12-20-2013, 07:40 PM
Democracy finally strikes FCM! Kind of...
I don't want to label it as a "rule", but Andy has softened up enough to allow me to post a poll on Tanking to see the league's support. While this is a poll, I am not making it an actual "Yes" or "No" poll. I want you guys to sound off with your thoughts and reasoning behind it. And no matter the support, there is no guarantee this will go into effect. It will merely be taken into consideration more heavily if there is support behind this.
The issue at hand: Should we punish teams for tanking?
As long as I'm here, there will NEVER be an absolute tanking rule like Outahere had. The strength of your division, league, schedule can highly influence the number of wins you have. The thought is if there's a team that's questionably tanking, it goes under discussion with the admins - possibly mods if extra opinions are desired. Then if the admins decide tanking has been done, the team is punished. Punishment could vary from team to team and will be handed out where ever the admins feel it'll hurt the most. The most likely scenario is a tanking team will lose draft picks and those picks will be auctioned off to the rest of the league where the cash simply disappears.
If you haven't listened to Podcast #4, I talked a great deal about my thoughts on tanking. Basically, tanking takes advantage of the game, rather than playing within the spirit of how it's intended to be played. I wish I would've said it on the podcast, but to me tanking is like steroids. Both work and both wouldn't be thought of as wrong if they didn't work to get you an unfair advantage.
My personal solution to tanking is going out in FA and attempting to sign some decent holdover players to $1M/2, $2M/3, or even $5M/3 contracts. First off, it gives you solid players to hold down the fort while your prospects develop. It also allows you the piece of mind of not having to scramble to sign enough players off-season after off-season while you rebuild.
As for the league, it does two HUGE things. Throwing out low to mid 70s that have no business being on a major league roster compromises the integrity of playoff races. Signing decent holdover players does the exact opposite, you could spoil a division rival's hopes in September. Secondly, bidding on FAs can, in good faith, drive up the prices for other teams or possibly mean a contender doesn't get a solid addition at all.
It's not like you need to spend much. $55M to $70M should suffice at turning in a 60 to 70 game winner. Look at NYY in 2040 and 2041. While care taking them, I signed a few decent players (mostly at just $1M/2) mainly because I didn't want to keep checking back on them each off-season. As it turned out, the Yankees turned in decent seasons while rebuilding and still got early picks.
Lastly, sure if you tank, you'd have a great chance at getting a top 3 pick. But how many top 3 picks have we some completely fail in this league? How many second half first rounders have we seen dominant?
I don't want to label it as a "rule", but Andy has softened up enough to allow me to post a poll on Tanking to see the league's support. While this is a poll, I am not making it an actual "Yes" or "No" poll. I want you guys to sound off with your thoughts and reasoning behind it. And no matter the support, there is no guarantee this will go into effect. It will merely be taken into consideration more heavily if there is support behind this.
The issue at hand: Should we punish teams for tanking?
As long as I'm here, there will NEVER be an absolute tanking rule like Outahere had. The strength of your division, league, schedule can highly influence the number of wins you have. The thought is if there's a team that's questionably tanking, it goes under discussion with the admins - possibly mods if extra opinions are desired. Then if the admins decide tanking has been done, the team is punished. Punishment could vary from team to team and will be handed out where ever the admins feel it'll hurt the most. The most likely scenario is a tanking team will lose draft picks and those picks will be auctioned off to the rest of the league where the cash simply disappears.
If you haven't listened to Podcast #4, I talked a great deal about my thoughts on tanking. Basically, tanking takes advantage of the game, rather than playing within the spirit of how it's intended to be played. I wish I would've said it on the podcast, but to me tanking is like steroids. Both work and both wouldn't be thought of as wrong if they didn't work to get you an unfair advantage.
My personal solution to tanking is going out in FA and attempting to sign some decent holdover players to $1M/2, $2M/3, or even $5M/3 contracts. First off, it gives you solid players to hold down the fort while your prospects develop. It also allows you the piece of mind of not having to scramble to sign enough players off-season after off-season while you rebuild.
As for the league, it does two HUGE things. Throwing out low to mid 70s that have no business being on a major league roster compromises the integrity of playoff races. Signing decent holdover players does the exact opposite, you could spoil a division rival's hopes in September. Secondly, bidding on FAs can, in good faith, drive up the prices for other teams or possibly mean a contender doesn't get a solid addition at all.
It's not like you need to spend much. $55M to $70M should suffice at turning in a 60 to 70 game winner. Look at NYY in 2040 and 2041. While care taking them, I signed a few decent players (mostly at just $1M/2) mainly because I didn't want to keep checking back on them each off-season. As it turned out, the Yankees turned in decent seasons while rebuilding and still got early picks.
Lastly, sure if you tank, you'd have a great chance at getting a top 3 pick. But how many top 3 picks have we some completely fail in this league? How many second half first rounders have we seen dominant?
Cleveland Record: 5631-4946 (.532) [2054-2071, 2083-2104, 2110-2135]
AL Post: 16 (ALC), 11 (WC) - ALDS Win: 12 - ALCS Champ: 7 - WS Champ: 4
ALW: Mariners + Angels Record: 1072-864 (.554) [2042-2048, 2105-2110]
AL Post: 3 (ALW), 4 (WC) - ALDS Win: 3 - ALCS Champ: 1 - WS Champ: 1
NLW: Rockies + Padres Record: 3230-2753 (.540) [2017-2042, 2072-2082]
NL Post: 18 (NLW), 4 (WC) - NLDS Win: 7 - NLCS Champ: 4 - WS Champ: 0