SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
|
|
Post by texs31 on Jun 3, 2024 13:30:26 GMT -5
Okay, stay with me. There is a point to this thread (the title of which probably resulted in a significant number of eye rolls).
Was reading some discourse in a separate thread and, combined with some discussions I have with buddies of mine, I'm coming to the conclusion that different people have VERY different expectations for what prospects should be providing to an organization (and since that likely differs from org to org, we'll stick with our Red Sox).
I don't want to start this off with false assumptions and bad interpretations from other threads so I'll just ask the Forum what they want/hope/expect from the Sox Farm system as we "rebuild".
I'll start.
While it's nice to envision the Big 3 (plus Casas, Raffaela, etc) to be the foundation of the Sox Future, I'm not relying on that in my reasonable but optimistic view of the next few years. Instead, I just hope that out of the current group, we have enough quality major leaguers (at very low or, at least, cost controlled AAV) to offset what I hope is an eventual spending push by ownership.
This doesn't require Mayer, Teel, Anthony or others to be stars (though it would be great). Stars CAN be bought. The Sox, with their resources, should always be in the mix IF they choose (when the time is right). But what's needed is to counter that spending with cheap players to help fill out the 26-man (and beyond) roster. Sure, a team could attempt to find bargain guys that are current major leaguers. But most teams, seemingly, try to build that from within.
Now I AM going to risk poor assumptions here but it does seem that many (again, some on SP threads, some in discussions I have elsewhere) believe the Sox (or us as fans) are waiting for the young guys to be the stars and that's the path to another championship. I just don't believe that should be true (and, while not an insider AT ALL, I don't believe it is). Some teams (Tampa, a logical example) probably DO need their prospects to be the stars. I just don't think that's true here.
So what do folks here expect?
Sorry if mods don't think this warrants its own thread. Just felt there were multiple threads where I wanted to go down this path but didn't want to derail the intended topic. Hence, the new thread.
|
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Jun 3, 2024 13:48:28 GMT -5
I appreciate the thoughtfulness but I disagree with your thesis here, - younger/arb or pre-arb players being stars isn't just one path to a championship it is the only path. Find one championship team in recent history that doesn't have multiple 3+ win seasons from arb or pre-arb players.
They can and should supplement those guys with established players, but it's not simply filling out the roster, they really need at least a couple players to be studs early in their career. They might already have those guys in Duran, Abreu, Casas, Houck on the roster now, I think it's TBD whether we need to wait for additional stars, but whether it's the current crop or the next wave they need some real foundation level players out of it to be able to win a championship.
|
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Jun 3, 2024 14:13:15 GMT -5
But think about what you are saying analytically.
Why does it matter if those multiple 3+ win players are pre-arb or vet minimum? What's the difference short of an AAV variation that shouldn't matter to a team that is "going for it". Especially one with the Sox resources.
Something that's always been doesn't mean it's always required. THAT demands proof that it could NOT happen any other way.
It's not hard to look at recent champions (or contenders) and theoretically "replace" their pre-Arb stars with veteran contributors throughout the league making very little (comparatively) money.
Significantly more unlikely, sure. But not impossible.
|
|
|
|
Post by bellhorndingers21 on Jun 3, 2024 14:30:33 GMT -5
But think about what you are saying analytically. Why does it matter if those multiple 3+ win players are pre-arb or vet minimum? What's the difference short of an AAV variation that shouldn't matter to a team that is "going for it". Especially one with the Sox resources. Something that's always been doesn't mean it's always required. THAT demands proof that it could NOT happen any other way. It's not hard to look at recent champions (or contenders) and theoretically "replace" their pre-Arb stars with veteran contributors throughout the league making very little (comparatively) money. Significantly more unlikely, sure. But not impossible. 29 other teams are vying for veteran contributors making little money and there's the higher likelihood of their performance declining as baseballs aging curve skews younger. |
|
|
|
Post by thegoodthebadthesox on Jun 3, 2024 14:31:49 GMT -5
But think about what you are saying analytically. Why does it matter if those multiple 3+ win players are pre-arb or vet minimum? What's the difference short of an AAV variation that shouldn't matter to a team that is "going for it". Especially one with the Sox resources. Something that's always been doesn't mean it's always required. THAT demands proof that it could NOT happen any other way. It's not hard to look at recent champions (or contenders) and theoretically "replace" their pre-Arb stars with veteran contributors throughout the league making very little (comparatively) money. Significantly more unlikely, sure. But not impossible. Am I missing something obvious here? Is there an abundance of 3+ win players making the vet minimum? This comment seems bananas. It is VERY hard to theoretically do that lol |
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Jun 3, 2024 14:33:10 GMT -5
Yeah, I don't know who these veteran contributors making very little money are. If they're veterans and they're reliable contributors then they're making money. If they're not reliable contributors then you can't really build a team around them. Maybe you hit on several of those guys in one season - the 2013 Red Sox sorta did (obviously supplemented with expensive guys and homegrown stars) - but that team also finished last in 2012, 2014, and 2015. Calling the 2013 team a fluke feels too harsh, but calling them a proper exercise in organizational building doesn't feel right either. And even that team had pre-FA Jacoby Ellsbury and Clay Buchholz as two of its most important contributors.
|
|
|
|
Post by puzzler on Jun 3, 2024 14:40:41 GMT -5
But think about what you are saying analytically. Why does it matter if those multiple 3+ win players are pre-arb or vet minimum? What's the difference short of an AAV variation that shouldn't matter to a team that is "going for it". Especially one with the Sox resources. Something that's always been doesn't mean it's always required. THAT demands proof that it could NOT happen any other way. It's not hard to look at recent champions (or contenders) and theoretically "replace" their pre-Arb stars with veteran contributors throughout the league making very little (comparatively) money. Significantly more unlikely, sure. But not impossible. If you have the ability to create a farm system that can annually provide potential 3+ win players, why would you accept additional risk by doing it a less reliable and more expensive way? I disagree entirely that it is possible to do what you suggest, but suppose we accept the premise that it isn't. As soon as you start winning, your ability to replenish your farm system though the draft is almost immediately impacted negatively. So how do you maintain that farm system if the veteran contributors you are paying league minimum become free agents immediately following your successful season? You no longer have the ability to trade them or the prospects that you can replace them with. The Red Sox better than any team in the last 25 years understand the cycle of peaks and valleys. Building something sustainable at least seems like a more worthy pursuit than enduring 2012 and 2020. To answer your initial question, the goal to me should be to essentially have a super team of prospects every 3 years. I'm thinking the Portland team this year (Mayer, Anthony, Teel, Lugo, Yorke, Paulino, Penrod, Perales, Gonzalez etc). You can't guarantee that level of talent at the same level every year - but if you can get to every 3 years then you have a pretty good chance of the following: 1) Having 2-3 prospects with the 'potential' to be 2-3 win players from your farm system every year. 2) Have enough talent to be able to make trades to supplement the big league roster for a postseason push 3) Have enough MLB talent/prospects that you can make trades to supplement either the big league roster or to back fill your farm system in the offseason |
|
|
|
Post by rhswanzey on Jun 3, 2024 14:47:14 GMT -5
Heading into 2011, the Kansas City Royals had a farm system that was legitimately debated as the best of all time. With the benefit of hindsight, we see all sorts of rookie ball and deep sleeper performers buried on their rankings: Salvador Perez, Yordano Ventura, Will Smith, Greg Holland
Here’s all of the 3 fWAR seasons their top 10 (John Sickels) produced:
(1) 3B Mike Moustakas (3.2 in 2012, 3.8 in 2015)
(2) 1B Eric Hosmer (3.1 in 2013, 3.5 in 2015, 3.7 in 2017)
(3) C Wil Myers (3.4 in 2016)
(4) LHP Danny Duffy (3.6 in 2017)
(5) LHP Mike Montgomery - none, 541 career IP
(6) LHP John Lamb - none, 129.2 career IP
(7) RHP Jake Odorizzi (4.3 in 2019)
(8) RHP Jeremy Jeffress - none, 424.1 career IP
(9) LHP Chris Dwyer - none, 3 career IP
(10) OF Brett Eibner - none, 244 career PA
OP isn’t saying young players aren’t necessary. They’re saying if the extent of the plan is to wait for our top three prospects to turn into perennial all stars, it’s not a great plan. I agree with OP. Arguably the best farm system of all time doesn’t win a title without acquiring a front line starter for each of the two World Series appearances they made.
|
|
|
|
Post by thegoodthebadthesox on Jun 3, 2024 14:54:54 GMT -5
Heading into 2011, the Kansas City Royals had a farm system that was legitimately debated as the best of all time. With the benefit of hindsight, we see all sorts of rookie ball and deep sleeper performers buried on their rankings: Salvador Perez, Yordano Ventura, Will Smith, Greg Holland Here’s all of the 3 fWAR seasons their top 10 (John Sickels) produced: (1) 3B Mike Moustakas (3.2 in 2012, 3.8 in 2015) (2) 1B Eric Hosmer (3.1 in 2013, 3.5 in 2015, 3.7 in 2017) (3) C Wil Myers (3.4 in 2016) (4) LHP Danny Duffy (3.6 in 2017) (5) LHP Mike Montgomery - none, 541 career IP (6) LHP John Lamb - none, 129.2 career IP (7) RHP Jake Odorizzi (4.3 in 2019) (8) RHP Jeremy Jeffress - none, 424.1 career IP (9) LHP Chris Dwyer - none, 3 career IP (10) OF Brett Eibner - none, 244 career PA OP isn’t saying young players aren’t necessary. They’re saying if the extent of the plan is to wait for our top three prospects to turn into perennial all stars, it’s not a great plan. I agree with OP. Arguably the best farm system of all time doesn’t win a title without acquiring a front line starter for each of the two World Series appearances they made. We have very different perspectives on what the OP meant then. Especially if you read their follow up comment, this seems pretty clearly not it to me. |
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Jun 3, 2024 14:56:16 GMT -5
Heading into 2011, the Kansas City Royals had a farm system that was legitimately debated as the best of all time. With the benefit of hindsight, we see all sorts of rookie ball and deep sleeper performers buried on their rankings: Salvador Perez, Yordano Ventura, Will Smith, Greg Holland Here’s all of the 3 fWAR seasons their top 10 (John Sickels) produced: (1) 3B Mike Moustakas (3.2 in 2012, 3.8 in 2015) (2) 1B Eric Hosmer (3.1 in 2013, 3.5 in 2015, 3.7 in 2017) (3) C Wil Myers (3.4 in 2016) (4) LHP Danny Duffy (3.6 in 2017) (5) LHP Mike Montgomery - none, 541 career IP (6) LHP John Lamb - none, 129.2 career IP (7) RHP Jake Odorizzi (4.3 in 2019) (8) RHP Jeremy Jeffress - none, 424.1 career IP (9) LHP Chris Dwyer - none, 3 career IP (10) OF Brett Eibner - none, 244 career PA OP isn’t saying young players aren’t necessary. They’re saying if the extent of the plan is to wait for our top three prospects to turn into perennial all stars, it’s not a great plan. I agree with OP. Arguably the best farm system of all time doesn’t win a title without acquiring a front line starter for each of the two World Series appearances they made. I guess, but no one is saying that is the extent of the plan. That's only the extent of the plan if you're a team with zero budget. The Red Sox obviously should and will supplement the farm with acquired talent. The point I am making (and I think others too) is that if none of the prospects become stars, the rest of it doesn't matter. There's no realistic path to winning a championship without that. |
|
|
|
Post by wanderingdude on Jun 3, 2024 15:15:46 GMT -5
Obviously, the entire roster can’t just be waiting for prospects to supplement everything, the Red Sox should be aggressive should be active in both FA and trades this offseason. But if you truly want “stars” and high war players you have to develop them internally. The new wave of signing pre-arb deals has killed free agency in terms of star power. Obviously there are many guys who will be available who would help in some capacity, but adding a star via free agency, or even trade, has become increasingly difficult. The only guy who would qualify this year is Soto. You could make a borderline case for Bregman or Alonso. That’s about it. Additionally the opportunity cost of missing in FA is so much more impactful than a prospect failing.
I also think the Red Sox reliance on the top 3 is a little overblown. If one of them turns into a 4* War player and the other two are merely average players, this team would look a lot better. Would it really be unreasonable to expect Mayer to play an average defense at short or second and be a 100 wrc+ guy? imagine how much better the team would look with that, and that’s probably a 50th percentile outcome for him?
|
|
|
|
Post by rhswanzey on Jun 3, 2024 15:22:46 GMT -5
The main course, to me, was the following two paragraphs. It sounded a lot like what I heard from Chaim at the Devers press conference, or in Springfield re: Mookie (when he used the word “bets” a number of times). I never heard that our stars need to come from the system. I heard that we can’t pay market rate for established star production without a pipeline of pre arb talent to support that bet.
|
|
|
|
Post by puzzler on Jun 3, 2024 15:55:21 GMT -5
The main course, to me, was the following two paragraphs. It sounded a lot like what I heard from Chaim at the Devers press conference, or in Springfield re: Mookie (when he used the word “bets” a number of times). I never heard that our stars need to come from the system. I heard that we can’t pay market rate for established star production without a pipeline of pre arb talent to support that bet. Then you heard incorrectly. Saying you can't pay market rate for established star production without a pipeline of pre arb talent to support that bet is not thing same thing as saying - 'We don't need stars from our system'. As was mentioned that literally just doesn't happen and the OP saying that it isn't impossible without providing anything to back it up pretty much confirms that. |
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Jun 3, 2024 16:03:21 GMT -5
Heading into 2011, the Kansas City Royals had a farm system that was legitimately debated as the best of all time. With the benefit of hindsight, we see all sorts of rookie ball and deep sleeper performers buried on their rankings: Salvador Perez, Yordano Ventura, Will Smith, Greg Holland Here’s all of the 3 fWAR seasons their top 10 (John Sickels) produced: (1) 3B Mike Moustakas (3.2 in 2012, 3.8 in 2015) (2) 1B Eric Hosmer (3.1 in 2013, 3.5 in 2015, 3.7 in 2017) (3) C Wil Myers (3.4 in 2016) (4) LHP Danny Duffy (3.6 in 2017) (5) LHP Mike Montgomery - none, 541 career IP (6) LHP John Lamb - none, 129.2 career IP (7) RHP Jake Odorizzi (4.3 in 2019) (8) RHP Jeremy Jeffress - none, 424.1 career IP (9) LHP Chris Dwyer - none, 3 career IP (10) OF Brett Eibner - none, 244 career PA OP isn’t saying young players aren’t necessary. They’re saying if the extent of the plan is to wait for our top three prospects to turn into perennial all stars, it’s not a great plan. I agree with OP. Arguably the best farm system of all time doesn’t win a title without acquiring a front line starter for each of the two World Series appearances they made. The Royals went to two consecutive World Series, winning one of them, because of the core they built up through the system. Looking at the WAR leaders of the 2015 champs: 1. Lorenzo Cain: Acquired by the Royals with < 1 year service time in the Greinke trade, was never a ranked prospect for KC but was clearly a key of that deal. 2. Eric Hosmer: 2008 1st-round pick (3rd overall), arb-eligible, had not reached FA 3. Mike Moustakas: 2007 1st-round pick (2nd overall), arb-eligible, had not reached FA 4. Wade Davis: Acquired pre-arb asthe second piece in the James Shields deal with Tampa for several of the players mentioned above (Myers, Montgomery, Odorizzi); was arb-eligible, not yet FA 5. Chris Young: Scrap heap veteran, good signing 6. Edinson Volquez: Mid-tier FA signing 7. Kendrys Morales: Mid-tier FA signing (widely mocked, proved to work out) 8. Alex Gordon: 2005 1st-round pick (2nd overall), stayed with Royals on a contract extension (was making $12.5M in 2015) 9. Salvador Perez: International FA, Pre-Arb 10. Jarrod Dyson: Low-round draft pick, Pre-Arb 11. Yordano Ventura: International FA, Pre-Arb (not really a low-level prospect either - he was ranked 26th by BA headed into 2014; he just hadn't broken out in 2011 when this list is from) 12. Ryan Madson: Injury reclamation FA, great signing So yeah, what I see here is a perfect example of what a strong, deep farm can do. Several home grown prospects, a top player who was acquired with other of their top prospects (though not the key contributor they thought they were trading for in that deal, what a crazy trade), and a top player who was a post-prospect but pre-arb who they sold a future Hall of Famer to get while they were rebuilding. The 2014-15 Royals didn't even get a ton of luck in terms of their prospects turning into stars, but still look like a pretty textbook example on what happens when you have a stacked system. |
|
|
|
Post by seamus on Jun 3, 2024 16:25:26 GMT -5
It seems clear to me that prospects matter because they're the only way you can build a team that can have sustained success if you're not willing to pay the luxury tax. You need them to fill out the roster, especially the bullpen, because it adds up quickly if you're paying FA rates for bench guys and middle relievers. But as others have pointed out, you also typically need to get above-average/star-level contributions from guys in their cost-controlled years. Flipping prospects for big leaguers is great and will likely be part of any successful rebuild, but there just aren't typically enough established stars available on the free agent market or through trades for you to get more than one or two players that way in a given year. There's no way around needing some prospects to reach their 80th+ percentile outcomes in order to reach the promised land.
|
|
|
|
Post by adamgregory81 on Jun 3, 2024 16:38:33 GMT -5
With Campbell and Teel crushing, Zanetello looking great (when he plays), and Wehunt looking like a steal, the early returns on the 2023 draft are looking exceptional.
Has anyone done an analysis on measuring the relative quality of a mlb draft class? It’s such a crapshoot, I’d think one long term first division regular and two role guys is probably enough to qualify as a “success” unless your drafting in the top 1/3rd of the draft, but it’s just a guess.
Way too early to suggest this as an outcome, but I’d expect that any draft producing 3 (or 4) first division regulars is an overwhelming success.
To the OPs point, if you could draft 3 first division regulars every year (impossible!), you’d replace your entire team, solely through the draft, every 8-10 years, and you probably wouldn’t need a single star - ever.
|
|
|
|
Post by adamgregory81 on Jun 3, 2024 16:46:06 GMT -5
Piling on - does this forum think of 2011 as the gold standard of drafts? (Betts, Bradley, Barnes, Shaw, Swihart, Owens…)
Had Swihart and Owen’s panned out, it could have been an all-timer.
|
|
|
|
Post by rhswanzey on Jun 3, 2024 17:05:57 GMT -5
Heading into 2011, the Kansas City Royals had a farm system that was legitimately debated as the best of all time. With the benefit of hindsight, we see all sorts of rookie ball and deep sleeper performers buried on their rankings: Salvador Perez, Yordano Ventura, Will Smith, Greg Holland Here’s all of the 3 fWAR seasons their top 10 (John Sickels) produced: (1) 3B Mike Moustakas (3.2 in 2012, 3.8 in 2015) (2) 1B Eric Hosmer (3.1 in 2013, 3.5 in 2015, 3.7 in 2017) (3) C Wil Myers (3.4 in 2016) (4) LHP Danny Duffy (3.6 in 2017) (5) LHP Mike Montgomery - none, 541 career IP (6) LHP John Lamb - none, 129.2 career IP (7) RHP Jake Odorizzi (4.3 in 2019) (8) RHP Jeremy Jeffress - none, 424.1 career IP (9) LHP Chris Dwyer - none, 3 career IP (10) OF Brett Eibner - none, 244 career PA OP isn’t saying young players aren’t necessary. They’re saying if the extent of the plan is to wait for our top three prospects to turn into perennial all stars, it’s not a great plan. I agree with OP. Arguably the best farm system of all time doesn’t win a title without acquiring a front line starter for each of the two World Series appearances they made. The Royals went to two consecutive World Series, winning one of them, because of the core they built up through the system. Looking at the WAR leaders of the 2015 champs: 1. Lorenzo Cain: Acquired by the Royals with < 1 year service time in the Greinke trade, was never a ranked prospect for KC but was clearly a key of that deal. 2. Eric Hosmer: 2008 1st-round pick (3rd overall), arb-eligible, had not reached FA 3. Mike Moustakas: 2007 1st-round pick (2nd overall), arb-eligible, had not reached FA 4. Wade Davis: Acquired pre-arb asthe second piece in the James Shields deal with Tampa for several of the players mentioned above (Myers, Montgomery, Odorizzi); was arb-eligible, not yet FA 5. Chris Young: Scrap heap veteran, good signing 6. Edinson Volquez: Mid-tier FA signing 7. Kendrys Morales: Mid-tier FA signing (widely mocked, proved to work out) 8. Alex Gordon: 2005 1st-round pick (2nd overall), stayed with Royals on a contract extension (was making $12.5M in 2015) 9. Salvador Perez: International FA, Pre-Arb 10. Jarrod Dyson: Low-round draft pick, Pre-Arb 11. Yordano Ventura: International FA, Pre-Arb (not really a low-level prospect either - he was ranked 26th by BA headed into 2014; he just hadn't broken out in 2011 when this list is from) 12. Ryan Madson: Injury reclamation FA, great signing So yeah, what I see here is a perfect example of what a strong, deep farm can do. Several home grown prospects, a top player who was acquired with other of their top prospects (though not the key contributor they thought they were trading for in that deal, what a crazy trade), and a top player who was a post-prospect but pre-arb who they sold a future Hall of Famer to get while they were rebuilding. The 2014-15 Royals didn't even get a ton of luck in terms of their prospects turning into stars, but still look like a pretty textbook example on what happens when you have a stacked system. Are any of these players “stars”? Cain had an excellent peak of star level performance. The second spot on this list would be Johnny Cueto if counting his pre-trade stats. So the Royals developed a lot of quality pre arb players, and they got two nearly four win seasons out of their top guys at the same time, even though both had somewhat underwhelming careers. Their best player (accidentally) came from a trade, as you pointed out. They had a stable of high minors top pitching prospects that mostly got hurt and never panned out. They spent some of them on two attempts at a front end starter: Shields, and then during the 2015 run, Cueto. If KC was building its plan around their top 3 of Hosmer, Moustakas and Myers developing into star players, would this have worked out well for them? OP said he doesn’t think the org needs, or should need, Mayer/Anthony/Teel to develop into star level players. I thought he was saying that if the team signed or traded for an established star bat - say, Devers and Soto, and then there was a large group of 2ish WAR pre arb guys filling out the lineup, that was where he was placing his expectations. I could be wrong. I don’t really understand why people are piling on. Who are the Yankees’ pre arb star players this year? Are they legitimate WS contenders? |
|
|
|
Post by rhswanzey on Jun 3, 2024 17:18:49 GMT -5
But think about what you are saying analytically. Why does it matter if those multiple 3+ win players are pre-arb or vet minimum? What's the difference short of an AAV variation that shouldn't matter to a team that is "going for it". Especially one with the Sox resources. Something that's always been doesn't mean it's always required. THAT demands proof that it could NOT happen any other way. It's not hard to look at recent champions (or contenders) and theoretically "replace" their pre-Arb stars with veteran contributors throughout the league making very little (comparatively) money. Significantly more unlikely, sure. But not impossible. I think a lot of people are confused by what you meant when you said pre arb vs “vet minimum”. When I read the rest of your comment here, I think the point you’re trying to make is that: yes, a roster needs multiple 3+ win players, but why do those players have to be pre-arb? Like, your next line says “what’s the difference short of an AAV variation”, which tells me you’re drawing a distinction between pre-arb players earning the league minimum salary, and the “vet minimum” players. A veteran player earning the league minimum salary earns the same as a pre-arb player earning the league minimum salary. I thought your first post was asking “why can’t this org be successful if our top prospects become okay players instead of stars”. What’s the difference between Mayer becoming a 5 WAR player and Teel and Anthony 4 WAR players, and then filling out the rest of the position player roster with bench guys from the farm system and lower tier free agents OR Signing/trading for 3 established higher end players, and planning out a roster only counting on our “big three” prospects to be okay players. There are pre arb players supporting the more expensive parts of the roster in either situation. It seems like your argument - which I may have misunderstood here - is being characterized as if you don’t think prospects or the farm system matter at all. I wasn’t seeing that. Thanks for starting a thread, because I do think it’s valid discourse to argue about how many eggs we should be putting in the basket of the core being these top prospects. One commenter said those core type players might already be here - Casas, Houck, etc. Sure looks like it. |
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Jun 3, 2024 17:30:09 GMT -5
Piling on - does this forum think of 2011 as the gold standard of drafts? (Betts, Bradley, Barnes, Shaw, Swihart, Owens…) Had Swihart and Owen’s panned out, it could have been an all-timer. Totally different era so not a real comparison but 1983 Roger Clemens and Ellis Burks is pretty stellar. |
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Jun 3, 2024 17:35:39 GMT -5
The Royals went to two consecutive World Series, winning one of them, because of the core they built up through the system. Looking at the WAR leaders of the 2015 champs: 1. Lorenzo Cain: Acquired by the Royals with < 1 year service time in the Greinke trade, was never a ranked prospect for KC but was clearly a key of that deal. 2. Eric Hosmer: 2008 1st-round pick (3rd overall), arb-eligible, had not reached FA 3. Mike Moustakas: 2007 1st-round pick (2nd overall), arb-eligible, had not reached FA 4. Wade Davis: Acquired pre-arb asthe second piece in the James Shields deal with Tampa for several of the players mentioned above (Myers, Montgomery, Odorizzi); was arb-eligible, not yet FA 5. Chris Young: Scrap heap veteran, good signing 6. Edinson Volquez: Mid-tier FA signing 7. Kendrys Morales: Mid-tier FA signing (widely mocked, proved to work out) 8. Alex Gordon: 2005 1st-round pick (2nd overall), stayed with Royals on a contract extension (was making $12.5M in 2015) 9. Salvador Perez: International FA, Pre-Arb 10. Jarrod Dyson: Low-round draft pick, Pre-Arb 11. Yordano Ventura: International FA, Pre-Arb (not really a low-level prospect either - he was ranked 26th by BA headed into 2014; he just hadn't broken out in 2011 when this list is from) 12. Ryan Madson: Injury reclamation FA, great signing So yeah, what I see here is a perfect example of what a strong, deep farm can do. Several home grown prospects, a top player who was acquired with other of their top prospects (though not the key contributor they thought they were trading for in that deal, what a crazy trade), and a top player who was a post-prospect but pre-arb who they sold a future Hall of Famer to get while they were rebuilding. The 2014-15 Royals didn't even get a ton of luck in terms of their prospects turning into stars, but still look like a pretty textbook example on what happens when you have a stacked system. Are any of these players “stars”? Cain had an excellent peak of star level performance. The second spot on this list would be Johnny Cueto if counting his pre-trade stats. So the Royals developed a lot of quality pre arb players, and they got two nearly four win seasons out of their top guys at the same time, even though both had somewhat underwhelming careers. Their best player (accidentally) came from a trade, as you pointed out. They had a stable of high minors top pitching prospects that mostly got hurt and never panned out. They spent some of them on two attempts at a front end starter: Shields, and then during the 2015 run, Cueto. If KC was building its plan around their top 3 of Hosmer, Moustakas and Myers developing into star players, would this have worked out well for them? OP said he doesn’t think the org needs, or should need, Mayer/Anthony/Teel to develop into star level players. I thought he was saying that if the team signed or traded for an established star bat - say, Devers and Soto, and then there was a large group of 2ish WAR pre arb guys filling out the lineup, that was where he was placing his expectations. I could be wrong. I don’t really understand why people are piling on. Who are the Yankees’ pre arb star players this year? Are they legitimate WS contenders? Cain was definitely a star and Moustakas and Hosmer were 3.5+ WAR players that season. Maybe that's not star but it's a lot different from roster-filler or an average 2 WAR guy. This year on the Yankees Volpe and Gil are having star level seasons. Cortes is borderline. Soto's an arb guy but making enough that it's fair not to count him now. To the Red Sox point, maybe they don't need to wait for Mayer/Anthony/Teel, but if so the reason isn't because they can simply buy enough wins in FA that they don't need to rely on farm talent, it's because Duran or Houck or Crawford or Casas or Abreu or some combination are already 3+ win players. |
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Jun 3, 2024 18:34:32 GMT -5
I wonder sometimes if people overestimate how many star players a really good team needs to have. Here are all the 3+ WAR players on the 2023 Baltimore Orioles, who won 101 games:
Rutschman 5.6 Henderson 4.7 Bradish 3.8
That's it. Here's the list for the 2023 Rangers:
Seager 6.1 Semien 6.1 Garcia 4.4 Heim 3.8
The 2022 Astros had about as many star players as any team in recent years:
Altuve 6.8 Alvarez 6.3 Verlander 6.0 Bregman 5.4 Tucker 4.9 Valdez 4.4 Pena 3.3 Javier 3.0
...but the Phillies made it to the World Series that year with:
Realmuto 6.6 Nola 6.3 Wheeler 4.2
The 2024 Red Sox currently have 7 guys on pace for 3+ WAR; they actually have 5 on pace for 4.5+ WAR. So basically they already have the "star power" they need to be near the top of the majors (all of them home-grown except Slaten). They just need to do something about the massively sub-replacement level portion of the roster.
|
|
|
|
Post by oldfaithful2019 on Jun 3, 2024 18:51:11 GMT -5
In 1969 When I started following MLB and became a Red Sox fan, since they did not have a baseball card yet, my exposure to prospects was the small pictures in the back of the year book and the minor league column in Sporting News. Then Pudge Fisk came along and in Dewey's 2nd game I saw him make a diving catch off Tom McGraw and I got it !!! Others of course followed. 1975 Sox remains my favorite team because the team was loaded with home grown players. I want to see draft picks, prospects picked up in trades and International guys become winners. That to me is more fun than the 2004 ( don't get me wrong, I love that WS win as much as anyone) team that was built with big FA signings, savvy trades by Dan D. and Theo, with some low cost/ high reward signings mixed in. Two different ways to build a winner. I prefer the pick em right, raise em well and believe they will succeed model. This is why prospects matter to me and I'm stickin to it !!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by thegoodthebadthesox on Jun 3, 2024 19:21:32 GMT -5
Tin foil hat time - Chris and Mike paid OP to start this thread so that people would be reminded of the importance of prospects, thus establishing a greater dependence on SP.
I mean, is it just a coincidence that this post coincided with the start of the donation drive?
Let’s pull the wool from over our eyes, people.
|
|
|
|
Post by seamus on Jun 4, 2024 16:01:48 GMT -5
I wonder sometimes if people overestimate how many star players a really good team needs to have. Here are all the 3+ WAR players on the 2023 Baltimore Orioles, who won 101 games:
Rutschman 5.6 Henderson 4.7 Bradish 3.8
That's it. Here's the list for the 2023 Rangers:
Seager 6.1 Semien 6.1 Garcia 4.4 Heim 3.8
The 2022 Astros had about as many star players as any team in recent years:
Altuve 6.8 Alvarez 6.3 Verlander 6.0 Bregman 5.4 Tucker 4.9 Valdez 4.4 Pena 3.3 Javier 3.0
...but the Phillies made it to the World Series that year with:
Realmuto 6.6 Nola 6.3 Wheeler 4.2
The 2024 Red Sox currently have 7 guys on pace for 3+ WAR; they actually have 5 on pace for 4.5+ WAR. So basically they already have the "star power" they need to be near the top of the majors (all of them home-grown except Slaten). They just need to do something about the massively sub-replacement level portion of the roster.
Different sport, but I remember once reading a blog that made the point "Kevin Durant + [bad player] = Andrei Kirilenko". Still really good, but bad players on your own team can do a lot to nullify the contributions your stars are making. This year's Sox are a good example of why being able to field replacement-level or better guys is both important and challenging. |
|
|
