Will There Be a 2020 Season?

[Harold's Leg Lift]

 

[ptatc]

41 minutes ago, Harold's Leg Lift said:

Yeah but who will ask it?

No one because it's a very similar offer to all the other ones. The owners kept asking for salary about the 56-58 range of full pay. They did go up a few games. They players gave up playing regular season games in October and expanded playoffs in 2021. Each side gave a little.

[Squirmin' for Yermin]

1 minute ago, Harold's Leg Lift said:

 

burned them.

[Jack Parkman]

6 minutes ago, Squirmin' for Yermin said:

So let's let more teams in the playoffs so more will be "buyers" or try.. Logically, that will happen

There's a fairly easy way to kill tanking: go away from a straight draft system or even a weighted lottery system to a non-weighted lottery system, where every spot of a non playoff team is part of the lottery. If you miss the playoffs, you have no idea whether you'd pick 1st or under the current system, 20th. It completely destroys the incentive to be really bad....in fact I'd argue that it puts all of the incentive towards winning, because even if you fall short, you'll have a chance to get a franchise changing talent. 

Edited June 17, 2020 by Jack Parkman

[ptatc]

5 minutes ago, Squirmin' for Yermin said:

The point is... our sport is dying... Expanding the playoffs may get some new fans (think upsets).. We already have the best playoffs in all of sports, with walk offs, and upsets... Maybe it's time to expand it.  Once again... Our sport is dying.

Agreed. Its worth experimenting with it in this weird scenario we're in. If it increases viewers keep it. If it flops, they can try something different. 

[Squirmin' for Yermin]

1 minute ago, Jack Parkman said:

There's a fairly easy way to kill tanking: go away from a straight draft system or even a weighted lottery system to a non-weighted lottery system, where every spot of a non playoff team is part of the lottery. If you miss the playoffs, you have no idea whether you'd pick 1st or under the current system, 20th. It completely destroys the incentive to tank. 

It 100% does not destroy it.... You still have way better odds of getting the top pick if you are a low team.. It changes nothing but gives better teams a chance to get a better pick.

[Squirmin' for Yermin]

1 minute ago, ptatc said:

Agreed. Its worth experimenting with it in this weird scenario we're in. If it increases viewers keep it. If it flops, they can try something different. 

You are my favorite now.  

[ptatc]

2 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said:

There's a fairly easy way to kill tanking: go away from a straight draft system or even a weighted lottery system to a non-weighted lottery system, where every spot of a non playoff team is part of the lottery. If you miss the playoffs, you have no idea whether you'd pick 1st or under the current system, 20th. It completely destroys the incentive to tank. 

For once we agree on something. 

[Jack Parkman]

1 minute ago, Squirmin' for Yermin said:

It 100% does not destroy it.... You still have way better odds of getting the top pick if you are a low team.. It changes nothing but gives better teams a chance to get a better pick.

That's under a weighted system, not an unweighted system. 

[ptatc]

1 minute ago, Squirmin' for Yermin said:

You are my favorite now.  

Ditto. Baseball needs fundamental changes because as you said it is dying a slow death. I'm not smart enough to figure it all out but in a season already drastic different from 5he norm, try new things.

[Squirmin' for Yermin]

4 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said:

That's under a weighted system, not an unweighted system. 

So on an unweighted system, a team that misses the playoffs by 1 game and wins 90 games that year, can get the #1 pick?  Yeah, that seems horrible. lol 

I think a better way to limit tanking is to impose a salary cap AND floor.  We are the only sport to not have one.  It will cap the top teams from spending ungodly amounts (Yankees/RedSox) and force teams to spend money on talent (Pirates)

 

While times are weird let's implement a Cap Floor! Can I get an amen @ptac

Edited June 17, 2020 by Squirmin' for Yermin

[ptatc]

1 minute ago, Jack Parkman said:

That's under a weighted system, not an unweighted system. 

Yes. Purely random chance of non-playoff teams. No teams gets any advantage over another based on record. That's good way to eliminate the desire to be the worst team.

[Jack Parkman]

3 minutes ago, Squirmin' for Yermin said:

So on an unweighted system, a team that misses the playoffs by 1 game and wins 90 games that year, can get the #1 pick?  Yeah, stupid. lol 

Yeah....that's the point.....that team has just as much of a chance to get the 1st pick as the team that was the worst. It eliminates the race to the bottom. 

Edited June 17, 2020 by Jack Parkman

[DirtySox]

 

[Jack Parkman]

Just now, ptatc said:

Yes. Purely random chance of non-playoff teams. No teams gets any advantage over another based on record. That's good way to eliminate the desire to be the worst team.

^^^^

[Squirmin' for Yermin]

Teams tanking isn't about getting a high pick, as much as it is saving money.. I don't believe it will change things.  A salary cap ceiling AND floor would be the best way to level the playing field and force teams to "try"

Edited June 17, 2020 by Squirmin' for Yermin

[SCCWS]

2 minutes ago, Squirmin' for Yermin said:

So on an unweighted system, a team that misses the playoffs by 1 game and wins 90 games that year, can get the #1 pick?  Yeah, that seems horrible. lol 

Hopefully, if an agreement gets hashed out, every team should do "spring training" in their own stadiums. Arizona and Florida are experiencing rampant increases in covid cases this week.   

[ptatc]

3 minutes ago, Squirmin' for Yermin said:

So on an unweighted system, a team that misses the playoffs by 1 game and wins 90 games that year, can get the #1 pick?  Yeah, that seems horrible. lol 

I think a better way to limit tanking is to impose a salary cap AND floor.  We are the only sport to not have one.  It will cap the top teams from spending ungodly amounts (Yankees/RedSox) and force teams to spend money on talent (Pirates)

Salary cap and floor has been my push for years. This is another good way to make the league more competitive.  The players have fought it forever though.

You are on fire today.

[Jack Parkman]

2 minutes ago, Squirmin' for Yermin said:

Teams tanking isn't about getting a high pick, rather saving money.. I don't believe it will change things.  A salary cap ceiling AND floor would be the best way to level the playing field and force teams to "try"

I agree here, but the MLBPA seems to be against that. Given that the luxury tax is a de facto ceiling, with no floor that makes owners really happy. 

I'm also for players being allowed arbitration rights after completing one full season in MLB, that would eliminate the cost savings from tanking as well. 

Edited June 17, 2020 by Jack Parkman

[Harold's Leg Lift]

5 minutes ago, Squirmin' for Yermin said:

So on an unweighted system, a team that misses the playoffs by 1 game and wins 90 games that year, can get the #1 pick?  Yeah, that seems horrible. lol 
 

It would be incentivizing winning instead of losing.

[Squirmin' for Yermin]

Just now, ptatc said:

Salary cap and floor has been my push for years. This is another good way to make the league more competitive.  The players have fought it forever though.

You are on fire today.

I try my best.  It is all for you. LET THE REVOLUTION BEGIN

[Squirmin' for Yermin]

Just now, Harold's Leg Lift said:

It would be incentivizing winning instead of losing.

I don't believe it would at all.  rebuilding teams want to save money too.  A way to get them to stop tanking is to force them to spend money... ie, cap floor

[Balta1701]

1 minute ago, Squirmin' for Yermin said:

I don't believe it would at all.  rebuilding teams want to save money too.  A way to get them to stop tanking is to force them to spend money... ie, cap floor

That also could remove some of the deals teams make at the trade deadline because teams couldn't just move their higher salary players to competitive teams as easily.

[ptatc]

1 minute ago, Jack Parkman said:

I agree here, but the MLBPA seems to be against that. I have no idea why. 

Because they dont want the high spending teams go have limits. Teams like the pirates and royals will stay at the minimum and the Dodgers, Yankees and red Sox will have limitations. The union only cares about the average salary increasing not individual teams.

[SonofaRoache]

10 minutes ago, ptatc said:

Agreed. Its worth experimenting with it in this weird scenario we're in. If it increases viewers keep it. If it flops, they can try something different. 

Baseball is too long and too flukey to not have expanded playoffs, even if it means shortening the season by 10 games. In most cases there just isn't much of a difference between teams ranked 4 thru 6 in each league.