One of my old worlds denied a guy that tanked it up in another of my old worlds. Much discussion took place over what is/isn't tanking, how one should play HBD, etc, etc.

Here are some basic guidelines, IMO:
1. Every player on your BL roster should be an actual BL player. One you'd have on a playoff roster. This is a wide-ranging, very open description. I have defensive C/SS and even utility guys that can't hit a lick. And I carry them on my playoff roster.
2. No player should be grossly out of position. Also wide-ranging, very open description. If your SS is really more of a 3B but has an OPS of 1.115 and 42 errors, you can make a case that he's OK. If you're using a C at 2B, you can't make a case. There has to be a better option and a better position for that C regardless of bat.
3. The use of fatigued pitchers is a no-no. Even the newest of n00bs can avoid this with the tiniest effort.
4. You should field a competitive team for the full 162. IMO, losing late(finishing 4-18 but still reaching 70 wins), is worse than losing all season. If you're consistently bad, everyone else benefits. If you're only terrible for the last 20, 5-6 owners benefit. It affects playoff races.


I've taken some terrible teams and have managed to be somewhat competitive the next season. And I accept that there will be down periods when in a decent world. Here's what I've done:
1. The waive wire is your friend. You don't have to add expensive stars. Your team is bad and that means other teams are good. Their scraps could be better than your starters. Claim them.
2. The end of FA is full of useful players on the cheap. If you don't want to give them 2 years(2nd season is mutual option) wait until the 3 PM cycle after the 8th ST game. All demands drop to 1 season.
3. Call up useful players even if they're 3rd year pros. They'll develop better in the bigs and might actually help you win games. Don't worry about what happens 2 1/2 real life years from now. But, if you must, wait 20 games. I hate that but I get that it's going to be done.

I've had one season below 60m payroll. 1st season in Hamilton. Took over a 40ish win team with a 10m payroll. I used the above 3 items and won 75. It's not hard to be competitive and play for the future.

Thoughts?

I agree with all of this, with one minor exception-- I think when rebuilding you can allow yourself to play pitchers that you would not quite have on a playoff roster, especially since many of us shorten our staffs for the playoffs. But they have to be at or around replacement value; no clear-cut AAA pitchers.

Good advice. I can't think of anything to add to that.

Posted by dedelman on 10/31/2017 11:17:00 AM (view original):
I agree with all of this, with one minor exception-- I think when rebuilding you can allow yourself to play pitchers that you would not quite have on a playoff roster, especially since many of us shorten our staffs for the playoffs. But they have to be at or around replacement value; no clear-cut AAA pitchers.

That's a good point. One of the reasons I carry the "no hit, d-spec" guys on my playoff roster is because I routinely carry 9 playoff pitchers. So, yeah, the bottom three on a regular season staff isn't "playoff caliber" for me. But they're not guys with 33 control and 43/41 splits either.

I inherited a crap team in Munson. All payroll and very little scouting/training budget for 10+ seasons before I took over. With nothing in the pipeline and overpaid average big leaguers (3 of them totaling $50M and one still under contract for another 2 seasons/$20M per) I didn't have a lot of options as far as winning was concerned. I baically used Mike's above guideline to stock my barely legitimate team with late FAs and rule 5 players.

I was able to win 67,73, & 64 in the three seasons I've played there. Not spectacular but good enough to meet the MWR and field a mildly competitive team.

Posted by MikeT23 on 10/31/2017 12:15:00 PM (view original):

Posted by dedelman on 10/31/2017 11:17:00 AM (view original):
I agree with all of this, with one minor exception-- I think when rebuilding you can allow yourself to play pitchers that you would not quite have on a playoff roster, especially since many of us shorten our staffs for the playoffs. But they have to be at or around replacement value; no clear-cut AAA pitchers.

That's a good point. One of the reasons I carry the "no hit, d-spec" guys on my playoff roster is because I routinely carry 9 playoff pitchers. So, yeah, the bottom three on a regular season staff isn't "playoff caliber" for me. But they're not guys with 33 control and 43/41 splits either.

This guy is an example of a pitcher I'd never keep on a playoff roster but whom I don't feel guilty giving innings to while rebuilding.

Not that he would do any worse than half the bullpen guys in the 2017 MLB World Series.

I also think the Rule 5 is a very good, easy, cheap tool. I've had terrible teams where I get 3-4 ML starters in the Rule 5 and help get my team to at least .500. there is usually always a couple pitchers in the rule 5 with 55-60+ splits that can be serviceable starters until you can get some of your prospects up.

https://www.whatifsports.com/hbd/Pages/Popups/PlayerRatings.aspx?pid=7487910
https://www.whatifsports.com/hbd/Pages/Popups/PlayerRatings.aspx?pid=7846906
https://www.whatifsports.com/hbd/Pages/Popups/PlayerRatings.aspx?pid=8230150
https://www.whatifsports.com/hbd/Pages/Popups/PlayerRatings.aspx?pid=8043694


These were all guys I got from the Rule 5 draft. 2.20, 3.21, and 4.16 ERAs from 3 of them last year

I didn't list R5. It is a great place to pick-up defensive players. It's tougher in good worlds because defense can "fix" pitching and virtually every owner in a good world knows this. But you can certainly get "fill-ins". I think it's a bad idea to come in and try spend heavy in FA. One needs to get the "lay of the land" in their first season. All worlds are different. That's why I was below 60m in payroll my first season in Hamilton. Starting at 10m leaves a lot of room for additions but there was absolutely NO HITTING, and not much pitching, available in FA. So I went defense.

You don't have to lose 100. You have to lose one more than the other guy. That's why "I won 75 games" is an invalid, stand alone argument. If the three in front of you lost 76, 77 and 77, those 75 moved you up three spots. Maybe to a top 5 pick or maybe just to a protected pick.

So I have a very good team in one of my worlds. As a result, I lost a couple players to injury and threw them on the 60 day DL to take advantage of the injury bug. Probably cost me a few wins, but I am not obsessed with winning 110 instead of 100. Is that considered tanking? (Serious question...in some ways I suppose it is because I could do better).

I'd say no. You're winning and you're attempting to improve already good (I assume) players.

The difference between pick 1 and pick 5 is huge in the draft. The difference between pick 25 and pick 31 is minimal. So I say no. Not tanking.

So where is the line? If you make the minimum but don't make an effort beyond that, it's considered tanking. When is not making a full effort accepted? If you make the playoffs? If you win 81 games?

Technically anything short of 100% is tanking on some level. It's been awhile since I've had an awful season because I sign FAs at the end of the signing period and rule 5, etc, but I don't go crazy calling up prospects until I feel the team is ready to compete at a high level unless they have 4 full years in the minors and even then I wait 20 days. So where is the line? I've operated under the do what you want as long as you make the minimum policy, but some world's are afraid to boot anyone because it's hard to fill these days.

I didn't used to care if people tanked, but I was convinced to care by seeing the results. I'm wondering if it's time to set the expectations even higher than just making the minimum.

The line is where the rest of your world draws it.

There are some simple questions based on the first post:
1. Was every player on your roster, after the disabled list additions, a legit BL player?
2. Was anyone grossly out of position after the disabled list additions?
3. Did you use fatigued pitchers at any point in the season?
4. Was there a dramatic drop-off in your winning percentage after the disabled list additions?