Draft idea

GoIrish · 03-03-2014, 06:14 PM

I was listening to Mike and Mike in the morning on my drive into the office and they started talking with the GM of the Toronto Raptors about tanking in the NBA. I thought this would be an interesting discussion piece for the league.

One of the ideas that Mike Greenberg threw out there to combat any tanking that may occur in the NBA was to start the draft in reverse order starting with the 1st team that missed the playoffs. His theory is that this will combat teams wanting to lose and obtain a better draft pick position and make them play the games out for the remainder of the season in an attempt to win as many games as possible for the better draft pick.

The one negative will be the teams that truely need that impact player will have a much harder time obtaining that impact player. However, in mogul baseball, I feel that in some instances, people can have better rosters, they choose not to. I know that when I rebuilt CHC and LAA, I did this. Not to the extent that some owners may have done theirs but I fielded teams with the hope that I would lose and get a better draft pick. I know that if I wanted to, I probably could have fielded a better team but that did not fit my goal of obtaining a better team in the future.

I thought that this was a very interesting idea and a different concept and I feel that it applies to mogul baseball as well. I know that for a long time there have been gripes about teams tanking. It would make teams not sit on their hands and actually have to manage their team down the line and put out the best roster possible. It may also force more competition all the way through the season because winning and not losing would mean something, not only to the playoff teams but the non-playoff teams as well.

I just thought this was an interesting theory and I wanted to get a discussion going.

hickoxb2 · 03-03-2014, 09:23 PM

Although I like the application they'd be using in the NBA, I don't think it's necessary here. I don't think teams actively try to lose games here to the extent that they're seeing over there. And even if we did, the first step should be a lottery sort of deal like they currently have before something like this. I don't feel it's an epidemic here at all. Also, It's hard enough to keep rebuilding GMs interested in a shitty team for more than a year or so, and this would delay that process substantially. It's an interesting idea for sure, but I'd still oppose it. Maybe I'm just biased because I've been rebuilding for 8 years...

mike · 03-03-2014, 10:05 PM

I've suggested ideas like this many moons ago and all I got was a resounding shit rain storm for any idea that's not the one we use now. I like the idea. To think that teams don't try and actively lose here is just being oblivious. Some do it more obvious than others but it still happens. I'd like to see a completely random draft order for every round so there is no incentive but to win the WS. In mogul we don't have to worry about losing your job due to poor team performance and it's about time someone does something to curb people not at least putting a semi competitive team out there. With the amount of cash in the league there is no excuse not to.

Vertigo · 03-03-2014, 10:20 PM

Some teams are bad because they're bad. Not because they're tanking.

I'd be completely against this.

cadmus2166 · 03-03-2014, 10:53 PM

This doesn't sound like a good idea to me. If there is a noticeable tanking, like guys playing low 70's guys while sitting their guys rated in the 80's and 90's, that is one thing. But sometimes a season is a lost cause, and you need to be able to move guys in order to facilitate a rebuild effort. Some teams will just be not very good while this is going on, but it doesn't mean they are tanking. Penalizing teams that finish poorly because of this is just silly in my opinion.

Steal Third · 03-04-2014, 01:09 AM

Being a small market team, I need to have the hope of high picks since that is the best, and perhaps only, way I can build a team. I cannot retain all of my best players as they approach FA and have limited ability to play in the FA market. I have tired to field the best team I could each year. In 2 seasons, I thought I had a decent team that could contend for a WC, but injuries killed me. And there is no way I can afford the depth that a large market team can.

I need the higher draft picks that result from lower finishes to help me compete and not for them to be diminished in importance.

It is hard enough to compete in this league given the abundance of talent in game, talent of our GMs, the sheer amount of cash in game that enables the rich teams to retain their players, send multiple players to WB, and sign FA's...all things TBR has limited ability to do.

If draft order becomes a "wild card", then the lesser teams will be hurt.

If tanking were an obvious situation, I think the admins should just deal with it directly with the GM. Let them decide on a penalty (financial? forfeit of a DP?). The MLB commissioner has the authority to act in the best interest of the league...we should do the same here. Less rule changes = better.

One man's opinion.....

***AndyP*** · 03-04-2014, 01:13 AM

Yeah, I wouldn't be on board.

***mattynokes*** · 03-04-2014, 01:19 AM

I think it's simple - play with some integrity, don't play the system.

mike · 03-04-2014, 01:26 AM

One thing I will say about anyone arguing the point that you need high picks to be good. Its simple. No you don't. If you did explain to me how a team like Andy's Jays stay good year after year. Yeah he has a fairly high budget now but it didn't start that way. What you need to do is scout the draft hard or make good use of your picks in trades. You don't need to be in the top 5 or 10 for 3-5 years to compete.

Cdawg · 03-04-2014, 02:38 AM

I beg to differ, I believe this is what hokey did, in essence, when he took over Texas for a few seasons. I can't say it's the best game plan tho.

This idea though kind of helps the rich stay richer. I can field a team but budget wise I can't compete w/ LAA, Seattle or Texas in a year to year basis. They can retain and buy better talent than I can, and the best option I have is to lose one or twice and try to take a top 10 pick for a couple years. Not that I'm a great drafter at all, but the more you have the better your odds.

If this was the idea would I try to field a better team every year? sure, can I do that every year? doubtful.