The recent successes of the Cubs and Astros might ensure the team-building strategy of “tanking” (that is, intentionally fielding a series of non-competitive teams) will continue to remain popular in the near future, as Evan Drellich of the Houston Chronicle writes in a long feature story. The Braves, for example, appear to be employing a variation of the Astros’ rebuilding approach, the Phillies are doing something somewhat similar, and the Brewers could conceivably do the same. But “tanking” isn’t without its downfalls. “[Y]ou risk losing the fan base and alienating a fan base and in some cases they come back and in some cases they don’t come back,” says Pirates GM Neal Huntington, who traded many of his team’s key players beginning in 2008, after he had been on the job for about a year. “I don’t know, I mean, we’re a copycat society, let alone industry, so I think it’s worked remarkably well on a couple of fronts. I think once it doesn’t work well, then it probably won’t be a thing to do anymore.”
Part of the “tanking” strategy simply involves trading assets to acquire, and clear playing time for, younger talent, but another part of it is potentially more controversial — losing teams receive higher draft picks, so in some cases, it might be sound strategy for a franchise to structure itself so that it doesn’t play well. The results can be hard to watch, as the Astros frequently were before this season. And for some markets, tanking might be difficult or impossible. The Astros and Cubs “were losing for a long time and a lot of markets can’t do that,” says Reds president Walt Jocketty. “We can’t do that in our market.” Here’s more from around the game.
- The Rangers have a void to fill at catcher, and it’s unclear how they’ll do it, Evan Grant of Dallas Morning News writes. Matt Wieters might have been one possibility, but he disappeared from the market when he accepted the Orioles’ qualifying offer. The Brewers could deal Jonathan Lucroy, and might even be more likely to with new GM David Stearns in place, but the market for Lucroy could be strong this winter given the lack of strong catching options available via free agency. The Rangers got solid performances from Robinson Chirinos and journeyman Chris Gimenez last season, but they have little depth behind them, particularly with Jorge Alfaro sent to Philadelphia in the Cole Hamels deal. They also traded Tomas Telis to the Marlins when they dealt for Sam Dyson. “We understood that it was going to leave a void in the system,” says GM Jon Daniels. “But we look back on those trades we made and don’t have any regrets.”
- Diamondbacks GM Dave Stewart says he’s continued to monitor Japanese righty Kenta Maeda, ESPN’s Jerry Crasnick writes (Twitter links). Assuming Maeda is posted (which seems likely), it probably won’t be for at least another week or two, after Team Japan’s run in the WBSC Premier 12 international tournament comes to an end. The Diamondbacks’ interest in Maeda has never been a secret, and it still sounds strong now. Crasnick also notes that the D-backs could pursue Yovani Gallardo. They might not be able to afford a higher-tier pitcher like Johnny Cueto or Jordan Zimmermann.
donniebaseball
Tanking is an interesting topic. I’m okay with it if it’s for a few years, but if it’s 4+ years, it’s pretty unbearable. I think it can be really interesting too. For example, I think that the Braves’ rebuild has been really interesting.
seamaholic 2
I find the Braves rebuild bizarre, to be honest. It’s the reverse Cubs-Astros. They appear to be determined to find every last mid-to-back of the rotation arm they can find, and have no hitters either in Atlanta or in the system. They may end up a decent rotation in a couple years (or maybe not, you how these things go) but I don’t see a competitive full team for many years, unless they decide to spend on FA hitters.
nookster
You can see them working on the Mets/Nats model of young core of starting pitching, but the outliers of Markakis/Olivera are what’s bizarre to me. Should have just kept Heyward at least then.
Dave 41
If the Rangers are going to get Lucroy from the Brewers, its going to take Joey Gallo away from them
Rooster
Gallo for lucroy? Never happen. Rangers would more likely trade non MLB ready prospects.
stymeedone
I doubt the Brewer’s do that trade. Lucroy is signed. There is such a shortage of quality catchers in MLB. His value is much like Donaldson’s. Gallo is much like Baez with CHC. They both have talent, but those strikeouts! While 3B is also a position lacking in quality, Gallo is not a proven commodity. It will take more than one “maybe” to acquire Lucroy.
disgruntledreader 2
The only similarity between Lucroy and Donaldson’s values is that both can be represented in WAR.
stymeedone
Huh? Lucroy’s situation is similar to Donaldson’s before he was traded to Toronto. Both play positions where there are a shortage of quality players. Both are expected to be good both offensively and defensively. Both signed contract extensions. Both are in their prime. One prospect, a “maybe”, isn’t going to be enough.
seamaholic 2
Lucroy is almost literally the best catcher in baseball. You should pay a little more attention to players in fly-over cities.
nookster
2016 will be interesting. Was 2015 just injury/getting back timing, or was that who we’ll see going forward and 2014 was the outlier. Also curious about Mesoraco.
cjcicerone18
There’s a ton of good third basemen what do you mean
Astros44
Yeah I’m a little disturbed you just compared Lucroy to Donaldson…
baumer16
Gallo gets the conversation started. More would have to be added for someone like Lucroy.
jlivers77
That would never happen
Lance
Beltre is going on the last year of his contract at the age of 37. His power numbers are slipping so I would suspect the Rangers are hoping Gallo will replace him in 2017 at third.
gopads
Rangers want to trade for the Padres cacher Norris?
GeauxRangers
An interesting thought considering they have Hedges and obvious ties between GMs
mike156
The system encourages tanking. The most valuable assets in baseball are the controlled talented younger players–and tanking brings them to you. Revenue sharing cushions the economic impact, since you always have money coming in. Protected draft picks exacerbate the issue, because if you are mid-season, and looking at a 75 win season, why not sell off a few older players, pick up some younger talent, and maybe lose a little more? But what tanking really is cheapen the product–not just for the hometown fans who are forced to watch, but also for the opposing teams team fans, who have tickets for less interesting games. Finally, going to the integrity of the game, tanking can have an impact on pennant races, If you are in the playoff chase, and have your schedule tilted later in the season towards teams that were expected to be competitive but are now in sell-off mode, that can be an unfair advantage.
BooJays33
tanking doesn’t make sense in baseball the way it would in the other North American sports…in football or basketball your only 1 Andrew Luck or LeBron James from being competitive again, and those guys are already very much known quantities when their respective teams draft them. There’s no Tim Duncan in baseball that’s gunna turn your team into a champion in short order. Sure teams want to build through the draft but the difference between picking 1st from 2nd or 2nd instead of 5th most years doesn’t justify actively trying to lose major league baseball games. The term “tanking” implies your not trying to win…let’s call it aggressively rebuilding..and sure casual fans are put off by rebuilding but real fans will stick through it if a team is acquiring exciting young talent. The only time a team should “tank” in baseball…truly deviate from the plan of winning major league baseball games is late in september when there’s a Bryce Harper or Stephen Strasburg sitting at the top of next years draft. I don’t see any of those guys in the 2016 draft.
stymeedone
The Lions would like to differ with your one draft pick from being competitive theory in the NFL.
Ray Ray
N’Damakong Suh was a high draft pick that basically made a bad Lions team a playoff team. Just because he was a petulant jerk that washed out quickly doesn’t negate the theory.
stymeedone
No, but they also had Stafford and Megatron and Fairly along with Suh to get there. And they were only decent last year, after adding Iggy.
TJECK109
Unless there is a Bryce Harper in the draft tanking is a HUGE risk. Not every number one pick or top 5 pick is a guarantee to play in the majors. Only one of 6 drafted players even reach the majors. Tanking in the MLB for the sake of high draft picks is a HUGE gamble.
User 4245925809
Maybe some small market teams can get away with tanking to some extent, though it’d be pretty impossible for the NYY, Red Sox, LAD and a few others with large, rabid fan bases to tank games, including the Phillies. They lost games? It was from poor design and leadership, not intentional, same with Boston last 2 seasons, not tanking. If Boston was tanking, they would have left the veterans in and gotten a protected top 10 pick this coming June, rather than #12 like they do now after getting rid of the Victorino’s, napoli’s, Masterson’s etc..
Those fans will let teams know that draw exceptionally well, like those 4 by not renewing season tickets.
One other thing not mentioned.. Pittsburg was one of THE largest spenders under the old CBA after Huntington came on board and not all went to those top 10 picks either.. He spent his fair share on the Josh Bell’s of the world.. Nothing wrong with that and not dicing them here, it’s SUPPOSED to be how you build a winner, not constantly poor mouthing like the ownership of Tampa, Houston and Miami always does, even tho Tampa had *10* top 100 picks that same year (2011) and didn’t go overslot on a SINGLE ONE! No wonder the Tampa farm is so abysmal since they ceased getting top draft choices, as in top 10 picks.
lunchmoney
The Tampa farm is not abysmal, what planet do you live on. Snell, Adames, Honeywell, Whitley, and Robertson are all consensus top 100 prospects. Farm system rankings have them in the top 15 or top 10.
Niekro
I don’t think a problem exists with the current structure good scouting beats high picks, all the teams that “tanked” missed on Trout. Look at the Cardinals great system with no high picks. Baseball is more revenue driven so tanking could have worse affects than its worth.
nookster
The one thing I do find hilarious is the “get the MLB off our back for spending ” outlier signing that rebuilding teams will do (Butler, Markakis, Salty, etc).
Niekro
Could Miller and Robertson both taking less money be viewed as a residual affect of being bad for so many years? Referencing the Astros. I think Headley also took less money than the Astros offered. The Astros seemed to have trouble giving money away.