PDA

View Full Version : Farm System


hawkeyesrule
08-08-2007, 02:46 PM
I'd like it if we could rebuild the farm system a la Boston and NYY. Stay competitive while hoarding prospects. I was reading the ESPN chat with Baseball America's Jim Callis today, and this is what he said:

Rob (Chicago): What about my Sox? Anything decent on the horizon outside of Gio Gonzalez?

http://assets.espn.go.com/i/sn2.gif Jim Callis: (2:14 PM ET ) Not really, no. I was trying to figure out who might have the worst farm system the other day, and the White Sox are my leading candidate.

I really hope that the Sox step up and start going for some higher ceiling players/players who fell due to signability.

WhiteSox5187
08-08-2007, 02:50 PM
Kenny has done an awful awful job building the farm system. Just awful.

oeo
08-08-2007, 02:52 PM
There's no way it's worse than the Padres' system.

Kenny has done an awful awful job building the farm system. Just awful.

That's not all on Kenny.

hawkeyesrule
08-08-2007, 02:54 PM
Actually, the Pads are an example of what I'd like the Sox to do. They have been stockpiling compensation picks for the last two drafts while remaining comepetitive.

balke
08-08-2007, 03:00 PM
That's pretty funny since everyone was calling them the best farm system like 3-4 years ago. Before Anderson came up, they thought we had two top 25 prospects IIRC.

I blame the developement and the scouting. I don't blame Kenny. I think he'll take some steps to correcting this in the offseason. I'm just glad Josh Fields seemingly made it out alive.

oeo
08-08-2007, 03:01 PM
Actually, the Pads are an example of what I'd like the Sox to do. They have been stockpiling compensation picks for the last two drafts while remaining comepetitive.

And you think it's better than ours? They're not the only ones, either. I know our farm system is bad, but worst in the league?

WhiteSox5187
08-08-2007, 03:07 PM
There's no way it's worse than the Padres' system.



That's not all on Kenny.
Oh, I know that, but Kenny is the boss, he is the one who gets most of the blame. It's his job not just to get us good major league players but to build the farm system too. He's seemed to ignore the latter part of that.

rdivaldi
08-08-2007, 03:10 PM
Jim Callis is a tool and a self-proclaimed Cub fan. We're not a great farm system, but to say we're the worst is hard to believe.

Take it with a grain of salt.

hawkeyesrule
08-08-2007, 03:11 PM
Yeah, I do. We've had one first rounder each of the last two years, they have had multiple, plus sandwich round. I also think that ours may be unfairly beaten up on, given the struggles of both BA and Sweeney when they came up, plus Chris Young is playing pretty well in AZ.

AJ Hellraiser
08-08-2007, 03:14 PM
Kenny got stuck between a rock and a hard place... the Sox, as an organization craved winning NOW... they did in 2005 and he tried to continue the window of success by trading numerous prospects for veterans... since things didn't pan out in 2006 or 07 it looks real bad.. but when he was making all the deals everyone was beyond thrilled....

the other problem is that the Sox haven't finished under .500 since 1999, so in KW's reign as GM he's never had an extremely high draft pick to get a can't miss/high ceiling guy...

I do think he realizes the problem and is doing what he can... the one area of strength is pitching and other teams are desperate for good, young pitching... some of those guys will fill out our major league roster in the coming years and others will be used as trade bait...they can bring back talented position prospects

oeo
08-08-2007, 03:14 PM
Oh, I know that, but Kenny is the boss, he is the one who gets most of the blame. It's his job not just to get us good major league players but to build the farm system too. He's seemed to ignore the latter part of that.

Well, he seems to be changing some things, so we'll see how things turn out in the next couple years.

Kenny got stuck between a rock and a hard place... the Sox, as an organization craved winning NOW... they did in 2005 and he tried to continue the window of success by trading numerous prospects for veterans... since things didn't pan out in 2006 or 07 it looks real bad.. but when he was making all the deals everyone was beyond thrilled....

The thing about this is, who did Kenny really give up that has been worth a damn? It's not like those 'prospects' would have helped us, because they're not helping anyone else. That's why I find it hard to blame it on Kenny trading the system away, because the way it looks, it wasn't that good to begin with.

AJ Hellraiser
08-08-2007, 03:21 PM
The thing about this is, who did Kenny really give up that has been worth a damn? It's not like those 'prospects' would have helped us, because they're not helping anyone else. That's why I find it hard to blame it on Kenny trading the system away, because the way it looks, it wasn't that good to begin with.

I understand what you're saying completely... that being said, when you look at strictly farm systems.... that is referring to the talent level there.... by trading so many prospects we've had to sign journeymen linor leaguers like Alex Sanchez, Craig Wilson and Ernie Young... without the trades, those prospects would still be in the system and considered potential future help...

hawkeyesrule
08-08-2007, 03:58 PM
I also think that the Sox have done a great job of not trading away prospects that go on to great things. Young may be the exception there, but at least we came away with a solid (occasionally great, occasionally putrid) starter out of it. The age of the team, combined with no depth on the farm is what my concern is.

South Side Irish
08-08-2007, 09:47 PM
It's very, very easy to stockpile a farm system when you're spending $200 million and don't need to make a trade to fill a roster spot. Free-spending in the free agent market means you don't have to dangle Chris Youngs out for a #3/4 pitcher. Just pay 10/40 for him like the Red Sox, Yanks, and Cubs have.

Kenny used our farm system to get quality ML players, and it won us a Championship. Who have we let go that's been real good, anyway? It comes down to scouting, player development in the rookie leagues, and Kenny making some bad draft picks. And yeah, we haven't beem below .500 for some time now, which hurts our pool of high-ceiling players.

lostfan
08-08-2007, 10:27 PM
Yeah, I do. We've had one first rounder each of the last two years, they have had multiple, plus sandwich round. I also think that ours may be unfairly beaten up on, given the struggles of both BA and Sweeney when they came up, plus Chris Young is playing pretty well in AZ.
I cannot believe you're comparing Anderson to Sweeney. Sweeney was hitting about .286, then didn't hit anything for about 5 games to drop his average down when he started getting busted inside, and got sent back down because Thome came back off the DL.

2 totally different situations.

lostfan
08-08-2007, 10:30 PM
For the record, our farm system is not the worst, but I would put it at the top of the bottom third, about 35th percentile. We have a few solid arms, and then we have...

...umm

...uhh Sweeney...

...That's pretty much it. Although Fields, Owens, and Richar were a pretty big part of the farm system and now they could end up being permanently on the major-league squad.

Madscout
08-09-2007, 12:18 AM
Don't put this all on Kenny, and he is trying to rebuild it. I really think with today's market, you have to develope young talent, and the quick and easy way to get a farm system working is young pitching. Kenny has tried to do that, by not going after big position players in the draft, but going with pitching potential, and trading for a lot of young arms. Although some of them may have failed at the MLB level, a lot of these guys (Logan, Sisco, Aardsma, Haeger, and Masset) and guys that haven't had a shot yet (Broadway, Gio, etc.) can get us a lot when they develope. The way pitching is going these days, Kenny is right to hoard it.

kitekrazy
08-09-2007, 12:28 AM
the other problem is that the Sox haven't finished under .500 since 1999, so in KW's reign as GM he's never had an extremely high draft pick to get a can't miss/high ceiling guy...



Finally someone said it. I think you can go back further than that.

WhiteSox5187
08-09-2007, 12:59 AM
Don't put this all on Kenny, and he is trying to rebuild it. I really think with today's market, you have to develope young talent, and the quick and easy way to get a farm system working is young pitching. Kenny has tried to do that, by not going after big position players in the draft, but going with pitching potential, and trading for a lot of young arms. Although some of them may have failed at the MLB level, a lot of these guys (Logan, Sisco, Aardsma, Haeger, and Masset) and guys that haven't had a shot yet (Broadway, Gio, etc.) can get us a lot when they develope. The way pitching is going these days, Kenny is right to hoard it.
Rebuild it??? He's the guy who BUILT it!!! But as someone below me said, they haven't had a losing season since 1999 and haven't had a top ten draft pick since 1989, so that's one disadvantage, but then again, there are so many great picks that come out of say the 38th round like Mark Buerhle, Tom Glavine, Greg Maddux (he might have been closer to the 38th pick though), or Mark Grace, etc. the list goes on and on and on and on.

Flight #24
08-09-2007, 11:08 AM
The lack of production from the farm (especially when factoring in that the guys traded away haven't done much either sans possibly Young) is 100% on KW. You look at it in one of 2 ways, neither of which comes out well for the Sox. Either it's the GM's job as the top man to make sure the farm is productive and not to wait until multiple years without production to make changes (especially if as has been hinted at, there was some kind of difference in viewpoints.strategies between the GM and the farm director). Or it's the farm director's job. Well, the Sox have drafted and produced few impact players in 5+ years. The guys doing the drafting leading up to that point (i.e. the guy who would have brought in guys to be called up to the bigs over the past 5 years) was KW.

It's his biggest failure, and unfortunately for the Sox it's a huge one for any team unless you have Yankee/BloSawx like resources.

And the "lack of a top 10 pick" argument doesn't wash. Good players come from all over the draft, the Sox just haven't drafted many of them.

balke
08-09-2007, 11:24 AM
...That's pretty much it. Although Fields, Owens, and Richar were a pretty big part of the farm system and now they could end up being permanently on the major-league squad.

And that's the biggest reason the Farm looks so weak. 2 years ago people were excited about Anderson Sweeney Young Fields and Owens. Now they've had to call all of these players up or trade them, and the Farm looks weak because of it.

I think developement is to blame for some of these players not looking MLB ready, but I also think the Sox haven't picked a superstar like Braun or Pence because they go in higher rounds. A lot of the Sox' early picks are going for pitchers ever since they got burned by Borchard.

voodoochile
08-09-2007, 11:36 AM
I understand what you're saying completely... that being said, when you look at strictly farm systems.... that is referring to the talent level there.... by trading so many prospects we've had to sign journeymen linor leaguers like Alex Sanchez, Craig Wilson and Ernie Young... without the trades, those prospects would still be in the system and considered potential future help...

They'd only be considered future help if they didn't completely suck. Near as I can tell the only certified Major League caliber player KW has traded is Chris Young. He did so from a position of strength with Anderson, Sweeney and Owens all considered potential major league caliber prospects at the same position.

Crappy depth just because it is better than the crap that was signed to replace it is still crappy depth. It does not matter whether said crap is completely crappy or simply mostly crappy. It's still crap...

Edit: and as others have pointed out, to evaluate the system as it currently sits seems to be extreme. The Sox have 3 players who were in that system earlier this year currently on the big league club. So pitching depth + Sweeney is a bit of an understatement. It should be pitching depth + Sweeney + Fields + Richar + Owens + Terrero. Heck throw in Bukvich, Logan, Floyd and Wassermann too.

If the depth at the minor league level is currently thin, it might have something to do with the number of players who have been called up this season and are currently contributing to the major league club...

FedEx227
08-09-2007, 11:55 AM
the other problem is that the Sox haven't finished under .500 since 1999, so in KW's reign as GM he's never had an extremely high draft pick to get a can't miss/high ceiling guy...


But the Atlanta Braves sure have sucked for the past 2 decades.

thedudeabides
08-09-2007, 12:14 PM
But the Atlanta Braves sure have sucked for the past 2 decades.

I think everyone would agree they are the model organization, no matter how much love the A's and Twins get.

Flight #24
08-09-2007, 12:14 PM
It should be pitching depth + Sweeney + Fields + Richar + Owens + Terrero. Heck throw in Bukvich, Logan, Floyd and Wassermann too.


Fields, Sweeney, Logan, Wasserman, Gonzalez, Broadway - Sox draftees
Richar, Owens, Floyd, Sisco, Masset - traded for
Terrero, Bukvich - Journeymen

Realistically, the Sox drafts have produced 1 high potential MLB player (Fields), 1 high potential MLB starter (Gio), and 1 medium potential prospect (Sweeney, who seems to project as a Mark Grace type without real corner OF power but high average and good D). Add in Young and I wouldn't consider that in any way a strong drafting/signing record for a ~5+year span.

California Sox
08-09-2007, 12:29 PM
First of all, Greg Maddux was not a 38th round draftee. He was a high second-rounder. And the Sox had a shot at Pence but the Astros were the only team that thought that highly of him. Good scouting by them. As far as Braun is concerned, the Sox were one of the first teams on him. They were all over him until he zoomed up draft boards in the month before the draft. That's just bad luck.

But all-in-all, our farm system is not where we'd like it to be. That's why Shaffer got canned. It might not have been his fault, but he was the one left holding the bag. Now, one player BA seems to have no use for that I like is Chris Carter. He's huge, strong and while a little raw has some idea of what he wants to do at the plate. He's leading the Sally in HR and XBH and he's only 20. He might not be the greatest first baseman ever but I recall the words of the immortal Dick Allen. A player who had seen him play third in the NL reached first after Allen came to the Sox and changed positions. They guy asked, "What do you have to do to play first?" Allen replied, "Hit like a mother****er." I think Carter has the chance to do just that.

voodoochile
08-09-2007, 01:02 PM
Fields, Sweeney, Logan, Wasserman, Gonzalez, Broadway - Sox draftees
Richar, Owens, Floyd, Sisco, Masset - traded for
Terrero, Bukvich - Journeymen

Realistically, the Sox drafts have produced 1 high potential MLB player (Fields), 1 high potential MLB starter (Gio), and 1 medium potential prospect (Sweeney, who seems to project as a Mark Grace type without real corner OF power but high average and good D). Add in Young and I wouldn't consider that in any way a strong drafting/signing record for a ~5+year span.

I wasn't commenting on how the players were acquired, merely on the fact that they are in our system or were before being promoted.

Frankly I don't care how the prospects are acquired. Perhaps the Sox aren't as good at picking prospects as some teams but they seem to get their money's worth when trading those prospects for the prospects other teams have drafted/acquired.

So long as they continue to acquire young players capable of contributing on the major league level, why should it matter? In fact, perhaps there is something to be said for not investing huge money in draft picks since so few of them actually pan out and instead waiting until they picks have proven they are worth the money and then acquiring them.

I've highlighted the players you listed who have already contributed to the major league team and have shown at least some promise to continue to do so on some level.

Flight #24
08-09-2007, 01:07 PM
I wasn't commenting on how the players were acquired, merely on the fact that they are in our system or were before being promoted.

Frankly I don't care how the prospects are acquired. Perhaps the Sox aren't as good at picking prospects as some teams but they seem to get their money's worth when trading those prospects for the prospects other teams have drafted/acquired.

So long as they continue to acquire young players capable of contributing on the major league level, why should it matter? In fact, perhaps there is something to be said for not investing huge money in draft picks since so few of them actually pan out and instead waiting until they picks have proven they are worth the money and then acquiring them.

I've highlighted the players you listed who have already contributed to the major league team and have shown at least some promise to continue to do so on some level.

I guess I'd agree to a certain extent, but I think it's a lot harder to sustain that. You rarely see cornerstone type of players acquired cheaply form other systems (although there are always the occasional Santana type of examples). Even the Sox, as successful as they've been at plucking gems from other systems, haven't been able to grab many cornerstone type guys. There's Jenks and then possibly Richar and Garland/Konerko a long while back.

IMO, if you want to sustain success without huge budgets, you need to draft & develop well, and unfortunately the Sox have not been all that successful at that under KW.

SoxxoS
08-09-2007, 01:21 PM
Realistically, the Sox drafts have produced 1 high potential MLB player (Fields), 1 high potential MLB starter (Gio), and 1 medium potential prospect (Sweeney, who seems to project as a Mark Grace type without real corner OF power but high average and good D). Add in Young and I wouldn't consider that in any way a strong drafting/signing record for a ~5+year span.

Add Egbert in the high potential starter.

Randar68
08-09-2007, 01:35 PM
I'd like it if we could rebuild the farm system a la Boston and NYY. Stay competitive while hoarding prospects. I was reading the ESPN chat with Baseball America's Jim Callis today, and this is what he said:



I really hope that the Sox step up and start going for some higher ceiling players/players who fell due to signability.

We're really lacking in position prospects and depth.

We've traded away some very good talent, but thank God Kenny got Gio back. Jack Egbert is a very good prospect and the Sox have a bunch of middle-of-the-rotation or bullpen pitching prospects.

upperdeckusc
08-09-2007, 01:39 PM
Rebuild it??? He's the guy who BUILT it!!! But as someone below me said, they haven't had a losing season since 1999 and haven't had a top ten draft pick since 1989, so that's one disadvantage, but then again, there are so many great picks that come out of say the 38th round like Mark Buerhle, Tom Glavine, Greg Maddux (he might have been closer to the 38th pick though), or Mark Grace, etc. the list goes on and on and on and on.

not really.....

upperdeckusc
08-09-2007, 01:49 PM
the more i read about and see stats on egbert, the more hope and promise i have for him. he is putting up almost identical numbers to gio, if not better. he doesnt give up homers, gets alot of K's, and i believe gets groundballs (from what i remember hearing). next yr = triple A, then 09 = our rotation. if he is not in our rotation by then, he's been traded.....hopefully to land a STUD of some sort. as far as our positional players (sweeney, anderson), i wouldnt object too much to trading them for some proven bullpen help (if there is strong interest or interest at all for these guys). i know sweeney hasnt had a TRUE tryout on the MLB squad, but if we could turn them for some bullpen arms with control, why not. it'll help us right now and they dont look like they will play a big part of a future (MAYBE sweeney, anderson not so much).
as a little sidenote, i really wish that someone like archie gilbert could keep progressing and land in a sox uni or be used for some good trade bait. he dominated last yr, this yr is doing eh-ok, but is amazingly fast and great at swapping bases. also, HE'S 5'8!!! you HAVE to root for him!! hahaha.

voodoochile
08-09-2007, 02:41 PM
We're really lacking in position prospects and depth.

We've traded away some very good talent, but thank God Kenny got Gio back. Jack Egbert is a very good prospect and the Sox have a bunch of middle-of-the-rotation or bullpen pitching prospects.

Some questions for you as one of the minor league experts who post here.

Do you think Owens can fill the starting CF job for the Sox?

How soon will Sweeney/Anderson be ready for a major league job?

Provided Fields and Richar can continue their rookie play, the only glaring weakness I see that doesn't seem to have an immediate replacement at the minor league level is SS.

I think the Sox are going to keep Dye and AJ for at least a few more years and that means there aren't a lot of need slots.

To me that says the lack of talent at position players really isn't that important at the moment. I'd be curious to read your thoughts on that matter.

balke
08-09-2007, 02:55 PM
Provided Fields and Richar can continue their rookie play, the only glaring weakness I see that doesn't seem to have an immediate replacement at the minor league level is SS.



I agree with this, and this is something we've seen Kenny nearly address at the major league level several times. Kenny has made it public before that he truly would love his best player and team captain to be his SS. He's made stabs at A-Rod and Tejada via rumor, but wasn't willing to break the bank on them.

To be honest, I was a bit surprised the Sox didn't draft a SS with their first pick this offseason. Kenny truly wants to stick with the pitching first philosophy it seems. They need to address the SS position somehow though. If Uribe does go down or leaves next season, there's not really anyone here that deserves that position it looks like.

voodoochile
08-09-2007, 04:29 PM
I agree with this, and this is something we've seen Kenny nearly address at the major league level several times. Kenny has made it public before that he truly would love his best player and team captain to be his SS. He's made stabs at A-Rod and Tejada via rumor, but wasn't willing to break the bank on them.

To be honest, I was a bit surprised the Sox didn't draft a SS with their first pick this offseason. Kenny truly wants to stick with the pitching first philosophy it seems. They need to address the SS position somehow though. If Uribe does go down or leaves next season, there's not really anyone here that deserves that position it looks like.

The question about Uribe remains. Is this an aberration year or is this what can be expected in the future. If he can return to the stats he put up most of the past 3 years, I'd take him for next year. However, if he is going to decline dramatically then the Sox need to replace him for sure.

Daver
08-09-2007, 06:10 PM
Some questions for you as one of the minor league experts who post here.

Do you think Owens can fill the starting CF job for the Sox?

How soon will Sweeney/Anderson be ready for a major league job?

Provided Fields and Richar can continue their rookie play, the only glaring weakness I see that doesn't seem to have an immediate replacement at the minor league level is SS.

I think the Sox are going to keep Dye and AJ for at least a few more years and that means there aren't a lot of need slots.

To me that says the lack of talent at position players really isn't that important at the moment. I'd be curious to read your thoughts on that matter.

Do you think Owens can fill the starting CF job for the Sox?

No. his arm isn't strong enough to be considered a pop gun arm.


How soon will Sweeney/Anderson be ready for a major league job?

Their ready now, they have shown they can hit minor league pitching, they need at bats against MLB pitching.

Provided Fields and Richar can continue their rookie play, the only glaring weakness I see that doesn't seem to have an immediate replacement at the minor league level is SS.

There is no one in the minors that can give you an improvement over Uribe right now.

Frater Perdurabo
08-09-2007, 06:16 PM
As an organization, over the past 20 years the Sox have done well drafting and developing pitchers (McDowell, Fernandez, Baldwin, Sirotka, Buehrle, McCarthy), outfielders (Cameron, Maggs, Lee, Rowand, Young), and corner infielders (Frank, Ventura, Crede, Fields).

They've also made some good trades for players that other organizations drafted but who became solid contributors with the Sox (Alvarez, Konerko, Garland).

They have been terrible at drafting and develpoing middle infielders and catchers. The last middle infielder the Sox drafted and developed who developed into a solid major leaguer was Ray Durham. Who was the last shortstop they drafted and developed? I honestly don't know. (Ozzie came from San Diego.) The last catcher was Ron Karkovice. :o::(:

delben91
08-09-2007, 06:21 PM
Do you think Owens can fill the starting CF job for the Sox?

No. his arm isn't strong enough to be considered a pop gun arm.


How soon will Sweeney/Anderson be ready for a major league job?

Their ready now, they have shown they can hit minor league pitching, they need at bats against MLB pitching.

Provided Fields and Richar can continue their rookie play, the only glaring weakness I see that doesn't seem to have an immediate replacement at the minor league level is SS.

There is no one in the minors that can give you an improvement over Uribe right now.

Do you think Owens could fit in LF perhaps? Is his current offensive production indicative of something he can reasonably be counted on to consistently produce based on his minor league history, or is he playing way over his head?

Daver
08-09-2007, 06:43 PM
Do you think Owens could fit in LF perhaps? Is his current offensive production indicative of something he can reasonably be counted on to consistently produce based on his minor league history, or is he playing way over his head?

Yes, but you go into the season knowing you are going to be giving away runs on a flyball to left with a runner on third.

balke
08-09-2007, 06:48 PM
Yes, but you go into the season knowing you are going to be giving away runs on a flyball to left with a runner on third.

Which isn't any different than now. I still support keeping Pods, and keeping Owens on reserve though. It gives the team a ton of speed, and you don't put all your faith in a rookie taking over the leadoff spot next season. He's been doing really well, but when it comes down to it he's hitting .249, he doesn't have double power really, and he doesn't walk... ever. I support letting him develop up here and giving him a lot of playing time as a 4th OFer next season though.

HomeFish
08-09-2007, 06:56 PM
Yes, but you go into the season knowing you are going to be giving away runs on a flyball to left with a runner on third.

Is he really worse than Podsednik and Carlos Lee?

Daver
08-09-2007, 07:19 PM
Is he really worse than Podsednik and Carlos Lee?

Carlos Lee had a decent arm, his problem was the fact that he couldn't play left field. He was a little more successful when he adopted the tactic of standing at the warning track knowing if it was over his head it was gone.

soxinem1
08-09-2007, 11:43 PM
Jim Callis is a tool and a self-proclaimed Cub fan. We're not a great farm system, but to say we're the worst is hard to believe.

Take it with a grain of salt.

Callis is what he is, but honestly, who has a worse FS?

And it is KW's fault. He's the GM, he calls the shots.

But hey, it took one season for Dombrowski to rebuild DET's minor league system. If the effort is made, it can be done.

jortafan
08-09-2007, 11:47 PM
Who was the last shortstop they drafted and developed? I honestly don't know. (Ozzie came from San Diego.) :o::(:

I seem to recall once hearing that the last starting shortstop for the White Sox who was actually a product of their farm system was Bucky Dent.

If that's really the case, that would mean it has been a good 35 years since a shortstop was produced by the White Sox. That's a disgrace, considering that this is a team that takes some pride in the quality of players it has had at that position throughout the years.

Randar68
08-10-2007, 10:36 AM
Yes, but you go into the season knowing you are going to be giving away runs on a flyball to left with a runner on third.

It's better than Pods' arm, IMO.

I still think Anderson is going to be a good everyday player somewhere. With the Sox lacking any semblence of a lead-off man at 2B or SS, I don't know if they will give Anderson another chance or not. It sounds like KW is going to go after one of the 4 FA CF'ers this offseason.

I was encouraged by Anderson's second half last year, but he isn't going to hit more than 30 HR's and he isn't going to steal a ton of bases. Therefore, will the Sox give him a chance when they really need speed and top-of-the-order ability?

Sweeney is a very similar situation. Both play great defense, but will either stand out enough at the plate to fit into the Sox's future plans?

I don't know, but either one would be very good in the NL or on a team with a pretty balanced offense looking to improve their defense.

Randar68
08-10-2007, 10:46 AM
But hey, it took one season for Dombrowski to rebuild DET's minor league system. If the effort is made, it can be done.

It took a bunch of top 10 draft picks. Of which the Sox haven't had one in 17 years.

2006: Andrew Miller (#6 pick)
2005: Cameron Maybin (#10 pick)
2004: Justin Verlander (#2 pick)
2003: Kyle Sleeth (#3 pick)
2002: Scott Moore (#8 pick)
2001: Kenny Baugh (#11 pick)


True, they've gotten better results with their last 3 picks, but having picks in the top 10 every year can make a lot of GM's and drafts in general look pretty great.

ChiSoxFan7
08-10-2007, 10:52 AM
I don't believe it's all KW's fault. There's fault on everyone from him to scouts, to JR not realizing that the system is falling.

That being said i don't think we have the worst, but we most definitely are not in the top half.

ArkanSox
08-10-2007, 12:11 PM
There's a system??? :o:

Actually, for not having any high draft picks over the past several years, these guys don't look bad at all: Fields, Sweeney, Logan, Wasserman, Gonzalez, Broadway. Does Little Looie have any grandsons?

oeo
08-10-2007, 12:13 PM
It's better than Pods' arm, IMO.

You think so? I've only seen the games he's played up here, so I'll take your word for it, but not only does his arm look weaker, it looks less accurate as well.

Randar68
08-10-2007, 04:58 PM
You think so? I've only seen the games he's played up here, so I'll take your word for it, but not only does his arm look weaker, it looks less accurate as well.

Tallest Midget contest, but Pods probably can't get it to the infield from the track in CF...

soxfan43
08-10-2007, 05:35 PM
Looks like there's a lot of animosity amongst the Sox farm staff and scouts. In the latest trib hardball blog, Gonzalez reports that a former sox employee now with mariners got into an altercation with the Sox director of amateur scouting at some high school baseball event in full view of other teams scouts. Real professional,

Lip Man 1
08-10-2007, 06:52 PM
Bad blood

Mark Gonzales - 3:39 p.m.

The White Sox and the 29 other major league teams geared up for the 2008 amateur draft by attending the annual Area Code Games at Blair Field in Long Beach, Calif., this week.

But multiple major league sources confirmed there was an unpleasant exchange between Seattle national coordinator Rick Ingalls and Doug Laumann, the Sox's director of amateur scouting. The incident took place in front of scouts from several major league teams.

Ingalls used to work for the Sox until 2005, when he joined Bob Fontaine, the Mariners' vice president of scouting who also worked for the Sox earlier this decade.

Sources confirmed that Ingalls initiated the exchange.

Lip

Nellie_Fox
08-11-2007, 12:55 AM
Tallest MidgetHasn't this phrase just about run its course?

gosox41
08-11-2007, 11:43 AM
That's pretty funny since everyone was calling them the best farm system like 3-4 years ago. Before Anderson came up, they thought we had two top 25 prospects IIRC.

I blame the developement and the scouting. I don't blame Kenny. I think he'll take some steps to correcting this in the offseason. I'm just glad Josh Fields seemingly made it out alive.

I only blame KW becuase he is in charge of hiring the right people for the job as well as setting up an organizational philosophy.


Bob

gosox41
08-11-2007, 11:51 AM
Callis is what he is, but honestly, who has a worse FS?

And it is KW's fault. He's the GM, he calls the shots.

But hey, it took one season for Dombrowski to rebuild DET's minor league system. If the effort is made, it can be done.


While Detroit has the benefit of high draft picks, it takes more then that. It's not like its only first round picks making it up to the Tigers.

But Dombrowski is an excellent talent evaluator. Look what he did with the Montreal teams in the mid 90's. And he did a good job restocking the Marlins in trades after the fire sale.

And while having many top 10 picks in a row help make it easier to draft better, IMHO a good farm system goes much deeper then that. How many top 10 picks has Pitt. had lately? How about Milwaukee? They haven't finished .500 since 1992. Should it take 15 years to become contenders again? Even Cincinnati has had numerous top 10 picks--heck the whole NL Central outside of St Louis and Houston has had ample opportunity to contend in a weak division with all those early picks.

On the flip side, teams like Atl, Oak, and Minn haven't had top 10 picks in quite awhile. How are they consistently good teams (and I'm aware Oak is under .500 and Atl didn't make the playoffs last year) without top 10 picks.

For teams that fall between the Pirates and the Braves in drafting, using a lack of top 10 picks is an easy excuse as to why the farm system isn't productive.



Bob

RowanDye
08-11-2007, 12:10 PM
I seem to recall once hearing that the last starting shortstop for the White Sox who was actually a product of their farm system was Bucky Dent.

If that's really the case, that would mean it has been a good 35 years since a shortstop was produced by the White Sox. That's a disgrace, considering that this is a team that takes some pride in the quality of players it has had at that position throughout the years.

I agree it's a problem, but it's a tough position to field. It's not like every other team has produced an All-Star shortstop over that time frame.

Also, while Ozzie didn't come through our system, signed as an undrafted free agent by the Padres, the fact that he played all of his first 13 seasons for us kind of skews things a bit.

Frater Perdurabo
08-11-2007, 04:01 PM
I agree it's a problem, but it's a tough position to field. It's not like every other team has produced an All-Star shortstop over that time frame.

Also, while Ozzie didn't come through our system, signed as an undrafted free agent by the Padres, the fact that he played all of his first 13 seasons for us kind of skews things a bit.

I'm not expecting an all-star shortstop. I'd be grateful for the Sox to draft and develop a shortstop who can play great defense, bunt/slap his way to .240, swipe 15 bags and bat ninth.

Here's a ridiculous hypothetical: build the 2007 White Sox exclusively from players they drafted and/or signed as amateurs: Maggs (RF), Rowand (LF), Cameron (CF), Crede (3B when healthy), Durham (2B), Lee (1B, converted from 3B, his original position when he was signed as a free agent out of Panama), and Frank (DH). Fields and Young would be chomping at the bit for playing time. Veteran-heavy to be sure, but quite good. So who's the catcher? Josh Paul? Chris Stewart? Who's the shortstop? Mike Morse? Could Iguchi (who wasn't drafted but signed first with the Sox) play SS in the MLB? Fields? :?: The rotation would have Buehrle, Kip Wells, McCarthy and Josh Fogg and the pen would have Bob Wickman, Chad Bradford, Joe Borowski, Matt Guerrier, Bendan Donnelly and Jon Rauch. Who's the fifth starter? One of these relievers? We also could choose from among Gary Majewski, Jeff Bajenaru, Charlie Haeger, Josh Rupe, Sean Tracey, Royce Ring and Boone Logan. Overall the team would have good hitting, bad middle infield defense and very questionable pitching.

UserNameBlank
08-11-2007, 06:56 PM
I'm not expecting an all-star shortstop. I'd be grateful for the Sox to draft and develop a shortstop who can play great defense, bunt/slap his way to .240, swipe 15 bags and bat ninth.

No you wouldn't. Nobody would want a .240 hitting SS that can't hit the ball out of the IF. Nobody.

Here's a ridiculous hypothetical: build the 2007 White Sox exclusively from players they drafted and/or signed as amateurs: Maggs (RF), Rowand (LF), Cameron (CF), Crede (3B when healthy), Durham (2B), Lee (1B, converted from 3B, his original position when he was signed as a free agent out of Panama), and Frank (DH). Fields and Young would be chomping at the bit for playing time. Veteran-heavy to be sure, but quite good. So who's the catcher? Josh Paul? Chris Stewart? Who's the shortstop? Mike Morse? Could Iguchi (who wasn't drafted but signed first with the Sox) play SS in the MLB? Fields? :?: The rotation would have Buehrle, Kip Wells, McCarthy and Josh Fogg and the pen would have Bob Wickman, Chad Bradford, Joe Borowski, Matt Guerrier, Bendan Donnelly and Jon Rauch. Who's the fifth starter? One of these relievers? We also could choose from among Gary Majewski, Jeff Bajenaru, Charlie Haeger, Josh Rupe, Sean Tracey, Royce Ring and Boone Logan. Overall the team would have good hitting, bad middle infield defense and very questionable pitching.
Who cares about that stuff? We trade most of our prospects. With all those names on that list we acquired Carl Everett, Roberto Alomar, Alex Cintron, Damaso Marte, Jon Danks, Jim Thome, Paul Konerko, Scott Podsednik, and Luis Vizcaino among those most notable.

By your logic, if Danny Richar develops into a good player and Aaron Cunningham busts, our system sucks for having developed the player necessary to complete that deal. Do we still suck because Matt Karchner flamed out? Or is it good that we picked up Garland?

Here's one little tidbit for everyone who rips our minor league system without looking at the bigger picture: when a prospect is drafted out of high school or college or signs as a raw FA out of another country, that player has just as much of a chance of making the big leagues as anyone else. Over time, some make it and most don't. But a lot of it really does depend on luck. How is Josh Fields a very good prospect that is already producing in the Majors while Joe Borchard is a bust out? Both were very raw, athletic football players with big power potential and nothing else. All a scout can do is look at what any certain player brings to the table and try to decide whether or not that player is worth taking a chance on if he is available at a certain spot in the draft. No scout can say for sure what goes on between the ears of a player and no scout can say with 100% certainly that any individual player is going to suffer a career ending injury before even making it to the majors.

If anything, all the Sox need to do is concentrate more on ceiling than they have been. That doesn't mean we'll be developing superstars all the time, but it does mean that as long as those players perform up to AA, they'll have more value and we'll have a better chance at getting better major league players for them. And of course, it is a double-edged sword here on WSI because the moment say Aaron Poreda or Nevin Griffith get traded for a major leaguer after dominating Double A you'll have all kinds ripping the Sox for trading such future HOFers.

Frater Perdurabo
08-11-2007, 07:08 PM
Who cares about that stuff? We trade most of our prospects. With all those names on that list we acquired Carl Everett, Roberto Alomar, Alex Cintron, Damaso Marte, Jon Danks, Jim Thome, Paul Konerko, Scott Podsednik, and Luis Vizcaino among those most notable.

By your logic, if Danny Richar develops into a good player and Aaron Cunningham busts, our system sucks for having developed the player necessary to complete that deal. Do we still suck because Matt Karchner flamed out? Or is it good that we picked up Garland?

:?:

Whoa. I didn't make any statements of judgment on the Sox system. All I did was try to see if what a team comprised entirely of Sox draftees (and amateur signees) would look like. And I concluded by writing this:

Overall the team would have good hitting, bad middle infield defense and very questionable pitching.

That's a fact. It's not an indictment. It's also a fact that the Sox haven't produced a shortstop recently. I just wish they would.

If anything, the Sox deserve credit for making great trades to assemble such a fantastic starting rotation after Buehrle (Garland, Vazquez, Danks).

gosox41
08-12-2007, 12:34 AM
Here's one little tidbit for everyone who rips our minor league system without looking at the bigger picture: when a prospect is drafted out of high school or college or signs as a raw FA out of another country, that player has just as much of a chance of making the big leagues as anyone else. Over time, some make it and most don't. But a lot of it really does depend on luck. How is Josh Fields a very good prospect that is already producing in the Majors while Joe Borchard is a bust out? Both were very raw, athletic football players with big power potential and nothing else. All a scout can do is look at what any certain player brings to the table and try to decide whether or not that player is worth taking a chance on if he is available at a certain spot in the draft. No scout can say for sure what goes on between the ears of a player and no scout can say with 100% certainly that any individual player is going to suffer a career ending injury before even making it to the majors.



So by this logic, the Pirates have been unlucky for the last 15 years while the Braves, Twins, and A's have been extremely lucky. The Sox have been unlucky under KW. So why bother having a scouting director or player development. Heck, why even sign your first round pick of you're just spending at least $1.5 mill (for a non Boras) client for a crap shoot?

I don't buy it being simple luck a difference. Luck plays a factor with most injuries. And luck plays more of a factor with the later round picks. But luck isn't the reason the Braves won 14 divisions in a row. It's damn good scouting be it college/HS players to other people's systems. It also helps to help solid player development.

Is it bad luck that HS power pitchers are more likely to suffer injuries then other pitchers?


Bob

Lip Man 1
08-12-2007, 01:29 PM
Luck does play a part (like in everything) but GoSox 41 (Nice to see you back) makes some very, very solid points.

You don't have bad 'luck' fifteen years in a row, you don't have good 'luck' like the Braves (and perhaps soon to be Yankees) 14 years in a row.

There simply has to be more to it then that and most probably it's the talent (or lack of) talent by the minor league scouts and amatuer scouts that can find kids who can play in your system, have the desire needed to make it to the highest level and then if they get there, stay there.

Lip

UserNameBlank
08-12-2007, 03:44 PM
So by this logic, the Pirates have been unlucky for the last 15 years...

Yes they have. They've also made a lot of poor decisions which hasn't helped them in any way, especially when it comes to the draft in which they go for signability over ceiling, but they still have since 1990 drafted and developed 4 impact players in Jason Kendall, Ian Snell, Mike Gonzalez, and Chris Young. There are several other players who may make an impact in the future in Bronson Arroyo, Zach Duke, Tom Gorzellany, Paul Maholm, Brent Lillibridge, etc. and it is also worth noting that two very good prospects in Jeremy Guthrie and Stephen Drew were drafted by the Pirates but didn't sign.

...while the Braves, Twins, and A's have been extremely lucky.

Take the Twins out of there. The Twins are not even close to the Braves and A's in terms of scouting, drafting, and player development. Not even close. ****ing miles and miles away. Since 1990, the Twins have drafted and developed 4 impact players in Brad Radke, Torii Hunter, Justin Morneau, and Joe Mauer who was taken #1 overall and fell into their laps as a signability pick since the Twins were too cheap to sign Prior. They picked up Santana in a trade after getting left unprotected and open to the Rule-5, yet they also had David Ortiz but let him go. Apparently the Twins didn't think he'd survive as a pull hitter. Yeah, they were so right on that one. The Sox have done a much better job than the Twins at this.

On the Braves since 1990:
Through the draft they have drafted and signed 7 impact players in Chipper Jones, Jason Schmidt, Kevin Millwood, Jermaine Dye, Adam LaRoche, Jeff Francoeur, and Brian McCann. I didn't check all their international signings but I know they picked up Rafael Furcal as an undrafted FA. They also developed a lot of good average to above average players in Jarrod Saltalamacchia, Yunel Escobar, Marcus Giles, Kelly Johnson, Jason Marquis, Chuck James, etc.

In terms of drafting, player development, scouting, quality of the teams, winning record, etc. nobody touches Schuerholz. ****ing nobody.

On the A's:
Again I didnt check all their international signings but they did pick up Miguel Tejada as an undreafted free agent. Through the draft, since 1990, they have done incredibly well though. They've drafted 11 impact players and signed 10 of them. They drafted Jon Papelbon but he didn't sign. They did sign Jason Giambi, Eric Chavez, Tim Hudson, Mark Mulder, Barry Zito, Rich Harden, Jeremy Bonderman, Joe Blanton, Nick Swisher, Mark Teahen, and Huston Street.

The problem with comparing the A's to the Sox though is that the A's operate under a totally different philosophy. When the Sox develop superstar players they usually try to sign them instead of trade them. They also trade prospects to win and sign free agents to win, which forfeit draft picks. The A's either trade their players or let them hit FA for draft picks. They generally don't trade their best prospects although they did trade Bonderman in a deal for Ted Lilly and Andre Eithier in a deal for Milton Bradley. The A's also don't sign bigtime FA's and forfeit draft picks and will lose for a couple of seasons while developing players if they have to, while the Sox organization generally will remain competitive as long as they possibly can. Especially under Kenny Williams.

Case in point on the A's philosophy: the 2002 draft got them a total of 7 first round draft picks which included 3 of the players on this list (Blanton, Swisher, and Teahen). Zito, for example, was No. 2 overall and Hudson 9 overall.

The A's are lucky that this many players have panned out for them, although Blanton and Harden are injured all the time and Street I know missed a lot of time. Generally the A's could be luckier though, as every other team in baseball could be. Out of those 7 first rounders in 2002 only three of them turned into anything.

The Sox have been unlucky under KW.

Yes they have in certain areas. Borchard for example would have been a terrific pick had he cut his swing down, cut his K's down, and became a better hitter overall. Honel could have been very good had he not gotten injured.

The Sox also have been very lucky in other areas under KW. They won a WS first of all, and secondly they were fortunate enough to have the Yankees offer Contreras for Loaiza, fortunate enough for the Mariners to accept the package they did for Garcia, etc. It takes two to make a deal and Kenny was lucky enough to have to players he needed available to be acquired for packages he could afford to give up.

So why bother having a scouting director or player development. Heck, why even sign your first round pick of you're just spending at least $1.5 mill (for a non Boras) client for a crap shoot?

Because 1.5 million gets you a prospect that can at least serve as trade bait. That's why teams should go high ceiling in the early rounds because even if those players bust out, you can still deal them for above average major leaguers while they still look promising dominating High A or Double A.

I don't buy it being simple luck a difference. Luck plays a factor with most injuries. And luck plays more of a factor with the later round picks.

Well, don't buy it then but it's a fact. Look at the best drafts for any team over any year, and you'll find that most all of the players drafted are busts. Maybe there is an impact player or two and a couple role players, but just about everyone is a bust, and you'll also see that there are low round picks that succeed just as much or even more so than the high rounders.

You go on and on about how great a team's scouting is, well what does it say when a guy gets picked 400th overall and goes on to become a superstar? If that player was so easy to identify he wouldn't have gone 400th overall.

But luck isn't the reason the Braves won 14 divisions in a row. It's damn good scouting be it college/HS players to other people's systems. It also helps to help solid player development.

Jon Schuerholz is the best talent evaluator in the buisness. It's not just the way he drafts; it is the way he builds a team and scouts players from other systems. And yes, luck has a hell of a lot to do with that too.

Is it bad luck that HS power pitchers are more likely to suffer injuries then other pitchers?

Power pitchers in general are more likely to suffer injuries. The younger and generally further a player is away, the greater chance that player will get injured.

gosox41
08-12-2007, 04:16 PM
Luck does play a part (like in everything) but GoSox 41 (Nice to see you back) makes some very, very solid points.

You don't have bad 'luck' fifteen years in a row, you don't have good 'luck' like the Braves (and perhaps soon to be Yankees) 14 years in a row.

There simply has to be more to it then that and most probably it's the talent (or lack of) talent by the minor league scouts and amatuer scouts that can find kids who can play in your system, have the desire needed to make it to the highest level and then if they get there, stay there.

Lip

Lip-It's good to back. My schedule has been a lot touger lately.

One other thing to keep in mind is player development. Some teams have excellent programs to develop players and some teams do a lousy job (ie the Sox with pitchers).


Bob

gosox41
08-12-2007, 04:32 PM
Yes they have. They've also made a lot of poor decisions which hasn't helped them in any way, especially when it comes to the draft in which they go for signability over ceiling, but they still have since 1990 drafted and developed 4 impact players in Jason Kendall, Ian Snell, Mike Gonzalez, and Chris Young. There are several other players who may make an impact in the future in Bronson Arroyo, Zach Duke, Tom Gorzellany, Paul Maholm, Brent Lillibridge, etc. and it is also worth noting that two very good prospects in Jeremy Guthrie and Stephen Drew were drafted by the Pirates but didn't sign..


Poor decisions aren't the result of bad luck. Wasn't it Branch Rickey who said that good luck is a residual of design.



Take the Twins out of there. The Twins are not even close to the Braves and A's in terms of scouting, drafting, and player development. Not even close. ****ing miles and miles away. Since 1990, the Twins have drafted and developed 4 impact players in Brad Radke, Torii Hunter, Justin Morneau, and Joe Mauer who was taken #1 overall and fell into their laps as a signability pick since the Twins were too cheap to sign Prior. They picked up Santana in a trade after getting left unprotected and open to the Rule-5, yet they also had David Ortiz but let him go. Apparently the Twins didn't think he'd survive as a pull hitter. Yeah, they were so right on that one. The Sox have done a much better job than the Twins at this..

You're right about the success relative to the Braves and A's but the last 7 years they've been legitimately contending. How many years have they finished ahead of the Sox even though they had a lesser payroll. And yes, I'll take the WS victory of course, but it's time to plan for the next won.

On the Braves since 1990:
Through the draft they have drafted and signed 7 impact players in Chipper Jones, Jason Schmidt, Kevin Millwood, Jermaine Dye, Adam LaRoche, Jeff Francoeur, and Brian McCann. I didn't check all their international signings but I know they picked up Rafael Furcal as an undrafted FA. They also developed a lot of good average to above average players in Jarrod Saltalamacchia, Yunel Escobar, Marcus Giles, Kelly Johnson, Jason Marquis, Chuck James, etc.

In terms of drafting, player development, scouting, quality of the teams, winning record, etc. nobody touches Schuerholz. ****ing nobody..

You're right. And the Braves philosophy shows luck plays less of a role in success. Obviously every team has some lucky breaks and unlucky one's, but you don't do what the Braves have done on just good luck alone.



The problem with comparing the A's to the Sox though is that the A's operate under a totally different philosophy. When the Sox develop superstar players they usually try to sign them instead of trade them. They also trade prospects to win and sign free agents to win, which forfeit draft picks. The A's either trade their players or let them hit FA for draft picks. They generally don't trade their best prospects although they did trade Bonderman in a deal for Ted Lilly and Andre Eithier in a deal for Milton Bradley. The A's also don't sign bigtime FA's and forfeit draft picks and will lose for a couple of seasons while developing players if they have to, while the Sox organization generally will remain competitive as long as they possibly can. Especially under Kenny Williams..

Another difference is under KW, the Sox haven't drafted and devloped any superstars or even stars. It's not like KW's trades of minor league players have resulted in a bunch of All Stars.

Case in point on the A's philosophy: the 2002 draft got them a total of 7 first round draft picks which included 3 of the players on this list (Blanton, Swisher, and Teahen). Zito, for example, was No. 2 overall and Hudson 9 overall.

The A's are lucky that this many players have panned out for them, although Blanton and Harden are injured all the time and Street I know missed a lot of time. Generally the A's could be luckier though, as every other team in baseball could be. Out of those 7 first rounders in 2002 only three of them turned into anything..

And how did the Sox do when they had something like 8 of the first 64 picks in the 1999 draft? How many of those guys made it? They've squandered away picks. Assuming no sandwich picks, if the Sox had 3 first round picks over a 7 year peiod develop into a Blanton, Swisher and Teahan, I'd be thrilled. And I do belive none of those 3 guys were tTop 10. Wasn't Swisher #17 and Blanton in the low 20's (after the Sox passed on him).



Yes they have in certain areas. Borchard for example would have been a terrific pick had he cut his swing down, cut his K's down, and became a better hitter overall. Honel could have been very good had he not gotten injured. .

Borchard isn't bad luck, but a lack of ability on his part to do what needed to be done to succeed. He never cut his swing down. That's a choice he made.

Honel goes back to the idea of drafting HS pitchers. I'm not shocked he got hurt. HS pitchers, especially hard throwers) get hurt at a higher rate then college pitchers or softer throwing pitchers.

The Sox also have been very lucky in other areas under KW. They won a WS first of all, and secondly they were fortunate enough to have the Yankees offer Contreras for Loaiza, fortunate enough for the Mariners to accept the package they did for Garcia, etc. It takes two to make a deal and Kenny was lucky enough to have to players he needed available to be acquired for packages he could afford to give up..

KW has done a good job of scouting other teams farm systems and finding major leaguers. But he also talks all the time of being like the Braves. Maybe he can't achieve as productive as a farm system as the Braves, but right now the Sox aren't even average.



Because 1.5 million gets you a prospect that can at least serve as trade bait. That's why teams should go high ceiling in the early rounds because even if those players bust out, you can still deal them for above average major leaguers while they still look promising dominating High A or Double A..

I see your point. But so far KW hasn't traded any first round picks out side of Royce Ring. If he wants to draft players and spend the money for the purpose of trading them (since most of them aren't developing into much) then he should start doing just that.



You go on and on about how great a team's scouting is, well what does it say when a guy gets picked 400th overall and goes on to become a superstar? If that player was so easy to identify he wouldn't have gone 400th overall.quote]

I did say that luck plays a role in the later rounds of the draft.


Bob

UserNameBlank
08-12-2007, 05:28 PM
Poor decisions aren't the result of bad luck. Wasn't it Branch Rickey who said that good luck is a residual of design.

No they are not, and I'm not saying they are. The Pirates have been unlucky in that not many players have turned out well for them, but that extends IMO to almost every team. The Pirates though are where they are at in terms of the standings and losing history because of overall poor decisions made in regards to the major league team, not the draft. Any team that gets that many high draft picks and picks that low on the waiver wire and Rule-5 drafts, both major league and minor league phases every year needs to have better results. Their failure as an organization doesn't have as much to do with their failure in the draft as people think it does. When they develop good prospects, every once in a while they need to make the necessary moves to bring in a major league player.

You're right about the success relative to the Braves and A's but the last 7 years they've been legitimately contending. How many years have they finished ahead of the Sox even though they had a lesser payroll. And yes, I'll take the WS victory of course, but it's time to plan for the next won.

I assume you're talking about the Twins, but the thing with the Twins is they don't do what they need to do wo win it all when they are close to doing it. They don't make the necessary additions to "go for broke" like most teams with good ownership/good GM's do. Since we both agree on Schuerholz, look what he did over the trade deadline. He picked up Texeira and Dotel in order to win now. He also made serious plays at Garland and Arroyo. The Twins would never, ever, ever trade prospects like that, and that is just another reason why the Twins suck.

The Twins rely on their drafts way too much, yet if you look at their successes they really haven't had much. Mauer was a no-brainer since they weren't going to spend on Prior, and Morneau was IIRC a 3rd rounder with power potential, a type of player taken by every team in every draft, who actually beat the odds and developed. Other than those two it has been a long, long time since the Twins have developed anyone impactful.

You're right. And the Braves philosophy shows luck plays less of a role in success. Obviously every team has some lucky breaks and unlucky one's, but you don't do what the Braves have done on just good luck alone.

Obviously the Braves know what they are doing. It's not just luck alone, no, but all I'm saying is that luck does play into it, especially when it comes to the draft. The thing is though, out of all those impact players the Braves have drafted, even if you take out a key player or two I'd still bet on the Braves winning during that span because they are such great talent evaluators over there that they would be capable of filling holes on the major league team with players out of other systems.

Another difference is under KW, the Sox haven't drafted and devloped any superstars or even stars. It's not like KW's trades of minor league players have resulted in a bunch of All Stars.

He's developed a couple possible future impact players in Fields and Chris Young, but overall it doesn't really matter that he hasn't developed any major impact players because of the simple fact that he trades his prospects for impact players. It doesn't matter that Jeremy Reed, Michael Morse, and Miguel Olivo (who was a product of Oakland IIRC) aren't stars because he used them to get Freddy Garcia who is. The only time the inability to draft impact players becomes a major liability is when the major league team depends largely on minor league players coming up and performing at a high level in the big leagues.

And how did the Sox do when they had something like 8 of the first 64 picks in the 1999 draft? How many of those guys made it? They've squandered away picks. Assuming no sandwich picks, if the Sox had 3 first round picks over a 7 year peiod develop into a Blanton, Swisher and Teahan, I'd be thrilled. And I do belive none of those 3 guys were tTop 10. Wasn't Swisher #17 and Blanton in the low 20's (after the Sox passed on him).

Oakland's picks were still 1st rounders. That means they get shots at the players they want before the second round begins and other teams without sandwich picks are out of luck.

The problem with the Sox draft in 1999 (of which in the first 100 they had 15 (Jason Stumm), 22 (Keith Ginter), 35 (Brian West), 45 (Rob Purvis), 66 (Bobby Hill who didn't sign), and 99 (Jon Rauch) is that they didn't trade these guys at the right time. I would definitely say they were unlucky here, especially regarding Rauch who could have been awesome, but normally under a Kenny Williams-like system these guys would have brought major league players to help our team win in the future. Actually the '99 draft is a pretty good example of why it is such a mistake to hold on to all your draft picks.

Borchard isn't bad luck, but a lack of ability on his part to do what needed to be done to succeed. He never cut his swing down. That's a choice he made.

It was bad luck from the Sox view, and I made this point in another post in this thread. Compare Borchard to Josh Fields out of the draft. Both were highly athletic football players coming out of college with his power potential, bad plate disciple, and very raw overall. The Sox, when they drafted Borchard, had no idea whether Borchard would be capable of putting it all together just as they had no idea whether Josh would be able to put it all together. As it is, it looks like Josh is going to be a very good player.

You can either look at the Borchard pick in two ways: 1. it's a bad pick, bad scouting or 2. bad luck. If you say it's bad luck then it explains why Josh can be good but Borchard sucks, and it justifies both draft picks because both were high ceiling prospects. If you say that it was a bad pick and bad scouting, well, then that means Fields was a bad pick too. But so far Fields is looking anything but a bad pick.

Honel goes back to the idea of drafting HS pitchers. I'm not shocked he got hurt. HS pitchers, especially hard throwers) get hurt at a higher rate then college pitchers or softer throwing pitchers.

True. But IMO if you fault the Sox for anything you fault them for not dealing Honel at the right time before he got injured. Honel was a guy with big potential who got hurt and never panned out, and of course a high school guy without the college track record is more of a gamble, but it is the type of gamble a team has to take if they want to get something impactful out of their drafts.

KW has done a good job of scouting other teams farm systems and finding major leaguers. But he also talks all the time of being like the Braves. Maybe he can't achieve as productive as a farm system as the Braves, but right now the Sox aren't even average.

What makes you think the Sox aren't even average? Look at all the players KW got from trading his minor leaguers. He won a WS. He has enough talent now to have another 2005-like offseason and win another WS. He has the pitching in the minor leagues to pick up an impact player or two. Looking at his assets both at the major league and minor league levels combined, KW isn't in as bad of a spot as most people say.

I see your point. But so far KW hasn't traded any first round picks out side of Royce Ring. If he wants to draft players and spend the money for the purpose of trading them (since most of them aren't developing into much) then he should start doing just that.

He has been doing that and IMO the last two 1st round draft picks before Poreda will probably be with another team in the very near future. My guess is that at least one is gone over this offseason.

I did say that luck plays a role in the later rounds of the draft.

Luck plays a role everywhere. Good baseball decisions certainly push the odds in your favor, but they depend on luck too. A good recent example is the Gload for Sisco swap. That was a smart move by KW to get a young hard throwing LHP for a middle of the road bench player that can only reliably play one position (1B).

But of course, luck factors in that one too. KW and co. I'm sure looked at a ton of video on Sisco and I'm sure they did every bit of preparation they could. They talked to him and tried to get a feel of what he is like mentally, but you can only do so much. You don't know exactly whether or not that player has what it takes inside to realize his potential, and if he does, then it's just good luck that your good baseball decision worked out. If Sisco never amounts to anything, I wouldn't call that a bad baseball decision, I'd call it bad luck, because it is always a good baseball decision to trade an easily replaceable bench player with no ceiling whatsoever for a troubled young lefty with top of the rotation potential.

UserNameBlank
08-12-2007, 05:51 PM
^To add to the previous post on trading 1st round draft picks:
2000 - Joe Borchard (traded for Matt Thornton)
2001 - Kris Honel (injured, out of baseball)
2002 - Royce Ring (traded for Roberto Alomar)
2003 - Brian Anderson (not traded, but KW traded other CF's Chris Young and Jeremy Reed. Who knows if KW tried to trade Anderson instead of one of these two?)
2004 - Josh Fields (our 3B)
2004 - Gio Gonzalez (traded for Jim Thome before being reacquired)
2004 - Tyler Lumsden (traded for Mike MacDougal)
2005 - Lance Broadway (AAA)
2006 - Kyle McCulloch (AA)
2007 - Aaron Poreda (Rookie league, untradeable during 1st year)

So, since 2000 KW has had 10 first rounders, 9 of which were eligible to be traded, and 4 of them. Again, I'd be willing to bet that at least one if not both of Broadway/McCulloch are gone this offseason.

gosox41
08-13-2007, 12:02 AM
I assume you're talking about the Twins, but the thing with the Twins is they don't do what they need to do wo win it all when they are close to doing it. They don't make the necessary additions to "go for broke" like most teams with good ownership/good GM's do. Since we both agree on Schuerholz, look what he did over the trade deadline. He picked up Texeira and Dotel in order to win now. He also made serious plays at Garland and Arroyo. The Twins would never, ever, ever trade prospects like that, and that is just another reason why the Twins suck. .

The Twins rely on their drafts way too much, yet if you look at their successes they really haven't had much. Mauer was a no-brainer since they weren't going to spend on Prior, and Morneau was IIRC a 3rd rounder with power potential, a type of player taken by every team in every draft, who actually beat the odds and developed. Other than those two it has been a long, long time since the Twins have developed anyone impactful..

While I don't know the Twins roster inside and out, I do like Garza and to a lesser extent Neshek and Bonser. And I'm pretty sure Torii Hunter was drafted by the Twins.






He's developed a couple possible future impact players in Fields and Chris Young, but overall it doesn't really matter that he hasn't developed any major impact players because of the simple fact that he trades his prospects for impact players. It doesn't matter that Jeremy Reed, Michael Morse, and Miguel Olivo (who was a product of Oakland IIRC) aren't stars because he used them to get Freddy Garcia who is. The only time the inability to draft impact players becomes a major liability is when the major league team depends largely on minor league players coming up and performing at a high level in the big leagues..

I have to disagree here a bit. While I'm all for trading 3 prospects for a player like Garcia, there comes a point where a team needs to have impact players from its farm system to rely on to produce due to payroll constraints or injuries/lack of production from majore leaguers. This year is a perfect example of why having some pitching depth in the minors could have offset the bullpen blow up.

Next year you may see why it would be nice to have some solid to great prospects coming up. The team is structured right now with about $84 mill for about 13 players. If Dye signs (according to rumors he will) that will be approx. $93 mill for 14 players. ow I tihnk you'd admit there are some holes on this team that will cost money to fill--SS, a couple of relievers, and a LFer (assuming Crede's back is a big issue and Fields has to move from LF back tp 3B). Unless JR ups the payroll, it's going to be tough to contend next year. While the situation isn't as dire as some fans make it out to be, the Sox have been a .500 team since the ASB. THis is with a hot Dye, a semi-hot PK, a statistically better BP,and a hot Owens (who is also a big question mark.)





The problem with the Sox draft in 1999 (of which in the first 100 they had 15 (Jason Stumm), 22 (Keith Ginter), 35 (Brian West), 45 (Rob Purvis), 66 (Bobby Hill who didn't sign), and 99 (Jon Rauch) is that they didn't trade these guys at the right time. I would definitely say they were unlucky here, especially regarding Rauch who could have been awesome, but normally under a Kenny Williams-like system these guys would have brought major league players to help our team win in the future. Actually the '99 draft is a pretty good example of why it is such a mistake to hold on to all your draft picks.

I got the impression from the Sox that they were expecting big things from Honel and Rauch. Heck, I remembe an interciew where Hahn compared Honel to Prior.

Wouldn't the time to trade Rauch have been after he won Minor League Player of the Year? He can't go up much higher then that as a prospect.



It was bad luck from the Sox view, and I made this point in another post in this thread. Compare Borchard to Josh Fields out of the draft. Both were highly athletic football players coming out of college with his power potential, bad plate disciple, and very raw overall. The Sox, when they drafted Borchard, had no idea whether Borchard would be capable of putting it all together just as they had no idea whether Josh would be able to put it all together. As it is, it looks like Josh is going to be a very good player.

You can either look at the Borchard pick in two ways: 1. it's a bad pick, bad scouting or 2. bad luck. If you say it's bad luck then it explains why Josh can be good but Borchard sucks, and it justifies both draft picks because both were high ceiling prospects. If you say that it was a bad pick and bad scouting, well, then that means Fields was a bad pick too. But so far Fields is looking anything but a bad pick..

So if Fields was as highly rated of a football player, would the Sox have paid him $5mill to stick with baseball? Did they feel that high on him? Obviously they thought the world of Borchard because they gave him more moneythen they ever gave an first round pick. It was a calculated risk that blew up.




What makes you think the Sox aren't even average? Look at all the players KW got from trading his minor leaguers. He won a WS. He has enough talent now to have another 2005-like offseason and win another WS. He has the pitching in the minor leagues to pick up an impact player or two. Looking at his assets both at the major league and minor league levels combined, KW isn't in as bad of a spot as most people say. .

Again, do they have the payroll flexibility to afford to trade
for an impact major leaguer. I assume you mean a proven major leaguer who is making more then the minimum.


Luck plays a role everywhere. Good baseball decisions certainly push the odds in your favor, but they depend on luck too. A good recent example is the Gload for Sisco swap. That was a smart move by KW to get a young hard throwing LHP for a middle of the road bench player that can only reliably play one position (1B).

But of course, luck factors in that one too. KW and co. I'm sure looked at a ton of video on Sisco and I'm sure they did every bit of preparation they could. They talked to him and tried to get a feel of what he is like mentally, but you can only do so much. You don't know exactly whether or not that player has what it takes inside to realize his potential, and if he does, then it's just good luck that your good baseball decision worked out. If Sisco never amounts to anything, I wouldn't call that a bad baseball decision, I'd call it bad luck, because it is always a good baseball decision to trade an easily replaceable bench player with no ceiling whatsoever for a troubled young lefty with top of the rotation potential.

I agree with the logic of the Cisco trade.



Bob

Lip Man 1
08-13-2007, 10:07 PM
In his latest edition of White Sox mailbag, Mark Gonzales is asked about the farm system:

"In a couple of recent chats on ESPN, Jim Callis of Baseball America termed the White Sox farm system as "thin" and "in the running for one of the worst systems in terms of talent." I was kind of shocked by these revelations until I did a thorough look at each of the Sox's minor league teams. Class-AAA Charlotte has four or five guys who have played with the Sox and could help out next year, but they're not rookies. Class-AA Birmingham has 2 pitchers, Gio Gonzalez and Jack Egbert, who are doing well and Gonzales is being mentioned as one of the top pitching prospects in all of the minors. High A and Low A have only a few possible future talents, but they are years away from benefiting the Sox. First baseman Chris Carter and pitchers Fautino De Los Santos and Aaron Poreda look like future hopefuls. Do the Sox even have enough guys to make up a top ten future prospect list? Have you done any analysis of the Sox minor league organization? --Jim Kessler, Tampa

"Jim, thanks for your question. First, I've known Jim Callis since he was an intern at Baseball America in the summer of 1988, and Jim does his homework on the draft and player development side as well as anyone. I take exception to those who knocked his work during ESPN's coverage of the 2007 draft.

The Sox have a lot of work ahead of them in the player development department, but it's fixable. Unfortunately, it's hard to find young catching. They also need some help in the middle infield.

Please keep this in mind - the Sox have rarely "overpaid" for a high draft pick since Joe Borchard. They also tend not to draft amateur players advised by Scott Boras, which eliminates them from about 20 percent of the draft's elite players. Very rarely have they tried to entice some lower-round picks to sign for above-round money, such as John Danks' younger brother who is excelling at the University of Texas.

It's axiomatic that the Sox, who could finish with a high first-round pick in the 2008 draft, better land a high-impact player."

Lip

Daver
08-13-2007, 10:12 PM
^To add to the previous post on trading 1st round draft picks:
2000 - Joe Borchard (traded for Matt Thornton)
2001 - Kris Honel (injured, out of baseball)
2002 - Royce Ring (traded for Roberto Alomar)
2003 - Brian Anderson (not traded, but KW traded other CF's Chris Young and Jeremy Reed. Who knows if KW tried to trade Anderson instead of one of these two?)
2004 - Josh Fields (our 3B)
2004 - Gio Gonzalez (traded for Jim Thome before being reacquired)
2004 - Tyler Lumsden (traded for Mike MacDougal)
2005 - Lance Broadway (AAA)
2006 - Kyle McCulloch (AA)
2007 - Aaron Poreda (Rookie league, untradeable during 1st year)

So, since 2000 KW has had 10 first rounders, 9 of which were eligible to be traded, and 4 of them. Again, I'd be willing to bet that at least one if not both of Broadway/McCulloch are gone this offseason.

The philosophy of using your farm system strictly to buy MLB ready players can be a dangerous game, and one that is hard to dig out of when it blows up.

UserNameBlank
08-14-2007, 12:12 AM
The philosophy of using your farm system strictly to buy MLB ready players can be a dangerous game, and one that is hard to dig out of when it blows up.
I agree that it can be dangerous (look at the Yankees in 2005-06), but I doubt we'll ever get to that level because the Sox will never have the payroll to trade for All-Star veteran players again and again and actually hold on to them. Of course, the Yankees also have a reputation for buying projected high picks late in the first round and sinking a ton of money into the international market, so they aren't the ideal comparison but that was the best example I could think of off hand.

As long as the Sox keep mixing in the smaller complimentary moves (Miles for Uribe and Loaiza for Contreras for example) with the big moves (Garcia trade, Thome trade, Vazquez trade) and continue to make the prospect-for-prospect deals like the Cunningham and Danks acquistions, we should be fine.