Support NeoGAF

[Sanjuro]

They purposely fielded a bad team, that's tanking. Why they are tanking is irrelevant.

Did they have a better team to field stashed somewhere else?

I mean, we are largely both in agreement in what the Astros did and why it was necessary. This is rather confusing.

 

[TheSecondSpitter]

To acquire prospects. Loads of them.

Draft position is one part.
More money to spend on the draft as a last place team (this one is super egregious and ripe for abuse.)
More money to spend on Latin American Academies as a last place team (Also super egregious and ripe for abuse)
Selling anyone over the age of 25 that showed a pulse for prospects. Doesn't matter how good the player is, one of those prospects might turn out to be a middle reliever or something.
Any prospect that did show promise were restricted to the Minor Leagues until the second half of last season.

Here is a better article on why the Astros did what they did: http://grantland.com/features/hoarding-prospects-being-horrible-houston-astros/

Yes, tanking for a draft pick doesn't work. But tanking for prospects, and strip mining your team, can work when done right.

If you feel that tanking should only be reserved for a draft pick, whatever. Call it strip mining, call it something else, but they weren't going to suck during the second half of this decade, and the big reason why is because they sucked in the first half of this decade.



They purposely fielded a bad team, that's tanking. Why they are tanking is irrelevant.

You can achieve all the things you cited above by fielding bad teams, average teams, good teams.

There is no causal link between purposefully fielding a bad team and spending more money on Latin American players, for example. If your organization has good young players there's no need to spend money on payroll and you can spend it only other things like scouting.

Tanking means purposefully losing games, not purposefully fielding a bad team.

 

[ConfusingJazz]

Did they have a better team to field stashed somewhere else?

I mean, we are largely both in agreement in what the Astros did and why it was necessary. This is rather confusing.

They probably could have had a better team between 2011-2014, but to what end? They would have been only mediocre rather than legendarily bad, but they would still be mediocre rather than good now.

Instead, trade the veterans, keep as many young players in the minors as possible, and field the rest.

 

[ConfusingJazz]

You can achieve all the things you cited above by fielding bad teams, average teams, good teams.

There is no causal link between purposefully fielding a bad team and spending more money on Latin American players, for example. If your organization has good young players there's no need to spend money on payroll and you can spend it only other things like scouting.

Tanking means purposefully losing games, not purposefully fielding a bad team.

Er, you can, but you can't industrialize it the way the Astros did. And the Astros needed to industrialize it.

You really need to look at how BAD the Astros farm system was before Drayton sold the Astros. He never fucking signed his first round pick, and in 2007, didn't have one prospect from the first, second, third, or fourth round! Any prospect we did have were traded for veterans that never panned out. All 7 minor league teams had losing records in 2011, and the Astros lost 106 games.

Also, what is the aim of purposely fielding a bad team if not to purposely lose?

 

[Sanjuro]

They fielded a poor team because nobody cares about the Houston Astros. That's the reality. They don't have Johnny from Burger King yelling at them to sign Panda Bears.

 

[Mr. Enigma]

Remember when 50-year-old Roger Clemens almost pitched for the Astros in 2012?

 

[ConfusingJazz]

They fielded a poor team because nobody cares about the Houston Astros. That's the reality. They don't have Johnny from Burger King yelling at them to sign Panda Bears.

Just like 2 years ago, you are talking out of ignorance here. If Boston had a terrible team, you will would only hear about Tom Brady over the summer.

Oh wait.

 

[Sanjuro]

Just like 2 years ago, you are talking out of ignorance here. If Boston had a terrible team, you will would only hear about Tom Brady over the summer.

Oh wait.

You think the Houston Astros have one of the more vocal fanbases?

 

[User 479360]

I miss baseball already.

 

[Sanjuro]

Also, it's ignorant to think that the entire country wasn't hearing about Tom Brady this summer. Practically anything with "NFL" peppered in is gaining traction.

There was plenty of baseball to talk about this year. I even got a souvenir.

https://twitter.com/iamjoonlee/status/638850904083595264

 

[thefro]

They fielded a poor team because nobody cares about the Houston Astros. That's the reality. They don't have Johnny from Burger King yelling at them to sign Panda Bears.

The Cubs basically were doing the same thing from 2012-2014. There were people wanting the Cubs to sign Pujols/Fielder once Epstein came in.

You can't deny that both the Cubs and Astros are in great positions for the next several years having "tanked" and now having a ton of young cheap MLB players, great prospects, and financial flexibility with their payrolls.

 

[Sanjuro]

The Cubs basically were doing the same thing from 2012-2014. There were people wanting the Cubs to sign Pujols/Fielder once Epstein came in.

You can't deny that both the Cubs and Astros are in great positions for the next several years having "tanked" and now having a ton of young cheap MLB players, great prospects, and financial flexibility with their payrolls.

It's still largely the usage of the word in relation to the other major sports. They are similar. Cubs payroll still has been around the $100m mark for a while now.

 

[jello44]

Sorta in 2014. They still sucked, but they stopped trading out, Luhnow started to promote prospects, and they fired Bo Porter (a dick move, but whatever)

Bo was fired because there was animosity between he and Luhnow. What it was about is only between those two.

 

[MultiJhonny]

https://twitter.com/jameswagnerwp/status/651052160843583488

damn I was hoping the Nats would keep him for another year so they could underperform as always

Matt Williams was fired

 

[zroid]

so who's making the offseason thread

 

[Sanjuro]

NEW THREAD
NEW THREAD
NEW THREAD
NEW THREAD
NEW THREAD
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1120300
NEW THREAD
NEW THREAD

 

[Windu]

Remember when 50-year-old Roger Clemens almost pitched for the Astros in 2012?

no but i remember him being in George and Suzyn's box though.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fdtn0Z4o8cM

 

[lastflowers]

To acquire prospects. Loads of them.

Draft position is one part.
More money to spend on the draft as a last place team (this one is super egregious and ripe for abuse.)
More money to spend on Latin American Academies as a last place team (Also super egregious and ripe for abuse)
Selling anyone over the age of 25 that showed a pulse for prospects. Doesn't matter how good the player is, one of those prospects might turn out to be a middle reliever or something.
Any prospects that did show promise were restricted to the Minor Leagues until the second half of last season.

Here is a better article on why the Astros did what they did: http://grantland.com/features/hoarding-prospects-being-horrible-houston-astros/

Yes, tanking for a draft pick doesn't work. But tanking for prospects, and strip mining your team, can work when done right.

If you feel that tanking should only be reserved for a draft pick, whatever. Call it strip mining, call it something else, but they weren't going to suck during the second half of this decade, and the big reason why is because they sucked in the first half of this decade.



They purposely fielded a bad team, that's tanking. Why they are tanking is irrelevant.

How is this not obvious to people?