Master Index of Archived Threads


All This Losing is Wonderful

Centerfield Jun 22 2017 02:55 PM

Should we really be hoping that the team tanks? I mean, this is not like the NBA draft where the #1 pick makes an immediate impact. I've heard more than a few times that it's not worth it, and baseball draft picks are all too speculative. This article suggests that the top few picks might actually be pretty valuable. http://outfieldflyrule.com/2015/09/01/t ... raft-pick/ Scroll down through the Braves garbage and to the analysis, about halfway through the article.

Benjamin Grimm Jun 22 2017 03:13 PM Re: All This Losing is Wonderful

I'm not hoping that the team tanks. A higher draft pick is a bit of a consolation for a poor season, but I don't see it as something to actively root for. As playoff hopes slip further and further away, I find that I'm hoping that the Mets at least manage to finish at or above .500.

Edgy MD Jun 22 2017 03:15 PM Re: All This Losing is Wonderful

It's one more reason professional sports drafts are an un-American absurdity.

Ceetar Jun 22 2017 03:16 PM Re: All This Losing is Wonderful

It's really too early for it though. The thing is, is the possibility of a better pick offset by the presumably lesser return you get by guys like Bruce and Granderson sucking into the deadline? Of course it doesn't really matter right now, as they're losing with some of those guys being good, but you'd kind of like them to be all on fire for a month or so here. And you kinda don't want the guys you have to suck. Like if d'Arnaud sucks you're worried about catcher for next year, but if he plays well and wins games, that's very much useful information. same with Nimmo, Conforto, Plawecki, Rosario, Smith, etc. Stick to 6-man and make sure Pill gets his fair share of starts and always pull the good pitchers early? You gotta at least wait until they rule out the possibility, however slim, that they go on a 15/18 tear that gets them back into things. Once September gets here, play some of these maybe not quite ready prospects to get them exposure.

Frayed Knot Jun 22 2017 03:44 PM Re: All This Losing is Wonderful

That guy goes through a whole lot of rigamarole to tell us that really high draft picks have a better shot at turning into stars compared to less high ones. Gee, thanks. And even then it's only in general and over time that those picks work better -- in other words you pretty much have to consistently have top-5 type picks for that "strategy" to have a decent shot at paying off and/or you need to consistently pick the right guys. Tough to pull all that off on purpose. It 'worked' for the Nats when they, for the first time ever, had back to back #1s overall* but that was as much timing as anything. It's great if the years you have #1s that you get gifted no-brainers like Strasburg and Harper. If you offered GMs their choice of draft picks for the entire 21st century, both at the time and with the wisdom of hindsight, those two would be in the top ten. It's also easy for the Braves fan to connect his team's predicament with the idea that it'll lead to the next Chipper Jones while ignoring that most top picks don't render anything close to him. Lately there's been a lot of talk about how Houston pulled an NBA-style tank job in order to get where they are now. But that breakdown/remake had more to do with the previous owner wanting to strip down in order to sell than it was a long-term or pre-thought-out plan. It also involved suffering through three straight seasons worse than anyone since the early '60s Mets had endured -- consecutive seasons of 106, 107, and 111 losses -- to produce three straight #1 picks, one of which, Carlos Correa, is contributing to this current surge. One of the others, Mark Appel, was dealt as part of a package to the Phils for set-up man Ken Giles and is currently pitching to a 6.00 ERA in AAA. The other, Brady Aiken, didn't sign w/the Astros and was re-drafted the next year #17thoverall by Cleveland where he currently sports a 5.50 ERA in A-ball. * the #1 overall pick used to bounce back and forth between the worst AL team and the worst NL team so it wasn't possible to pick 1st twice in a row until they did away with the distinction.

Centerfield Jun 22 2017 03:59 PM Re: All This Losing is Wonderful

Frayed Knot wrote: That guy goes through a whole lot of rigamarole to tell us that really high draft picks have a better shot at turning into stars compared to less high ones. Gee, thanks. But that theory in itself has been challenged. Plenty of folks cite the Piazza and Pujols and suggest draft order doesn't matter, or that it's a complete crapshoot. I think there is enough there, if it's true, to suggest that it does make sense to tank. Basically, the two desirable results are to make the playoffs, or finish last.

Centerfield Jun 22 2017 04:01 PM Re: All This Losing is Wonderful

I wonder how sports would be different if, instead of rewarding tanking, we gave the first overall pick to the team with the best record that missed the playoffs. And then went in order from there, with the playoff teams picking last. It would encourage teams to remain competitive throughout the entire season.

Frayed Knot Jun 22 2017 04:39 PM Re: All This Losing is Wonderful

Those who use the term "crapshoot" to imply that the draft is a totally random activity with later round picks succeeding at the same rate as top picks are more wrong than those who treat each slot as if it's a Beamonesque leap above the previous one. Of course higher picks are better than lower and most top players who come via the draft come from earlier rounds. But there's still so much variation within rounds that it becomes pointless to obsess over getting this slot rather than that one. Is the #2 pick better, over the long-haul, than #22? ... Sure. But dumping games so as to move from #10 to #7? ... eh, not so much. As an example: Kernan in the Post today is chiding the Mets for not just Justin Turner's career as a Dodger vs his one as a Met but also for losing out to the Dodgers by selecting the wrong SS in the 1st round of the 2012 draft: Gavin Cecchini with the 12th pick vs Corey Seager with the 18th; and then for the wrong 4th round legacy pick in 2013 when the Mets chose LJ Mazzilli with the 116th pick leaving Cole (son of Clay) Bellinger to be scooped up by LA with choice #124 Unless things change dramatically in the near future, the Mets clearly made the worse choice in each case despite having the better pick and there there's no way of knowing whether or not the Dodgers would have done the exact same thing had the roles been reversed. THAT is what people should mean when they employ the word 'crapshoot' about the draft.

Lefty Specialist Jun 22 2017 05:49 PM Re: All This Losing is Wonderful

The baseball draft is such a different animal. Football and basketball picks can have an immediate impact. Even the best draftees in baseball are usually at least a year or two away. Mike Piazza was a 62nd round pick as a favor to his father by Tommy Lasorda. An undrafted TJ Rivera will have a better baseball career than a lot of first-rounders, I'd bet. Tanking for a better draft pick probably isn't worth it.

Frayed Knot Jun 22 2017 06:47 PM Re: All This Losing is Wonderful Edited 2 time(s), most recently on Jun 22 2017 10:21 PM

... An undrafted TJ Rivera will have a better baseball career than a lot of first-rounders, I'd bet. Considering that around 1/4 of all 1st round picks* never spend a day in the majors, he already has. * oe: I actually did a quick ten-year search and the number I found was closer to 1/3 -- 95 of the 300 top-30 picks from 1995-2004 never played a single ML game The only slots not to have a failed prospect from that sample were the 1st, 2nd and ... 22nd picks.

Edgy MD Jun 22 2017 07:15 PM Re: All This Losing is Wonderful

Yeah, all this losing sucks big buttery butt.

Centerfield Jun 22 2017 07:56 PM Re: All This Losing is Wonderful

Lefty Specialist wrote: The baseball draft is such a different animal. Football and basketball picks can have an immediate impact. Even the best draftees in baseball are usually at least a year or two away. Mike Piazza was a 62nd round pick as a favor to his father by Tommy Lasorda. An undrafted TJ Rivera will have a better baseball career than a lot of first-rounders, I'd bet. Tanking for a better draft pick probably isn't worth it. Well see, that's it exactly. There are many out there that feel just like you. That tanking for a better draft pick isn't worth it. But this article seems to be saying just the opposite. That it IS worth it. There are no guarantees obviously, but the higher the pick, the better your odds of finding a star. This difference can be measured.

MFS62 Jun 22 2017 08:08 PM Re: All This Losing is Wonderful

Losing is not wonderful, especially when you have to share the city and media space with the MFYs and their fans. Later

seawolf17 Jun 22 2017 08:14 PM Re: All This Losing is Wonderful

Centerfield wrote: I wonder how sports would be different if, instead of rewarding tanking, we gave the first overall pick to the team with the best record that missed the playoffs. And then went in order from there, with the playoff teams picking last. It would encourage teams to remain competitive throughout the entire season. That's why I liked Bill Simmons' NBA postseason tournament idea where the teams who didn't make the playoffs had to play for the first overall pick. I don't know that it'd have the same importance in MLB because of reasons everyone's mentioned, but I did like it for other sports.

Frayed Knot Jun 22 2017 08:41 PM Re: All This Losing is Wonderful Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Jun 22 2017 10:23 PM

Centerfield wrote: But this article seems to be saying just the opposite. That it IS worth it. There are no guarantees obviously, but the higher the pick, the better your odds of finding a star. This difference can be measured. But only in a very broad sense. Take this graph, for instance, where the author separates out where only those 'Impact' players came from in his sample. High impact results in green, highest level in Red: [fimg=400]https://i0.wp.com/outfieldflyrule.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/1986-2005-Impact-Draft-Pick1.png?resize=1352%2C902[/fimg] The only picks really outdistancing the others are the first two or three; from pick #4 through about #24 a trend line drawn on that graph would be more or less flat. There are plenty of peaks and valleys in between but even those don't always show up where you expect them: 12th picks in this sample had a better track record than 6th picks, 22's turned out considerably better than 18's, etc. Go down the graph a bit further and you find that the top 25 or so picks, as a whole, have a considerably higher hit rate as compared to the next 25. But, like I said earlier, anyone taking the 'crapshoot' label so literally as to not expect that to be the case had a skewed view of this going in. And of course many of the second set of 25 picks are the second picks for teams who already chose once, so it's not like you can simply mail it in during September in order to tank yourself from say a mid-30s pick where 2 or 3 out of 20 becomes an impact player up to the top 5 where closer to half do. In fact what it's showing is that, even within those areas where a team could conceivably tank itself into a better spot, the results from the 17th slot have been pretty much like those from the 10th which itself is about the same as the 5th. Would I rather have the 5th pick than the 17th? Of course I would but, even if one could/would move from the one to the other, the evidence doesn't suggest that it would be an effective strategy.

Edgy MD Jun 22 2017 08:54 PM Re: All This Losing is Wonderful

There is also a competitive upside to trying to win, even if you come up short of the post-season.

Ashie62 Jun 22 2017 08:57 PM Re: All This Losing is Wonderful

Lefty Specialist wrote: The baseball draft is such a different animal. Football and basketball picks can have an immediate impact. Even the best draftees in baseball are usually at least a year or two away. Mike Piazza was a 62nd round pick as a favor to his father by Tommy Lasorda. An undrafted TJ Rivera will have a better baseball career than a lot of first-rounders, I'd bet. Tanking for a better draft pick probably isn't worth it. This is spot on. In college football and hoops drafts you can try to tank and catch an impact player early. Baseball? Play as hard as you can if you are out of it use the 7/31 deadline to trade and help yourself for the future.

Lefty Specialist Jun 23 2017 12:05 AM Re: All This Losing is Wonderful

Well, if you're craving high draft picks, I have good news for you: Rafael Montero is starting Sunday.

seawolf17 Jun 23 2017 10:02 AM Re: All This Losing is Wonderful

Lefty Specialist wrote: Well, if you're craving high draft picks, I have good news for you: Rafael Montero is starting Sunday. Good to know that nobody else in the org cares about winning games either.

Fman99 Jun 23 2017 10:23 AM Re: All This Losing is Wonderful

Edgy MD wrote: Yeah, all this losing sucks big buttery butt. I appreciate that at least you're seeing the romantic side to all of this.

Lefty Specialist Jun 23 2017 12:42 PM Re: All This Losing is Wonderful

Well, at least they're freeing up my summer.

Mets Willets Point Jun 23 2017 01:54 PM Re: All This Losing is Wonderful

Wasn't the original "All this losing is wonderful" concept because it would mean that they would Sell the Team Now!!! Perhaps to the Dolans?

Edgy MD Jun 23 2017 03:17 PM Re: All This Losing is Wonderful

The original concept I remember was an "All this winning is terrible!" when the Mets turned the season around mid-summer 2001, starting with the MOFo picnic. Presumably, the evil that was feared is that the Mets' management would be fooled by this illusory success, and wouldn't tear the team down and go for the offseason makeover that they desperately needed. The irony is that they hung in the race to the end, and management still gave the team a super-aggressive offseason makeover for the ages, and it was disastrous. The true illusion turned out to be the Madoff money that was underwriting that offseason spree.

Mets Willets Point Jun 23 2017 05:18 PM Re: All This Losing is Wonderful

Edgy MD wrote: The original concept I remember was an "All this winning is terrible!" when the Mets turned the season around mid-summer 2001, starting with the MOFo picnic. Presumably, the evil that was feared is that the Mets' management would be fooled by this illusory success, and wouldn't tear the team down and go for the offseason makeover that they desperately needed. The irony is that they hung in the race to the end, and management still gave the team a super-aggressive offseason makeover for the ages, and it was disastrous. The true illusion turned out to be the Madoff money that was underwriting that offseason spree. Oh yeah, it's all coming back to me. But there was still a faction who wanted the Dolans to buy the team.

d'Kong76 Jun 23 2017 05:43 PM Re: All This Losing is Wonderful

I think I banged the Dolan drum (softly) sometime back. I'd like to now say that was a really dumb fucking notion that I regret. Phwam, that felt good.

Centerfield Jun 23 2017 06:00 PM Re: All This Losing is Wonderful

Edgy MD wrote: The original concept I remember was an "All this winning is terrible!" when the Mets turned the season around mid-summer 2001, starting with the MOFo picnic. Presumably, the evil that was feared is that the Mets' management would be fooled by this illusory success, and wouldn't tear the team down and go for the offseason makeover that they desperately needed. The irony is that they hung in the race to the end, and management still gave the team a super-aggressive offseason makeover for the ages, and it was disastrous. The true illusion turned out to be the Madoff money that was underwriting that offseason spree. Do you remember if "ATWIT" was actually said by those rooting for losses? Or by us on the other side mocking them? Was trying to remember. We used to mock a lot.

Edgy MD Jun 23 2017 06:06 PM Re: All This Losing is Wonderful

It was the name* of the thread, unironically. * The actual name might have been "All This Winning Is Horrible," but either way ...

Mets Willets Point Jun 23 2017 08:31 PM Re: All This Losing is Wonderful

d'Kong76 wrote: I think I banged the Dolan drum (softly) sometime back. I'd like to now say that was a really dumb fucking notion that I regret. Phwam, that felt good. I'll confess it's cruel of me to use hindsight to mock people for wanting Dolan to buy the team, but I am using it as a general mockery of the dumb ideas (not by you) that were put forth in the general "some rich guy needs to buy the team and make it a winner" category.

Frayed Knot Jun 23 2017 09:05 PM Re: All This Losing is Wonderful

Yeah, the main quarrel many had with the 'Pons was them not "opening the wallet" which in turn led many to assume that a different wealthy father-son duo would do better and seeing as how the Dolans ran Long Island based Cablevision, then the owner/distributer of SportsChannel which carried the NYM games, it made them the logical target for Knight in Shining Armor status. What this 'solution' ignored (aside from the whole part about not knowing whether Dolan pere or fils was any good at running a sports team - since proven 'Not') was that the Mets payroll in those days was consistently among the top tier in MLB. But for some fans it didn't match their (made up) idea of where the payroll should be and of course it didn't match the Yanqui payroll so anything south of that was forever doomed to be branded as inadequate.

Edgy MD Jun 24 2017 12:57 AM Re: All This Losing is Wonderful

I believe some merry mocker created a parallel thread called "All This Whining is Horrible."