 |
View Old Forum Thread
Old Forum Index » Baseball Beta Testing » Long Term League Talk » Youth Tanking still worked with this pumped up Initial draft.
jrspc4
I hate 'youth tanking" it is unrealistic and should be one of the main things we look to take out of the game. I used it here to see if our new initial draft could stop it. But unfortunately it did not.
:(
Youth Tanking still worked with this pumped up Initial draft.
May 31, 2004 at 01:16PM View BBCode
My PITT team in the LT Beta league youth tanked and we are on top of the NL (after 7 years of as a YTanker). So the beefed up draft may have slowed us down a bit, but it sure didn't stop this ridiculous startegy from working.I hate 'youth tanking" it is unrealistic and should be one of the main things we look to take out of the game. I used it here to see if our new initial draft could stop it. But unfortunately it did not.
:(
jer2911
However, if we were to start again, now that I have seen how the Pre-rank settings for the Amateur work, I would kinda like to give it another shot and see if I could "youth tank" my way to the top again.
May 31, 2004 at 04:33PM View BBCode
I actually tried it and it didn't work for me. I used basically the same settings I had for the last Beta League, and while I drafted young pitchers, something went wrong with my batters and I drafted a team of vets. I attribute this to the beefed up Initial Draft. I had to dump the few young future stars I had and had gained through the draft to give myself the pitching I needed to win... but now... 2 WS rings and 34 game (and running) win streak later... I don't know, but I don't think this could be considered "true" youth tanking.However, if we were to start again, now that I have seen how the Pre-rank settings for the Amateur work, I would kinda like to give it another shot and see if I could "youth tank" my way to the top again.
hcboomer
I've done the tank-to-rebuild thing a half-dozen or so times in various leagues -- I actually enjoy the process, but I do understand why others don't -- and what usually happens is that once a team peaks into a contender it will have a 6-7 year stretch as one of the league's elite (depending mostly on when the bulk of the pitching staff hits the decline years). That doesn't seem likely for Pittsburgh -- maybe they'd be a contender for that long, but not a dominant team.
I still believe that without tangible incentives to win games you will always have some tanking. But if you can reduce the benefit of tanking, then the impact of it on the league will be lessened to a more acceptable level.
Generally there are two things people don't like about tanking -- the extreme lows and the extreme highs. And the extreme highs (that will theoretically come from an effective tanking/rebuilding program) are the bigger issue because that's more directly affecting the races and playoffs. So if you are at least able to minimize those instances, that's at least half the battle. I don't think Pittsburgh's experience is enough yet to gauge either way whether those initial draft adjustments were helpful.
June 01, 2004 at 06:03PM View BBCode
There's an important difference though: no knock on your roster, but Pittsburgh certainly doesn't look like it will have the long window of dominance ahead of it -- at least with the current roster -- that we've seen other tanking teams have.I've done the tank-to-rebuild thing a half-dozen or so times in various leagues -- I actually enjoy the process, but I do understand why others don't -- and what usually happens is that once a team peaks into a contender it will have a 6-7 year stretch as one of the league's elite (depending mostly on when the bulk of the pitching staff hits the decline years). That doesn't seem likely for Pittsburgh -- maybe they'd be a contender for that long, but not a dominant team.
I still believe that without tangible incentives to win games you will always have some tanking. But if you can reduce the benefit of tanking, then the impact of it on the league will be lessened to a more acceptable level.
Generally there are two things people don't like about tanking -- the extreme lows and the extreme highs. And the extreme highs (that will theoretically come from an effective tanking/rebuilding program) are the bigger issue because that's more directly affecting the races and playoffs. So if you are at least able to minimize those instances, that's at least half the battle. I don't think Pittsburgh's experience is enough yet to gauge either way whether those initial draft adjustments were helpful.
jrspc4
It should not be allowed to work at all, here or anywhere else.
Jeff
June 01, 2004 at 07:59PM View BBCode
Of course, most experienced youth tankers are in leagues where half the owners are relative newbies, and the strategy works to a dominant level. The fact that it worked at all here in a beta league with the strongest owners in the universe says alot.It should not be allowed to work at all, here or anywhere else.
Jeff
celamantia
Would there be any serious negative efects to not allowing anyone under 25 to be picked in the first 20 rounds of the draft?
--Chris
June 01, 2004 at 08:37PM View BBCode
Split draft, I'm tellin ya.. split draft. Either that, or limit youth to a max of 15. Or both.Would there be any serious negative efects to not allowing anyone under 25 to be picked in the first 20 rounds of the draft?
--Chris
tysonlowery
I'm working on something else for the initial draft. Uses different talent levels. Should be ready for testing in the next week or so.
June 01, 2004 at 08:44PM View BBCode
Sorry, don't like the idea of the split draft.I'm working on something else for the initial draft. Uses different talent levels. Should be ready for testing in the next week or so.
tysonlowery
Teams have to be able to build/rebuild.
The new draft system will be similar to the amateur draft system. The only exception is that instead of ranking players 1-100, you'll have to rank them 1-whatever within each position. Then you say which position you would like to select in each of 50 rounds.
I've been working on the draft talent and have gotten the levels to match what I'd like to see - namely the makeup of some of the leagues in the 1960's and 1970's. Looking over the data, I think one of the issues with the current initial draft structure is that there are too many 30+ players, and the ones that are there aren't all that great. Due to retirements and other things, most leagues are youngish with only good to great players playing into their mid 30's - which I think is more realistic as well.
June 01, 2004 at 09:29PM View BBCode
Just a few quick thoughts while I'm working here...Teams have to be able to build/rebuild.
The new draft system will be similar to the amateur draft system. The only exception is that instead of ranking players 1-100, you'll have to rank them 1-whatever within each position. Then you say which position you would like to select in each of 50 rounds.
I've been working on the draft talent and have gotten the levels to match what I'd like to see - namely the makeup of some of the leagues in the 1960's and 1970's. Looking over the data, I think one of the issues with the current initial draft structure is that there are too many 30+ players, and the ones that are there aren't all that great. Due to retirements and other things, most leagues are youngish with only good to great players playing into their mid 30's - which I think is more realistic as well.
thejoe914
June 02, 2004 at 03:30AM View BBCode
in my oppinion... the best 32 year old player in 1950 should be about the same as the best 32 year old player in 1970... same goes for every other age, so if you pump up the initial draft you get less talent inflation... ya that makes sense and all, but the thing we lose with A- being the average age to play, is the superstars.... when everyone is A-, most people will perform around the same level, you wont be able to find a guy who is above everyone else. I know it should be rare, but everyone once in awhile, a player should come around who is high above everyone else in the league, and if everyone's talent is so high, i dont see taht happening.
gmclaws
June 02, 2004 at 10:29AM View BBCode
I believe that the youth preference in your draft preferences should be eliminated. That someone couldn't intentionally try to load up on all the young talent in the initial draft. The youth would then be split up more evenly and fairly for all the players. This could have some impact on tanking. But it would definitelly have an impact on some of the strategy used in the initial drafts by some of the tankers.
celamantia
If you don't like the split draft, how about this: Just don't have anyone under 25 in the initial draft pool at all! Single-season leagues don't need them, and the first amateur draft will bring in 100 17-24 year olds anyway.
--Chris
June 02, 2004 at 02:05PM View BBCode
Well, if you can pick your players, there's still nothing preventing you from picking only young players. If there's no youth preference, it just makes it harder because you have to do it by hand, but the rewards are so great it's worth the effort.If you don't like the split draft, how about this: Just don't have anyone under 25 in the initial draft pool at all! Single-season leagues don't need them, and the first amateur draft will bring in 100 17-24 year olds anyway.
--Chris
tysonlowery
I don't necessarily think loading up on youth talent in the initial draft is tanking. My definition of tanking is "mistreating" your veteran players in an attempt to lose more games or play younger players.
thejoe - see the thread that has like 100 replies in the beta boards about this. We discussed this thouroughly - the only "real" disadvantage to having higher letter grades is that players tend to become more homogenous. This will be addressed. Everything else is perception.
June 02, 2004 at 03:35PM View BBCode
I don't view the draft as the main way to fix the problem of tanking - the new format might help slightly and the talent levels should narrow the window of how good that team will be. They will be at no greater advantage or disadvantage (in terms of number of WS victories) than a team that totally rebuilds in 1964 for example.I don't necessarily think loading up on youth talent in the initial draft is tanking. My definition of tanking is "mistreating" your veteran players in an attempt to lose more games or play younger players.
thejoe - see the thread that has like 100 replies in the beta boards about this. We discussed this thouroughly - the only "real" disadvantage to having higher letter grades is that players tend to become more homogenous. This will be addressed. Everything else is perception.
hcboomer
As for the split draft, while I like the concept, it really doesn't do a thing to address that youth tanking issue, beyond preventing teams from STARTING at that point. In fact, in that regard you're better off with the latest initial draft, when the young talent in the league was sparse. If you pump more young talent into the league at the start, the split draft will assure that it is spread around. But then teams can simply strip down as they please -- with more prospects to try to deal for.
Again, though, as we have belabored on the boards in many threads, the idea isn't to discourage rebuilding. The idea is to balance out the benefits of rebuilding with the benefits of remaining at least somewhat competitive in the meantime. Right now, there are none of those competitive incentives built into the game. And that, in some fashion, is what Tyson seems to be working on these days.
June 02, 2004 at 03:58PM View BBCode
Actually, my own experiences/successes with youth tanking have been in leagues with almost all experienced owners. I don't think the benefits have much to do with "taking advantage" of other owners. It's really more the decision to strip down and be bad for awhile.As for the split draft, while I like the concept, it really doesn't do a thing to address that youth tanking issue, beyond preventing teams from STARTING at that point. In fact, in that regard you're better off with the latest initial draft, when the young talent in the league was sparse. If you pump more young talent into the league at the start, the split draft will assure that it is spread around. But then teams can simply strip down as they please -- with more prospects to try to deal for.
Again, though, as we have belabored on the boards in many threads, the idea isn't to discourage rebuilding. The idea is to balance out the benefits of rebuilding with the benefits of remaining at least somewhat competitive in the meantime. Right now, there are none of those competitive incentives built into the game. And that, in some fashion, is what Tyson seems to be working on these days.
thejoe914
We need a way to keep people from youth tanking... through every season, and i dont think fixing the initial draft can do that.
June 02, 2004 at 04:41PM View BBCode
we are all sitting here trying to figure out how to stop teams from youth tanking in the initial draft... but if you do this, whats to stop a team from just loading up on young players after the initial draft (trades, amatuer drafts, etc.).We need a way to keep people from youth tanking... through every season, and i dont think fixing the initial draft can do that.
celamantia
The other 15 teams. The problem is people trade draft picks like candy. It's like buying things with a credit card... pretty soon you've run up a huge bill, and the creditors rake it in.
June 02, 2004 at 04:51PM View BBCode
Originally posted by thejoe914
we are all sitting here trying to figure out how to stop teams from youth tanking in the initial draft... but if you do this, whats to stop a team from just loading up on young players after the initial draft (trades, amatuer drafts, etc.).
The other 15 teams. The problem is people trade draft picks like candy. It's like buying things with a credit card... pretty soon you've run up a huge bill, and the creditors rake it in.
thejoe914
Im just saying in most every league there are going to be players trying to get younger and younger, and wait 4 or 5 years to win. And in every league there are going to be players trying to win it this year, who will trade away their youth for better players.
June 02, 2004 at 04:57PM View formatted
You are viewing the raw post code; this allows you to copy a message with BBCode formatting intact.
if there is a team in the race for the playoffs they are going to be willing to trade away young talent and draft picks to some team trying to re-build, for players that are going to help their team win the WS this year.
Im just saying in most every league there are going to be players trying to get younger and younger, and wait 4 or 5 years to win. And in every league there are going to be players trying to win it this year, who will trade away their youth for better players.
griffel
June 02, 2004 at 05:19PM View BBCode
With the talent in recent drafts, I would always prefer to try to win now if I think I have a good chance as opposed to taking my chances with draft picks. I have gotten some real stinkers with 1st rounders that I have kept.Pages: 1