Official Race to the Finish for 2024 Draft Position

[tzill]

Per MLBTR, here are the odds for each of the 18 non-playoff teams to get the 1st pick of the 2024 draft:

1. A’s (50-112): 18.3%
2. Royals (56-106): 18.3%
3. Rockies (59-103): 18.3%
4. White Sox (61-101): 14.7%
5. Cardinals (71-91): 8.3%
6. Angels (73-89): 6.1%
7. Mets (75-87): 4.3%
8. Pirates (76-86, 62-100 in ’22): 3%
9. Guardians (76-86, 92-70 in ’22): 2%
10. Nationals (71-91): Ineligible
11. Tigers (78-84, 66-96 in ’22): 1.6%
12. Red Sox (78-84, 78-84 in ’22): 1.2%
13. Giants (79-83): 1%
14. Reds (82-80, 62-100 in ’22): 0.9%
15. Padres (82-80, 89-73 in ’22): 0.7%
16. Yankees (82-80, 99-63 in ’22): 0.6%
17. Cubs (83-79): 0.4%
18. Mariners (88-74): 0.2%

So you're saying there's a chance!!

 

[LHG]

So you're saying there's a chance!!

 

[LHG]

Per MLBTR, here are the odds for each of the 18 non-playoff teams to get the 1st pick of the 2024 draft:

1. A’s (50-112): 18.3%
2. Royals (56-106): 18.3%
3. Rockies (59-103): 18.3%
4. White Sox (61-101): 14.7%
5. Cardinals (71-91): 8.3%
6. Angels (73-89): 6.1%
7. Mets (75-87): 4.3%
8. Pirates (76-86, 62-100 in ’22): 3%
9. Guardians (76-86, 92-70 in ’22): 2%
10. Nationals (71-91): Ineligible
11. Tigers (78-84, 66-96 in ’22): 1.6%
12. Red Sox (78-84, 78-84 in ’22): 1.2%
13. Giants (79-83): 1%
14. Reds (82-80, 62-100 in ’22): 0.9%
15. Padres (82-80, 89-73 in ’22): 0.7%
16. Yankees (82-80, 99-63 in ’22): 0.6%
17. Cubs (83-79): 0.4%
18. Mariners (88-74): 0.2%

The draft lottery winners have been announced. Here is the draft order for 2024's amateur draft:

1. Guardians (had a 2% chance of getting this spot)
2. Reds
3. Rockies
4. Athletics
5. White Sox
6. Royals
7. Cardinals
8. Angels
9. Pirates
10. Nationals
11. Tigers
12. Red Sox
13. Giants
14. Cubs
15. Mariners
16. Marlins
17. Brewers
18. Rays
19. Mets
20. Blue Jays
21. Twins
22. Orioles
23. Dodgers
24. Padres
25. Yankees
26. Braves
27. Phillies
28. Astros
29. Diamondbacks
30. Rangers

 

[sf1giantfan]

Why did they change it? It used to be the team with the worst record

 

[LHG]

Why did they change it? It used to be the team with the worst record

Create a lack of incentive for teams tanking. However, the A's still get the 4th pick, the Royals still get the 6th pick and the Rockies still get the 3rd pick. Really, what it does is exactly what happened. It gives a mediocre team the chance to sneak in and get the 1st pick of the draft. The Reds, who ended with the 2nd pick of the draft, actually finished with a record above .500. Its weird and it adds some intrigue to the draft but I don't really think it makes much of a difference with what the stated reason was for the change.

 

[calsnowskier]

2 long shot teams taking the top 2 picks is going to cause a lot and hand wringing. I doubt this system stays in place much longer because of this.

 

[LHG]

2 long shot teams taking the top 2 picks is going to cause a lot and hand wringing. I doubt this system stays in place much longer because of this.

According to MLBTR, they had to do the lottery twice because the Nationals got pulled the first time for the 1st pick but they weren't supposed even be eligible until the 10th pick.
However, I could see MLB doubling down on this system because of these picks. It reinforces the idea that tanking won't get you high draft privilege.

 

[filosofy29]

lol at the A’s owner. Karma

 

[LHG]

lol at the A’s owner. Karma

The A's. I read the history of that franchise. Owners threatening to move that team to other cities and eventually succeed in moving it is the blood of that franchise. Whether it was Connie Mack in Philadelphia, Charlie Finley in Kansas City or whoever owns the team now, it seems inevitable that (A) the owner will be a financial tightwad, (B) the owner will nickel and dime to death the front office, the players and the fan base, (C) the owner will complain about the lack of fans attending and, in turn, further claim poverty, (D) start threatening to move the team to another city in hopes that ownership gets want it wants from the current city and/or league and (E) move the team to a new city.

 

[calsnowskier]

The A's. I read the history of that franchise. Owners threatening to move that team to other cities and eventually succeed in moving it is the blood of that franchise. Whether it was Connie Mack in Philadelphia, Charlie Finley in Kansas City or whoever owns the team now, it seems inevitable that (A) the owner will be a financial tightwad, (B) the owner will nickel and dime to death the front office, the players and the fan base, (C) the owner will complain about the lack of fans attending and, in turn, further claim poverty, (D) start threatening to move the team to another city in hopes that ownership gets want it wants from the current city and/or league and (E) move the team to a new city.

Same recipe for the Raiders. Not sure if Oakland just got cursed with 2 pain in the ass franchises or if Oakland somehow bred them, but fax is fax.

 

[tzill]

1. Phuk Jokeland. Second tier city with second tier owners. Glad the Ws are out of there.

2. I read yesterday that the A'ss cannot have a top six pick next year b/c they have been top six two years in a row and are getting competitive balance money. Phuk you, A'ss