Farm Systems

[BrewPackBuck]

How would you rate all the Farm Systems right now?

[And That]

I got my BA Prospect Handbook today and while I won't list their entire list, here's the top 5 plus the NL Central:

 

1. Rays

2. Red Sox

3. Reds

4. Rangers

5. Yankees

...

13. Cardinals

...

20. Cubs

21. Brewers (They mention they think Jack Z. will be able to restock the system.)

...

26. Pirates

...

30. Astros

[BrewPackBuck]

To be honest I am suprised that the Cardinals are that high but I dont know there farm system and the Brewers that low. Figured we would be in the 15 range but I have trust in Jack Z to restock our system. Also I believe the Yankees prospects get a little to hyped but thats just my opinion.

 

Edit: Thank you for posting that.

[DrWood]

Cardinals have Rasmus. Top 5-level prospects help the overall rating. Brewers don't have anyone that falls into the top 20, maybe not even top 40, depending on the judge of prospects.

[brwrsfan]

I agree about the Yankees, it seems that their prospects get WAY over-valued. Without actually taking time to research it, they just always seem to have "blue-chip" prospects, and they just don't seem to turn out.

[DrWood]

yankees have been building a solid system for a few years now.

[Boy Jeenius]

Yep, they even traded for a couple of nice prospects in the Randy Johnson trade. However, I still agree with the premise that any prospect that the Yankees has, tends to get over valued.

[ILuvDaBush]

I remember thinking up ways for us to trade Sheets for Eric Duncan/Andy Marte a few years back. 3B prospects are like pitching prospects! :-)

[DrWood]

I remember thinking up ways for us to trade Sheets for Eric Duncan/Andy Marte a few years back. 3B prospects are like pitching prospects! :-)

I can better that. I kept thinking that the brewers should trade Fielder for Marte, since they hit about the same in the same league at (I believe) the same age and the brewers needed a 3b while the braves didn't.

 

[DrWood]

In these rankings, elite prospects are the most important things, and when LaPorta, Parra, Escobar, and Jeffress (depending on the ranking) are your top guys, you're not going to have many top 20 or even top 50 guys. While the elite prospects SHOULD be the most important when comparing organizations, I wonder if depth is given too little credit. Guys like Villanueva can be productive major leaguers, even at a young age, without ever being a top prospect. I believe the depth is quite strong in the organization; the winning percentage would support that.

[colbyjack]

I wonder if depth is given too little credit. Guys like Villanueva can be productive major leaguers, even at a young age, without ever being a top prospect. I believe the depth is quite strong in the organization; the winning percentage would support that.

 

That's a good point. I was a little surprised by the low ranking, as I would even argue that Manny Parra IS an elite prospect, and I do think the system's depth to go along with proven results (credibility) should stand for more than they did.

 

The Pirates at #26? Ouch. They don't even have much to look forward to.

[DrWood]

I think Parra's age moves him down the rankings, otherwise I think he should probably be right up there too. If he was 22, with his stuff and productivity last season, he'd be one of the top 20 prospects, maybe top 10.

[colbyjack]

I definitely understand why he isn't ranked higher, especially when you toss in his injury history. I just think he is one of the more overlooked prospects in baseball and could be a huge part of the 2008 Brewers much like Gallardo and Villanueva were a year ago. Someone could look awfully smart if they ranked Parra in the top 10-20 and he went on to have a big season with the Brewers.

 

I think Gamel is overlooked as well. If he has another big year offensively he too needs to be considered a top 50 prospect.

 

At this time next year Parra will probably be the only player off of the top prospect list, and the team will have added seven of the top 100 draft picks. I think it's safe to say that they will be back among the top 5-10 teams, especially if guys like Gamel, Green, Braddock, Bryson, Tyson, Seidel, Gindl, Lucroy, etc. continue to progress. A triumphant return of players such as Mark Rogers and Jeremy Jeffress would be a nice touch as well.

[DrWood]

I've been a Parra supporter for awhile, I just hope he spends most or all of 2008 in MKE, preferably starting. Otherwise, he'll still be on the prospect list.

[NastyTwig]

We've got a lot of guys that most people are sleeping on. Good stats/skills/stuff that could really shoot them up these prospect lists very quickly. Combine that with the most draft picks I can ever remember the Brewers having, and this system will be top 10 by the end of the year.

[sheetswannabe]

Scary to think the Red Sox, have a great farm system. I could see them winning 5 of the next 10 WS.

[erbacaine04]

The Sox and Yankees both rebuild their Farm Systems quickly because they dont stick to the Slotting rule that Baseball wants teams to stick with......These Top 5 guys drop because they want huge deals...and they drop to the Yankees and pay them A ton of money...and they do this for some of these kids that get drafted in the 10th round...that probably would be first round picks the next season......thats how you restock fast...just pay the draft picks a lot of money and go after the ones that have signability problems.

[colbyjack]

The whole draft slotting thing is gaining a lot of momentum recently, and I think that whole point is really overblown. Yes, both the Yankees and Red Sox have cashed in on some nice players that have fallen, but another part of the strength of their systems is making the right picks (Clay Buccholz and Jacoby Ellsbury of the Red Sox in particular, who signed for slot value) and their presence on the international free agent market. Plus, the Yankees picked up some nice players in exchange for Gary Sheffield a year ago, which clearly helped.

 

You don't have to outspend to turn your system around in a hurry. You need to make good picks and have a good scouting staff to make the correct recommendations. I've commented about this elsewhere, but everyone points to the fact that the Astros and Pirates have a bad system because they haven't exceeded slot recommendations. They have a bad system because they've made bad selections, regardless of how much money they have spent.

[TooLiveBrew]

These Top 5 guys drop because they want huge deals...and they drop to the Yankees and pay them A ton of money...and they do this for some of these kids that get drafted in the 10th round...that probably would be first round picks the next season......thats how you restock fast...just pay the draft picks a lot of money and go after the ones that have signability problems.

How much truth is there to this? For the time being, I'll just substitute "big money teams" for "Yankees", since sticking this on one organization is really unfair. So to refine my question, how much truth is there that the big money teams just prey on the signability concern guys, and how much is this just perception being taken for reality?

[erbacaine04]

Well it is real...because in the 2007 Draft there were some teams ahead of the Cubs that were thinking of drafting Vitters....but because of signability he fell to the Cubs who had no problems with signability even though they took until the deadline to sign him....

 

It really is all about making smart picks still.... but the thing is there are some guys rated as TOP 20 prospects who drop to the middle of the 2nd round because of cost and signability problems.....I am not saying its the only reason why teams like these have been able to restock quickly.....but teams like the Brewers and Reds and Pirates have not gone with the safer more expensive prospects, but have reached more...and taken kids that were HAPPy to be drafted in that spot...... Fielder was considered a big reach at the time.... Laporta was considered a reach as well(some felt end of 1st round pick).....I think Mark rogers was even considered to be a slight risk pick as well....even though most people felt he had the best stuff in the draft... they felt Hughes and Bailey were "safer" but more expensive picks...

[TooLiveBrew]

Well it is real...because in the 2007 Draft there were some teams ahead of the Cubs that were thinking of drafting Vitters....but because of signability he fell to the Cubs who had no problems with signability even though they took until the deadline to sign him....

Interesting. I certainly don't doubt whether or not this kind of thing happens - as it clearly does. What I'm wondering about is the frequency of the occurrence. If it happens here and there, but sort of inherently with the 'big' prospects, it might stand out as happening more in memory (just human nature to recall something like that, imo) than it does in the actual drafts.

 

I wonder if the Fielder 'reach' was a signability issue or not, just for one example, because I know Jack Z. & his crew are big on drafting the super-tools - in this case, extreme high-end power. The LaPorta pick... does that have to do with signability of other guys, or just that raw power super-tool again (plus the relative fast-track to MLB that most expect for Matt)?

 

 

EDIT: but teams like the Brewers and Reds and Pirates have not gone with the safer more expensive prospects, but have reached more.

...

I think Mark rogers was even considered to be a slight risk pick as well....even though most people felt he had the best stuff in the draft... they felt Hughes and Bailey were "safer" but more expensive picks...

That's mostly just in fun - yay irony! - but it also does make me wonder about the frequency. If the Reds weren't scared off by Bailey's price tag, perhaps the guys falling to more wealthy teams is happening less frequently than it seems? Honest question.

[colbyjack]

Well it is real...because in the 2007 Draft there were some teams ahead of the Cubs that were thinking of drafting Vitters....but because of signability he fell to the Cubs who had no problems with signability even though they took until the deadline to sign him....

 

I'm guessing you're thinking of the wrong guy. The Cubs picked third overall last June, as it's hard to label any player "falling" two spots. Considering David Price was the top overall prospect a good year before the 2007 draft and how the Royals targeted Rick Porcello and Mike Moustakas before the draft, two of the pricier draft-eligible players that were available for the 2007 draft, you can't really say that Vitters fell because of financial reasons.

 

Basically, Vitters was by far the most signable of the three.

 

Not too many guys fall to the middle of the 2nd round or beyond and end up being signed. Those that do typically end up going to college, meaning everyone passes on them. The big names you see falling are guys like Ian Kennedy, Daniel Bard, Joba Chamberlain and Andrew Brackman, who made it to the lower part of the first round and supplemental round the years they were drafted. But even then, those three guys had concerns about their stuff (Kennedy), command (Bard), health (Chamberlain) or a mixture of things (Brackman - health + command, and he ended up having TJ surgery). Luke Hochevar is the only guy that comes to mind quicky in recent years that truly fell for no other reason than he was represented by Scott Boras, and of course he went first overall the next year to the Royals. Guys like Matt Wieters, Rick Porcello, Jered Weaver and Stephen Drew fall every year, but they usually only do so 10-15 spots at the most.

 

Matt Harvey fell to the 3rd round last year, but even the spend-happy Angels couldn't get him signed and he ended up at UNC.

 

And what do most of them have in common? Scott Boras.

[erbacaine04]

What will happen a lot of times is in the 8th rounds or the latter rounds.....then the big clubs will talk to the guy they drafted... and he might have been hurt... might be a HS kid with some Raw talent.... so the Big club will go way outside of the slotting to make sure he is Signed and not able to go back into the draft the next season....

 

Like when the Brewers drafted Hunter Pence... in the Late late rounds.. a few years ago... lets say the Brewers offered him 800K bonus to sign....(I am just guessing at what the deal was that he almost sgned with the Brewers)...but if this was the Yankess or Red Sox then they would Double the Signing bonus of whatever the top signing bonus in that round was...and offer it to their draftee... and then they take it..... alot of times these same kids if they dont sign will go to college or go back to college and be first round picks the next year or 2 years later....

 

Look at the red Sox drafted Matt laporta in 2006 in the 13th round I believe(he was injured and fell all that way)....ended up not signing and going back to college and became a first round pick...

 

Honestly though I think the teams should just go after best avail...and screw the demands.... this is the one time that every team is actually on equal footing against the Big Market teams....and yet small market teams still pass on the Best prospects at times because of the Price.....

 

 

Sorry I was wrong it was Weiters.... most thought of him as the #2 pick.... with Price going 1..... and some thought He would drop out of the top 10 becase Boras was his agent.....Balt took him at 5...so not much of a drop... but had Balt not picked him there was a real chance of him dropping then..

 

 

Here is an example....most thought he would be a top 10 pick.....

30	30	NYY	Andrew Brackman	rhp	North Carolina State	NC
As an awkward 6-foot-7 16-year-old at Cincinnati's Moeller High, Brackman wasn't considered a top 50 prospect in baseball or basketball. His basketball game blossomed as a senior, and when N.C. State offered him a chance to play both sports, he eagerly accepted. A bout with tendinitis assured he wouldn't be drafted highly enough out of high school to buy him out of college, and after giving up basketball as a sophomore (he had thrown just 77 innings in his first two years at N.C. State), he's begun to come into this own. Now a legitimate 6-foot-10, 240 pounds, his upside is considerable. His athleticism helps him repeat his delivery, but he struggles with his balance and release point, leading to erratic command, especially of his secondary stuff. He touched 99 mph in the Cape Cod League in 2006 and again during an early-season outing in Myrtle Beach, S.C., and he pitches at 94 with exceptional plane. His mid-80s spike-curveball is filthy. Brackman's changeup was the pitch that had improved the most this spring, and grades as a third potential plus offering. He's still unrefined, but even without the polish, Brackman shouldn't slide out of the top 10 picks.

[TooLiveBrew]

Sorry I was wrong it was Weiters...

Geez, how did you ever confuse "Vitters" for "Weiters"?! http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/wink.gif

Thanks for the specific example (Brackman), but I still wonder just how frequent this is. I'll have to do my part & stay informed about prospects & upcoming drafts. Seeing a Brackman fall so far certainly lines up with what you've been describing, but how often does that really happen (perhaps not as extreme as a 10-15 guy falling to the bottom of rd. 1)? Is your position that it happens moreso in the later rounds? (hence your Pence & LaPorta examples)

[colbyjack]

What will happen a lot of times is in the 8th rounds or the latter rounds.....then the big clubs will talk to the guy they drafted... and he might have been hurt... might be a HS kid with some Raw talent.... so the Big club will go way outside of the slotting to make sure he is Signed and not able to go back into the draft the next season....

 

I wouldn't say it happens a lot, but yes, it happens. The Brewers did this with two of their draftees last year, Scarpetta and Zarraga.

 

Look at the red Sox drafted Matt laporta in 2006 in the 13th round I believe(he was injured and fell all that way)....ended up not signing and going back to college and became a first round pick..

 

It had more to do with him being injured. His agent was, and still is, surprise surprise, Scott Boras. He had a bad year but LaPorta and Boras both knew that he had first-round talent. The Red Sox took a flyer on him in the 14th round, just in case.

 

And keep in mind teams do take flyers on players like this in similar situations as somewhat of a backup plan if they aren't able to get one of there earlier picks signed. For the most part they never really intend to sign those players.

 

The Brewers might have done this in taking Richard Hague as late as they did, who all but made it clear that he was going to Rice. Or Chase Reid who ended up at Vanderbilt. Or Cody Hawn and Chad Bell. You can pull examples from every team like this from each and every year.

 

Like when the Brewers drafted Hunter Pence... in the Late late rounds.

 

Completely different scenario. The Brewers liked Pence and drafted him with the intention of following him as a draft and follow candidate. They drafted him in 2002 out of Texarkana Junior College but he ended up at Texas-Arlington, a D1 program in which he was no longer a candidate to be followed through the DFE process. In addition, the Astros took him in the second round of the 2004 draft, TWO years after the Brewers selected him. So sure, the Brewers could have ponied up the dough and looked like geniuses in doing so, but when they drafted Pence they were doing so hoping his skills would further develop. And when the Astros took him in the 2nd round in '04, most felt they were reaching considerably to select him.

 

And I did mention Brackman's name above.

 

I understand what you're trying to say, but saying that a team can re-build more quickly by spending more in the draft is somewhat of a blanket statement. You don't necessarily have to go out of your way to ignore the slotting recommendations to build a better ballclub from the bottom up. It doesn't hurt, but it doesn't always help either.