Since this seems to be all some people can talk about these days, let's take a look at the current standings:
People have fallen in love with the idea of the M's being so bad they end up picking first, but right now, that's looking pretty unlikely. However, it's also looking pretty unlikely that they fall out of the top four, as they currently have a six-game gap between themselves and the Indians. Six games is a lot of ground to concede over two months, especially when your bullpen has Jamey Wright in it.
This is not an invitation to talk about the draft and mention that you're rooting for losses now in every single thread. This is also not an invitation to keep talking about Anthony Rendon. I assure you, there are few things more annoying than fantasizing about specific draft candidates more than ten months before the draft takes place. Shut up. Just shut up.
This is simply an observation that the M's are sitting in a pretty good place when it comes to getting set for next year's draft. Even if they don't end up going first, odds are they'll go in the top four, and the class is supposedly deep. Whatever that means.
0 recs | 39 comments
It's shocking to see us that much worse than Kansas City.
We have gained 2 games on Baltimore since I first started wondering about it. I agree finishing last is unlikely; Baltimore is really terrible.
Llewdor - August 6, 2010
Yay for Gerrit Cole!
Things will get complicated pretty quickly if Harper re-enters the draft. But I assume that’s just posturing. Typical Boras.
perfectstrat - August 6, 2010
Well, maybe Boras would like Harper to the only the second player since Danny Goodwin to be picked number one overall
Nothing would surprise me when it comes to Scott Boras
Coug1990 - August 6, 2010
I think there's a "twice" missing in there somewhere.
appleshampoo - August 6, 2010
If Harper reenters the draft, doesn't Washington get the top pick again for failing to sign last year's #1?
If Harper doesn’t sign this year, the Nats won’t waste another #1 overall pick on him again.
Jon S. - August 6, 2010 via mobile
They get #2
Graham MacAree - August 6, 2010
I don't feel these situations give me reason to root for a loss, so much as they ease the burden of a loss.
I want to see the M’s win, but there’s consolation when they lose.
Kenneth Arthur - August 6, 2010
But going along with that ideology, there's always a consolation when you lose to lessen the burden.
I guess it just comes down to how good the consolation is.
perfectstrat - August 6, 2010
Having basically secured a top 4 pick, I guess most of the consolation is already decided until the final week or so when we really get down to positioning.
Kenneth Arthur - August 6, 2010
I don't know
I was kind of hoping for a loss or two at the end of the 2008 season, in that last series against the A’s.
Aly Edge - August 6, 2010
So what you are trying to say without getting our hopes up to high is that we are back in the running for Strasburg?
Robert - August 6, 2010
Until Washington doesn't sign Harper
And jumps right back in front of us!
OceanBird - August 6, 2010
Well, the draft will be decently exciting with us getting one of the top four picks.
This year’s was kind of boring, and the fact that everyone already knew we would take Ackley made 2009’s draft a little dull (and then disappointing with the whole Baron thing).
lailaihei - August 6, 2010
I still cannot believe we are in spitting distance of Baltimore.
Ugh.
MT Olson - August 6, 2010
Baltimore was a pretty good team on paper
kinda like us
Bearskin Rugburn - August 6, 2010
What's remarkable is that I didn't think we'd be in this "race".
At the end of June (two wins in Yankee Stadium), we were 9.0 games up on Baltimore, basically tied with Kansas City, AND the Nationals, and ahead of five other clubs. In other words:
June 30th
1) Baltimore
2) Pittsburgh (2.5)
3) Cleveland (6.0)
4) Arizona (7.0)
5) Houston (7.0)
6) Seattle (9.0) .429 w%
7) Kansas City (9.0) .430 w%
8) Washington (9.0) .430 w%
The Mariners finished the month 33-44, having basically secured a .500 month for the second time this season. We didn’t look like we were in serious consideration for strong draft picks. Except…
July 1st – August 5th
1) Seattle (7-25)
2) Arizona (10-20)
3) Baltimore (11-20)
4) Pittsburgh (11-19)
5) Kansas City (12-17)
6) Washington (14-16)
7) Cleveland (16-16)
8) Houston (16-12)
How’s this for epic? We’ve been obliterating the competition in the losing department, playing worst than the 2nd closest competitor by a good four games.
ThundaPC - August 6, 2010
I'm actually rooting for the Angels to win at this point because I don't want their picks to be protected.
Bearskin Rugburn - August 6, 2010
The Orioles are 3-0 with Showalter, could this be a sign?
SeaKoala - August 6, 2010 via mobile
No they need to fire him first, then PLAYOFFS!
JY - August 6, 2010
Yea, right.
“I assure you, there are few things more annoying than fantasizing about specific draft candidates more than ten months before the draft takes place.”
It’s almost as if July-September 2008 never happened.
andrewgolfsalot - August 6, 2010 via mobile
it's more like trying to make sure that sort of mess doesn't happen again
pdb - August 6, 2010
This verbal tone is always really indicative of good commentary.
Matthew - August 6, 2010
That wasn't Jeff's thing
Graham MacAree - August 6, 2010
Wow Houston is way way better than us. How the hell did this happen?
Edgar for Pres - August 6, 2010
They've had better pitching
But their defense has been crap and their offense has been as bad as ours. I would have wagered them for a bit of a comeback in the second half before the fire sale at the deadline. Now they probably are as terrible as us.
seattlecougar - August 6, 2010
We have had a tougher schedule as well...
We still suck. A lot. But as far as schedules go, we have been unfortunate to play more division leaders than they have… plus we suck.
ambrosia2112 - August 6, 2010
A Dose of Reality
What do Matt Bush, Bryan Bullington, and Luke Hochevar have in common with David Price, Justin Upton, Joe Mauer and Adrian Gonzalez?
They’re all first overall draft picks. Besides those guys, you can add Delmon Young and Tim Beckham to the list of first overall picks. Top picks don’t always work out, and except Mauer, you can find someone who ended up being better than the top overall pick.
It’s easy to get excited about the first overall pick. They are successful at a far greater rate than later picks. But they still bust at nearly a 50% clip, and a decent fraction end up being no more than MLB average players. Many who turn out well don’t really produce while they are under club control.
philosofool - August 6, 2010
Matt Bush was a panic pick by a Padres front office desparate to save money.
He belongs in the discussion of number one overall picks in the same way Michael Garciaparra belongs in discussion of supplemental first-round picks.
Bullington was picked in large part because the Pirates didn’t think they could afford B.J. Upton.
JY - August 6, 2010
Further addition because it's a peeve of mine.
A lot of people have made an effort to demonstrate the overall value of picks based on rounds and attempted to show the difference between first round picks and those in other rounds to make a determination as to the overall value of the picks.
This is stupid. Every year, there are a few teams that reach in the first round because they don’t have money, don’t want to risk a compensatory pick, or have retarded scouting departments. Similarly, prospects slip every year because they have signability or work ethic/make-up or injury concerns that cause them to drop down a round or two from where they would have ended up on talent alone.
Trying to infer the overall value of a draft pick based on its round isn’t as helpful as people would like to believe because teams aren’t always picking the best player available. There are too many different factors mucking things up from the get-go, so the dataset is inherently flawed to such a degree that conclusions drawn from it are specious at best.
</ end rant>
JY - August 6, 2010
Admittedly, it is hard to make any kind of judgment on the MLB draft until you've really truly followed it for several years.
Because it’s so much different than the much easier to follow NBA and NFL drafts. Players don’t ever fall in the NBA draft because of agents or signability. (Save for a few foreign players) In the NFL, you can manuever a bit as a draft pick, but because you can trade draft picks, players typically go where they would normally go in any circumstance. In the MLB, players can go all over for so many reasons. It’s a totally messed up draft, so if someone just looks at past drafts they’ll say “What the hell were they thinking?!” without realizing how much went into that pick. Every year someone seems to go in the top 5 that wouldn’t have done so if he wasn’t signable and/or cheap.
Kenneth Arthur - August 6, 2010
But do those instances really skew things that much?
There are some players that slide due to signability, but I don’t think there are really all that many, and most of them don’t slide well down into the draft where they would have a huge influence on the total outcome. There are guys that get picked a bit early because they may come in under slot, but again, I can’t think there’d be that many, and it’s not like you’re seeing players that are projected as 10th round talents going in the first couple of rounds.
Yeah, these things have an affect, but because the nature of the draft causes future outcomes to be so unpredictable anyway, it’s hard for me to imagine that it throws things off that much.
nathaniel dawson - August 6, 2010
Effect, even
Goddamnit, I hate when I read other people making that mistake, and now there it is out on the internet where it will haunt me forever.
nathaniel dawson - August 6, 2010
Every year the way people project the draft to go based on talent and the way it does go are two very distinct things.
JY - August 6, 2010
Fair enough, you've convinced me.
But I still think that prospect development is much more variable than people want to believe, and that was my main point.
philosofool - August 6, 2010
I can get on board with that point.
JY - August 6, 2010
Can you really call Beckham a bust at this point?
He’s still only 20.
Mariner John - August 6, 2010
No, which is why I didn't include him in the main list.
He’s yet to slug above .400 at any level, which is disappointing, kinda like Delmon Young, who classifies as useful, everyday guy, not star.
philosofool - August 6, 2010
In fairness to Young, he's very good this season.
I hadn’t looked at his numbers this season, but he’s certainly living up to top pick expectations. Still, he falls into the list of “guys that didn’t start to produce when they were under club control.”
philosofool - August 6, 2010
I don't follow this draft stuff closely
but I assume since Strasburg would only sign with the Padres, that he did not sign with Washington, and we have a fair chance of drafting him if we finish in the bottom 2
Poochie - August 6, 2010 via mobile
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Lookout Landing to post a comment.