Does O's management want to win in Sept?

[Frobby]

17 hours ago, El Gordo said:

What's the difference between the # 1 and #3 picks? Worth demoralizing the players?

 

15 hours ago, weams said:

Harper v.  Machado

 

10 hours ago, atomic said:

Beckham.vs Hosmer.

David Clyde vs. Robin Yount (1973)

Bill Almon vs. Lonnie Smith (1974)

Harold Baines vs. Paul Molitor (1977)

Jeff King vs. Matt Williams (1986)

Matt Anderson vs. Troy Glaus (1997)

Hochevar vs. Longoria (2006)

To name a few times when the no. 3 pick outperformed no. 1.    But the odds are against it.    

[atomic]

2 minutes ago, Frobby said:

 

 

David Clyde vs. Robin Yount (1973)

Bill Almon vs. Lonnie Smith (1974)

Harold Baines vs. Paul Molitor (1977)

Jeff King vs. Matt Williams (1986)

Matt Anderson vs. Troy Glaus (1997)

Hochevar vs. Longoria (2006)

To name a few times when the no. 3 pick outperformed no. 1.    But the odds are against it.    

Robin Yount and Paul Molitor seems like a good foundation for a championship contender.

[Frobby]

10 minutes ago, atomic said:

Robin Yount and Paul Molitor seems like a good foundation for a championship contender.

They played together from 1978-92, and only made the playoffs twice in that span (1981-82).   But, they had winning seasons 10 of those 15 years and finished .500 another time.    

[atomic]

4 minutes ago, Frobby said:

They played together from 1978-92, and only made the playoffs twice in that span (1981-82).   But, they had winning seasons 10 of those 15 years and finished .500 another time.    

Yeah but that was when fewer teams made the postseason,  I said championship contender as they made the World Series in 82.  Tough to make the playoffs when you had the Orioles, Yankees, Red Sox, Tigers and Blue Jays in your division back then and there is no wild card.  

[Frobby]

3 minutes ago, atomic said:

Yeah but that was when fewer teams made the postseason,  I said championship contender as they made the World Series in 82.  Tough to make the playoffs when you had the Orioles, Yankees, Red Sox, Tigers and Blue Jays in your division back then and there is no wild card.  

Yup.    They missed out on the playoffs while winning 93 in 1978, 95 in 1979, 91 in 1987 and 92 in 1992.   Molitor left in ‘93 and they went from 92 to 69 wins.    Then Yount retired and they had 11 straight losing seasons.    

[MCO'sFan]

19 hours ago, El Gordo said:

What's the difference between the # 1 and #3 picks? Worth demoralizing the players?

2019 Draft Slots

1-1 $8,415,300

1-3 $7,221,200

Dif -$1,194,100

minus 14.2% (if my math is correct) That's a pretty big difference to me. 

[DrungoHazewood]

5 hours ago, LA2 said:

I don't disagree with the overall point that skepticism about the team playing .500 next year is far from being a troll. I just want to point out that, as I'm sure you know, the relation between W/L record and run-differential isn't categorical. Even if one looks only at this season's standings, the Brewers are 4 W's over .500 with a -38 run-differential (RD) and the Phillies are a remarkable +7 W's with -4 RD; they are only 4 and 2.5 games out of WC status, respectively.

Even less linear is the fact that the Brewers' W/L is only a 1/2-game worse than the Diamondbacks despite being 124 runs behind in RD (-38 vs. +76). And the Phillies are 2.5 games up on the Mets despite being 24 RD worse. In the same division, the Nats are a probably insurmountable 6.5 games behind the Braves despite a +22 RD superiority.

Our cherished O's of 2012 went 93-69 despite scoring only 7 runs more than they gave up, which is even more impressive than the scrappy Why-Not? team of 1989, which won six less games (87-75) with a 15-run better RD (+22).

There is, of course, a strong correlation between RD and W/L overall, but the number of exceptions is not insignificant--and it happens every season. It would be very unlikely, but not really too amazing, that is, if next year's Orioles somehow fall far short of the zero RD you posited and still put up a W/L record that approaches .500.

At the same time, I'm not going to call anyone a troll just because that fact doesn't inspire him or her to a fine madness.

Of course the other side of that is the 2018 Dodgers, whose run differential was that of a 102-win team and they won 92.  Or last year's O's and Nats, who were each eight games worse than their run differential would suggest.  Or the '14 A's, who should have been a nearly 100-win team but didn't make the playoffs. The '06 Indians outscored the opposition by 88 runs and finished under .500.

The Orioles could overachieve, but it's about as likely that they underachieve.

[DrungoHazewood]

17 hours ago, weams said:

Harper v.  Machado

 

12 hours ago, atomic said:

Beckham.vs Hosmer.

It's fun to be a contrarian and point out the times when the #3 pick did as well as or better than the #1.  But odds are the #1 is going be the better player.  You always want to pick higher.  It's like asking if you'd rather have 1000 free lottery tickets or 200.  Sometimes the winner will be in the 200, but you'd never willingly pick that ahead of time.

[Redskins Rick]

53 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

 

It's fun to be a contrarian and point out the times when the #3 pick did as well as or better than the #1.  But odds are the #1 is going be the better player.  You always want to pick higher.  It's like asking if you'd rather have 1000 free lottery tickets or 200.  Sometimes the winner will be in the 200, but you'd never willingly pick that ahead of time.

Jeter was only a #6 pick, and the Orioles took Hammonds on the #4 pick.

I do agree with you, odds are higher for the higher pick to do better.

 

[Can_of_corn]

3 minutes ago, Redskins Rick said:

Jeter was only a #6 pick, and the Orioles took Hammonds on the #4 pick.

I do agree with you, odds are higher for the higher pick to do better.

 

Word was Jeter would only sign with the Yanks.

[Redskins Rick]

Just now, Can_of_corn said:

Word was Jeter would only sign with the Yanks.

He was also out of High School, and even Jeter's book talks about how many scouts were highly critical of his skillset and wasnt even sure, he would make the MLB.

[DrungoHazewood]

7 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Word was Jeter would only sign with the Yanks.

My kid's new homeroom teacher has Yanks stuff everywhere in the room.  But said she hasn't really followed them since Jeter left.  So she might start rooting for the Orioles.  Or the Nats.

I don't even know what to do with that.  It's like my kid is being taught by someone who only speaks ancient Babylonian.  Or is an alien.  Or a platypus.  

Don't schoolboards screen for this kind of thing?

[interloper]

Sorta don't want the #1 pick. There's no consensus like there was with Adley, plus the player doesn't have the added pressure of being #1. 

[LookinUp]

9 minutes ago, interloper said:

Sorta don't want the #1 pick. There's no consensus like there was with Adley, plus the player doesn't have the added pressure of being #1. 

You want the #1 pick, you just don't know it.

If there's no consensus, that gives the #1 team even more leverage to negotiate an under-slot deal with multiple players, which leaves even more slot money available later in the draft. It's a big advantage to draft higher no matter the players you're picking from.

[NCRaven]

And, just because there’s no concensus now doesn’t mean that there won’t be in June of next year.