I'm the commissioner of a private world that's been experiencing some serious tanking lately and we're considering putting a minimum win requirement into place to help support the competitive balance of the league. From the looks of the Classified boards it seems that many leagues are using M/W/Rs and I wondered if anyone had any tips/thoughts on how high to set them, if using a rolling 2-year might be more helpful than a 1-year M/W/R, and really any advice you might have for a league that's considering an M/W/R.

Thanks.

I'm Commissioner of Mauer, I'm also in your league dw that you speak of. In Mauer we have a MWR of 58 in any given season. If you do not reach the MWR you are capped at 10 million in your prospect budget line the following season. This was developed for a couple of reasons.

a. Some teams just have a bad year and you don't want to remove an owner over a one off, ie injuries.
b. As you know, it can be hard to recruit good quality owners, and by placing a MWR and then booting them, it creates a ton more work for the commish.
c. If a team is "tanking" it's pretty hard to win a good quality international FA with a cap of 10 million. So the best you can do is a draft pick. Not ideal but it does reduce total load up of IFA big buy and first overall draft pick..
d. It creates a little more balance in the league, at least for Mauer.

Thanks Helamen - in addition to some knowledge about what's worked in Mauer, I liked that you introduced yourself in case I didn't remember the guy who's been playing in the same world as me for 20+ seasons :)

I know.....LOL....., I try to stay under the radar in the other worlds I'm in, and let the commish do their job without interference from me. Wow, it's been 20+ seasons.....time fly's!!

Some things to consider before adding an MWR. I took over as commish a while back with an MWR already in place of 55/120/185/260. The penalties weren't well defined within the private world rules, but it was expected that if you missed the MWR you were removed. As the seasons went on and the league had more owner turnover, there were widespread complaints of the rules being to harsh and not clearly defined. We went to a world vote and in the end came up with a new set of rules. We kept the same 55/120/185/260 format, but created a penalty of 8 mil prospect cap for the first MWR miss and then removal on the second violation. Here is what I have found out.

1. Having to look back at four seasons is kind of a pain in the a$$, but it makes sure that teams continue to try and improve. Even if it's a two or three season increase instead of four. A one season 55 or 58 doesn't really do a whole lot because a team can sit at 55-60 wins for several seasons and rack up top picks.
2. We had fewer MWR misses when it was one and done, it was pretty rare to have an MWR casualty. Once we allowed teams to have a penalty year, the misses increased because they knew that they would be allowed to return the following year no matter how bad their record was. Owners would still tank to get that number 1 pick. The problem is that there were several teams that tanked so bad, they weren't able to improve enough the second year and missed it again. We've had several back to back misses. Even with some of my teams, I don't necessarily have the urgency to rebuild quickly when I know that I can take a penalty if I have an MWR miss. Most owners will take advantage of rules wherever they can.
3. Even if your private world rules are clearly defined, you will have owners that intentionally tank and then go to admin to complain about penalties being enforced. Make sure you explain everything in detail in the PWR and know exactly how you are going to handle MWR misses. Make sure that everything is enforced equally. If you give one owner a mulligan, every owner that misses will want it too.

I am in nine Worlds. Each of them has some sort of MWR. My personal favorites are the ones that have Veteran's Committee's that can evaluate each MWR violation on an individual basis and then recommend the discipline as a Committee. Not all MWR violations are the same (i.e. the owner that has an $80mm payroll and misses a two-season or three-season MWR by a win or two is not the same as the owner that is running a $20mm payroll and missing a one season MWR of 55 wins that is missing it by 4+ wins). The $10MM prospect budget is one of the most used forms of discipline in our Veteran's Committee Worlds. It gets the job done without being too harsh. However, from time to time, we have to be more harsh on owners that violate the MWR consistently.

Got to be careful though. I am currently in a conversation with a long time HBD Dynasty player who just took over as the Commish as a World that had a heavy tanking issue and he is getting a lot of push back from owners. So, if there is an issue with tanking in the World where you are trying to implement a MWR, you may either want to prepare yourself to have some attrition or give them a one or two season grace period before the MWR goes into effect.

I am commissioner of Field of Dreams and Say Hey and we have MWR in each. My advice is to set up clear rules. I would suggest at least one- and two-season MWR, even adding a third season. Put everything up for a vote so you get a buy-in from the other others and make sure everyone is involved in the process. We have owners vote on whether an owner who doesn't meet the MWR should remain in our world. I do like giving the owner who doesn't meet a MWR a chance to explain themselves. Sometimes there is a personal situation, sometimes it is something else.

I will also back tlowster in his endorsement of a Veterans Committee or whatever you want to call it. Can be great for discussing issues without clogging up the world chat.

Posted by bripat42 on 7/26/2021 7:48:00 PM (view original):
Putting the fate of MWR violators to a vote is asking for trouble. Whether it is a vote of all owners or a select committee, it's too easy for it to devolve into a popularity contest. I quit a world once over such an approach, and I'll never join such a world again. I watched veteran owners tank it up and get a free pass because they'd been in the world for so long, blah, blah, blah, while newer owners taking over troubled franchises got the boot. Make rules and consequences clear -- and make them the same for everyone regardless of any reasons that aren't specifically spelled out in the rules.

I think this approach is the best approach for the most competitive worlds where the majority of owners in the World have an above .500 career record.
However, for Worlds that are not looking to fill every spot with a proven successful owner, I still stand by the Committee approach. We have very specific rules in place in Glavine and in Dirt that outline the MWR expectations and we list nine separate outcomes that the Committee has at its disposal from a discipline perspective. Anywhere from a noted warning down to permanent expulsion.

At the end of the day, you need to ask yourself what kind of World you are looking to run. If you're looking to run one of the most competitive worlds in HBD, the approach that Bripat outlines above is likely the best approach. If you're looking to run a World where you welcome all levels of skill, a Committee might be better. I'm in multiple Worlds with multiple owners that just can't seem to put together winning seasons consistently and there have been times where one of these types of owners was running an 80+ million payroll and still missed MWR. Im not going to kick someone from the World because they just are not that good at the game.

Strongly agree with bripat42... the reasons for keeping vs. kicking seem to me always to be who's friends with whom, not who's not so good at this vs. who's really tanking.

Appreciate all the input on this. Thanks in particular to those from other worlds who shared their experiences: fireattack, tlowster, bripat, drummer.

My favorite anti-tanking rule isn't an MWR. In Aaron world, the team that picks first in the draft must select a 2-pitch pitcher as long as the team is still controlled by the same owner who started the previous season with it. This incentivizes not finishing last, no matter what.

Posted by shobob on 8/7/2021 12:17:00 PM (view original):
My favorite anti-tanking rule isn't an MWR. In Aaron world, the team that picks first in the draft must select a 2-pitch pitcher as long as the team is still controlled by the same owner who started the previous season with it. This incentivizes not finishing last, no matter what.

I like this rule sounds fun, but doesn’t that just make it a race to finish second

Posted by shobob on 8/7/2021 12:17:00 PM (view original):
My favorite anti-tanking rule isn't an MWR. In Aaron world, the team that picks first in the draft must select a 2-pitch pitcher as long as the team is still controlled by the same owner who started the previous season with it. This incentivizes not finishing last, no matter what.

What if there is a generational hitter available who would be No. 1 on everyone's draft board? Are there exceptions made?

Posted by drummer_66 on 8/7/2021 3:32:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shobob on 8/7/2021 12:17:00 PM (view original):
My favorite anti-tanking rule isn't an MWR. In Aaron world, the team that picks first in the draft must select a 2-pitch pitcher as long as the team is still controlled by the same owner who started the previous season with it. This incentivizes not finishing last, no matter what.

What if there is a generational hitter available who would be No. 1 on everyone's draft board? Are there exceptions made?

Nope

Posted by GoCubsGo0903 on 8/7/2021 1:42:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shobob on 8/7/2021 12:17:00 PM (view original):
My favorite anti-tanking rule isn't an MWR. In Aaron world, the team that picks first in the draft must select a 2-pitch pitcher as long as the team is still controlled by the same owner who started the previous season with it. This incentivizes not finishing last, no matter what.

I like this rule sounds fun, but doesn’t that just make it a race to finish second

We do have rules to cover off other problem behaviors, governed by a committee:

- More teams can end up being required to draft a 2-pitch pitcher if they finish the season with less than 60 wins at the ML level. If a team (currently owned by the same owner who controlled the team for the entire previous season) fails to achieve 60 wins in a season, the committee will be charged with determining if they: