Article: To Tank Or Not To Tank?

[jorgenswest]

The paragraph I quoted said that even though the Twins had high picks, they missed out on the above named players. I just pointed out that the above named players were all gone before the Twins picked.

I think the original writer's point was that though they had high picks they didn't have the opportunity for those players. If they had tanked, they may have had that opportunity. I could be mistaken. I certainly expect them to fight for every win. Every baseball game is a joy in itself. None should be wasted.

[Mr. Brooks]

The paragraph I quoted said that even though the Twins had high picks, they missed out on the above named players. I just pointed out that the above named players were all gone before the Twins picked.

Yes, and again, he is saying that if we had tanked for the #1 overall pick, we could have had a chance to pick them. That is the entire premise of the thread.

[Vanimal46]

Unless there's a consensus #1 overall pick that's going to be a phenom like A-Rod, Harper, or Strasburg, I don't see the point in a baseball team tanking.  

[Mike Sixel]

No player should try to lose, nor any manager. Of course, that's not happens in practice in any sport, but that straw man won't die......

 

I don't think they should call up A players and try to lose.....

 

I do think they should gut the team of many veterans, and bring up AAA players that are legit parts of the future sooner rather than later.

[Shaitan]

 

Unless there's a consensus #1 overall pick that's going to be a phenom like A-Rod, Harper, or Strasburg, I don't see the point in a baseball team tanking.  

 

I'd say even then. What happens if the player doesn't sign because he doesn't like what he's seen?

[Otto von Ballpark]

I'd say even then. What happens if the player doesn't sign because he doesn't like what he's seen?

Hasn't happened often, and not recently. (Aiken chose not to sign because of a reduced offer.) A player taken #1 would probably be nuts to pass up a slot offer.

[terrydactyls]

Yes, and again, he is saying that if we had tanked for the #1 overall pick, we could have had a chance to pick them. That is the entire premise of the thread.

I reread the post five times. I can see how you can read it as you've interpreted it. I think it was not written as clearly as it could have been. Regardless, no tanking allowed in baseball.

[Shaitan]

 

Hasn't happened often, and not recently. (Aiken chose not to sign because of a reduced offer.) A player taken #1 would probably be nuts to pass up a slot offer.

I want to agree, but agents and other major sports show clear evidence that it can happen. What about Appel not signing 4 years ago, or Bo Jackson or Eli Manning in NFL. It's only a matter of time, given the money involved.

[Otto von Ballpark]

I want to agree, but agents and other major sports show clear evidence that it can happen. What about Appel not signing 4 years ago, or Bo Jackson or Eli Manning in NFL. It's only a matter of time, given the money involved.

Until they allow trading of draft picks, and remove the draft spending caps, those examples aren't really relevant to present day MLB. (IIRC, Appel fell in the draft and declined to sign for a lower slot, so he re-entered and went higher the next year. He would not have refused to sign had he originally been selected #1.)

Edited July 26, 2016 by spycake

[Tom Froemming]

 

This whole concept is offensive to me. Tanking a season, IMO, is an ethical crime. It cheats the fan who pays money to see players do their best to win. It cheats the players who pride themselves on their performance and the respect of their abilities. It cheats the other teams of the league who are playing to win and expect their opponents to give it there all every game. It cheats the integrity of the game.

Now, and I think this is what you're really asking Tom: Should the Twins FO take the approach toward next year and beyond on how they structure and adjust this team without concern about the won/loss record? To that, I say yes. But it should be done with integrity to the game, fans, and players intact. To strive for a higher draft pick is short-sighted and foolish. Making moves by calling up prospects or unloading veterans toward an eye on next year seems prudent and wise.

When I say tank, I'm thinking like in the movie Major League Ownership completely handcuffs the organization in an effort to lose as many games as possible. Except in this scenario we're trying to get the no. 1 pick/ International bonus slot, not move the team to Miami.

[Tom Froemming]

 

I reread the post five times. I can see how you can read it as you've interpreted it. I think it was not written as clearly as it could have been. Regardless, no tanking allowed in baseball.

Yeah I struggled with the best way to put that. Let me try to make that point again.

 

In 2013 the Twins got Kohl Stewart at No. 4. That's great, he's got plenty of potential, and as a 21-year-old in Double-A the book's still out on him, obviously. But if the Twins were just a bit crappier that year and picked second, they would have had the opportunity to draft Kris Bryant, who is already a ROY, two-time All-Star and possibly the favorite for NL MVP.

 

Who knows, maybe the Twins would've taken Stewart anyway. But the difference between going 66-96 in 2012 instead of 61-101 (the Cubs record that year) cost them the opportunity to even consider drafting Bryant. Was it worth 5 wins in a lost season? I'd definitely say no.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Yeah I struggled with the best way to put that. Let me try to make that point again.

 

In 2013 the Twins got Kohl Stewart at No. 4. That's great, he's got plenty of potential, and as a 21-year-old in Double-A the book's still out on him, obviously. But if the Twins were just a bit crappier that year and picked second, they would have had the opportunity to draft Kris Bryant, who is already a ROY, two-time All-Star and possibly the favorite for NL MVP.

 

Who knows, maybe the Twins would've taken Stewart anyway. But the difference between going 66-96 in 2012 instead of 61-101 (the Cubs record that year) cost them the opportunity to even consider drafting Bryant. Was it worth 5 wins in a lost season? I'd definitely say no.

Well stated.

 

The jury is obviously still out on Buxton in MLB, but it was probably better to pick top 2 in 2012 too than #5 (the oft injured Kyle Zimmer).  That year the Astros leveraged their #1 into an under-slot Correa and above-slot McCullers later.

 

Not that #4 or #5 picks are bad players, but you generally don't have the same shot at elite talents or leveraging slots like you do at #1 or #2.

 

(That said, from their August/September records, it looks like the Twins may have been more or less tanking at the end of the season from 2011-2013.)

[akmanak]

A good coach can make their team give 100% every game. In no way should we just hope to tank and give up on the season.