19 Game Streak Post-Mortem

[Sports Guy]

3 minutes ago, Pickles said:

Another thing to think about:

I know many of us are Ravens fans.  If you're a Ravens fan you take pride in their draft record, and it has been impressive.  What is a very common tactic of the Ravens?  (They do a bit of everything.  Again it is a much more flexible system.  And I'm talking about both the totality of the draft, and not just the first round, and relative to other organizations not just in general.) They trade down.

If going "underslot" is analogous to trading down, and is it not?- should it not be fairly common without a clear BPA staring you in the face?

and a big reason the Ravens couldn’t get over the top, especially over Pitt is because they lacked the elite playmakers.  Maybe if they had not traded down or even traded up, that could work.

Every draft is different.  There is no one right way to draft.

[Pickles]

1 minute ago, Sports Guy said:

and a big reason the Ravens couldn’t get over the top, especially over Pitt is because they lacked the elite playmakers.  Maybe if they had not traded down or even traded up, that could work.

Every draft is different.  There is no one right way to draft.

And yet they've dominated Pittsburgh for years on end, have been demonstrably better than them for the last several years, and are far better situated going forward.

[Pickles]

2 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

and a big reason the Ravens couldn’t get over the top, especially over Pitt is because they lacked the elite playmakers.  Maybe if they had not traded down or even traded up, that could work.

Every draft is different.  There is no one right way to draft.

Did you edit in that last line?

Well, I agree with that.  That's for sure.

You don't trade down from Adley for example.  Or when Wieters slipped to us.

Every pick is different.

But going underslot is probably a good decision often enough to do it often enough.

[Sports Guy]

23 minutes ago, Pickles said:

And yet they've dominated Pittsburgh for years on end, have been demonstrably better than them for the last several years, and are far better situated going forward.

Dominated them for years on end?  Huh?

They have been demonstrably Better for the last several years and yet Pitt has finished ahead of them in the Division 5 of the last 7 years.

Pitt won both meetings last year and are 6-4 vs the Ravens since 2016.

[Sports Guy]

25 minutes ago, Pickles said:

Did you edit in that last line?

Well, I agree with that.  That's for sure.

You don't trade down from Adley for example.  Or when Wieters slipped to us.

Every pick is different.

But going underslot is probably a good decision often enough to do it often enough.

Is it?  The average WAR for a player outside of the top 10, especially as you get past the first round is next to nothing.  
 

I think the underslot strategy is fine at times.  I was happy with the Kjerstad pick.  It’s not the pick I would have made but I liked it better than Martin or any of the pitchers.  

[Pickles]

3 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Dominated them for years on end?  Huh?

They have been demonstrably Better for the last several years and yet Pitt has finished ahead of them in the Division 5 of the last 7 years.

Pitt won both meetings last year and are 6-4 vs the Ravens since 2016.

For many years yes.  Been better than them.  For several years on end.  These teams go back and forth.  Look at 11-13 for example.

Citing last year is laughable.

You're basically cutting numbers to emphasize that Pitt was better in the 2015-2017 seasons.

Pitt has been better, generally, slightly, the last twenty years.  Though they both have two Super Bowls.

That difference is almost solely predicated upon the fact that the Steelers had better QB play.

And frankly, when the Ravens get even adequate QB- see above and the last three years (Yes, they "won" the Division and "won" both head to head meetings.  The Ravens would have curbstomped them in the playoffs- much like the Browns did.)- they beat the Steelers.

But this is an Orioles board.  This is a bad path to go down.

[Pickles]

11 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Is it?  The average WAR for a player outside of the top 10, especially as you get past the first round is next to nothing.  
 

I think the underslot strategy is fine at times.  I was happy with the Kjerstad pick.  It’s not the pick I would have made but I liked it better than Martin or any of the pitchers.  

Again, it's not about picks for me; I'd rather talk about strategy.

In that case, you have to acknowledge that it's more about pool than it is about slot- in the MLB.

[Sports Guy]

8 minutes ago, Pickles said:

For many years yes.  Been better than them.  For several years on end.  These teams go back and forth.  Look at 11-13 for example.

Citing last year is laughable.

You're basically cutting numbers to emphasize that Pitt was better in the 2015-2017 seasons.

Pitt has been better, generally, slightly, the last twenty years.  Though they both have two Super Bowls.

That difference is almost solely predicated upon the fact that the Steelers had better QB play.

And frankly, when the Ravens get even adequate QB- see above and the last three years (Yes, they "won" the Division and "won" both head to head meetings.  The Ravens would have curbstomped them in the playoffs- much like the Browns did.)- they beat the Steelers.

But this is an Orioles board.  This is a bad path to go down.

I’m cutting numbers?  Your words were the Ravens have been better for the last several years.  Those were your words, not mine?  Do you just define several different than the rest of the planet?..yet Pitt is beating them more and they have finished higher in the division more and let’s not forget the post SB years where the Ravens weren’t making the playoffs.  Now, the Ravens have finished higher than them 2 of the last 3 years but the games are always close and hard fought.  To say one team has been demonstrably better than the other is a moronic statement that has no basis on reality.  That’s just homerism at its finest.
 

For years, it was the Killer Bs that made the difference between the 2 teams.  They made plays when the Ravens couldn’t.  They had the elite guys and the Ravens just didn’t have it.  Could they have gotten that if they traded up? Been more aggressive?  Maybe.  
 

The Ravens have also largely failed in the second round.  They have been great in rounds 3-5.  

[Sports Guy]

Just now, Pickles said:

Again, it's not about picks for me; I'd rather talk about strategy.

In that case, you have to acknowledge that it's more about pool than it is about slot- in the MLB.

To me, when your strategy is to lose and the only unique thing you gain by losing is a high pick, I think you take BPA and forget about whether you have money to spend on a 4th round pick.  
 

But again, that’s a general thought, not a hard and fast rule.

[NCRaven]

3 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

I think it would be historic if a team as bad as the Orioles had three teams finish behind them in the standings. 

SG said that.  Not me.  

[Pickles]

1 minute ago, Sports Guy said:

I’m cutting numbers?  Your words were the Ravens have been better for the last several years..yet Pitt is beating them more and they have finished higher in the division more and let’s not forget the post SB years where the Ravens weren’t making the playoffs.  Now, the Ravens have finished higher than them 2 of the last 3 years but the games are always close and hard fought.  To say one team has been demonstrably better than the other is a moronic statement that has no basis on reality.  That’s just homerism at its finest.
 

For years, it was the Killer Bs that made the difference between the 2 teams.  They made plays when the Ravens couldn’t.  They had the elite guys and the Ravens just didn’t have it.  Could they have gotten that if they traded up? Been more aggressive?  Maybe.  
 

The Ravens have also largely failed in the second round.  They have been great in rounds 3-5.  

I think you're misinterpreting my original statement.  The Ravens have been better than them the last 3 years- it's not really questionable- and other than a Covid fluke.  What I was referring to though was they've been better than them for years on end at various periods in the past.  The very recent past.

It's not fair to say one organization is demonstrably better than the other.  But from year to year it is fair to say that about individual teams.  And yes, the games will always be close and hard fought, and back and forth, because it is the nature of the rivalry, and both teams are among the best in the sport annually.  

Let's keep it to baseball though.  So I'll get to your other points.

[Pickles]

4 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

To me, when your strategy is to lose and the only unique thing you gain by losing is a high pick, I think you take BPA and forget about whether you have money to spend on a 4th round pick.  
 

But again, that’s a general thought, not a hard and fast rule.

Of course.

But if there's no clear BPA?

And how often is there a  distinguishable BPA at any one point in an MLB draft?

[Sports Guy]

58 minutes ago, Pickles said:

And yet they've dominated Pittsburgh for years on end, have been demonstrably better than them for the last several years, and are far better situated going forward.

Dominated for years on end and demonstrably better for the last several years…and IM misinterpreting you?  Ummm ok.  That makes lots of sense.

Im sure anyone reading those statements would know you meant just the last few years. It’s sooo obvious!

[Sports Guy]

1 minute ago, Pickles said:

Of course.

But if there's no clear BPA?

And how often is there a  distinguishable BPA at any one point in an MLB draft?

Well Lawlar was a pretty clear BPA this year, at least by everyone who rates these guys.

[Pickles]

17 hours ago, Sports Guy said:

Well Lawlar was a pretty clear BPA this year, at least by everyone who rates these guys.

Well, that leads to the issue of BPA by whose criteria.

Sometimes the professionals' and the media's is going to align, and sometimes it won't.