Hardest realistic rebuild

[webbjay82]

I had a lot of fun rebuilding the orioles in mlb 21. Going to pick up 22 soon, which team do you guys think is the hardest realistic rebuild with the current rosters?

[IndianSummer]

The A’s will be a handful.

[jcar0725]

A's. Nationals. Reds. Pirates. Royals.

[kinsmen7]

Quote: Originally Posted by IndianSummer

The A’s will be a handful.

I'm running an A's one right now and can confirm that it's hilariously tough to do from a realism standpoint.

I still play '20, but service time/contracts have been updated to their current levels.

A quick run down:
-Simmed the first year to get to the offseason (finished 3rd last with Pittsburgh/Washington/Cincy/KC rounding out the bottom 5 which is fairly realistic).
-My approach to the offseason was to try and and least get us to a competitive standpoint by being methodical about how I'd build the team and set us up for contention within a couple of years, and hoping to see some growth from my young players throughout that time frame.
-I was pretty fortunate to draft an MLB-readyish CF (Who I renamed Ken Griffey III, because why the heck not? Also changed his swing to Griffey's because it's hilariously fun) who made my opening day lineup based on a strong spring.
-In free agency, I went for a couple of low tier 2/upper 3rd tier starters that seemed like semi-realistic targets for the A's in Tyler Anderson (3 year contract) and Chris Paddack (1 year deal as a bounce back candidate after being non tendered by the Twins?), plus a bit of veteran help in the pen with Kimbrel. I also traded Sean Murphy to the Cards to replace Yadi (Gorman+something small-can't remember who right now, but saw it on BBTV.com as a trade that was generally considered as a good deal for both teams), and Seth Brown to the Rays for Vidal Brujan.
-Overall my team still stinks, but my defence and rotation have improved while also keeping my budget below $40 mil (I think I'm at $39?). My hope would be that by playing 162 I can hover around .500, which would be a big leap forward and a chance to increase my budget enough to take a run at an upper tier FA next offseason.
-Depth-wise from a pitching perspective, I've got Carlos Martinez and Aaron Sanchez on minor league deals as the only rotation/bullpen help on the roster. Not ideal if I have any injuries...
-Depth-wise from a lineup perspective, it's even bleaker. I'm kind of fortunate that I've put together a reasonably versatile roster, but again, if I lose someone for any length of time, I'm in trouble.
-Farm system-wise, aside from drafting KG3, there's nobody that's super highend that's close to MLB ready. Tyler Soderstrom is my best prospect, but he's at least another year out from being ready. I feel like the last time I looked it up, Oakland was around the bottom 5 in the farm system rankings.
-I'm 7-3, but it's early and we've gotten pretty lucky a couple of times so far. I split the opening series with Seattle 2-2, but have only played Detroit and KC since then. Once I start playing better teams I'd imagine the record will crash back down towards my initial target.

So yeah, short story long, Oakland is a really, really tough rebuild if you're going for fair trades/realistic signings.

[soxfanbs91]

I think it depends. I see some people talk about wanting to start Franchises with a team to rebuild and then name a team that is already young or traded all their veteran players away (unless you are starting from pre-2022 season rosters). To me, starting a rebuild would start with a team that has been pretty middle of the pack with veterans with limited control that you want to move for prospects in your own trades for younger players.

Just looking at the standings now, I think rebuilding the Angels, Red Sox, Twins, Cubs (still have some veterans they can move/bring guys in on one year deals to flip which you will do with any team), Marlins maybe, and Giants could be fun. I'm not sure who I would considered "the hardest" to be though from this group.

Now if you are just trying to take over a young team and add veterans to it, I guess Reds, Pirates, O's, KC, or Oakland?

[jcar0725]

Quote: Originally Posted by soxfanbs91

I think it depends. I see some people talk about wanting to start Franchises with a team to rebuild and then name a team that is already young or traded all their veteran players away (unless you are starting from pre-2022 season rosters). To me, starting a rebuild would start with a team that has been pretty middle of the pack with veterans with limited control that you want to move for prospects in your own trades for younger players. Just looking at the standings now, I think rebuilding the Angels, Red Sox, Twins, Cubs (still have some veterans they can move/bring guys in on one year deals to flip which you will do with any team), Marlins maybe, and Giants could be fun. I'm not sure who I would considered "the hardest" to be though from this group. Now if you are just trying to take over a young team and add veterans to it, I guess Reds, Pirates, O's, KC, or Oakland?

I think what makes a team like the A's or the Reds so hard to rebuild is that they basically have nothing. They don't have a lot decent players in their prime that you could move for younger future stars (realistically), and they don't have any real future stars of their own. So that's why they get mentioned a lot for challenging rebuilds. At least some of the other teams you mentioned have a lot of collateral that makes it easy to make moves.

[kinsmen7]

@jcar0725 and @soxfanbs91, I think it all comes down to how far you're willing to go with a rebuild, and how willing you are to try to keep it realistic from a budget/trade values perspective. If you're just going to spam the (unrealistic) trade engine in the game, and then turn around and use the money you free up to sign high end FA's, someone like the Angels would be hilariously easy to fix.

If you're willing to set yourself (and then hold yourself to) a solid set of house
rules, it gets a heckofalot harder. Baseballtradevalues.com is a much more *realistic* (for better or worse) reference when it comes to trade values. You're budget isn't going to drastically decrease if you're bad, so setting up your own (hard to attain) budget would help as well.

[jcar0725]

Quote: Originally Posted by kinsmen7

@jcar0725 and @soxfanbs91, I think it all comes down to how far you're willing to go with a rebuild, and how willing you are to try to keep it realistic from a budget/trade values perspective. If you're just going to spam the (unrealistic) trade engine in the game, and then turn around and use the money you free up to sign high end FA's, someone like the Angels would be hilariously easy to fix. If you're willing to set yourself (and then hold yourself to) a solid set of house rules, it gets a heckofalot harder. Baseballtradevalues.com is a much more *realistic* (for better or worse) reference when it comes to trade values. You're budget isn't going to drastically decrease if you're bad, so setting up your own (hard to attain) budget would help as well.

100% TRUE. That's why I said "realistically" when it comes to trading.