Comparing Sox & Twins minor league systems

[Fungo]

Originally Posted by caulfield12

I am curious as to why the Sox passed on Garza

I'm curious to find out your obsession with Garza? Hindsight is always 20/20 and I don't recall any of the mock drafts tooting his horn before the draft either. He was a supplemental first rounder according to the publications I saw. 23 other team besides the White Sox passed on the guy as well. The Twins saw something they liked and targeted him.

[DumpJerry]

If I owned a MLB baseball team, I would model it after the 1980's era Dodgers who resemble the present-day Twins a bit. The Dodgers brought most of their players up through the system. I would spend $$ on scouts and minor league coaches to get the "White Sox" system (I cannot own any team other than the White Sox) instilled in the players so that they will be fully ready for Ozzieball when they get called up. When someone declared free agency, I can tell him that if he does not accept our offer, he is free to move on because we have several prospects who can replace him.

I would target high school amd jr. college players with raw talent, the coaching staff will take over from there.

[caulfield12]

Another interesting aspect is the B/C level prospects that play (or have played) "small/Gardy ball" so effectively and their style of play seemed to designed specifically for that turf.

Bartlett
Punto
Tyner
Hocking
LeCroy
Lou Ford
Rivas
Guzman
Mientkiewicz
AJ
Koskie

I know that half those guys (at least) came from other organizations. They're those "pirahna/death by 1,000 cuts" players that annoy the heck out of everyone.

[Daver]

Originally Posted by Fungo

I'm curious to find out your obsession with Garza? Hindsight is always 20/20 and I don't recall any of the mock drafts tooting his horn before the draft either. He was a supplemental first rounder according to the publications I saw. 23 other team besides the White Sox passed on the guy as well. The Twins saw something they liked and targeted him.

And that is why the Twins spend the money on scouting that many other teams do not, because if you scout and assess more players, you expand your draft potential, and make it far easier to come up with a pick if the player you targeted is taken before you get to him.

The draft is a crapshoot, Mark Buehrle is a prime example of this, but it is a calculated crapshoot, and the team that calculates it best is going to reap the rewards.

[Ol' No. 2]

Originally Posted by Daver

The Twins in the last ten years, have feilded a competetive team that has made it's share of playoff appearances, or come close, and have done it on a payroll about half of what the league average is. Granted the Yankees and Red Sox skew that average, but none the less, the Twins are doing something right.

But isn't that basically the Billy Beane argument? Sure they fielded teams better than expected based on their payroll, but it's no substitute for actually winning something.

It's not that I disagree that the Twins do a great job scouting and developing their young players. But until they actually win something, so what?

[Craig Grebeck]

Originally Posted by Ol' No. 2

But isn't that basically the Billy Beane argument? Sure they fielded teams better than expected based on their payroll, but it's no substitute for actually winning something.

It's not that I disagree that the Twins do a great job scouting and developing their young players. But until they actually win something, so what?

I believe it's centered around the idea that the playoffs are a total crapshoot (as evidenced by WC teams winning the World Series). If you get in and get on a hot streak, anything can happen. Competing on that payroll is impressive, no matter what the organizational philosophy.

[caulfield12]

Or the Braves...however, over 13-14 years of opportunities you would like to think you would have more WS titles to show for your efforts than the Marlins.

All you can do is keep stockpiling quality arms and hope than 10% of them pan out...the "waves and waves" we heard about when the 2000 farm system was ranked first behind the likes of Rauch, Garland, Wright, Ginter, Guerrier, Malone, Jason Stumm, Honel, Barcelo, etc.

We all know how difficult it is to develop frontline starting pitching. Still, over the last 10 years even, we've drafted and produced more quality starters than the Twins.

The Twins have Radke (an 8th rounder in 1991)

We have Buehrle, Kip Wells and Josh Fogg that became regular MLB starters.
Josh Rupe, Lumsden and Gio Gonzalez all have a chance to make rotations in 07. Then we have McCarthy.

The Twins have Garza, while we counter with Broadway from the same draft.

[Ol' No. 2]

Originally Posted by Craig Grebeck

I believe it's centered around the idea that the playoffs are a total crapshoot (as evidenced by WC teams winning the World Series). If you get in and get on a hot streak, anything can happen. Competing on that payroll is impressive, no matter what the organizational philosophy.

That's Billy Beane's perennial excuse. It's also hogwash. The fact that WC teams win doesn't prove squat except that a team that finishes one or two games ahead in the standings isn't necessarily a better team, especially considering the unbalanced schedule. I'm not impressed by above average finishes.

There's a difference between building a team to win in the regular season and building a team to win in the playoffs. Over the last 7 years, Oakland and Minnesota have done a good job at the former, but have been abject failures at the latter. For all the "miracles" these low-payroll teams have wrought, Beane has never won even one post-season series, and the Twins in the last 7 years have only won one, and that was by beating Oakland.

[caulfield12]

On a more uplifting note, out of the 18 series contested in the AL to get to the WS since 2000, 7 have been won by teams with higher ERA's.

2004 Yankees (4.69) over Twins (4.03)
2003 Red Sox (4.48) over A's (3.63)
2002 Twins (4.12) over A's (3.68)
2001 Yankees (4.02) over A's (3.59)
2001 Yankees (4.02) over Mariners (3.54)
2000 Yankees (4.76) over A's (4.56)
2000 Yankees (4.76) over Mariners (4.50)

The Twins, A's and Mariners were all built for regular season success but failed abysmally in the playoffs. So obviously, they were flawed teams that didn't come through at crunch time for one reason or another.

Of course, the only teams to beat these "fundamentally" superior teams have normally been the offensive juggernauts, the uber teams the Yankees and Red Sox.

[Daver]

Originally Posted by Ol' No. 2

But isn't that basically the Billy Beane argument? Sure they fielded teams better than expected based on their payroll, but it's no substitute for actually winning something.

It's not that I disagree that the Twins do a great job scouting and developing their young players. But until they actually win something, so what?

No, not really. Beane's philosphy is targeting high stats guys, and exclusively scouting them, without scouting lower tier players, wheras the Twins scout as many players as they can as thouroughly as they can, regardless of stats. They are willing to draft guys with average numbers if their scouts are convinced that a player has a flawed approach that is causing average numbers, and then let their coaches fix it. the Twins not winning anything is also caused by their philosphy on developing players, they refuse to trade away young talent to buy a veteren prescence for a post season push.

[caulfield12]

Originally Posted by Daver

No, not really. Beane's philosphy is targeting high stats guys, and exclusively scouting them, without scouting lower tier players, wheras the Twins scout as many players as they can as thouroughly as they can, regardless of stats. They are willing to draft guys with average numbers if their scouts are convinced that a player has a flawed approach that is causing average numbers, and then let their coaches fix it. the Twins not winning anything is also caused by their philosphy on developing players, they refuse to trade away young talent to buy a veteren prescence for a post season push.

With the exception of Shannon Stewart and signing Rogers in 2003.

And the hitters they gave up to get Stewart were not top flight prospects, wasn't one of them Kielty or Mohr?

Essentially, they have refused to part with any of their top pitching prospects and have paid the price when they couldn't quite scrape by offensively against the Yankees and Red Sox caliber of teams...the differential was just too big for either the A's or the Twins to make it up in pitching superiority.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...ana/index.html
Interesting article about the Twins' philosophy

[Ol' No. 2]

Originally Posted by Daver

No, not really. Beane's philosphy is targeting high stats guys, and exclusively scouting them, without scouting lower tier players, wheras the Twins scout as many players as they can as thouroughly as they can, regardless of stats. They are willing to draft guys with average numbers if their scouts are convinced that a player has a flawed approach that is causing average numbers, and then let their coaches fix it. the Twins not winning anything is also caused by their philosphy on developing players, they refuse to trade away young talent to buy a veteren prescence for a post season push.

That wasn't what I meant. I was referring to the "we did really well for having a small payroll, even though we didn't actually win anything" excuse that the Moneyballistas keep proffering.

[Daver]

Originally Posted by Ol' No. 2

That wasn't what I meant. I was referring to the "we did really well for having a small payroll, even though we didn't actually win anything" excuse that the Moneyballistas keep proffering.

When have you heard Terry Ryan ever say anything remotely close to that?

Beane makes excuses, Terry Ryan will tell you straight out he didn't build a good enough team.

[Fungo]

Originally Posted by caulfield12

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...ana/index.html
Interesting article about the Twins' philosophy

From the article...

As a major-leaguer, Santana went from long man to a setup role alongside LaTroy Hawkins, to starter; it was a deliberate, sometimes maddeningly slow process, particularly when the Twins' rotation struggled last summer and Santana was openly craving a starting slot.

Sounds familiar, maybe the Sox are trying to take a page out of the Twins book in regards to McCarthy.

[caulfield12]

Originally Posted by Fungo

From the article...
Sounds familiar, maybe the Sox are trying to take a page out of the Twins book in regards to McCarthy.

They did the same thing w/ Liriano. They wouldn't have had to play .800 ball to catch us had he started the season in the rotation.

And we used Buehrle in the bullpen his first season (by and large) although he was undoubtedly better than some of our ailing, veteran starters like Baldwin, Parque and Eldred.