Over the years, there have been a few times that questions have come up regarding the transaction order in the off-season - for the Redistribution Draft and spring and early season free agent signings.
We have always set the draft/transaction order in reverse order of wins from the previous season - with division winners in the last four slots.
Of course, the possible complaint about this is that team that is clearly tanking - clearing its roster of star players or sticking them on the taxi squad - not setting the best lineup/rotation - etc. All with the design of landing the top draft slot (and the first spot in the waiver order in the first 2-3 weeks of the season when there can be other new players added to the list).
I've had some people say this is a major problem - some say that it's not an issue at all.
As always, this isn't up for popular vote and BWB has the final say - but I'm interested in your opinions.
So - please use the comments here for a discussion about this topic:
1) Should we change the way we determine the off-season order? (plus why or why not)
2) If you think we should change it, what's your suggestion as a replacement?
Some possible different options:
- 2nd-place teams get the top spot(s)
- Determine the order of the first 8 places based on the results of the Bottom Feeder Open
- Draft lottery
- ?
Posts
5 comments:
The first picks in the offseason draft have not really been worth that much in most years - only Ohtani has been a real difference maker in recent years. Most really good prospects show up during the regular season rather than the offseason.
Probably the only fair change would be a lottery and that seems to be too complicated based on the limited benefit.
I like the idea of using the Bottom Feeder playoffs to determine the order for the Redistribution Draft, with the winner having the first pick, the runner up having the second pick, etc. Picks 9-16 could remain as they currently are set in reverse order of standings. I'm in three other leagues that have similar provisions and everyone seems to like it. It encourages teams to stay competitive through the end and places added importance on the playoffs for the teams that are out of the running for the championship. It's not perfect, but it beats giving the first pick to someone who put Mike Trout on their taxi squad the last 8 weeks so they could have the worst record.
Not all last place teams got there by tanking. The really bad teams are not going to win the Bottom Feeder tournament so you would be penalizing the bad teams in most leagues to punish a few tankers.
I’m ok with the way things are but could also see something like giving the top pick to the best of the four cellar dwellers. Teams could still tank but they won’t be overly rewarded for being totally non-competitive
i agree with Roland's comment that some teams are truly bad and shouldn't be penalized because of the tankers. i have also noticed that all but the most competitive leagues have a couple three teams like that each year who finish at or near the bottom even if there are one or two tankers in the league.
the thing about tankers is that there are essentially two kinds. the early tanker tanks the entire season or most of it because the owner felt in advance of the season they couldn't be competitive (which i think is the kind we mostly see in real life). some of those owners are accurate in their assessment, some aren't, but just like in real life, the choice not to compete hard and use extra resources in one season in a legacy format seems valid to me. the early tankers are much more likely to finish dead last or close to it.
the other kind of tanker is the late season tanker. someone who tried their darndest up until some point late in the season, maybe after 90 games, they're 16 games back and several of their best players are hurt, etc. or maybe they wait until 120 games and things look insurmountable. these teams then cut or trade expensive players to get ready for the following season. those teams are unlikely to finish dead last or even in the bottom three of their league, because up until the point they started tanking, they were actually pretty competitive.
i like the idea of incentivizing owners to compete as hard as they can for the entirety of the season, while still helping downtrodden teams rebuild. so my suggestion would be that the 16th overall record still picks 1st and 15th overall record picks 2nd. but then 3rd-8th picks would go to teams finishing 9th,10th,11th,12th,13th,14th by record. the teams in the top 8 don't generally need much or any help, so i would treat picking early as a reward. so 9th-12th picks would go to teams finishing 5th,6th,7th,8th by record (not Gore Cup). and 13th-15th picks would go to 2nd,3rd,4th by record (not playoff results). 16th pick would still go the to the League Champion.
i especially don't like using Gore Cup/Bottom Feeder results because that doesn't incentivize regular season performance. and those tournaments already have built in rewards.
john h (San Diego Surfriders in Hall)
Post a Comment