Jim Callis: Brewers have the worst minor league system in baseball

[And That]

I asked Jim Callis (of Baseball America) whether the Brewers recent trades pushed the Brewers system down BA's annual organizational rankings, and though the rankings went to press before the Greinke trade, he told me:

 

"They were No. 30 even before the Greinke deal." (tweet)

 

While I think that the Brewers were definitely somewhere in the lower tier of teams, Callis' statement is at least a little alarming. Are the Brewers really in that bad of shape going forward? Are the people that are at least somewhat bullish on the system sugarcoating it? Is Callis wrong?

[paul253]

I can't believe they were number 30 before the trade, but the losses of Jeffress, Lawrie and Odorizzi certainly made things worse. Plus they didn't sign their #1 pick last year. At least they still have some decent pitchers who are relatively close.

[brewmann04]

let just hope the two first rounders will add to the minors and then getting those extra picks for Prince should help.

[paul253]

Let's also hope that someone signs Trevor Hoffman to get us that extra pick.

[logan82]

I am sure there are people who see something special in some of the players but when those players are in A+ or lower and the ceiling for most of your prospects is middle of the rotation starters your system is going to look pretty bad. 30th before the Greinke trade seems a little harsh though. Well we only really lost Odorizzi in that trade as far as valuable prospects.(depending on what you read he was maybe a #2 tops) I don't believe Jeffress was considered worth much as a prospect and it is hard to argue for him much considering how little he has played over the last couple years.

[AdvantageSchneider]

Does it matter? We're going for it this year, and to a certain extent next year. The only downside to that ranking is that it means we probably don't have anything other than Gamel that we could use as trade bait for a mid-year acquisition if we need something. There is plenty of time to rebuild the farm system in the next two years.

[logan82]

Does it matter? We're going for it this year, and to a certain extent next year. The only downside to that ranking is that it means we probably don't have anything other than Gamel that we could use as trade bait for a mid-year acquisition if we need something. There is plenty of time to rebuild the farm system in the next two years.

Yes it does matter to some extent. If you have a highly ranked farm system you can trade prospects for better players than you can if you have a perceived bad farm system.

[colbyjack]

I've said it before, and I'll say it again, the simple fact that the Brewers have done a good job developing talent from within should stand for something. I don't know which teams 20-29 are, but I have a hard time believing many teams have done a better job developing talent in the last 5-7 years than the Brewers have.

 

In addition, the BA staff does not have a Brewer homer. I'm guessing Callis still has the Red Sox in the top 5 despite the Gonzalez trade.

[DocBrewPack]

All of our starters are under the age of 30 on the big league team, our top 3 starting pitvhers are under 30 and we have a lot of young arms in the bullpen. Our farm system might be pretty weak but is that really a big deal at the moment? we have a good team for a while in my opnion and if we can extend the contracs of our stars, then we get loaded with draft picks for loosing them and we rebuild our farm system.

[DHonks]

wow, that's a bold statement. When we were last about a decade ago, we had nowhere near the talent we have in the minors now. We don't have impact bats, but we have solid ones. And our 3 straight pitching heavy drafts will hopefully pay dividends this year with lots of potential 2-5 starters. However, it is also fair to say that if you evaluate Frederickson, Zarraga, Lintz, Wooten, Hall, Green, Prince, etc, we are hoping for lots of huge steps forward this year.

[MNBrew]

Escobar & Cain were already in the bigs as starters -- Escobar since Aug. '09. Jeffress was in the bigs last August and had a good shot of making the roster this spring. So who did our farm system really lose this winter? Only 2 guys: Lawrie & Odorizzi. Granted, they're definitely top-tier prospects, but it's still truly only 2 guys. I suppose you could say that from last year they also lost Salome, but only because he apparently flaked out.

 

There are many, many players who either sniffed the bigs or have the potential to be solid contributors in the bigs, A+ ball & higher:

 

- pitchers: McClendon, Kintzler, Rogers, Rivas, Peralta, Heckathorn, Scarpetta, and SEVERAL other pitchers (even a year ago, you couldn't really say that!)

- hitters: Gamel, Schafer, Gindl, Komatsu, Farris, Green (maybe), Luis Cruz, Kentrail Davis, and handful of others

 

So we're thinner on position players. But other than SS, we've got young, under-control big-league talent -- mostly home-grown, as someone else noted -- at about every position on the big-league diamond. . . . The cupboard's not totally bare at all.

 

Then again, what people think "on paper" during the winter -- even generally pretty minors-savvy folks like Callis -- doesn't mean much if the results continue in the right direction and the talent pipeline continues to yield solid prospects.

[DHonks]

If the Brewers are able to extend Marcum and Greinke for 3-5 more years, we're only need to develop a few pitchers. Starting pitching was a glaring problem when we had no budget AND no talent. Now we have big league talent, so we can hold back the prospects we do have. Assuming Prince walks after 2011, we'd have a rotation locked up and salary certainty at RF, LF, and possibly 2b (weeks), 1b (Hart/Gamel), McGehee (a candidate for a 3-4 year deal now),etc

[ramssuperbowl99]

I've said it before, and I'll say it again, the simple fact that the Brewers have done a good job developing talent from within should stand for something. I don't know which teams 20-29 are, but I have a hard time believing many teams have done a better job developing talent in the last 5-7 years than the Brewers have.

 

In addition, the BA staff does not have a Brewer homer. I'm guessing Callis still has the Red Sox in the top 5 despite the Gonzalez trade.

Why? What does the past 5-7 years have anything to do with the Brewers' current farm system? I guess I could see the stance that the Brewers have done a good job developing talent, so they might get a little more out of this group of prospects than, say, the Pirates, but that has nothing to do with where the farm system currently stands and should have no impact on the ranking. You aren't ranking the organization, you're ranking the players within the organization.

I'm not surprised he's this low on the system. He sees Rogers, Scarpetta, Peralta and Heckathorn as bullpen arms. And it's not like we have a big time position player prospect, just a lot of guys who are sleepers. He didn't see Brett Lawrie as a 2B, thought Jake Odorizzi was a fringe top 100 guy, and didn't like Jeffress based on character concerns.

I think the system isn't that barren or broken, personally. A few big years from sleepers like Richardson, Walla, Robers and Morris on the position side gives us guys with tools doing well. A few good years at AA for Peralta, Heckathorn, and Scarpetta changes their appearance from relievers to starters. A good year in Nashville for Rogers changes the book on him. Two picks in the top 15, used well, give us some high ceiling players. These things are cyclic. The Royals went from No. 10 farm system to "best farm system anyone's ever seen" according to Kevin Goldstein, and they did it in one year. No reason the Crew can't put themselves back into the top 20 with a good season.

[igor67]

Development success has a big role in evaluating systems in my opinion. The Braves and Twins tend to stand-out in my mind as teams that have generally had systems that people like, but don't hit top 5 status or that sort of thing. They just keep producing players. And someone else mentioned compared to a decade ago is absolutely correct. Josh Klimek was a top 10 prospect back in those days. The best comp I can think of for him would be Brendan Katin. Big difference in system quality.

[Tedaldtada]

Callis, and all of BA, are falling off a cliff. I pretty much agree with Callis here, though. We are a bottom 5 system right now. That said, I think there are guys in our system who deserve much more respect/hype. Rogers for one. The AA pitchers (Scarpetta, Heckathorne, Peralta) too. Now, just for fun, go look what Kentrail Davis did in Low-A. Now, go look what Mike Trout did in Low-A. Obviously age is a hugehugehuge factor, but it was Kentrail's first taste of pro pitching (Trout got 207 PA's in 2009), and he ain't exactly old. Davis did what he did with 2 bad hammies and about 12 knots in his back and arms from all the HBP's. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/wink.gif

 

People are gonna kill me for that comparison, and it is probably deserved (age, Trout's stats were just better all around), but Kentrail can at least be a poor man's Mike Trout, right?

 

It isn't all that surprising that our hitters don't get more hype. All the top guys are smallish. Kentrail Davis, Caleb Gindl, Erik Komatsu, Scooter Gennett. Add an inch or two, and suddenly you are legit...We must have the biggest pitchers and the smallest hitters in all of the minors.

[JohnBriggs12]

There's really no position player under 24 that you can say in the next 3 years is a likely starting major league player. Guys like Fielder, Weeks, Braun, Hardy, etc. were as minor leaguers. My guess is that most systems have at least one or two of those types. There are some that bear watching ala Davis that could become that by the end of the season though. Likewise, there's really no one single pitcher under 24 that is considered likely to be in a rotation within 3 years. There's plenty of candidates (more so than the recent past) that could develop into that but they are not there yet. When ranking teams, I think BA puts most it's weight on the number of these types each team has.

 

Gamel, Rogers, McClendon, Faris and Rivas will all be 25 on opening day. They could all be contributors this year, some more than others, but I would think BA no longer looks at them the same way they look at 21 and 22 year olds.

 

If Weeks and Fielder aren't signed, they will need to fill in around a core of Braun, Hart, McGehee, and Lucroy with moderate priced FA. That should allow them to sign at least one of Marcum or Greinke to an extension. The other should bring back at least one quality young arm in a deal next year. Wolf could also be trade bait with a solid 2011.

[yount19.u]

I was just looking through my copy of BA's 2005 prospect book and Detroit was the 29th ranked system with Granderson, Verlander and Jurrjens. It just goes to show that rating prospects and systems is no exact science. Draft to draft, and year to year can also change a system's outlook drastically. With the team we now have, having a low ranked farm system is not that big of a deal. The farm system can, and will be restocked, so it's not like ten years ago where the team and the farm system were both bad and we had little hope.

[colbyjack]

Why? What does the past 5-7 years have anything to do with the Brewers' current farm system? I guess I could see the stance that the Brewers have done a good job developing talent, so they might get a little more out of this group of prospects than, say, the Pirates, but that has nothing to do with where the farm system currently stands and should have no impact on the ranking. You aren't ranking the organization, you're ranking the players within the organization.

 

But they are ranking the organizations, as he said the Brewers have the worst system in all of baseball. And there isn't a formula to come up with those lists, as they are purely subjective. How a team does developing talent IMO should play a large part in ranking the systems talent-wise.

 

Igor brought up a good example with the Braves. There have been some years where their system is lean on talent, but they still are given the benefit of the doubt because they historically have done a better job developing big-league players, even if the players in their system at any given time aren't necessarily impact players.

 

I don't mean to bash BA, because I like their work and have been a long-time subscriber, but they do have their own biases, and those biases play into their subjective rankings. After all, if BP's Kevin Goldstein thinks the Royals went from having the best farm system in all of baseball to arguably the best farm system of all time due to the players acquired in the Greinke trade, obviously there was some good talent given up in Jeffress and Odorizzi. And it doesn't matter where someone ultimately views a player's future, such as Jeffress and Rogers as relievers, Lawrie as a LF, etc., the tools are what should have them ranked. Rogers will still be groomed as a starter (as far as we know at this point in time) and is one of a few very list of players that can reach triple digits.

 

Remember when Callis had Nick Hagadone ranked so highly in the Red Sox system? Most had him pegged as a future reliever as well, but Callis didn't, and was a big reason why the Red Sox were ranked higher than where many to most may have put them (I believe two years ago). Daniel Bard was ranked pretty highly as well that same year, another pitcher that projected as a future reliever (which he is). At the time, that wasn't presented as big of a negative as it is/was with Rogers and Jeffress now.

 

As others have noted, the system still has quite a few players that could contribute at the big-league level in the next 1-2 years, and that also should stand for something. The impact talent is absolutely lacking, but the Brewers should continue to procure talent from within to fill crucial spots on the roster, which is what the system should be doing. I agree that they should be among the worst, but again, there are still plenty of potential big-league contributors sprinkled in the mix, arguably more than a lot of other teams.

[jhart05]

I was just looking through my copy of BA's 2005 prospect book and Detroit was the 29th ranked system with Granderson, Verlander and Jurrjens. It just goes to show that rating prospects and systems is no exact science. Draft to draft, and year to year can also change a system's outlook drastically. With the team we now have, having a low ranked farm system is not that big of a deal. The farm system can, and will be restocked, so it's not like ten years ago where the team and the farm system were both bad and we had little hope.

Agreed. The truth is, no one really knows how good a system is 'till those players reach the majors. Or if by trading away your so-called "top" prospects you can reach the playoffs and win a couple series when you get there.

[monty57]

I think it's important to look at the Brewers' system as a whole, and not act as if the majors and minors aren't part of the same system. When we had a top-ranked minor league system, we had a lot of holes to fill on the MLB roster. Those holes have been filled when our top-ranked minor leaguers became everyday (in many cases All Star) Major Leaguers, and now we have a playoff-caliber major league team comprised of a lot of young players, many of whom are "Brewers property" for a number of years.

 

The ultimate goal of the minor leagues is to help the major league team win. Melvin used his big chips pick up a couple of elite young pitchers this season. Now, for the future, we need to extend at least two of Weeks, Marcum and Greinke. Let's assume we extend Weeks and one of the pitchers. We will then not need a C (Lucroy), 1B/3B (Gamel/McGehee), LF (Braun), RF (Hart) 2B (Weeks) for the foreseeable future. We do have CFs on the roster to bridge the gap to whichever of the minor leaguers becomes major-league ready first. That leaves our biggest need for upgrade at SS, where there will be a plethora of available FA talent next off-season. We have a lot of young bullpen arms both on the MLB roster, and at the AAA level. We would also have two top-of-the-rotation starters locked up for a number of years, with a lot of good-but-not-great talent coming up through the minors to fill in around them.

 

Of course I'd like to have more talent at the MiLb level, but I'd much rather have a lot of young, team-controlled talent at the MLB level and simply have to fill in the few holes that open up on the MLB roster over the next few years. The extra picks we'll have should bolster the minors so that we will have impact players stepping in when we need them in a few years.

[logan82]

All of our starters are under the age of 30 on the big league team, our top 3 starting pitvhers are under 30 and we have a lot of young arms in the bullpen. Our farm system might be pretty weak but is that really a big deal at the moment?

Yes and no. If everybody stays healthy is doesn't matter. We are covered at the corners with Gamel but don't really have any up the middle guys and have a really really big drop off if a pitcher gets hurt.

[Patrick425]

Well, if it's true that the Brewers were ranked 30th even before the Greinke trade, then I think it makes that trade look that much more impressive.

[Polish Falcons]

I was just looking through my copy of BA's 2005 prospect book and Detroit was the 29th ranked system with Granderson, Verlander and Jurrjens. It just goes to show that rating prospects and systems is no exact science. Draft to draft, and year to year can also change a system's outlook drastically. With the team we now have, having a low ranked farm system is not that big of a deal. The farm system can, and will be restocked, so it's not like ten years ago where the team and the farm system were both bad and we had little hope.

This is kind of what I was thinking about while reading through this thread. Have there ever been any studies examining the relevance of Baseball America’s prospect and organizational rankings rankings? For example, who were the top/bottom rated minors systems three years ago and how do their big league teams look now? Over time, not just one year. Since Baseball America is considered THE source for prospect and organizational rankings I am curious to see if there are any critical studies measuring the significance of their ranking systems.

 

Interesting that the team with the worst system in baseball was able to trade for Zack Grienke while most baseball reporters applaud the brewers for not giving up too much to get him.

 

 

[Patrick425]

Interesting that the team with the worst system in baseball was able to trade for Zack Grienke while most baseball reporters applaud the brewers for not giving up too much to get him.

 

Actually I think this makes sense. If we had the worst system in baseball, then it would be logical that we could not have given up too much to get Greinke.

 

 

[crewcrazy]

Organizational rankings are based on the number of potential stars in the system, and there's not many people that would say there are any potential stars in the Milwaukee system that are still considered prospects. There are plenty of guys who could be solid contributors or bench players if everything goes well, but every organization has those types.

 

As long as finishing at the bottom of the organizational rankings isn't an annual thing, it doesn't bother me much. This year, it's a result of graduating a lot of talent, using pieces to solidify an area of need on the parent club, and not doing well in the few high picks they've had the past couple years. They could easily shoot back up to the middle of the pack with a solid draft this June, and Fielder leaving could provide a boost to the next season's draft class as well. I'll get worried if the front office completely ignores the farm system like Houston has for awhile.