Turn Off Ads?
Page 26 of 39 FirstFirst ... 1622232425262728293036 ... LastLast
Results 376 to 390 of 574

Thread: "Lose For Crews"

  1. #376
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Calgary, Alberta, aka, the most prosperous city in the world.
    Posts
    13,308

    Re: "Lose For Crews"

    Quote Originally Posted by 757690 View Post
    No. Not even close. This is actually laughably wrong, which is rare for you, you are usually quite factual.

    Powerball odds

    1 in 292,201,338

    I don’t know the exact odds of the team with the worst record getting the #7 pick, but according to Tankathon, it’s around 1 in 5, or 19%.

    It seems the way the lottery is set up, odds are rather similar for top 8 teams getting any of the top 8 slots.

    https://www.tankathon.com/mlb/pick_odds
    You are correct 19%.

    The #1team actually has the best odds of getting the #7 pick, simply because they cannot get worse than the #7 pick.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #377
    Daffy Duck RedTeamGo!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Cleveland, OH
    Posts
    20,208

    Re: "Lose For Crews"

    What would you say.....ya do here?

  4. #378
    I wear Elly colored glass WrongVerb's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Woodbridge, VA
    Posts
    18,087

    Re: "Lose For Crews"

    Quote Originally Posted by Roy Tucker View Post
    Well huh, I did not know. www.random.org returns a truly random number:
    Actually, no computer algorithm can generate a truly random number, though that site is likely good enough for the baseball lottery.
    Our planet is a lonely speck in the great enveloping cosmic dark. In our obscurity, in all this vastness, there is no hint that help will come from elsewhere to save us from ourselves. -- Carl Sagan (Pale Blue Dot)

  5. #379
    Be the ball Roy Tucker's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Mason, OH
    Posts
    18,227

    Re: "Lose For Crews"

    Quote Originally Posted by WrongVerb View Post
    Actually, no computer algorithm can generate a truly random number, though that site is likely good enough for the baseball lottery.
    RANDOM.ORG is a true random number service that generates randomness via atmospheric noise. Computers collect and disseminate the data, but the generation is not computer-driven.

    Interesting history… https://www.random.org/history/
    She used to wake me up with coffee ever morning

  6. #380
    I wear Elly colored glass WrongVerb's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Woodbridge, VA
    Posts
    18,087

    Re: "Lose For Crews"

    Quote Originally Posted by Roy Tucker View Post
    RANDOM.ORG is a true random number service that generates randomness via atmospheric noise. Computers collect and disseminate the data, but the generation is not computer-driven.

    Interesting history… https://www.random.org/history/
    Interesting solution. Thanks for the info.
    Our planet is a lonely speck in the great enveloping cosmic dark. In our obscurity, in all this vastness, there is no hint that help will come from elsewhere to save us from ourselves. -- Carl Sagan (Pale Blue Dot)

  7. #381
    Daffy Duck RedTeamGo!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Cleveland, OH
    Posts
    20,208

    Re: "Lose For Crews"

    The pirates have lost 7 straight. They are really committed to losing for Crews.
    What would you say.....ya do here?

  8. Likes:

    REDREAD (09-27-2022),Wonderful Monds (09-23-2022)

  9. #382
    Member Strikes Out Looking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    4,903

    Re: "Lose For Crews"

    The Reds lost the lottery the day that Bob and Phil decided they didn't care about winning. They can draft as many first picks in the draft that they want, their model is flawed. It doesn't matter if they draft Babe Ruth Jr. next summer. The better model is to build a team that competes every year rather than having to look at the waiver wire in the afternoon to see who your starting pitchers are the next week.
    Where we gonna go?

  10. Likes:

    REDREAD (09-27-2022),wlf WV (09-24-2022)

  11. #383
    Daffy Duck RedTeamGo!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Cleveland, OH
    Posts
    20,208

    Re: "Lose For Crews"

    What would you say.....ya do here?

  12. Likes:

    Wonderful Monds (09-27-2022)

  13. #384
    Member Kingspoint's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    All around
    Posts
    12,212

    Re: "Lose For Crews"

    The 5th pick is pretty good, too.
    "One problem with people who have no vices is that they're pretty sure to have some annoying virtues."

  14. #385
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Posts
    35,391

    Re: "Lose For Crews"

    Just remember if Reds finish, say, fifth in lottery odds, they can still wind up selecting as late the 11th pick.

    The top six picks are selected by lottery. If you lose out, you then draft in reverse W-L PCT order, beginning with pick seven.

    It’s unlikely Reds would drop that far, but their guarantee, with the fifth worst record, is only a pick somewhere in the top 11.

    Further, if Reds do manage a top six pick, they can only do so for two years in a row. As a team that obtains revenue sharing dollars, they are limited in that way. So Reds can’t count on getting a very high pick every year and building that way.

  15. Likes:

    REDREAD (09-27-2022)

  16. #386
    Member mth123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    31,935

    Re: "Lose For Crews"

    Quote Originally Posted by Kc61 View Post
    Just remember if Reds finish, say, fifth in lottery odds, they can still wind up selecting as late the 11th pick.

    The top six picks are selected by lottery. If you lose out, you then draft in reverse W-L PCT order, beginning with pick seven.

    It’s unlikely Reds would drop that far, but their guarantee, with the fifth worst record, is only a pick somewhere in the top 11.

    Further, if Reds do manage a top six pick, they can only do so for two years in a row. As a team that obtains revenue sharing dollars, they are limited in that way. So Reds can’t count on getting a very high pick every year and building that way.
    This is exactly why it should just be best record of the non-play-off teams that picks first followed by the next best all the way down to the worst record followed by the play-off teams picking at the end in reverse order of how they performed in play-offs (World Seres winner picks last, world series loser picks second to last etc.)

    Spend your revenue sharing money and try to win. This is a sport about winning. Winning should be rewarded not losing.
    All my posts are my opinion - just like yours are. If I forget to state it and you're too dense to see the obvious, look here!

  17. Likes:

    Falls City Beer (09-27-2022),REDREAD (09-27-2022)

  18. #387
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Posts
    35,391

    Re: "Lose For Crews"

    Quote Originally Posted by mth123 View Post
    This is exactly why it should just be best record of the non-play-off teams that picks first followed by the next best all the way down to the worst record followed by the play-off teams picking at the end in reverse order of how they performed in play-offs (World Seres winner picks last, world series loser picks second to last etc.)

    Spend your revenue sharing money and try to win. This is a sport about winning. Winning should be rewarded not losing.
    What annoys me about the draft is that it creates false hope for lousy franchises. Prospects often disappoint. Home grown talent alone hardly ever results in a consistent winner. Yet for a team like the Reds, the prospect base becomes a primary point of interest and excitement. The team has little else to sell.

    Thinking back to last year’s negotiations, I would have liked a minimum salary structure. Require teams to pay some veterans, make that a pre-requisite even for rebuilding clubs.

  19. Likes:

    Falls City Beer (09-27-2022),REDREAD (09-27-2022),Roy Tucker (09-27-2022)

  20. #388
    I rig polls REDREAD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    ohio
    Posts
    29,254

    Re: "Lose For Crews"

    Quote Originally Posted by Kc61 View Post
    What annoys me about the draft is that it creates false hope for lousy franchises. Prospects often disappoint. Home grown talent alone hardly ever results in a consistent winner. Yet for a team like the Reds, the prospect base becomes a primary point of interest and excitement. The team has little else to sell.

    Thinking back to last year’s negotiations, I would have liked a minimum salary structure. Require teams to pay some veterans, make that a pre-requisite even for rebuilding clubs.
    Yes.. the Reds have just had a long string of relatively high draft picks, and they did pretty well on them. Greene is a work in progress. Senzel failed, but pretty much everyone else has hit. Plus they got Ashcraft in a lower round (4th round? I don't remember). They hit on Diaz too. But look at the team, it stinks, because ownership is too cheap to get quality veterans to support these kids.
    The Reds have done about as well as someone could reasonably expect in the draft, yet they are still awful.

    The farm is ranked high now, because of all the vets that were traded for prospects, but there's just not enough talent there to make the team a winner without investing in some veterans.
    All these kids are going to arrive at staggered times. Steer is here now. That kid we got for Gray is probably 4 years away (if he makes it) -- by the time that kid arrives, most of the successful #1 picks on the team now are likely to be gone.

    I agree with you, the last labor agreement did little to help competitive balance. I do like that teams can't tank their way to the #1 pick, but ownership like Phil C could care less about where the Reds pick in the draft, they don't care about winning today or tomorrow. They think they are entitled to put out a crappy product , screw over the fans and watch the money roll in. And the current system lets them do that. Your idea is a good one. Another good idea would be to make a team's revenue sharing tied to payroll and/or W-L record. You lose 95+ games? No revenue sharing money for you.
    [Phil ] Castellini celebrated the team's farm system and noted the team had promising prospects who would one day be great Reds -- and then joke then they'd be ex-Reds, saying "of course we're going to lose them". #SellTheTeamBob

    Nov. 13, 2007: One of the greatest days in Reds history: John Allen gets the boot!

  21. Likes:

    Falls City Beer (09-27-2022)

  22. #389
    Member mth123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    31,935

    Re: "Lose For Crews"

    Quote Originally Posted by Kc61 View Post
    What annoys me about the draft is that it creates false hope for lousy franchises. Prospects often disappoint. Home grown talent alone hardly ever results in a consistent winner. Yet for a team like the Reds, the prospect base becomes a primary point of interest and excitement. The team has little else to sell.

    Thinking back to last year’s negotiations, I would have liked a minimum salary structure. Require teams to pay some veterans, make that a pre-requisite even for rebuilding clubs.
    Exactly. It feeds into the shell game teams like the Reds and Pirates play. "We're getting some top picks and we'll compete in 3 years." Every year it just gets pushed out another couple of years, but they sell this to keep the fan base engaged. Trying to win would be a better way to keep the fans engaged IMO.
    Last edited by mth123; 09-27-2022 at 11:03 AM.
    All my posts are my opinion - just like yours are. If I forget to state it and you're too dense to see the obvious, look here!

  23. Likes:

    Falls City Beer (09-27-2022),REDREAD (09-27-2022),Redsfan6272 (09-27-2022)

  24. #390
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Posts
    35,391

    Re: "Lose For Crews"

    MLB is one of the worst offenders in terms of the prospect build-up game. In the NBA and NFL, there are no minor leagues for the higher level prospects. The better players go directly to the big team. They’re expected to contribute within a couple of years. There isn’t much time for a build up.

    In baseball, players spend years in the minors leading to all kinds of analysis, speculation, projection. With a prolonged waiting period, teams can ask fans to wait, and trumpet these kids, for a longer period.

    There’s nothing wrong with good prospects, they’re essential, but they aren’t a substitute for a competitive MLB team.

  25. Likes:

    Falls City Beer (09-27-2022),mth123 (09-27-2022),REDREAD (09-27-2022)


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | Gallen5862 | Plus Plus | Powel Crosley | RedlegJake | The Operator