Tiger337

Tony Phillips, baseball's ultimate utility player.

A lot of people dislike Frank Beckman. I think there were rumors about him being responsible for Harwell being fired, but that seems dubious. I thought he was a good broadcaster. He wasn't Harwell or Dickerson, but he wasn't rathbun/Rizzs either.

I think of tanking as giving up or not trying to win (not necessarily trying to lose). In the more specific usage, I don't think teams spend the whole season trying to lose, but I think it is tempting to not put the best product on the field at the end of the season to improve draft position or for international pool money. That's why I would like to see these things determined on July 31 rather than at the end of the season.

I meant that unloading salaries and not trying to be competitive in down years saves them money.

And there is tanking to save money for themselves.

Here is a SABR article talking about the dual purpose of the draft. https://sabr.org/journal/article/the-history-and-future-of-the-amateur-draft/

Reducing competition for draft picks, not minor leaguers. Prior to the draft, they could sign with any team. With the draft, they can of course only sign with the team that drafts them. I am too cynical to believe that MLB does anything out of fairness. They've been tinkering with the draft all along closing loopholes and changing signing rules to keep down salaries and bonuses down. Sure, the draft also helps competitive balance to an extent, but keeping down salaries is an important purpose of the draft.

I agree.

I always assumed one of the main reasons for the draft (which started before the players had any power) was to cut costs by eliminating competition between teams for players.

I drew the line at 8 teams because I guessed there are usually about that many teams that are bad and in need of help. It could even be varying amounts of teams such as every team with less than 70 wins. My other idea was for the draft order to be based on team records at July 31 which would eliminate any concern about teams trying to finish with the worst record. I know you said that doesn't happen, but I don't think it's out of the question that is has crossed the minds of front offices. It certainly has crossed the minds of fans.

I really doubt that a small lottery is going to screw anything up. The level parity that you guys want will be the same

Won/loss record is a measure of team strength in a particular year. It is not a measure of organizational strength or an indication of how much a team needs help. A team that is stacked with prospects after four years of losing is not more in need of help than another bad team with a barren farm system having it's first bad year.

But not the function of the draft. You're still helping the bad teams get better.

I think a lottery still allows weaker teams to become more competitive. I don't see how it distorts anything. You are still helping bad teams get better. You just aren't rewarding professional teams for finishing last which seems absurd to me. I like it. It's not a big deal to me, but I like it as a fan. And I don't think teams being bad is solely a function of tyrying to re-build. A lot of it is trying to save money and sometimes it is incompetence. I do agree that the lottery probably won't do much to change behavior of teams.

When you finish last in pro sports, you are a loser. You failed. If it's just one year, then OK. If you finish last five straight years, you are a big time loser and shouldn't be rewarded year after year. That, to me, is incompetence. Let some of the other re-building teams get a shot. Giving out rewards to the team that finished last goes against the nature of pro sports competition. We can eliminate that silliness and still help bad teams become more competitive with a lottery containing a limited number of bad teams.

Wouldn't the teams that lost the lottery be paying a little less according to the slots? It seems like it would be a wash financially.

Those 20 run games happened the first week I discovered the internet. I was looking at news groups and there was a messageboard where people all over the country were talking about baseball. And someone mentioned the Tigers. It was amazing!

The players seem to think it will make a difference. They are the ones who wanted it. I just like it based on principle.

I think Law didn't like the Tigers a few years ago because they had poor prospects and he delivered the news correctly. Now, they have good prospects, so he likes them.

I don't think the last place team is necessarily in more need of help than teams a few spots ahead of them. Maybe the last place has been "tanking" for five years and already got some high picks. Maybe the team five spots ahead of them just got old and this is their first bad year. I would say that the latter team was more in need of draft pick help.

It depends on how many teams are in the lottery. It won't be 30 teams. If it's 8 teams, all 8 teams are going to need to get better. The team that finishes last is not more deserving of the first pick than several other bad teams.

I don't really care about the draft lottery. It will be an interesting piece of news to look forward to and I won't have to see Tigers fans rooting for the team to lose in their bad years. On principle, I also don't like teams being rewarded for incompetence. I agree that it won't make a big difference though.

The draft lottery is happening!

I am sure you knew. Good fans knew, but I remember a lot of media people saying the Tigers were losing because they struck out too much. Red Sox fans too!