2019 Draft Order Tracker

[sevastras]

Back to back home runs to start the 9th and end the game. Both by rookies. I was afraid they were going to lose again. 

[weams]

https://www.baseballamerica.com/stories/ringolsby-last-laugh-belongs-to-albert-pujols/

[eddie83]

32.

[jerios55]

13 hours ago, eddie83 said:

32.

29, that was a quick 3.

[TonySoprano]

On 8/24/2018 at 2:14 PM, TonySoprano said:

It seems every time the O's lose, KC loses and it's been that way for a while.

Since June, KCR has actually been 2.5 games worse:
BAL 20-51
KCR 18-54

The O's "lead" for the 1st pick is due to May, when KC actually came close to a .500 record
BAL 9-19
KCR 13-15

Since June, both teams are now 20-54. 

[Greg Pappas]

The draft standings updated after Saturday's games-- 8/25/18.  
--In the event of a tie at season's end, the Orioles will pick before KC--

1. Orioles 37-93 (.285)

2. Royals 40-90 (.308)  /  3.0 GB 

3. Padres 50-82 (.379)  / 12.0 GB --Did this to illustrate that it is a two-team 'race'--

[TonySoprano]

12 minutes ago, Greg Pappas said:

The draft standings updated after Saturday's games-- 8/25/18.  
--In the event of a tie at season's end, the Orioles will pick before KC--

1. Orioles 37-93 (.285)

2. Royals 40-90 (.308)  /  3.0 GB

FTFY

[Greg Pappas]

9 hours ago, TonySoprano said:

FTFY

Thank you Tony.   I added the Padres this morning, who are in third place, to show that it's down to us and KC.  Most of us already knew that, but...

[atomic]

2 hours ago, Greg Pappas said:

Thank you Tony.   I added the Padres this morning, who are in third place, to show that it's down to us and KC.  Most of us already knew that, but...

By the end of next week the Orioles will have pretty much have clinched worst team in the league for the year.  And with baseball draft being such a crap shoot I don't really think it is an honor you want to win.  And the draft isn't even until next June. Luckily football season is starting soon and then hockey season.

The only bright spot is if you want to buy season tickets for next year I am guessing you will get some pretty choice seats. 

[Greg Pappas]

1 hour ago, atomic said:

By the end of next week the Orioles will have pretty much have clinched worst team in the league for the year.  And with baseball draft being such a crap shoot I don't really think it is an honor you want to win.  And the draft isn't even until next June. Luckily football season is starting soon and then hockey season.

The only bright spot is if you want to buy season tickets for next year I am guessing you will get some pretty choice seats. 

Thank you for the lesson in time-wasting.

On a more serious note, while the draft isn't an exact science, it's not the "crap shoot" you believe it to be. Picking first matters, historically. It doesn't mean that the pick will work out, but your chances of getting a great player are typically enhanced the higher you pick. The following post from @Frobby illustrates my point:
 

On 7/12/2018 at 12:40 PM, Frobby said:

Yes, they do.    The higher the pick, the better the odds.    But fluky things can happen.  

#1: 46 of 54 played in the majors, 1037 WAR total.

#2: 45 of 54 played in the majors, 679 WAR total

#3: 42 of 54 played in the majors, 569 WAR totoal

#4: 41 of 54 played in the majors, 572 WAR total.

#5: 31 of 54 played in the majors, 404 WAR total.

#6: 38 of 54 played in the majors, 559 WAR total.

Oddly, teams have had much better luck in the 6th spot than the 5th spot.

FWIW Manny already has the 7th highest WAR total of any no. 3 pick  (behind Yount, Molitor, Longoria, M. Williams, L. Smith and Glass).

 

Again, we may make a pick that doesn't turn out, but I'd MUCH rather choose first than any other slot. As well, I'm hopeful for our future and believe that the best way to achieve that future is via the draft and the International market. Having to wait until June to begin to see that potential future is worth my time and efforts, if not yours.

 

[Otter]

1 hour ago, Greg Pappas said:

Thank you for the lesson in time-wasting.

On a more serious note, while the draft isn't an exact science, it's not the "crap shoot" you believe it to be. Picking first matters, historically. It doesn't mean that the pick will work out, but your chances of getting a great player are typically enhanced the higher you pick. The following post from @Frobby illustrates my point:
 

Again, we may make a pick that doesn't turn out, but I'd MUCH rather choose first than any other slot. As well, I'm hopeful for our future and believe that the best way to achieve that future is via the draft and the International market. Having to wait until June to begin to see that potential future is worth my time and efforts, if not yours.

 

Exactly.  I get sick of hearing people say the draft is a "crapshoot."  I think it might be safe to call the later rounds a crapshoot, but first round picks and where you pick in the first round matter a lot.  While it's not as easy to project MLB draftees like in the basketball and football drafts, picking higher gives you a better chance of getting an impact major leaguer.  Plus, the higher you pick the larger your pool of draft money.

[Frobby]

2 hours ago, Greg Pappas said:

Thank you for the lesson in time-wasting.

On a more serious note, while the draft isn't an exact science, it's not the "crap shoot" you believe it to be. Picking first matters, historically. It doesn't mean that the pick will work out, but your chances of getting a great player are typically enhanced the higher you pick. The following post from @Frobby illustrates my point:
 

Again, we may make a pick that doesn't turn out, but I'd MUCH rather choose first than any other slot. As well, I'm hopeful for our future and believe that the best way to achieve that future is via the draft and the International market. Having to wait until June to begin to see that potential future is worth my time and efforts, if not yours.

 

Here’s another way to look at it.  By my count, the 1st pick has turned out better than the 2nd pick 29 times out of 49 (there are five years where neither pick has made the majors yet, all recent).   So, a team isn’t always going to pick the right guy, but the odds are better at no. 1 than anywhere else.

[TonySoprano]

29 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Here’s another way to look at it.  By my count, the 1st pick has turned out better than the 2nd pick 29 times out of 49 (there are five years where neither pick has made the majors yet, all recent).   So, a team isn’t always going to pick the right guy, but the odds are better at no. 1 than anywhere else.

Between first and second is one way to look at it.  "Anywhere else?"  That's simply not the case.  Between #1 and the rest of the round is a broader sample size.  From 2001-13, 10 times the player with the highest career WAR picked in the first round, was not the one selected first overall. 

On 6/24/2018 at 12:16 PM, TonySoprano said:

#1 Overall + WAR; Notables +WAR (pick #)

2013 Appel N/A ; Bryant 21.4 (2)
2012 Correa 19.4;  Seager 13.7 (18)
2011 Cole 14.5; Lindor 20.2 (18)
2010 Harper 24.2; Sale 39.8 (13), ManNY 29.8 (3)
2009 Strasburg 25.9; Trout 60.7 (25)
2008 Beckham 4.1; Posey 40.3 (5), Hosmer 15.7 (3)
2007 Price 35.1; Heyward 34.4 (14), Bumgarner 32.1 (10)
2006 Hochevar 3.6; Kershaw 61.9 (7), Longoria 50.3 (3), Scherzer 49.3 (11)
2005 Upton 33.3; Tulowitzki 44.1 (7), Gordon 34.2 (2)
2004 Bush 2.3; Verlander 60.9 (2), Weaver 34.4 (12)
2003 Young 2.4; Markakis 32.2 (7), Hill 23.7 (13), Danks 20.3 (9)
2002 Bulington -0.3; Greinke 62.7 (6), Hamels 54.7 (17)
2001 Mauer 54.6; Teixeira 51.8 (5)

Update - For 2014, currently the WAR leader is Aaron Nola, drafted 7th; Brady Aiken was the first overall pick. 2015's leader is Alex Bregman, selected with the #2 pick;  Dansby Swanson, the top pick, is 3rd in WAR behind Bregman and Benitendi.  For those keeping score, that's 12 of 15 where the top value was found after the first pick.

Yeah, I'll keep beating this drum (because I don't want to work)

 

[Can_of_corn]

And I'll say again:  The team picking first had the opportunity to pick the player that ended up with the most WAR to date.  Just because they didn't doesn't diminish the first pick.

[TonySoprano]

1 hour ago, Can_of_corn said:

And I'll say again:  The team picking first had the opportunity to pick the player that ended up with the most WAR to date.  Just because they didn't doesn't diminish the first pick.

And way more times than not, they missed out on that opportunity.