Minor League talent rankings

[joeynach]

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/t...t-lists-so-far/

 

The Chicago White Sox

2010 MLB Record: 88-74 (2nd in the AL Central)

Minor League Power Ranking: 30th (out of 30)

[Jordan4life_2007]

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/t...t-lists-so-far/

 

The Chicago White Sox

2010 MLB Record: 88-74 (2nd in the AL Central)

Minor League Power Ranking: 30th (out of 30)

 

There's a shock. I figured it would be the Brewers or Cardinals. But I'm not surprised at all. I expect BA to rank us right around the bottom three as well.

[Balta1701]

There's a shock. I figured it would be the Brewers or Cardinals. But I'm not surprised at all. I expect BA to rank us right around the bottom three as well.

Some of us being this low is injury-related luck. Mitchell and Phegley were hurt all year, that hurts. Our #1 pick from last year is already in the bigs, that hurts. Another top level pitcher is off in AZ, that hurts. And Flowers was awful, that hurts.

[iamshack]

But see, it doesn't hurt that Sale and Beckham are already producing in the Big Leagues! That is the entire point of the draft!

 

I could give a s*** about this stuff.

 

Why not just have a ranking of draft picks contributions to the MLB club? That seems far more relevant to me.

[Jordan4life_2007]

Some of us being this low is injury-related luck. Mitchell and Phegley were hurt all year, that hurts. Our #1 pick from last year is already in the bigs, that hurts. Another top level pitcher is off in AZ, that hurts. And Flowers was awful, that hurts.

 

Does anybody here really like Phegley? I saw quite a bit of him on the Big Ten network and I wasn't impressed at all, or at least I didn't feel he warranted a sandwich round pick.

[Jordan4life_2007]

But see, it doesn't hurt that Sale and Beckham are already producing in the Big Leagues! That is the entire point of the draft!

 

I could give a s*** about this stuff.

 

Why not just have a ranking of draft picks contributions to the MLB club? That seems far more relevant to me.

 

That's a lame excuse. A good farm is as much about depth as it is star power.

[chw42]

There's a shock. I figured it would be the Brewers or Cardinals. But I'm not surprised at all. I expect BA to rank us right around the bottom three as well.

 

They did the Brewers' list before the Brewers made the Greinke trade.

[Jordan4life_2007]

They did the Brewers' list before the Brewers made the Greinke trade.

 

That makes sense. I didn't even click the link. I just wasn't surprised. But even I think we have a better system than the Brewers now.

[iamshack]

That's a lame excuse. A good farm is as much about depth as it is star power.

Well don't confuse this as me saying we have a good farm system. But the fact that when you hit immediately on draft picks you don't get consideration in terms of your success drafting is just silly.

Edited December 24, 2010 by iamshack

[3E8]

Does anybody here really like Phegley? I saw quite a bit of him on the Big Ten network and I wasn't impressed at all, or at least I didn't feel he warranted a sandwich round pick.

Scott Merkin said Phegley is doing really well this offseason after having his spleen removed to try and overcome his ITP disease. His IU stats in soph/junior seasons are quite ridiculous. Near a 1.200 OPS. He's a sleeper prospect in our system and his future will depend on how his health progresses.

[Jerksticks]

I agree with Jam. Our post 2005 farm has netted us A. Ramirez, Peavy, Ejax, Danks, Floyd, CQ, Pierre. Add recent graduates Viciedo, Morel, and Sale, with Morel being the only real question mark, and sweet fancy moses, that's one hell of a farm. One hell of a GM. Who's farm has outproduced that group of players? Oh, can't forget Mr. Teahen. Haha, man all this typing has made me realize how entirely pointless it is to be upset at our farm. It's damn near our entire roster.

[JPN366]

Does anybody here really like Phegley? I saw quite a bit of him on the Big Ten network and I wasn't impressed at all, or at least I didn't feel he warranted a sandwich round pick.

 

I like what I saw. Defense is all that needs work.

[Jordan4life_2007]

I agree with Jam. Our post 2005 farm has netted us A. Ramirez, Peavy, Ejax, Danks, Floyd, CQ, Pierre. Add recent graduates Viciedo, Morel, and Sale, with Morel being the only real question mark, and sweet fancy moses, that's one hell of a farm. One hell of a GM. Who's farm has outproduced that group of players? Oh, can't forget Mr. Teahen. Haha, man all this typing has made me realize how entirely pointless it is to be upset at our farm. It's damn near our entire roster.

 

What the hell did our farm have to do with netting Ramirez? I'll give you Danks, I guess. Peavy was a salary dump. Unless you really believe a package centered around Clayton Richard was legit. Hudson might very well be better than Jackson going forward and A LOT cheaper. We've gotten one good year out of CQ. Though he was a big reason we one the division. So I can even give you that. Pierre? That was a curse. Again, what does the farm have to do with Viciedo? The jury is still out on Morel and Sale. If Morel can sport a .700+ OPS and Bible Award caliber defense then that's a win. I'm still not sold on Sale. But he should help us either way.

[Jordan4life_2007]

I like what I saw. Defense is all that needs work.

 

Do you agree that he was an overdraft?

[R.J.]

It's ok to be a fan and have some optimism about the future of some of our prospects. But, objectively, there's no way this farm system can be ranked higher than 29th. And that's just based on the depth of our system and the ceiling of our prospects (measured against the likelihood they reach their potential.)

 

And there's no reason to doubt it, because it's this organizations philosophy that the farm system is important in acquiring veteran talent, rather than relying on it to shore up the MLB team. This, actually, has never really hurt us. We also haven't been in a position to move any veteran players for high-upside young talents.

 

It's also this organization's philosophy that the MLB draft is too risky to make any real meaningful investment in. And nobody here should deny that - there have been a couple of players we've paid for but the overall numbers put us firmly in the bottom of draft spending on a year-by-year and cumulative basis.

 

So yeah, this year our farm system is about as weak as it has ever been. And we don't have a first round pick, either. And nothing has changed as far as not spending money on boom-or-bust draft picks.

 

But I agree that all that matters is the success of the MLB team. And we aren't likely to have to go in a younger direction for a couple more years. Maybe by then we can hit on a few more draft picks.

 

 

[lord chas]

nowhere to go but up!

[gatnom]

Some of us being this low is injury-related luck. Mitchell and Phegley were hurt all year, that hurts. Our #1 pick from last year is already in the bigs, that hurts. Another top level pitcher is off in AZ, that hurts. And Flowers was awful, that hurts.

 

Not that this really matters, but in this list Sale is actually included as a prospect. I would expect the same for BA's list.

 

As for the rest of your points, if we had more than a handful of good prospects, maybe we wouldn't be decimated by 2 injuries and 1 traded pitcher. In the end, the things you described were probably the difference between being in the mid-20's and being dead last. That is, we would be marginally better off.

 

 

[witesoxfan]

That's a lame excuse. A good farm is as much about depth as it is star power.

 

Oh horses***. The only place the Sox don't have enough depth are starting pitching and outfield. Some will argue that Sale is an option as a starter, and quite frankly, he is until the Sox decide otherwise. If not, they'll sign minor league free agents that will be capable of putting up a 6.00 ERA and 5 innings a start...that's all you can ask for out of "depth," isn't it? Outfielders are a problem too, and the same exact scenario presents itself - the Sox will be able to sign MLFAs that will be able to produce a .675-.725 OPS. Again, "depth." Not a starter.

 

Beyond those two spots, the Sox have enough [young] guys who can play. Viciedo can play both 1B and 3B, Escobar can play both 2B and SS, Flowers can play C, and there are a zillion different guys in this system and in every system that can fill in as a reliever.

 

Unless you still consider Jordan Danks as a legitimate prospect, there isn't anybody who can replace Alex Rios while giving you a glimpse into the future. But if Alex Rios gets hurt for 3 weeks, Danks (or anybody else) will fill in just fine. If Joe Mauer goes down for 3 weeks, who in the bluef*** are the Twins going to replace him with? What about Miguel Cabrera?

 

Depth is there to give a team replacement (or slightly above replacement) level production at a bargain price...the Sox will be able to do that. It won't be a sexy name that makes this list, and it won't be a sexy name that is available for trade, but the Sox have enough pieces.

 

---

 

I love FanGraphs, and it's an incredible site. But considering they downgrade Viciedo and rank him as the #4 prospect...doesn't that throw up a red flag? You've seen Viciedo, and you know he has Vladimir Guerrero type potential. He also has a Wily Mo Pena type floor. Do you honestly believe that Dayan Viciedo is the 4th best prospect in this system? I know I don't. I understand the boom/bust potential, but that potential alone should increase his rating above Scott

Brosius and a player who has never played a full season of minor league baseball, don't you think?

 

I'm not arguing that the Sox system is good - it's far from - but if the Sox lose someone important for a long period of time, they're f***ed anyways, because ANYBODY is (save the Red Sox and Yankees, who can just buy more talent). You are freaking out about this, when it's been known for quite some time that the White Sox deal any minor league talent they have for upgrades at the MLB level, while they'll be able to replace anybody over a short period for dirt cheap, pretty much as well as anybody else can. Settle.the.f***.down.

[soxrwhite]

None of the teams on that list were playoff teams last year.

[scenario]

I think people get all excited over nothing on these rankings.

 

Yeah, our system must suck... 2 of our last 3 top picks are in the majors... rather than sitting in the minors and improving our ranking.

 

 

[ptatc]

That's a lame excuse. A good farm is as much about depth as it is star power.

 

The only reason for the farm existence is too help the MLB club. We currently have good young players at 3B, SS, 2B with established veterans at CF and 1B. The starting pitching is complete with talented veterans and 1 young promising rookie (Sale). The bullpen has two established veterans (Thronton, Crain), a good young righty (Santos) and maybe Sale. The only positions not adequately filled for a few years are corner outfield due to injury history (Quentin) and average to below average performance (Pierre) and catcher for age (AJ) along with a bullpen arm or two.

 

I think the farm or international signings has produced well and has a few years to produce players for either trade or MLB production.

 

Personally, I love watching the minors as I worked there for a few years. However, I like KW philosophy of prospects are suspects until they are proven in the MLB so if you can get proven MLB players you need, you are going to be right more than wrong because most prospects will fail.

 

[Jordan4life_2007]

Oh horses***. The only place the Sox don't have enough depth are starting pitching and outfield. Some will argue that Sale is an option as a starter, and quite frankly, he is until the Sox decide otherwise. If not, they'll sign minor league free agents that will be capable of putting up a 6.00 ERA and 5 innings a start...that's all you can ask for out of "depth," isn't it? Outfielders are a problem too, and the same exact scenario presents itself - the Sox will be able to sign MLFAs that will be able to produce a .675-.725 OPS. Again, "depth." Not a starter.

 

Beyond those two spots, the Sox have enough [young] guys who can play. Viciedo can play both 1B and 3B, Escobar can play both 2B and SS, Flowers can play C, and there are a zillion different guys in this system and in every system that can fill in as a reliever.

 

Unless you still consider Jordan Danks as a legitimate prospect, there isn't anybody who can replace Alex Rios while giving you a glimpse into the future. But if Alex Rios gets hurt for 3 weeks, Danks (or anybody else) will fill in just fine. If Joe Mauer goes down for 3 weeks, who in the bluef*** are the Twins going to replace him with? What about Miguel Cabrera?

 

Depth is there to give a team replacement (or slightly above replacement) level production at a bargain price...the Sox will be able to do that. It won't be a sexy name that makes this list, and it won't be a sexy name that is available for trade, but the Sox have enough pieces.

 

---

 

I love FanGraphs, and it's an incredible site. But considering they downgrade Viciedo and rank him as the #4 prospect...doesn't that throw up a red flag? You've seen Viciedo, and you know he has Vladimir Guerrero type potential. He also has a Wily Mo Pena type floor. Do you honestly believe that Dayan Viciedo is the 4th best prospect in this system? I know I don't. I understand the boom/bust potential, but that potential alone should increase his rating above Scott

Brosius and a player who has never played a full season of minor league baseball, don't you think?

 

I'm not arguing that the Sox system is good - it's far from - but if the Sox lose someone important for a long period of time, they're f***ed anyways, because ANYBODY is (save the Red Sox and Yankees, who can just buy more talent). You are freaking out about this, when it's been known for quite some time that the White Sox deal any minor league talent they have for upgrades at the MLB level, while they'll be able to replace anybody over a short period for dirt cheap, pretty much as well as anybody else can. Settle.the.f***.down.

 

So when were ranked in the bottom 5 by every minor league publication there is I'm supposed to believe we have depth?

 

 

I think people get all excited over nothing on these rankings.

 

Yeah, our system must suck... 2 of our last 3 top picks are in the majors... rather than sitting in the minors and improving our ranking.

 

They include Sale. As did BA. So one first round pick making it to The Show quickly is not really a viable defense for having such a bad system.

Edited December 24, 2010 by Jordan4life

[scenario]

So when were ranked in the bottom 5 by every minor league publication there is I'm supposed to believe we have depth?

 

They include Sale. As did BA. So one first round pick making it to The Show quickly is not really a viable defense for having such a bad system.

 

 

For a guy who hates minor league baseball you sure seem concerned about it.

 

I completely disagree with your logic about speed-to-show vs. depth-of-system.

 

Go look at the drafts of any team. See where the people who represent their top prospects are and when they were drafted.

It's mostly high draft picks... from the last 3-4 years... because most prospects 'aged' more than 3-4 years in the minors no longer make "top prospect" lists.

So, any player from that 3-4 year group who moves through the system more quickly degrades the quality of that team's minor league ranking.

Which means exactly squat from the perspective of a major league team, who would rather have the player in MLB rather than making their minors look good.

Example: is Cleveland better off than Chicago because Lonnie Chisenhall (drafted the same time as Beckham) was a highly ranked AA prospect this year, while Beckham was starting in the majors? Hell no.

 

A much better measure of whether a system sucks, IMO, is to look at the number of busts among high picks.

But don't criticize teams for picking players who move through the system quickly. That makes absolutely no sense.

Edited December 24, 2010 by scenario

[witesoxfan]

So when were ranked in the bottom 5 by every minor league publication there is I'm supposed to believe we have depth?

 

What the hell do you want with depth? Players that are above replacement level? Because if they did that, they would not have the team they have right now. You are seriously sacrificing a lot by wanting more.

 

Do you disagree with the fact that the White Sox have a replacement (or perhaps better) player behind every single position on the diamond? With the exception of outfield and starting pitching of course. I don't even see how that's an arguable point. If the Sox were to lose Rios, Konerko, or Dunn for an extended period of time, odds are the Sox would be f'ed anyways. Not comparing him directly, but if the Twins lost Mauer for an extended period of time, what they hell are they going to do?

 

(again, I'm not comparing them directly, merely the importance of them)

 

I have never said the system was good. No one has. All I've said was that they have the depth to handle an injury. Do you want a backup for the backup?

[Jordan4life_2007]

For a guy who hates minor league baseball you sure seem concerned about it.

 

I completely disagree with your logic about speed to show vs depth of system.

 

Go look at the drafts of any team. See where the people who represent their top prospects are and when they were drafted.

It's the last 3-4 years... because most prospects 'aged' more than 3 years in the minors no longer make "top prospect" lists.

So, any player from that 3-4 year group who moves through the system more quickly degrades the quality of that team's ranking.

Which means exactly squat from the perspective of a major league team, who would rather have the player in MLB rather than making their minors look good.

Example: is Cleveland better off than Chicago because Lonnie Chisenhall (drafted the same time as Beckham) was a highly ranked AA prospect this year? Hell no.

 

A much better measure of whether a system sucks, IMO, is to look at the number of busts among high picks.

But don't penalize teams for picking players who move through the system quickly. That makes absolutely no sense.

 

This post is all over the place. First of all, what do you mean by "hate the minor leagues"? Because I don't give two s***s about overall minor league records, playoffs and championships? If that means I hate the minor leagues then so be it. You couldn't pay me to care if the Knights won the AAA title or not. Your minor league system serves exactly two purposes: To supplement your major league team with impact talent and to be able to go out and upgrade at other positions with other talent. We've done a solid, not great, job with the latter. But a horrible job with the former during the KW era. And why are you acting as if the only difference between the masses ranking our system at the bottom compared to maybe middle-tier is one first round pick getting to the majors quickly? Now I'm not gonna lie. I don't get to see a lot of these guys. It's not like minor league games are on TV all the time. All I can go by is statistics, scouting reports, projections, age appropriate guys for whatever league they're in, ect. And when our system is consistently ranked in the bottom 5 by people who get paid to do this for a living, that's enough for me. I like Mitchell and Viciedo's potential. Besides that? Color me extremely unimpressed with what we currently have (and I'm not counting Sale, he's not really even a prospect anymore at this point).