Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Phil Mickelson Outshines Tiger Woods

Sustainable Farming: Can any organization succeed every season?

From all vantage points and through various evaluation mechanisms, major league organizations are judged by not only how well the MLB team does in the standings but by the success of their entire operations. Scouting, player development, front office honchos, ownership, business operations and their presence on the international scene can all be evaluated with readily available information. All this has fostered a new perspective on professional baseball in the United States.

This focus on the macro level of baseball is ironic in a way. Baseball has long been the most adverse sport to change, the slowest of the major American professional leagues to learning, accepting and improving because of innovative or nontraditional forces. Baseball purists decry instant replay as the first step towards eliminating umpires. Old school fans point to the "baseball card stats": batting average, RBI, wins, etc. as the best way to determine who's the best player. Hell, Wrigley Field didn't have lights until the 80's! My point is that while some of baseball's most knowledgeable fans accept advanced statistics, analytical evaluation of players and maintain a watchful eye on all areas of an organization, MLB itself has been slow to change it's perspective on a myriad of issues.

Of all the organizational areas that have received an enlarged interest over the past ten years or so has been the minor league teams. Not necessarily the teams and their ultimate place in the standing, but the amateur draft in June and the performance of each team's top prospects. There are many different websites, media outlets and everything in between that watch, analyze and ultimately give prognoses on individual players and systems as a whole. Most of the time these entities are in agreement (Texas Rangers- yay!, Houston Astros- horrid!), but sometimes they disagree (Jordan Lyles- Astros Prospect #1!, Jordan Lyles- third starter if he's lucky). These are good things for people like DQ, Dave, Farmstros, clack and me. More topics for discussion, more points for both disagreement and consensus. It's what makes blogging enjoyable and fandom both a great deal of fun and often a source of consternation.

Some teams have earned the reputation for being "good" talent evaluators and other clubs have not been as fortunate. The truth, however, is you're only as good as the next big prospect. If you have a stable of youngsters on the farm, you're ready to roll off seasons of success extending into perpetuity. If your land is barren, well...you'd better spend wisely on the free agent market, and be prepared to hear that your GM and scouting director aren't fit to tie the laces of Andrew Friedman's loafers.

As I pondered the bleakness of our current crop of young players, I wondered just how well the various organizations are at not only rising to the top of the minor league rankings, but once they get there- how often can they stay at the top? Is it possible to remain a top echelon minor league system for an extended period of time?

From 2005 to the current season, I wanted to look at the top five farm systems in that year and see where they were ranked in the subsequent five years. For 2005,2006, 2008, 2009, 2010 I used Baseball America's rankings (which are free for those seasons), For 2007, I used Baseball Prospectus (free again). With that in mind, here is how it played out:

Team 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
LA Angels of Anaheim 1 4 3 10 25 16
LA Dodgers 2 2 5 6 23 19
Milwaukee Brewers 3 5 7 21 10 7
Minnesota Twins 4 6 12 18 22 14
Atlanta Braves 5 7 14 8 6 6

 

Now, what to make of these rankings..

  • Milwaukee traded the farm (literally) for CC Sabathia in 2008, and he helped them make the playoffs for the first time since 1982. Their farm system ranked 21st that season, but shot up to 10th the following season. So even after giving up the likes of Matt LaPorta, the Brew Crew improved on the whole
  • Ditto for Atlanta. Landing Mark Teixeira in 2008 and giving up the likes of Elvis Andrus and Neftali Feliz didn't seem to hurt them on the whole. Sure, it helped Texas jump to the top of the rankings in 2009 and 2010, but the Braves aren't doing all that poorly either with Tommy Hanson and Jason Heyward buttressing an extremely talented farm system. It helped that the Braves were able to flip Teixeira to the Angels to recoup some of the prospect cost as well.
  • The Dodgers and Angels were at the top of the organizational rankings until 2009, when the wheels fell off. Both teams have graduated a number of players in recent seasons (Maicer Izturis, Matt Kemp, Clayton Kershaw, Andre Ethier, etc) which has helped the teams remain competitive, but now it appears as if the minor league pipelines have trickled a bit dry, at least temporarily.
  • Minnesota's dance into mediocrity isn't as important as it could have been, because with the opening of their new stadium, the team has ponied up more cash for free agent contracts, meaning that the drop in the organizational rankings may be masked for the immediate future

Ultimately, these rankings are fairly subjective, and what seems to be most important is having solid minor league classes for at least three consecutive seasons. When this happens, a handful of major league contributors usually emerge and should keep the major league team playing at least respectable baseball for half a decade or so. Teams like Tampa Bay (Longoria, Upton, Price, Shields), Philadelphia (Hamels, Madson, Howard, Utley), and Boston (Youkilis, Ellsbury, Pedroia, Papelbon, Lester) are not unlike the Dodgers and Angels in graduating multiple young, productive players in close succession, allowing the big league team to compete for more than just a season or two. Texas hopes to join this group, as do the Braves, who, despite their high rankings, haven't seen a postseason game since Chris Burke sent them home in 2005.

There is not one way to build a successful farm system, and once a team builds one they have to strike while the iron is hot, and continue to draft and evaluate well. It is an ongoing process, where nothing is guaranteed no matter what Keith Law thinks of you. My take is that your best bet is to spend wisely on the free agent market and have enough in the way of young minor league talent to supplement the holes that free agency and trades cannot fill sufficiently.

Comment 10 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

And of course, if you went back to the early 2000’s, you would see the Astros’ minor league system at the top of the heap, named as “Major League Organization of the Year” by BA, etc. The contemporaneous starting rotation moving up through AA and AAA composed of Roy Oswalt, Tim Redding, Brad Lidge, and Carlos Gonzalez almost was enough by itself to make a minor league system.

It seems like almost all organizations go through up and down cycles. The Dodgers, which probably has one of the greatest organization histories as a producer of prospects, was “down” when Logan White (who was my choice for Astros GM) took over in 2002, and turned out a succession of yearly “top 5” drafts. Most highly rated farm systems hit a down cycle when a group of top prospects graduate to the majors. In a sense, those down cycles are an indicator of success, since the best outcome is to turn a group of prospects into major league producers at the same time. And the Astros began their down cycle in the 2004-5 period as a number of prospects had made it to the big leagues in the prior couple of years. The test is how fast an organization can turnaround the down cycle, and the Astros didn’t do a good job at that part. As I have said many times, the 2007 “missing draft” was the biggest contributor to falling way down.

by clack on Feb 14, 2010 9:04 AM CST reply actions  

Carlos Hernandez you mean. But its depressing looking back at those guys. Redding and Hernandez were unbelievable at AA. Imagine if Hernandez and Miller stayed healthy, and Redding’s head was worth more than 10 cents. Sigh.

by seanbergmanrules on Feb 14, 2010 2:06 PM CST up reply actions  

Sorry, when I wrote it, I thought something looked wrong…I must have had the Brewers’ CF on my mind. (In other words, yes, Carlos Hernandez.) 2 of the 4 guys who were in that minor league rotation (Roy and Lidge) succeeded at All Star levels in the majors. Carlos Hernandez injured his shoulder sliding into 2d base and was never the same afterward. 3 of 4 (including Redding) had better than average longevity in the majors. Those percentages are probably well above average for top prospects. 1 in 4 injured. 2 of 4 achieve star level performance. And the remaining 1 disappoints and becomes a journeyman pitcher. That’s why I think you can never have too many pitching prospects.

by clack on Feb 14, 2010 2:22 PM CST up reply actions  

oh, I said Gonzalez, not Gomez, so the Brewers CFer isn’t a good excuse. I just made a mistake, and leave it at that.

by clack on Feb 14, 2010 2:33 PM CST up reply actions  

Agreed. Man, Hernandez was so good before that slide. If my memory is correct, he had 17 scoreless innings to begin his career, injured his shoulder, gave up a homerun the next inning, and was never the same.

by seanbergmanrules on Feb 14, 2010 2:30 PM CST reply actions  

"biggest" fans accept analytical analysis???

Bad adjective.

Some of the biggest fans I know are little old ladies who couldn’t give a flip for advanced statistics. Many “old school” fans rank up there as the game’s and individual team’s biggest fans.

Astros fan for life

by Joe in Birmingham on Feb 14, 2010 3:45 PM CST reply actions  

how about “ardent” fans? “Obsessed” fans? “analytical fans”?

by clack on Feb 14, 2010 4:08 PM CST up reply actions  

noted

and i know what you’re saying is true. go to an astros game and you’ll sit around other people who don’t adhere to the beyond the boxscore, advanced metrics, objective thought, mantra but still know everything about every astro.

i guess i just wrote that without thinking too heavily on the subject, and moved on to the next part.

although it’s possible to make an argument that stat-head fans are in fact bigger fans. they understand the complexities of the game, perhaps, more than the traditional/old school fan, and read, write and analyze the tedious minutiae of the game that most fans wouldn’t touch with a twenty foot foul pole. so while “biggest” is sort of a third grade adjective, i wouldn’t say it’s that “bad” an adjective.

The Crawfish Boxes, Astros blogging at its finest.

by Evan Hochschild on Feb 14, 2010 6:39 PM CST up reply actions  

Would it be too cruel to replace “biggest” with “smartest”?

by OremLK on Feb 15, 2010 2:16 AM CST up reply actions  

I’d like to see the rankings of a minor league system five years after the fact, kind of like how an NFL writer will go back and look at a particular draft class 3-5 years afterwards.

by Timothy De Block on Feb 16, 2010 11:13 AM CST reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the Crawfishboxes, the SBNation blog for the Houston Astros.

TCB Tweets!

    

Current Series

3 game series vs Rockies @ Minute Maid Park

Sat 04/07 6:05 PM CDT
Sun 04/08 1:05 PM CDT

NL Central Standings

W L PCT GB STRK
Chicago 0 0 .000 0 Lost 0
Cincinnati 0 0 .000 0 Lost 0
Houston 0 0 .000 0 Lost 0
Milwaukee 0 0 .000 0 Lost 0
Pittsburgh 0 0 .000 0 Lost 0
St. Louis 0 0 .000 0 Lost 0

(updated 2.13.2012 at 6:03 AM CST)


Managing Editors

Tcb_icon_small Timothy De Block

Old_school_dome_logo_small David Coleman

Editors

Nsapcs13_large_small clack

H_astros_small Subber10

Astrobritrs2_small AstroB

Small conroestro

Small native_astro

Small CRPerry13

Authors

Astros_logo121009_small OremLK

This-is-my-boom-stick_small allphilla

Th_houston-astros-logo-3_small Will Bonn