PDA

View Full Version : Farm System Pet Peeve


shingo10
09-24-2010, 12:16 AM
Reading Phil Rogers article in the Chicago Tribune today about how KW basically rode the 2 best players of the Ron Schuler era (PK and Buehrle) to the World Series and since then hasn't really produced any talent. Other than Beckham.

The article goes on to say that he spends too much and trades too much of the farm system away. Here's my pet peeve. How successful were the Sox when they had a "good" farm system? The farm system does NOT win championships. I can't stand when people complain about our lack of talent down there because what good does it do if you don't win anything. Granted the Sox have only been to the postseason twice during KW's time here but they have been in contention into September 7 out of the last 8 years. That's pretty good. Not good enough but better than when Schuler was here and we had a "good" farm system.

I think the emphasis on having a good farm system is overrated. At the end of the day I wouldn't take any of the guys that have been traded back other than Gio Gonzalez.

TDog
09-24-2010, 12:33 AM
Paul Konerko was as much a procuct of the White Sox farm system as Carlos Quentin was. Konerko came from the Dodgers farm system. He was a product of a trade from the Reds.

SoxSpeed22
09-24-2010, 12:36 AM
My pet peeve with the farm system is how if someone gets hurt or they say we can replace him from within, said replacement comes in here and is really bleeping bad at baseball. See 2003 and that cluster**** we had going at the 5th starter spot. Point I'm trying to make is, we don't need to build the entire team from within, but just be able to replace certain parts from within helps over the course of the season.

Huisj
09-24-2010, 12:46 AM
My pet peeve with the farm system is how if someone gets hurt or they say we can replace him from within, said replacement comes in here and is really bleeping bad at baseball. See 2003 and that cluster**** we had going at the 5th starter spot. Point I'm trying to make is, we don't need to build the entire team from within, but just be able to replace certain parts from within helps over the course of the season.

And even better would be to have some of those replacement pieces become key full-time players a year or so down the road after that first fill-in period. Seems like other teams can spin things to work out like that so much more than the Sox. Maybe it's just a grass-is-always-greener thing.

DumpJerry
09-24-2010, 08:29 AM
Reading Phil Rogers article in the Chicago Tribune today.
The same Phil Rogers who, a couple of years ago, wrote that the way to evaluate a trade is to count how many players each team gave up and received and the team that received the highest number of players came out ahead? Under this system, if a team sent three players to the Cards for Pujols, the Cards come out ahead because they got three players. That Phil Rogers? Did he detail Paulie's rise through the Sox farm system?

nccwsfan
09-24-2010, 10:19 AM
Reading Phil Rogers article in the Chicago Tribune today about how KW basically rode the 2 best players of the Ron Schuler era (PK and Buehrle) to the World Series and since then hasn't really produced any talent. Other than Beckham.

The article goes on to say that he spends too much and trades too much of the farm system away. Here's my pet peeve. How successful were the Sox when they had a "good" farm system? The farm system does NOT win championships. I can't stand when people complain about our lack of talent down there because what good does it do if you don't win anything. Granted the Sox have only been to the postseason twice during KW's time here but they have been in contention into September 7 out of the last 8 years. That's pretty good. Not good enough but better than when Schuler was here and we had a "good" farm system.

I think the emphasis on having a good farm system is overrated. At the end of the day I wouldn't take any of the guys that have been traded back other than Gio Gonzalez.

Sounds as if Rogers is contradicting himself in his own article- on one hand KW hasn't cultivated any talent in the minors, but goes on to rip him for trading away their top prospects.

Am I missing something? PR is one of a kind....

wilburaga
09-24-2010, 10:22 AM
It's remarkable how uniformly awful Chicago sportswriters have been for the last 10-15 years. There's been no one with a national presence. Rogers is probably the best known presently and he's frankly pathetic. Unoriginal, uninformative and bland.

Craig Grebeck
09-24-2010, 10:23 AM
Reading Phil Rogers article in the Chicago Tribune today about how KW basically rode the 2 best players of the Ron Schuler era (PK and Buehrle) to the World Series and since then hasn't really produced any talent. Other than Beckham.

The article goes on to say that he spends too much and trades too much of the farm system away. Here's my pet peeve. How successful were the Sox when they had a "good" farm system? The farm system does NOT win championships. I can't stand when people complain about our lack of talent down there because what good does it do if you don't win anything. Granted the Sox have only been to the postseason twice during KW's time here but they have been in contention into September 7 out of the last 8 years. That's pretty good. Not good enough but better than when Schuler was here and we had a "good" farm system.

I think the emphasis on having a good farm system is overrated. At the end of the day I wouldn't take any of the guys that have been traded back other than Gio Gonzalez.
Having both a winning ballclub and a productive farm system is not impossible.

Don't believe the organization's line about winning today, and not worrying about tomorrow. There are organizations that do both.

ode to veeck
09-24-2010, 10:24 AM
what no love for WS MVP runner up Joe Crede?

I take PR's articles with a wide grain of salt and haven't bothered reading them for years. Sure he's a few notches above Cowely and well above the Moron but who cares.

Irishsox1
09-24-2010, 10:32 AM
I read that article and it was vintage Dr. Phil. A lot of borderline mental patient logic.

Tragg
09-24-2010, 11:17 AM
OUr farm system isn't particularly good. But you'll find some productive players on the As, the Padres, and, as always, with Friendly Arizona.
Most of this has happened in the last 2 years; when Williams has been off his game.

Nellie_Fox
09-24-2010, 11:20 AM
The same Phil Rogers who, a couple of years ago, wrote that the way to evaluate a trade is to count how many players each team gave up and received and the team that received the highest number of players came out ahead? Under this system, if a team sent three players to the Cards for Pujols, the Cards come out ahead because they got three players. That was the way we used to calculate trades when we were in third grade. I'll package four or five crappy players, and you give me your star. Hey, you're getting four or five guys, c'mon!

spawn
09-24-2010, 11:50 AM
That was the way we used to calculate trades when we were in third grade. I'll package four or five crappy players, and you give me your star. Hey, you're getting four or five guys, c'mon!

That's how we calculated trading baseball cards.

DSpivack
09-24-2010, 12:29 PM
Phil Rogers is a moron who has a longstanding hatred of the White Sox.

Hitmen77
09-24-2010, 12:37 PM
I actually think the Sox farm system does need to get better for us to compete. We have a decent payroll, but not enough to fill every position with expensive veterans.

Right now, the only starter for us who isn't beyond the arbitration eligible stage is Beckham. Looking ahead, we now have Sale too and maybe Morel can become another good player too. That's an improvement over the years we were churning out Josh Fields and Lance Broadways year after year.

Yes, having a great minor league system can be overrated, but that doesn't mean the Sox farm system should be barren either. IMO, this is one of the biggest failing of KW's tenure and it is making it more difficult for us to compete with our division rivals.

I don't mind KW trading prospects for major league talent. But let's not pretend this will always be one sided for the Sox or that we can always rely on our own internal talent being good enough to trade, but not good enough to ever amount to much.

It's not only Gio. Ryan Sweeney and Chris Young aren't total losers either. There's also Clayton Richard (I haven't been against the Peavy deal) and Daniel Hudson. I'm not saying KW should never have traded any of these guys....but let's not pretend that the ex-Sox prospects out there are Gio and then drop off to Lance Broadway. John Ely's success at LA didn't last this year, but I hadn't heard that this means the end of his career or that he could never improve with more seasoning. Chris Carter has had a slow start so far, but he might not end up being a bust either.

fram40
09-24-2010, 01:25 PM
The same Phil Rogers who, a couple of years ago, wrote that the way to evaluate a trade is to count how many players each team gave up and received and the team that received the highest number of players came out ahead? Under this system, if a team sent three players to the Cards for Pujols, the Cards come out ahead because they got three players. That Phil Rogers? Did he detail Paulie's rise through the Sox farm system?

The same Phil Rogers who - in the summer of 2006 - wrote an espn.com article about the Sox farm system and how promising it was (and the White Sox future) because all of the Sox minor league affiliates were in first place?

Phil Rogers is bad. real bad. Just read this article for a laugh at his expense. http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?columnist=rogers_phil&id=2447208

guillen4life13
09-24-2010, 01:32 PM
The Sox teams of the early-mid '90's had strong farm systems with strong teams on the field, right?

Those teams were made primarily of homegrown products. Ventura, Thomas, Fernandez, Alvarez, McDowell, and Ozzie were the core of those teams.

fram40
09-24-2010, 01:34 PM
The Sox teams of the early-mid '90's had strong farm systems with strong teams on the field, right?

Those teams were made primarily of homegrown products. Ventura, Thomas, Fernandez, Alvarez, McDowell, and Ozzie were the core of those teams.

Ozzie was not home grown. Nor was Alvarez

Nellie_Fox
09-24-2010, 02:08 PM
Right now, the only starter for us who isn't beyond the arbitration eligible stage is Beckham. IIRC, Jenks, Danks, Peņa, and Quentin are arb-eligible.

khan
09-24-2010, 02:26 PM
Reading Phil Rogers article in the Chicago Tribune today...
See, there's your first mistake. You could get better information from a blind, drunk monkey than from Rogers on most days.

The article goes on to say that he spends too much and trades too much of the farm system away.
Actually, I can agree with this.

For example, I have been on record from the moment that it happened that the Jackson trade was stupid, dumb, moronic, idiotic, myopic, short-sighted, etc...

Adding an expensive SP to THIS team was akin to spending money to put a turbocharger on your 1992 Honda Accord: Sure, it'll make your car faster, but you're not going to win the Daytona 500 with that car. [Just as adding an expensive 5th SP might have made the 2010 SOX better, but this team was NEVER going to win the World Series as it is/was composed.]

At the same time, the money spent on that turbocharger might have been better utilized by SAVING it for another day. [Just as NOT blowing $12M on a Boras client while keeping a young, cheap player of reasonable ability would have been the better course of action for THIS team and for future years as well.]

Here's my pet peeve. How successful were the Sox when they had a "good" farm system? The farm system does NOT win championships. I can't stand when people complain about our lack of talent down there because what good does it do if you don't win anything.
I disagree. Having talent in the farm system is akin to having assets that can be used HERE, or as a form of "currency" to trade later. Since KW has been foolishly aggressive, he NOW has to spend money to fix his mistakes.

Granted the Sox have only been to the postseason twice during KW's time here but they have been in contention into September 7 out of the last 8 years. That's pretty good. Not good enough but better than when Schuler was here and we had a "good" farm system.
I'd say that Schuler wasn't aggressive enough when he had his opportunities, while KW has been the opposite. KW has been recklessly aggressive, with little to show for it. [Other than an aging, expensive team that can't win a division with enough regularity.]

As an aside, comparing today's team/manager/GM to the incompetent clowns of yesteryear is a form of insanity, IMO.

I think the emphasis on having a good farm system is overrated.
I don't think anyone has an "emphasis" on having a "good" farm system.

I think we as a fandom would just like to have even a mediocre farm system, which this club DOESN'T have. It has been an absolutely ****ty, deporable farm system that is an embarrassment and an impediment to sustained success.

At the end of the day I wouldn't take any of the guys that have been traded back other than Gio Gonzalez.
At the end of the day, if the only player you'd take back is Gonzalez, then that speaks ill of KW's front office's ability to scout, draft, and develop youngsters. Of course, since his buddy Wilder did a ****ty job and stole money and KW hasn't bothered to replace him, that hasn't helped.

And for MY part, I'd take Daniel Hudson back over the $12M nightmare that KW, in his foolish and reckless aggression, unleashed on this team.

Bobby Thigpen
09-24-2010, 03:08 PM
There are organizations that do both.
Who?

DirtySox
09-24-2010, 03:14 PM
Who?

Tampa Bay, Minnesota, Boston, Philadelphia, San Francisco, Colorado off the top of my head.

Why is there this misconception that you can only have a decent farm system if you lose? It certainly helps to have early round draft picks, but a team doesn't have to be rebuilding to produce and develop talent. Competent scouts, coaches, development personnel, and not routinely being one of the bottom teams in draft spending certainly would help. The White Sox farm system is pathetic, and it's certainly not because they win and pick at the bottom.

Hitmen77
09-24-2010, 03:14 PM
Right now, the only starter for us who isn't beyond the arbitration eligible stage is Beckham.
IIRC, Jenks, Danks, Peņa, and Quentin are arb-eligible.

Oops, my mistake. I meant to say the only starter who hasn't reached arbitration eligibility yet. Sorry for the confusion.

My point there is that once good players hit arbitration, they have a big increase in salary. Jenks makes quite a bit. Danks might see a nice raise this year.

The Sox have a decent major league payroll, but if they can't produced much in the way of players that can perform and who are in that inexpensive stage of their career, they seem to reach that ~$100 million ceiling before they can fill all the holes in their lineup.

A good farm system alone doesn't = a successful team. I agree with that. But I do think having a talent-poor farm system is holding the Sox back in terms of being able to be one of the better teams in the AL.

Red Barchetta
09-24-2010, 03:50 PM
Perhaps the best farm system we had in this modern (Comisky II/US Cellular) era was under Larry Himes. Jack McDowell, Frank Thomas, Robin Ventura, Alex Fernandez, etc. to name a few.

We did not win one WS championship and we did not consistently win the division.

BTW - We obtained Konerko through a trade (Mike Cameron). He was not a product of our farm system so I'm not clear on his point about riding Konerko and Beuhrle to a championship.