Sanity check...

[SteveA]

This is what I keep waiting for, the page to be turned and for the team to get on some kind of hot streak. But the young players continue to flounder and are playing awfully.

The one good thing about the '03 Tigers--with that year's draft pick (2004 Draft), they picked Justin Verlander.

Yeah, but they could have won 19 more games and STILL been able to pick Verlander!

[The Rick]

Yeah, but they could have won 19 more games and STILL been able to pick Verlander!

Haha, that is true--but I doubt we'll have that much of a gap if we do finish in last. I'm really torn. I would love the chance to draft Rendon, but this losing culture has to change. Therefore, I'm not rooting for the O's to finish last at all. I'd love to see us go on a tear and start turning that culture around. At the same time, both the Tigers (2006) & the Rays (2008) were able to reach the World Series just a few years, or the year after their awful seasons respectively. It would certainly suck to get stuck with the 2nd pick by a game or two.

[Frobby]

Great post, and I agree 100%. I do have to point out, however, that my recent research into teams that have gotten off to this type of start in the past 25 years, kind of reveals the fallacy if bringing up that a team is "on pace" for something, even as we are now about 1/3 through the season.

[http://forum.orioleshangout.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2157633#post2157633]

I found 13 teams in the past 25 years, prior to this year's Orioles) that were .300 or less after 50 games (i.e. "on pace" to win 49 or fewer games).

Only one of those teams actually wound up in the 40s in wins, the Tiger team you mention. And 6 of the 13 won 62 or more games. The AVERAGE of what the teams finished at was 60-102. And the Oroiles, at 15-35, were actually at the high end of that range. 10 of the 13 teams had FEWER than 15 wins after 50 games.

I'm not trying to weaken your point, and believe me I am as frustrated and angry as you are about this season. But despite the start, and despite what we are "on pace" for, the odds are still fairly low that we would actually finish in the range of those historically bad teams you mention.

I agree with all the points you make, I just wanted to point out that history and logic still shows we aren't going to be quite as epically bad as our current win% would project to.

Of course someone probably made that same point on Tigers Hangout in 2003.

I did read your prior post, and thank heavens you wrote it or I'd be even more suicidal than I am already. Even instinctively, I know that we will win 60 games somehow, some way this year. But none of that changes where we are right now.