1st overall pick?

by Mahon on May 31, 2007 11:44 PM CDT

at this point, I'd rather see the Rangers completely tank and get the 1st overall pick in the 2008 draft.

0 recs | Comment 30 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

draft picks

i'm sure it won't hurt but baseball draft picks are probably the least dependable, and the payoff is so far away.

Forget Johnny Bench, we got Gerry "the Jet" Laird

by ab03 on May 31, 2007 11:47 PM CDT 0 recs

eh

baseball draft picks arnt worth tanking for.

and although i have completely abandoned the rangers being any good, i dont think they are worse then the royals and such and doubt they will end up in the bottom 3 in record.

by DSheppard on Jun 1, 2007 12:02 AM CDT 0 recs

The number one pick

is worth tanking for, imo.

Especially when there is a clear cut premium talent available, like there will be at the top of next year's draft.

It takes a big man to cry. It takes an even bigger man to laugh at that man.

by thedirkatron on Jun 1, 2007 7:55 AM CDT up 0 recs

We'll be worse than the Royals

when we trade Teixeira and everyone on the team older than 32.

by JBImaknee on Jun 1, 2007 9:11 AM CDT up 0 recs

baseball prospectus

...says that the biggest difference in value between any 2 picks in the draft is the first and second overall.

Maybe especially true next year if this Pedro Alvarez is all that.

by tricer on Jun 1, 2007 12:15 AM CDT 0 recs

Yeah

This is probably one of those years where it's worth it to secure a guy like Alvarez.

by zywica on Jun 1, 2007 12:32 AM CDT up 0 recs

+1

It takes a big man to cry. It takes an even bigger man to laugh at that man.

by thedirkatron on Jun 1, 2007 7:55 AM CDT up 0 recs

luke hochever (p)
justin upton (ss)
matt bush (ss/p)
delmon young (of)
bryan bullington (p)
joe mauer (c)
adrian gonzalez (1b)
jost hamilton (of/p)
pat burrell(1b)
matt anderson (p)
kris benson (p)
darin erstad (of)
paul wilson (p)
alex rodriguez (ss)
phil nevin (3b)

i'll randomly pick a draft...2001. i'll post the draft picks taken at where the rangers will pick

17 daniel denham
24 macay mcbride
35 jd martin
44 jayson nix
54 mike rodriguez

hmm...not good.

let's try 1 more. . .the uh...1999 draft

17 eric asadoorian
24 kurt ainsworth
35 brian west
44 scott rice
54 brian sanches

oh damn, that wasn't good either...
last try...2002

17 colbert hamels
24 joseph blanton
35 jeremy brown
44 joseph votto
54 william johnson

screw it

Al Gore 2008 http://www.myspace.com/igotsculture

by gossamer on Jun 1, 2007 1:15 AM CDT 0 recs

Umm

Getting Cole Hamels, Joe Blanton and Joey Votto out of these five picks would be a jackpot.

by zywica on Jun 1, 2007 1:46 AM CDT up 0 recs

right

after i posted it i looked at the 2002 players. i didn't recognize their names at first, but there are a couple solid 2nd year pitchers there. let's hope for a 2002 draft and not a draft like 1999 or 2001

Al Gore 2008 http://www.myspace.com/igotsculture

by gossamer on Jun 1, 2007 10:59 AM CDT up 0 recs

im pretty sure

that the 02 draft id take in a HEARTBEAT

votto is doing quite well in AAA
hamels alone would make it worth it
blanton has a career ERA+ of 105 and is 26 this yr

hamels has a career era+ of 113, career era of 3.96, 231 Ks/69 bb in 207 IP (34 starts) - 29 HR allowed....and best of all hes 23.

hamels/votto/blanton is one hell pf a deal there.

by knockoutking24 on Jun 1, 2007 1:49 AM CDT up 0 recs

Even more impressive

when you consider that Bush and Bullington (possibly others, I'm not sure) were signability picks. The #1 spot matters a lot.

Speaking of the first pick, I have a question for Zywica and others... How many times has a player who was the consensus number one talent in the draft dropped for reasons other than signability?

I ask because there's the possibility that the Royals and the Rangers will have the 1 and 2 picks in 2008, and obviously the Royals consider themselves set at 3B (assuming Gordon has some sort of bounce-back over the next 12 months).

Given, of course, that draftees in baseball take a good while before they are significant contributors in the majors, I suspect this happens less often than with the other major sports, but I really have no idea.

by a bebop a rebop on Jun 1, 2007 2:48 AM CDT up 0 recs

Mark Prior for Joe Mauer

Minnesota picked Mauer over Prior for signability issues...that's why Teix fell to us...I believe one or two analysts had him as the best player in the draft (although everyone thought the top pick would be Prior for the simple fact that he was a pitcher, and extremely well polished going into the draft).

by rangeressary on Jun 1, 2007 7:33 AM CDT up 0 recs

He said "not" for signability

Teix also slid to us because Boras told Philly and Tampa he wouldn't sign w/ them. He was a sophomore, eligibility-wise, wasn't he?

I think Bullington over Upton is a good example of not for signability. Although I have read differing accounts, supposedly the Pirates owner demanded they take a college pitcher because he'd be ready faster. It was funny, because after picking him, Littlefield proclaimed Bullington to project as a solid #3 starter.

Dozens!!!

by Brian Thomas on Jun 1, 2007 10:23 AM CDT up 0 recs

As for the Royals and Rangers

Yes, the Royals are most likely set for years to come with Gordon...BUT, you always take the best player in the draft if you can afford him. In baseball, more than any other sport, teams almost always draft based on talent and not need.

by rangeressary on Jun 1, 2007 7:34 AM CDT up 0 recs

equally

...its the royals.

if we dont take a guy because of his (percieved?) bonus demands i think tom hicks may have to be run out of town.

by knockoutking24 on Jun 1, 2007 8:40 AM CDT up 0 recs

Speaking of the Royals...

We are currently have the same record....the race is on!

If Rangers Make Playoffs, I will be a Hundredaire via Online Betting....Let's Do This!

by SMITTY on Jun 1, 2007 8:53 AM CDT up 0 recs

Watch the Royals

get the first pick and run into a Blalock/Teixeira situation...for the second time in two years.

by zywica on Jun 1, 2007 9:06 AM CDT up 0 recs

I'm pretty confident...

...that the Nationals are gonna screw this up for us.

by tricer on Jun 1, 2007 10:51 AM CDT up 0 recs

Take notes from the Celtics and Grizzlies

Tanking games comes back to haunt you.

by OKC Ranger Fan on Jun 1, 2007 10:54 AM CDT up 0 recs

The lottery

is a big difference between the two leagues. And it's what screwed Boston and the Griz.

by zywica on Jun 1, 2007 2:26 PM CDT up 0 recs

Karma

I realize the 2 leagues are different, but I was more meaning karma. Doing bad things comes back to haunt you.

by OKC Ranger Fan on Jun 1, 2007 2:29 PM CDT up 0 recs

Well

it didn't the Rockets or Knicks.

by zywica on Jun 1, 2007 2:47 PM CDT up 0 recs

It will, it will...

The Rockets may end up trading for Kobe here soon and let the bad begin.

by OKC Ranger Fan on Jun 1, 2007 2:48 PM CDT up 0 recs

Standings

How about we dump the AL West standings on the left-hand side of the page and put something up that we actually have a chance at winning...the 2008 #1 pick!

by BCanfield on Jun 1, 2007 6:41 AM CDT 0 recs

tanking not necessary

I think this group will manage to play enough the remainder of the season that no extra effort will be required to lose

by simplesimon on Jun 1, 2007 9:00 AM CDT 0 recs

bad enough is what I meant

by simplesimon on Jun 1, 2007 9:00 AM CDT up 0 recs

Honestly

I can't imagine the starting pitching continuing to be this bad, unless guys start getting hurt there too (beyond blisters and minor leg things). Padilla has never performed like this in his whole career, Millwood really hasn't, no one had any idea that McCarthy would be throwing up a nine ERA for a while. The only ways that I think that the Rangers are in the mix are if they continue at this silly pace with injuries and/or if they start trading guys like Teixeira and Millwood.

by zywica on Jun 1, 2007 9:10 AM CDT up 0 recs

trade offs

I too expect Millwood to be generally OK - he really has not pitched enough to dog him, even though he has been bad when he has pitched.

however - think some of the improvement by others will be offset by other guys going in the tank.

For instance - Tejeda was great in April, but he has been bad in May.

I think the offense will get more consistent and hopefully they will shore up the defense.

I don't think they will ultimately be as bad as the Royals, but some of that will be because the division is not as strong.

they're still pretty bad

by simplesimon on Jun 1, 2007 9:54 AM CDT up 0 recs

playing up to potential

I agree, the pitching is just not going to be this bad all season. These guys will regress to the mean soon. I see the Rangers ending up with about 70-72 wins or so even if they trade Teixeira and play lots of youngsters the rest of the way. I think they'll end up ahead of KC and Wash, maybe Tampa and one of the NL Central teams as well, and pick anywhere from 3-6 next year.

by t ball on Jun 1, 2007 10:07 AM CDT up 0 recs