure should be changed.

It seems some owners just hit the "accept" button without looking at trades. If a commissioner can replace owners who don't compete, who can replace the commissioner? I like the idea of changing the rewards structure. If it were not for a couple owners warning me ahead of time, I may have gotten "trade raped" by our commissioner too. But in all fairness to the next owner. My job is to sign the #1 pick tomorrow, and hopefully leave the franchise in better position. If you have a handful of owners leave the world because of the commissioner, why don't owners speak up?
Back to the subject :) I would love to see owners discuss or explain a questionable trade. There may be a point of view we do not see. Nothing wrong with that.

Be careful what you ask for, Mr. Ijustlostmylastfourgamesbyacombinedscoreof32-2.

Quote: Originally posted by MikeT23 on 1/27/2010Be careful what you ask for, Mr. Ijustlostmylastfourgamesbyacombinedscoreof32-2.

Man I would hate to sign that name!

Addressing the original post:

1) Ranking system and points: I don't think that this will deter tankers the slightest bit. What may be something "fun" for owners with egos will be a resounding "who cares?" by a lot more. Especially the tankers who won't mind the negative points they'd be banking because they know a lot more positive points will be coming down the road.

2) Reward system: I agree that this needs to be reviewed and changes need to be made. Any system that provides a $4 credit for finishing last in your division is horribly flawed. There should be more incentive for having a winning record yet not achieving a playoff spot. Perhaps get rid of the $4 last place credit and $1 third place credit and replace it with a $2 above-.500 non-playoff team credit. I would think that would be cheaper for WIS in the long run.

3) DITR changes. This has been discussed ad-nauseum by the folks who feel that everybody should be entitled to better players. There's no need to change the DITR process, it does just what it's intended to do. It's not intended to make everybody's 16th round draft pick a potential ML all-star. Likewise, it should not randomly turn first-round draft picks into busts. Some owner's mismanagement of prospects already does a good enough job with that.

How many of you guys would have made this trade?

Jimmie Brownson

for

Pedro NavarroCraig FigueroaJesus Hernandez

Granted it was a 3 for 1.....but Figueroa was abused from PVC not taking care of his system...what a surprise. It was the newbie's only season in the league(surprise), the owner only had 10 mil. across the board in scouting...And it was in the same division!