Mike’s reaction to 45 vs 50 vs 70 wins

[HowAboutThat]

I said in another comment somewhere, that Mike doesn’t care whether we win 45 or 50 games, but he certainly does care if we win 70. There was a little bit of hyperbole in that comment, but I just wonder if maybe it’s really accurate.

The equivalent of 70 wins would be ~26, Would probably leave us out of any playoff consideration, but would mess up our draft order for next year, conceivably leaving us out of the single digit draft picks.
At the moment, I think the last thing that Elias wants is on field success.
I think he would much rather we win 15 games than 25. So I think that if we start to do well he’s going to trade off our successful players, less with a view to maximizing their trade value than to getting them off the team because they’re playing too well.

There are several players on this team who could conceivably participate in our next contender, but nobody who’s a definite, so he wouldn’t be damaging the future by, for instance, trading Alberto or Ruiz, and he wouldn’t care as much about the return.

My question for the crowd is whether you think this is accurate, or if he would actually enjoy a genuine and unexpected successful won-loss record, Even if it meant a less desirable first round pick next year?

[MurphDogg]

I think if we were successful on the basis of career seasons by Iglesias, LeBlanc and Milone he would be less happy than if it was on the basis of great seasons by Hays, Means, Mountcastle, Sisco and Ruiz.

The only players on the team that aren't under team control until the start of the next potential competitive window, which I am defining as 2022, are Iglesias, LeBlanc, Millone, Givens and Cobb. Even if you want to extend the start of the window to 2023, that only adds Davis, Mancini, Castro and Alberto.

Good performances from any players not mentioned in the above paragraph are a net bonus for the team, even if it means they draft 8th (or go wild and make the playoffs and draft 15th) instead of 2nd or 3rd. It will just become more important to actually use all of our International Pool money, since we won't have as much money to allocate to the draft.

Ultimately, this is not a situation I will be spending a lot of time worrying about.

As an aside, I wouldn't be so certain that the 2021 draft order will be based solely off 2020 records. Even if the 60-game season is completed, MLB may decide to weigh 2019 records in as well, to minimize the benefit of egregious tanking over the last couple weeks of the season.

[now]

1 hour ago, MurphDogg said:

As an aside, I wouldn't be so certain that the 2021 draft order will be based solely off 2020 records. Even if the 60-game season is completed, MLB may decide to weigh 2019 records in as well, to minimize the benefit of egregious tanking over the last couple weeks of the season.

Good point and let's hope that's the case!

[Ripken]

2 hours ago, MurphDogg said:

As an aside, I wouldn't be so certain that the 2021 draft order will be based solely off 2020 records. Even if the 60-game season is completed, MLB may decide to weigh 2019 records in as well, to minimize the benefit of egregious tanking over the last couple weeks of the season.

Yeah, I've been of the opinion they might take the 2019+2020 records for the 2021 draft order.  Or something similar beyond just using 2020 records.

[brvn52]

1 hour ago, Ripken said:

Yeah, I've been of the opinion they might take the 2019+2020 records for the 2021 draft order.  Or something similar beyond just using 2020 records.

I’ve been guessing a lottery. MLB wants to discourage tanking and, for the first time, they have the ability to change how the draft order is formed. We’ll see, but I’d be somewhat surprised if it’s purely based off standings. 

[Mr. Chewbacca Jr.]

7 hours ago, Philip said:

I said in another comment somewhere, that Mike doesn’t care whether we win 45 or 50 games, but he certainly does care if we win 70. There was a little bit of hyperbole in that comment, but I just wonder if maybe it’s really accurate.

The equivalent of 70 wins would be ~26, Would probably leave us out of any playoff consideration, but would mess up our draft order for next year, conceivably leaving us out of the single digit draft picks.
At the moment, I think the last thing that Elias wants is on field success.
I think he would much rather we win 15 games than 25. So I think that if we start to do well he’s going to trade off our successful players, less with a view to maximizing their trade value than to getting them off the team because they’re playing too well.

There are several players on this team who could conceivably participate in our next contender, but nobody who’s a definite, so he wouldn’t be damaging the future by, for instance, trading Alberto or Ruiz, and he wouldn’t care as much about the return.

My question for the crowd is whether you think this is accurate, or if he would actually enjoy a genuine and unexpected successful won-loss record, Even if it meant a less desirable first round pick next year?

I mean, he put together a pretty terrible team on purpose. He wouldn't have put together this gaggle of mediocrity if his goal wasn't to tank.

I can't imagine he'd be stoked if the O's make the playoffs and he can't go underslot with a top five pick. Like MurphDog mentioned - I think he'd be excited if the players of the future propel the O's to that success, but there really aren't any players like that even on the roster besides Hays and Means.

[weams]

The dream has ended. 

[sportsfan8703]

Easy formula. Don’t call up Mountcastle. No Mason Williams. Play DJ Stewart and Davis. Just roll over. 
 

Don’t worry, we’ll have a top draft pick, but will we draft the BPA?

[DrungoHazewood]

17 hours ago, MurphDogg said:

As an aside, I wouldn't be so certain that the 2021 draft order will be based solely off 2020 records. Even if the 60-game season is completed, MLB may decide to weigh 2019 records in as well, to minimize the benefit of egregious tanking over the last couple weeks of the season.

I think that they should do that anyway.  The 1989 and 2012 Orioles had wildly unexpected seasons that by all accounts should have been partway through a longer rebuilding process.  They leveraged some things like bullpen and defense to a much better record than anyone thought would happen, and their reward was a 20-something draft pick in each round.  And the Red Sox will sometimes alternate World Series with 70-win seasons, and every time their $190M payroll wildly underachieves they get a top 10 pick. 

I think every year draft picks should be based on a weighted multi-year average.  Something like 3x last year plus 2x the year before plus one times two years ago, divided by six.  (If not a straight market-size based draft regardless of record.)

[DrungoHazewood]

13 hours ago, brvn52 said:

I’ve been guessing a lottery. MLB wants to discourage tanking and, for the first time, they have the ability to change how the draft order is formed. We’ll see, but I’d be somewhat surprised if it’s purely based off standings. 

My real preference is to do away with the draft and allocate amateur signing bonus money by a combination of multi-year record and market size.  For example, the Orioles would get $15M to sign amateur players, the Braves would get $9M, the Cubs $3M, the Sox $1M, and the Yanks $175.22.

[Tony-OH]

22 hours ago, MurphDogg said:

I think if we were successful on the basis of career seasons by Iglesias, LeBlanc and Milone he would be less happy than if it was on the basis of great seasons by Hays, Means, Mountcastle, Sisco and Ruiz.

The only players on the team that aren't under team control until the start of the next potential competitive window, which I am defining as 2022, are Iglesias, LeBlanc, Millone, Givens and Cobb. Even if you want to extend the start of the window to 2023, that only adds Davis, Mancini, Castro and Alberto.

Good performances from any players not mentioned in the above paragraph are a net bonus for the team, even if it means they draft 8th (or go wild and make the playoffs and draft 15th) instead of 2nd or 3rd. It will just become more important to actually use all of our International Pool money, since we won't have as much money to allocate to the draft.

Ultimately, this is not a situation I will be spending a lot of time worrying about.

As an aside, I wouldn't be so certain that the 2021 draft order will be based solely off 2020 records. Even if the 60-game season is completed, MLB may decide to weigh 2019 records in as well, to minimize the benefit of egregious tanking over the last couple weeks of the season.

I'm thinking the MLB needs to definitely put the 2020 and 2019 records together to sort out the draft next year. No way they can go off this weird 2020 mini season.

[Tony-OH]

I think everything Elias does is with the big goal in mind and winning this season does nothing to help that. He went into this season knowing he was "tanking" once again and although he can never say this publicly, you don't trade away one of your best relievers a week into the season to another team that may be competing with you for worse record overall unless you have the big picture in mind.

Obviously there are so many wild cards this year that really anything could happen, but let's be honest here, it does not do this franchise any good to just miss out on the expanded playoffs and then lose draft position in 2021 draft.

I imagine trades of Givens, LeBlanc and Milone to happen if they continue to pitch well and especially if the Orioles find ways to keep winning.

[survivedc]

17 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

I think everything Elias does is with the big goal in mind and winning this season does nothing to help that. He went into this season knowing he was "tanking" once again and although he can never say this publicly, you don't trade away one of your best relievers a week into the season to another team that may be competing with you for worse record overall unless you have the big picture in mind.

Obviously there are so many wild cards this year that really anything could happen, but let's be honest here, it does not do this franchise any good to just miss out on the expanded playoffs and then lose draft position in 2021 draft.

I imagine trades of Givens, LeBlanc and Milone to happen if they continue to pitch well and especially if the Orioles find ways to keep winning.

Not sure you’re saying this but I don’t think the objective in the Bleier trade was to weaken this team. I also don’t think, if we’re comfortably sitting in 2nd place (or at least in good shape for one of the two “wildcard” spots) that the team will be weakened with the implicit goal of losing games. 

I could see a trade of one of those three and Lowther or Kremer or someone entering the rotation. That being said, I’m certainly not counting on LeBlanc or Milone being of value to another team at that point and would almost prefer they get traded ASAP.

[HowAboutThat]

I have said it before, but I think the best way to solve the tanking issue is to give the first draft pick to the best of the worst. Six divisions in baseball 6 Last place teams, so you give the number one draft pick to the best of those six. That will eliminate any desire to tank Because it will eliminate the reward for tanking.

[Can_of_corn]

2 minutes ago, Philip said:

I have said it before, but I think the best way to solve the tanking issue is to give the first draft pick to the best of the worst. Six divisions in baseball 6 Last place teams, so you give the number one draft pick to the best of those six. That will eliminate any desire to tank Because it will eliminate the reward for tanking.

Because the value of the #2 pick isn't higher than the #6 pick?

You have a lottery in the NBA and teams are still in hard on the tank model.

Teams have more to gain by finishing with the 2nd worst record than they do the 10th worse record.  Being "just bad" can be a decade long purgatory for teams.  Look at the O's or the Wizards for that matter.