Updated 6:24PM: Final Draft Order
This is the final order, assuming the Giants hold on to their 7-run lead. Final, that is, before FA compensation this offseason. Remember that in case of a tie, the tie-breaker is the previous year's record. So Kansas City gets the 3rd spot over the equally-bad Orioles because they had a worse record the previous year.
Here's the complete order, now with loss totals:
1. Tampa Bay 96
2. Pittsburgh 94
3. Kansas City 93
4. Baltimore 93
5. San Francisco 91
6. Florida 91
7. Cincinnati 90
8. Chicago (AL) 90
9. Washington 89
10. Houston 89
11. Texas 87
12. Oakland 86
13. Saint Louis 84
14. Minnesota 83
15. Los Angeles (NL) 80
16. Milwaukee 79
17. Toronto 79
18. Atlanta 78
19. Chicago (NL) 77
20. Seattle 74
21. Detroit 74
22. New York (NL) 74
23. Colorado 73
24. Philadelphia 73
25. San Diego 73
26. Arizona 72
27. Los Angeles (AL) 68
28. New York (AL) 68
29. Cleveland 66
30. Boston 66
42 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
pedro alvarez
by witmerbob on Sep 29, 2007 1:12 AM EDT reply actions
Why?
For example
i don't think there's a real need
to me, the only reason to allow trading of draft picks is because of the boras factor. that way, a team which can't afford to sign the best player available can always trade the pick to a team with the money, and pick up a little something in return.
MLB Draft Is Not The NFL Draft
Happens in hockey
How Many 18-19 Year Olds...
by Brett Keith on Sep 29, 2007 10:33 PM EDT up reply actions
Sidney Crosby
I'm not sure, but I think that was his point.
by abbreviatedman on Oct 1, 2007 11:41 AM EDT up reply actions
Hmm
Well...
Football draftees
I disagree
Trading picks only works in a fixed slotting system similar to the NBA.
One correction!
Nice work - thanks!
One correction though - I think you meant that second New York (NL) to be New York (AL,) right?
You could also add (AL) to the second Los Angeles, though that isn't necessary.
Take care and have a great day!
Value Of High Picks
Pirates
by abbreviatedman on Sep 29, 2007 2:02 PM EDT up reply actions
Pittsburgh Too?
by DrBGiantsfan on Sep 29, 2007 3:24 PM EDT up reply actions
I agree
First pick rotates
oh
by nothingissound on Sep 29, 2007 3:26 PM EDT up reply actions
yea
Well, at least that part of the draft, the rest is for a whole other discussion.
Still?
by DrBGiantsfan on Sep 29, 2007 3:20 PM EDT up reply actions
Turned out pretty good for them in retrospect.
yeah
Excited?
Eh
by ajohnst1 on Sep 29, 2007 11:34 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah....
Revere-has made the Twins look smart, but wasn't the right selection
Parmalee-probably a hit. Took a step backward in the pitcher friendly MWL this year
Garza-Hit
Henry Sanchez-Miss, at 20 still in Rookie Ball
Plouffe-I am going to say hit
Perkins-hit, but the big club is jerking him around
Waldrop-not bad, but not that good
Matthew Fox- Actually quite a nice comeback, but at 24 still stuck in low-A ball the chances are very slim
Jay Rainville- Another injury victim, still one of my favorite prospects. Had a decent bounceback year at 21
Matt Moses-Bustarooni
Span-bustarooni
Mauer-I think he's going to be an alright MLB player....
Adam Johnson-Huge Bustarooni
Aaron Heilman-not a bad pick, he just didn't sign
BJ Garbe-Super Bust
Ryan Mills-Injury Bust
Cuddyer-Snatched MLB success from the jaws or inept managing
LeCroy-Nice role player who fell apart
Travis Lee-Twins got Screwed by Boras, in the end it was probably better that way
Mark Redman-Nice pick, sent away for the ghost of Todd Jones
There aren't a lot of bright spots, especially near the top of the draft. Garbe, Mills, Johnson, Moses are huge craters that a team cannot have.
Ryan/Radcliffe did a lot of things right, drafting high wasn't one of them for the most part
by Terry Ryan Jr on Oct 3, 2007 12:30 PM EDT up reply actions
2002 Reversed?
Thankfully
by Kanst42 on Sep 30, 2007 6:17 PM EDT up reply actions
Yes, but...
Of course, in 8 months any number of players could be considered the top prospect.
by abbreviatedman on Sep 30, 2007 6:37 PM EDT up reply actions
Yes, but...
by HumboltThunderbolt on Oct 2, 2007 12:41 PM EDT reply actions

by 












