All I know is the Astros were awful for years and were able to draft
Springer 11th overall in 2011
Correa 1st overall in 2012
Bergman 2nd overall in 2015
Tucker 5th overall in 2015
Springer, Correa, and Bergman combined for 14 fwar in 2017 and were key members of that WS championship team. So, I don’t think being bad, intentionally or not, had nothing to do with winning later. Can you do it without being awful for years? Sure.
I've done this many times and I can do it again.
You want to conflate 2 different things. Everyone in MLB comes from somewhere.
The question is: Was the plan that Jeff Luhnow sold to Jim Crane in the Fall of 2011 causal to success.
If the Astros had won the WS in JLs first year in Houston, he still drafts Correa and Springer was already in the Organization.
The 3 draft picks that the Astros got for being intentionally bad was Mark Appel, Brady Aiken and Kyle Tucker. The only reason Bregman is a thing is because they failed to sign Aiken. That wasn't some intentionality of rebuilding, they picked the wrong guy and lucked into a different answer that worked out better.
The Astros were 100% cheating in 2017 and 2018 and MLB didn't investigate 2019 and we suspect they were more sophisticated with it in that year. So part of the issue is you want to align performance with a player in a year but you don't know what % of that player is artificial. You don't want to tie cheating to the value of rebuilding, do you? I think the Astros answered your own question there because they looked like a fringe good, but not special team in 2015 and 2016 (coming out of rebuilding) and they couldn't get to where they promised so they cheated to make it work.
Moreso, why do you want to tie their success to a couple of players (not tied to rebuilding). If all you need is a couple good players, were they the only team with a couple good players? Contrary to the rebuilding narrative, it really only gives you ONE unique player per season. That's it. As an example, Kyle Tucker is having his best season and the Astros are having their worst. How does he not automatically solve winning?....he was the 3rd guy in 'rebuilding".
The Orioles added Kjerstad, Cowser and Holliday as a function of "rebuilding". The had nothing to do with the results of 2022 or the 101 win team in 2023. Cowser has been Hot, cold and warm so far this season. Orioles are playing well....is he uniquely doing something that there's no other way the Orioles could have somehow accomplished? If they had drafted 17-17-17 (worst possible position) versus 2-5-1, they'd still have everything they have today but different names for those 3 guys. (I did this in the T5 v 17 thread, that was the point).
If you could somehow guarantee that you'd have the 2 best players in MLB by losing, then look at a team with the 2 best players...like the Angels with Trout and Ohtani and explain why those guys don't make the Playoffs. I'll answer it....because winning in MLB is about more than having a couple or handful of great players.
The things you have to do to build the Team you want that creates opportunity (never a guarantee) to Win (Now and Later) has nothing to do with getting an early draft pick or picks. Everything else is more important and you don't have to lose to do everything you need to do. Period.
You can pick Teams from the spectrum of resources like the Rays, Cards and Dodgers and none of thier success over the last 20+ years is from rebuilding but they've consistently produced quality Teams (Note why I think something is going on internally with the Cards right now).