PDA

View Full Version : ESPN's Down on the Farm Top 10 Prospects


Dadawg_77
02-01-2005, 03:32 PM
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?id=1981234

Flight #24
02-01-2005, 04:55 PM
Interesting that they project Reed with a .351 OBP. That's good, but nowhere near great. He'd have to up that significantly to meet the expectations that the anti-KW/FOBB had for him when pooh-poohing the Garcia trade as giving up too much.

rdivaldi
02-01-2005, 05:29 PM
6) Jesse Crain, RHP, Minnesota
No question that he is ready for a major league job. Projects as a dominating closer, but stuck behind Joe Nathan for now.

Wonderful. :(:

JUribe1989
02-01-2005, 05:39 PM
LOL Jesse Crain, he gave up the game winning grand slam to Juan Uribe on September 21, 2004.

rdivaldi
02-01-2005, 06:14 PM
LOL Jesse Crain, he gave up the game winning grand slam to Juan Uribe on September 21, 2004.

True, but he was pretty f'ing dominant in almost every other game.

PAPChiSox729
02-01-2005, 07:45 PM
6) Jesse Crain, RHP, Minnesota
No question that he is ready for a major league job. Projects as a dominating closer, but stuck behindJoe Nathan for now.

Wonderful. :(:

They don't cease to amaze me. They must have an endless supply of talented, young players. Ford, Mauer, and Morneau are all on their way to become impact players.

Dadawg_77
02-01-2005, 07:46 PM
Interesting that they project Reed with a .351 OBP. That's good, but nowhere near great. He'd have to up that significantly to meet the expectations that the anti-KW/FOBB had for him when pooh-poohing the Garcia trade as giving up too much.

For a rookie .351 is better then you are making it out to be.

Flight #24
02-01-2005, 10:50 PM
For a rookie .351 is better then you are making it out to be.

Don't get me wrong, I think it's very good. But there were some who were certain he was going to be great right off the bat and only get better. Phrases like "As good a prospect as Frank Thomas" come to mind.

The rest of us thought "Hmmm...good but unproven prospect for good and proven #1 pitcher - OK".

MRKARNO
02-01-2005, 11:19 PM
Where the hell is Brandon McCarthy on that pitching list?

Jerome
02-02-2005, 09:48 AM
They don't cease to amaze me. They must have an endless supply of talented, young players. Ford, Mauer, and Morneau are all on their way to become impact players.

Hwo do they have so many good young players if they've been coming in first place the last three years? Are these guys all high draft picks back when from when the twins were bad?

MisterB
02-02-2005, 10:51 AM
Hwo do they have so many good young players if they've been coming in first place the last three years? Are these guys all high draft picks back when from when the twins were bad?

No. Crain was a 2nd round pick from '02, and was drafted 2 positions after the Sox drafted Jeremy Reed. The Twins haven't done it all with high first round picks. They just have better scouting and player development than the Sox.

rdivaldi
02-02-2005, 10:53 AM
Where the hell is Brandon McCarthy on that pitching list?

Brandon doesn't have the "sexy" arm to make those kinds of lists yet. If he had put up the same numbers as he did last year, and threw in the mid/high 90's he'd be way up the charts. He will have to prove himself able to pitch an entire dominant year in AA/AAA to be recognized as one of the best.

For now he's somewhat "under the radar".

Flight #24
02-02-2005, 10:55 AM
No. Crain was a 2nd round pick from '02, and was drafted 2 positions after the Sox drafted Jeremy Reed. The Twins haven't done it all with high first round picks. They just have better scouting and player development than the Sox.

They also routinely keep their best prospects in the minors a lot longer than most teams. Example: Morneau was drafted IIRC in '99, but was "blocked" by Mientkodkhwkuetkwewrhgwicz until last year. By design, they kept him down there until they were absolutely sure he was ready. Similarly, they kept Santana in the 'pen even when it was clear he was at least one of their top 2-3 starters. Mauer is an exception.

Many other teams, including the Sox, bring guys up earlier.

SoxFanTillDeath
02-02-2005, 11:43 AM
So what you're saying is that with patience the Sox prospects who never panned out would have all panned out if they were left in the minors longer? I think it's actually a reflection of poor scouting and drafting than anything else, because you can't tell me that if Rauch, Borchard, Wright, etc. stayed in the minors for longer than they already had they would have been better.

The guys the Twinkies took their time on had consistently proven themselves in the minors, and there was no doubt they were ready. They were obviously head and shoulders above everyone else in the minors when they were brought up. The Sox prospects are considered to have a lot of potential in the minors, but that's it. That's scouting, not patience.

Flight #24
02-02-2005, 11:51 AM
So what you're saying is that with patience the Sox prospects who never panned out would have all panned out if they were left in the minors longer? I think it's actually a reflection of poor scouting and drafting than anything else, because you can't tell me that if Rauch, Borchard, Wright, etc. stayed in the minors for longer than they already had they would have been better.

The guys the Twinkies took their time on had consistently proven themselves in the minors, and there was no doubt they were ready. They were obviously head and shoulders above everyone else in the minors when they were brought up. The Sox prospects are considered to have a lot of potential in the minors, but that's it. That's scouting, not patience.

Perhaps I wasn't clear. Obviously the talent is there, but the Twins maximize that talent by keeping guys down longer, making absolutely sure that they have their fundamentals down and play in the "Twin way". Thus, even while their guys thatcome up aren't usualy superstars, they fit well into the way the team plays and are solid contributors.

A secondary point is that they are still reaping the benefits of their high draft picks as those guys (IIRC including Morneau) come up arond now.

The Twins are excellent at scouting and developing players. A part of that is their patience and willingness to live with potentially worse results at the major league leve rather than possibly rush a player.

rdivaldi
02-02-2005, 11:57 AM
But you have to wonder what happened with the AA starting staff of 2000 (Buehrle, Biddle, Ginter, Fogg, Rauch) as it definitely wasn't scouting problems that caused most of these highly regarded prospects to not reach the heights that we hoped for. Something is amiss in the way that we develop our pitchers, I firmly believe that.

ma-gaga
02-02-2005, 12:01 PM
So what you're saying is that with patience the Sox prospects who never panned out would have all panned out if they were left in the minors longer? I think it's actually a reflection of poor scouting and drafting than anything else, because you can't tell me that if Rauch, Borchard, Wright, etc. stayed in the minors for longer than they already had they would have been better.

The guys the Twinkies took their time on had consistently proven themselves in the minors, and there was no doubt they were ready. They were obviously head and shoulders above everyone else in the minors when they were brought up. The Sox prospects are considered to have a lot of potential in the minors, but that's it. That's scouting, not patience.

Well, the Twins effectively "started over" in 1999. Dumping pretty much the entire roster, and only keeping some pitching. They promoted a bunch of players at once and got lucky that 5-6 of them developed into decent players at the same time.

Meanwhile, they've been letting their "next wave" progress at the minor league level to do exactly what they are doing now, waiting until the first wave gets' too expensive then bringing them up.

From what I've seen, the Sox haven't ever had that total breakdown year. So they haven't a.) ever gotten the prize pick in the draft, b.) ever felt out of contention, so they've legitimately had to aggresively promote to hope to catch that one lightning in a bottle type player/year.

So it seems like it is two different situations. The Sox can't do what the Twins did, unless they want to completely "start over" and lose 100 games. And no one wants to be responsible for that. It's horrible PR.

rdivaldi
02-02-2005, 12:06 PM
From what I've seen, the Sox haven't ever had that total breakdown year. So they haven't a.) ever gotten the prize pick in the draft,

If I'm not mistaken, the Sox are the only team in baseball not to draft higher than 15th since 1990, and that includes the Yankees and the Braves.

gosox41
02-02-2005, 01:17 PM
But you have to wonder what happened with the AA starting staff of 2000 (Buehrle, Biddle, Ginter, Fogg, Rauch) as it definitely wasn't scouting problems that caused most of these highly regarded prospects to not reach the heights that we hoped for. Something is amiss in the way that we develop our pitchers, I firmly believe that.

I've been saying that for years. But after reading so many posts from people with various degrees of expertise regarding the minors the conclusion is that it's all luck. There's little to no skill involved. The Twins are living off years of high first round picks making a huge impact in Minnesota while a team like Oakland was just plain lucky to have guys like Mulder, Hudson, Zito, and Harden come through the last 5-6 years. KW and the Sox organizaiton is just have a bout of bad luck, they're doing nothing wrong at all.


While it takes years to turn around a whole farm system, there's no law stopping them from having a player or 2 (preferably a pitcher) make a postive impact on this team


People here seem excited abou the farm system. Hopefully it will payoff.



Bob

rdivaldi
02-02-2005, 01:42 PM
I've been saying that for years. But after reading so many posts from people with various degrees of expertise regarding the minors the conclusion is that it's all luck. There's little to no skill involved.

There is some luck involved, our injuries in 2001 were unbelievable. But yeah, luck plays a small role in the overall progress of the farm system. I think there are some very talented players in the current crop, we're due for some success in regards to pitching.

maurice
02-02-2005, 01:59 PM
Many former Sox prospects probably would have benefitted from additional time in the minors or in the MLB bullpen, IMHO. Caruso, Wells, Garland, and Wright immediately spring to mind. More recently, it was unfair to ask Diaz and Munoz to start MLB games last year without first gaining MLB experience pitching out of the pen. All of these guys were rushed along and subjected to unreasonable expectations because the Sox refused to pay a competent veteran stop-gap.

Rauch and Borchard failed for different reasons. Most of Rauch's problems appear to be injury-related, while Borchard simply crashed and burned after a strong AA season.

Flight #24
02-02-2005, 02:22 PM
I've been saying that for years. But after reading so many posts from people with various degrees of expertise regarding the minors the conclusion is that it's all luck. There's little to no skill involved. The Twins are living off years of high first round picks making a huge impact in Minnesota while a team like Oakland was just plain lucky to have guys like Mulder, Hudson, Zito, and Harden come through the last 5-6 years. KW and the Sox organizaiton is just have a bout of bad luck, they're doing nothing wrong at all.



Bob

No one's saying it's all luck, but if you don't think that bringing up 3 pitchers over a 2 year span (Mulder, Hudson, Zito), each of whom became excellent within a year of callup involves some degree of luck then we'll have to agree to disagree. I'd point to the fact that no one has really done that prior to that, or for that matter, since then. And that includes Oakland.

If it's really a matter of skill, then why hasn't it been repeated? Even if Harden takes that step (not guaranteed), it's still a big difference to get a Harden every 4 years than getting 3 within 2.

The point is that having an excellent development & scouting org is key, but having that plus high draft picks plus luck makes the org look even better than it really is. The truth will be told as we see what happens to the highly touted Harden, Blanton, etc if they can replicate Mulder/Hudson/Zito. But I doubt it.

WhiteSoxFan84
02-02-2005, 02:36 PM
They don't cease to amaze me. They must have an endless supply of talented, young players. Ford, Mauer, and Morneau are all on their way to become impact players.

Ford is about 31 and he sucks. Last year was a fluke.

gosox41
02-02-2005, 02:41 PM
No one's saying it's all luck, but if you don't think that bringing up 3 pitchers over a 2 year span (Mulder, Hudson, Zito), each of whom became excellent within a year of callup involves some degree of luck then we'll have to agree to disagree. I'd point to the fact that no one has really done that prior to that, or for that matter, since then. And that includes Oakland.

If it's really a matter of skill, then why hasn't it been repeated? Even if Harden takes that step (not guaranteed), it's still a big difference to get a Harden every 4 years than getting 3 within 2.

The point is that having an excellent development & scouting org is key, but having that plus high draft picks plus luck makes the org look even better than it really is. The truth will be told as we see what happens to the highly touted Harden, Blanton, etc if they can replicate Mulder/Hudson/Zito. But I doubt it.

I know it's not all luck (hence the teal) but reading some posts around here you'd think KW has a productive farm system. He doesn't..yet. Maybe he will, maybe he won't.

There is some degree of luck involved, I just think it gets over exaggerated here. It's easy to say other teams are lucky when they produce players and we don't. But the issue lies deeper then that.


Bob

gosox41
02-02-2005, 02:42 PM
Many former Sox prospects probably would have benefitted from additional time in the minors or in the MLB bullpen, IMHO. Caruso, Wells, Garland, and Wright immediately spring to mind. More recently, it was unfair to ask Diaz and Munoz to start MLB games last year without first gaining MLB experience pitching out of the pen. All of these guys were rushed along and subjected to unreasonable expectations because the Sox refused to pay a competent veteran stop-gap.

Rauch and Borchard failed for different reasons. Most of Rauch's problems appear to be injury-related, while Borchard simply crashed and burned after a strong AA season.

It definitely couldn't have hurt to have some more time for some of these guys. It is a reason why the Sox farm system hasn't been more productive.


Bob

s.dedalus
02-02-2005, 04:25 PM
Ford is about 31 and he sucks. Last year was a fluke.

He's actually going to turn 29 during this season. Despite a dip in power in the second half, he kept hitting all last season and actually showed better discipline as the season wore on.

I think he'll be pretty good again next season.

Cowhead418
02-02-2005, 08:13 PM
I'm sure it doesn't help our farm system when the Sox have gone the longest of any team in the MLB without a top ten draft pick - 14 years I believe. The Yankees got Jeter in 1993 with a top ten pick. The Cubs have had 12 top ten picks in the last 14 years. Of those they drafted with those picks include Zambrano, Prior, Wood and Patterson.


The Sox are always good enough to not be good enough.

I do think its funny though that a pitcher who was picked in the 38th round is better than a pitcher who was a top ten pick.

MB>>>>>>>>>>>>>KW:D:

s.dedalus
02-02-2005, 08:40 PM
The Cubs have had 12 top ten picks in the last 14 years. Of those they drafted with those picks include Zambrano, Prior, Wood and Patterson.


Zambrano is Venezuelan. He was signed as a free agent when he was 16.

eastchicagosoxfan
02-02-2005, 10:12 PM
The Sox had a great run of drafting in the late 80's, with McDowell, Ventura, Thomas, and Fernandez. I think it's unrealistic to expect any organization to deliver one guy like that annually, yet alone for four years straight. I've often wondered if the farm system properly develops pitchers ( Scott Ruffcorn ), but each team has three, maybe four good starters, only a select few have five. Most minor leaguers simply don't have the stuff to play in the majors.

1997 top 10 draft choices 1998 top 10 draft choices
Matt Anderson Detroit Pat Burrell Phillies
Travis Lee Twins Mark Mulder Oakland
Braden Looper Cards Corey Patterson Cubs
Billy Koch Toronto Jeff Austin KC
John Patterson Expos JD Drew Cards
Seth Greisinger Tigers Ryan Mills Twins
Matt White Giants Austin Kearns Reds
Chad Green Brewers Felipe Lopez Toronto
Mark Kotsay Marlins Sean Burroughs Padres
Eric Chavez Oakland Carlos Pena Rangers

How many of these guys are stars? Everyday players? Bench guys? Career minor leaguers? Out of baseball? I think the Sox farm system would be better off with some 90 loss seasons, but a top ten choice is no guarantee of success.

Dadawg_77
02-02-2005, 10:29 PM
They also routinely keep their best prospects in the minors a lot longer than most teams. Example: Morneau was drafted IIRC in '99, but was "blocked" by Mientkodkhwkuetkwewrhgwicz until last year. By design, they kept him down there until they were absolutely sure he was ready. Similarly, they kept Santana in the 'pen even when it was clear he was at least one of their top 2-3 starters. Mauer is an exception.

Many other teams, including the Sox, bring guys up earlier.

Actually I think the Twins keep their players in the minors in order to get their good portion of the player's peak years before they become eligible for free agency.

Dadawg_77
02-02-2005, 10:36 PM
But you have to wonder what happened with the AA starting staff of 2000 (Buehrle, Biddle, Ginter, Fogg, Rauch) as it definitely wasn't scouting problems that caused most of these highly regarded prospects to not reach the heights that we hoped for. Something is amiss in the way that we develop our pitchers, I firmly believe that.

Thats why there is a saying, There is no pitching prospects. Young pithers subcum to injury all the time, not just with the Sox organization. Rauch, Biddle and Ginter were hamper by injuries and Fogg is an average pitcher in the majors. So one pitcher is good, three got hurt and one is average, historically that is pretty good.

Jabroni
02-02-2005, 10:38 PM
The Sox had a great run of drafting in the late 80's, with McDowell, Ventura, Thomas, and Fernandez. I think it's unrealistic to expect any organization to deliver one guy like that annually, yet alone for four years straight. I've often wondered if the farm system properly develops pitchers ( Scott Ruffcorn ), but each team has three, maybe four good starters, only a select few have five. Most minor leaguers simply don't have the stuff to play in the majors.

1997 top 10 draft choices 1998 top 10 draft choices
Matt Anderson Detroit Pat Burrell Phillies
Travis Lee Twins Mark Mulder Oakland
Braden Looper Cards Corey Patterson Cubs
Billy Koch Toronto Jeff Austin KC
John Patterson Expos JD Drew Cards
Seth Greisinger Tigers Ryan Mills Twins
Matt White Giants Austin Kearns Reds
Chad Green Brewers Felipe Lopez Toronto
Mark Kotsay Marlins Sean Burroughs Padres
Eric Chavez Oakland Carlos Pena Rangers

How many of these guys are stars? Everyday players? Bench guys? Career minor leaguers? Out of baseball? I think the Sox farm system would be better off with some 90 loss seasons, but a top ten choice is no guarantee of success.So you want the Sox to be perennial losers for years like the Cubs so they can draft prospects that may never pan out anyways?

:dtroll:

You should become a Cubs fan. They were perennial losers for years and gained alot of highly rated prospects because of it but they still haven't won a World Series. :rolleyes:

Flight #24
02-02-2005, 10:44 PM
Actually I think the Twins keep their players in the minors in order to get their good portion of the player's peak years before they become eligible for free agency.Right, the requirement for that being that by keeping them down longer, they hit their peaks more quickly once they come up.

eastchicagosoxfan
02-03-2005, 07:31 AM
So you want the Sox to be perennial losers for years like the Cubs so they can draft prospects that may never pan out anyways?

:dtroll:

You should become a Cubs fan. They were perennial losers for years and gained alot of highly rated prospects because of it but they still haven't won a World Series. :rolleyes:
Be a Cub fan, hardly pal, it's a just an observation. Some poor seasons get a team higher draft choices, because I can think about it, by no means is an indication that I want it to happen. The thread concerns the state of the Sox farm system, and people's opinions concerning the development of players. You read what you wanted to see, and then made a smart-a** remark. After that sentence you quote, I go on to say that a top ten choice does not guarantee success.