Worst Farm System Poll

by John Sickels on Nov 22, 2005 10:12 AM EST in News Comment 52 comments

Who Has The Worst Farm System In Baseball?

The Candidates:

Baltimore Orioles
Cincinnati Reds
New York Yankees
Pittsburgh Pirates
San Diego Padres
San Francisco Giants
St. Louis Cardinals
Washington Nationals

Take the poll in the comments thread.

Poll

Who Has The Worst Farm System In Baseball?

Baltimore Orioles

31 votes

Cincinnati Reds

61 votes

New York Yankees

121 votes

Pittsburgh Pirates

15 votes

San Diego Padres

45 votes

San Francisco Giants

43 votes

St. Louis Cardinals

42 votes

Washington Nationals

139 votes

497 votes | Poll has closed

0 recs | Comment 52 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Orioles?

How could they even be in the running for this? If the Beckett trade goes through, they easily have the 2nd best farm system in their division. A very strong 2005 draft puts them in the 13-17 range, IMO.

Worst farm system finalists are the Yanks, Reds, Pads, and Nats. I'd give it to the Reds.

by dkdc on Nov 22, 2005 10:30 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Name one?

The O's have a lot of talent, but they don't know how to make it work FOR them. Trading Denny Bautista for Jason Grimsley, and the slew of injuries to their prospects.

3Rivers, United League of Moderate Gamers | Writer, Minor Details | Writer, Independent Thinking

by rockies73 on Nov 22, 2005 10:34 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Nats are bad, but Phillies just as bad IMO

"If you don't like Torey Lovullo, then you don't like baseball." Sparky Anderson

by natsfan2005 on Nov 22, 2005 10:34 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

trade

the trade hasn't happened yet, has it?

by John Sickels on Nov 22, 2005 10:36 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

No, but...

...They are still in the middle of the pack, and they might even edge out the BoSox talent-wise without the trade.

I just think that they O's farm system has been stuck with a reputation as one of the worst for a few years longer than they have deserved (they certainly DID deserve that reputation a few years ago).

by dkdc on Nov 22, 2005 10:45 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

are you nuts?

I'm serious, are you? The Sox before the trade had a top 10 system, the Orioles are at best middle of the pack. The sox have 2 ace type guys still (paps and lester) a sick closing candidate (hansen) a great 2B prospect (pedroia) and a slew of other very good prospects (shoppach, moss, delcarmen, buccholz, lowrie, ellsbury, murphy, bowden, soto). Can you please defend this position ebcause its very much against every other opinion I have heard.

BTW: The Phills are really the worst system, when Cole Hamels is your top prospect, you're in trouble, but the Nats are pretty bad as well. As much as I can't stand the Yanks, they are probably in the 20ish range, not very good, but not the worst either

by jspearlj1 on Nov 22, 2005 11:56 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Top systems in no particular order

Angels
Dodges
D-backs
Braves
D-Rays
Brewers
Indians
Twins
A's
Chi Sox

I think Boston are probably are close to systems like the Rockies, Marlins, Rangers, and Mariners. Not top ten material. They have some depth and some quality talent but not much of either.

by riktermiller on Nov 22, 2005 1:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Worst Farm System

My opinion is that the Reds have the worst farm system.

I also have no idea what they are going to do about a long-term solution to their ballpark problem. If they can move the fence back, or raise it up a few feet, that might help. If not, they will struggle like the Rockies for the next twenty years.

Join the 1st ever GM Instructional League. You control a fantasy franchise with a full minor league farm system.

by GMIL on Nov 22, 2005 5:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Pirates?

I'm not happy with the way the Pirates' system is headed, but I don't think they're anywhere near the level of the other teams on this list. I think they WILL be at or near the bottom soon, given their poor drafting and the complete failure of their international scouting under Ed Creech. Right now, though, there's still some talent in the upper levels, plus two high-ceiling guys in Walker and McCutchen.

I'm curious, though, for the perspective of anybody with a bit more detachment.

by WTM on Nov 22, 2005 11:22 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

As a fellow pirates fan

I agree with you that the Pirates are towards the bottom of the list.

They have almost zero position player prospects worth mentioning and have made some puzzling draft choices.
On the plus side they have very good pitching coming up soon. Perez, Duke & Malholm are all good lefties. I see Duke struggling a bit next year when teams start making adjustments but I think Perez will be better next year so it should even that out. Burnett is a big question mark but he was promising before the injury.
Kinda up in the air about the righties. Bullington might be better in relief when he comes back from injury. Van Bensnotchen & Snell look to be at least average/back of the rotation starters. I would like to see Snell as a swingman ala Glendon Rusch but he pitches better as a starter.

The Pirates also have catching depth. Doumit looked good as a rookie. Neil Walker looks good but didn't they have him working at 3rd base recently?
Having Walker at third would fill one HUGE hole in the organization because I don't see anyone in the minors being even average at third and that is a hard position to fill through free agency.

Hopefully they stick Eldred at first full time. Yeah he strikes out but he has some power.

As long as they keep drafting the best player available I think they will be o.k.
Making some shrewd waiver/6 yr. free agent pickups would also help with the depth.

I can totally see the Pirates start to rise toward .500 next year and with Jim Tracey and some more payroll maybe having a shot at the NL wildcard in 07!

by colinadam on Nov 22, 2005 1:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Reds??

I'm critical of the Reds' system, but the Yankees, Nationals and Cardinals are far worse.

by Doc Scott on Nov 22, 2005 11:28 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

i don't know about

other systems, but i can vouch for the cardinal system. it really, really stinks.

viva el birdos www.vivaelbirdos.com

by lboros on Nov 22, 2005 11:31 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Cincinnati

personally, i think the Reds' system is hopeless.. Homer Bailey sucks... go Jay Bruce

by ufo on Nov 22, 2005 11:40 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Sucks?

He was a 19 year-old in low-A and he performed respectably. I don't know how you can say he sucks. The dude also throws gas, and is 6'4" and only 180lbs, he's the definition of projectable.

"Chuck Lamar, you're fired"- Stuart Sternburg.

by Tyler on Nov 22, 2005 11:48 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

yea he;s ok

i was being a little sarcastic, because he wasn't too impressive in low-A .. i understand what his ceiling is but he just looks to me like a big-headed jerk who will spend have his career on the couch with injuries... and the other half at great american smallpark ... i'm just being pessimistic because the reds now how to doom themselves and doom themsleves good... he can't be their only hope, Denorfia is ok but they need something else

by ufo on Nov 22, 2005 11:59 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

what????

I have a few comments to make. First of all, as you can probably ascertain I am a Yankees fan but for someone to say that the Orioles have a better farm system than the Red Sox is just incredible. Secondly, to say that Homer Bailey sucks is equally as incredible. And last but not least, Cole Hamels is one of the best pitching prospects in all of baseball when healthy. I understand that is a big concern but my god he's only 21 years old. The guys numbers are off the chart and keep in mind he hasn't had any recurring injuries. I, personally, think the guy's snakebit.

by the pinstripes on Nov 22, 2005 12:25 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Hamels

His prospect status is only as good as his health and that isn't a very positive outlook. Other than Hamels th Phils are lookin' sorry.

by riktermiller on Nov 22, 2005 1:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

retort

You my friend, are very pessemistic!

by the pinstripes on Nov 22, 2005 1:35 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

or am I

realistic?

by riktermiller on Nov 22, 2005 3:38 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

No Joke

Ishtar's one of my favorite movies. Get past the big budget, and it's pure comedy gold.

by jhelfgott on Nov 22, 2005 12:29 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

I'd Make Some Snide Remark

But I have to go watch Hudson Hawk for the umpteenth time.

Go ahead and shoot your mouth off, like it might kill the silence.

by ESiegrist on Nov 22, 2005 2:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

worst system

Oh and by the way, the Phils have the worst farm system. The Yanks are close but we have 3 chances at an impact player. Eric Duncan, Philip Hughes and J. Brent Cox. My guess is the latter will be the only one to make it.

by the pinstripes on Nov 22, 2005 12:31 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

The Reds are bad, but the Nats are the worst

The Reds are definitely bottom 5, but I would say the Nats would be the worst.

I might be one of the few people in North America that actually likes Waterworld...like jhelfgott says about Ishtar - get past the big budget and you have an interesting concept story with a great (as usual) performance by Dennis Hopper.

"Why do we need so many scouts? All they do is sit around and watch games" Marge Schott, the bane of my existence...

by BigRedMachine on Nov 22, 2005 12:37 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

I'll second that.

Waterworld was a fun movie. Great visual imagery. And even if Dennis Hopper seems like he's playing Dennis Hopper playing the character, it's still fun.

by abbreviatedman on Nov 22, 2005 3:16 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Feh

It's no Super Mario Bros., that's for sure. Just ask John Leguizamo.

by drjayphd on Nov 22, 2005 5:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Nats

just a sick system to look at.

I wonder what a farm system is worth when it comes to buying a major league team? Has anyone ever looked into that?

by Terry Ryan Jr on Nov 22, 2005 1:15 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Tigers

Has the Tigers' farm system improved this much to where they're no longer considered in the bottom tier? Has it been their recent drafts that's pulled them up out of the bottom and into mediocrity?

Brian
http://www.tigerblog.net

by Brian B on Nov 22, 2005 3:09 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

I like the Tigers direction

Hard to argue with Verland and Zumaya. Now, Maybin may amount to something.

In my opinion, that's a better top 3 than most, and certainly better than the teams in the poll.

by Mr Met on Nov 22, 2005 9:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Nats

I don't know all that much about Cinci or St. Louis, but the Nats have got to be the worst, don't they?

Zimmerman is excellent, but there's just NOTHING else there. Is there anyone who projects as a regular? Casto's emergence is more than balanced by Hinckley's collapse. I just don't see anything in that system other than guys who will be lucky to have careers as reserves or marginal middle relievers.

by Joltin Joe Orsulak on Nov 22, 2005 3:30 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

I'd rather have

the Nats' prospects than the Phillies' group.

Mike Emeigh http://www.baseballthinkfactory.org/files/minor_key/

by MikeE on Nov 22, 2005 4:42 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Clint Everts

i think alot of people forget about Everts.. i think he's their best prospect after he gets fully healthy this year (and he will) ,,, i like Everts alot better then Homer Bailey which is why the Nats have a better system then Cincy .. cincy is easily the worst

by ufo on Nov 23, 2005 1:43 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Gigli

If we're discussing disasters, why isn't Gigli up there? Gigli makes Waterworld seem like a success.

by CrimsonLiederhosen on Nov 22, 2005 6:02 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

What about KC???

I don't aside from Butler and Gordon, the royals have absolutely nothing.... This team is a really sorry excuse and the only reason why they have those two prospects is because they had the first picks in the draft and even the royals can't possibly screw this up... But you'll see, they'll manage to somehow stunt the growth of these two and eventually lose them to free agency in 2013

by huuuubaah on Nov 22, 2005 6:03 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Can't possibly scew it up!

The Padres managed to screw up early picks QUITE well.

by abbreviatedman on Nov 22, 2005 8:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

You are so money and you don't even know it!

Matt Bush, Tim Stauffer, Khalil Greene, Jake Gautreau, Mark Phillips, Vince Faison, Sean Burroughs, Kevin Nicholson, Matt Halloran and Ben Davis.

The Padre #1 picks 1995-2004.
Pathetic.

"too high..too high..."
"who gives a s*&%, its outta here."

by themikemancometh on Nov 23, 2005 1:25 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Huber?

Well they have Huber because the Pirate GM insisted on whoever that scrub was that came from KC in the Benson deal. We'll gladly take him back if he's thought of as nothing!

by MetfanBren on Nov 22, 2005 9:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Defending the Phillies

Ryan Howard, Chase Utley, Ryan Madsen, and Robinson Tejeda.

They all graduated in the last two years.

So, yes, the Phillies' system is thin at the moment. But how critical can you be? It isn't like the system isn't producing.

Also, Cole Hamels and Gavin Floyd had lousy seasons, but how many teams would still love to have them?

Hamels' minor league stats: 28 GS, 152 IP, 88H, 208K, 62BB, 1.54 ERA. and he'll be 22 next season in AA (3 starts there in '05).

Floyd is less thrilling and had major control issues this year. But this was the first bad season, it came at AAA, and he'll still only be 23 next season.

So the system just produced a ton of talent and has two premium pitching prospects. "The worst"? No.

by Arthur on Nov 22, 2005 6:10 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

I think

the question was regarding farm systems in their current form. That leaves the Phils with an often injured angry potential #1 and not much else. Objectivity is the key the Phils system is in shambles at the moment.

by riktermiller on Nov 22, 2005 7:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Potential

One thing worth noting, though it really doesn't affect their status here, is that the Yankee farm system has the potential to move up very quickly. While the upper levels are almost completely devoid of worthwhile prospects, the lower levels are, I think, some of the richest in baseball. Obviously these players will have to perform at higher levels before we can even upgrade the system to "mediocre," but at least the potential is there.

by amol on Nov 22, 2005 6:24 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Yep.

2006 will be a big year as a good number of the power arms and toolsy positional guys will make their way to high A and AA. The number of votes for the Yankees is laughable

by PooNani on Nov 22, 2005 6:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

understandable

I don't know that its laughable. These guys are all guys who could just as easily bust a la Estee Harris and Rudi Guillen. Still, if just half of them progress, the system will be looking a lot stronger.

by amol on Nov 23, 2005 6:52 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

to be fair

Estee has never performed since signing, and Rudy Guillen's best season was pretty mediocre. I never understood the love for him

by PooNani on Nov 23, 2005 7:11 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Giants?

I'd really like to know why the Giants are even on the list, let alone had people who voted for them. They may not have the best system in baseball, but it isn't even close to being the worst. Here's the evidence:

They tied with Detroit for the best overall organizational W-L record in 2005. Except for Fresno, their worst team, they didn't us a lot of career minor leaguers either.

They ranked 12'th in number of players who made one of BA's League Top 15 lists.

They have Matt Cain, still a prospect, who has to be at least a top 10 pitching prospect in all of baseball if not top 5. He's poised to start 2006 in the Giants rotation.

They had 5 teenagers make BA League Top 15 lists including Marcus Sanders, Pablo Sandoval, Waldis Joaquin, Sharon Martis and Sharlon Shoop. So they aren't just a bunch of college draftees and old-for-league types either.

3 of their teams, Augusta, Salem-Keizer and the AZL Giants led their leagues inTeam OBP so they aren't just a bunch of hackers.

While they don't have any top shelf position prospects, they have a lot of depth with a long list of grade B's. At least some of those figure to help the big club in the near future.

I'd really like to know what John was thinking in including them on the list and I'd like someone who voted for them to defend why they voted that way.

by DrBGiantsfan on Nov 23, 2005 9:43 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

but they give up...

their first round picks!!! They MUST have no idea what they're doing. Because, as we all know, a well-stocked farm system is of far greater importance than major league talent.

by kenshin1 on Nov 23, 2005 11:25 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Dumping Picks

I'm no fan of dumping draft picks and the Giants system would undoubtedly be much better if we had #1's from the last 2 years to say nothing of last year's #2,3. Still, that doesn't by itself make the system a bad system.

Dick Tidrow has done an excellent job of scouting, drafting and signing hidden gems in the late rounds and even as undrafted FA's. Heck, Jeremy Accardo who contributed last year and could be a big part of the 2006 bullpen was an undrafted FA. The other encouraging thing is that their scouting outside of the U.S. seems to be picking up some steam. They had several excellent non-USA players in Short Season ball in 2005.

The Giants have a top 10 pick plus 2 compensation picks from losing Scott Eyre. Combine that with the expected development of kids like Griffin, Copeland, Sanders, Sandoval, Joaquin, Martis, Shoop and possibly Ariel Nunez, and they could be a whole heckuva lot stronger by this time next year.

by DrBGiantsfan on Nov 23, 2005 3:23 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I might actually cry...

if we make signability choices this coming draft :-(

by kenshin1 on Nov 23, 2005 4:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Dr B Giants Fan

What do you think of Eddy Martinez-Esteve? He can mash, but I hear his fielding is right there with Jack Cust. Do you think he can be a corner outfielder at SBC Park? Did you see him play at San Jose last season?

by sdbaseballfan on Nov 23, 2005 3:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Eddy M-E

Yup, I saw him play both in 2004 and 2005. He's a good hitter, but his butt was definitely bigger this year than last year. His biggest problem defensively is that he has no arm. He was just coming off shoulder surgery, so that could get better in the future. He played LF both times I saw him and he could barely make a cutoff throw. He actually got two OF assists this year by throwing to a cutoff man who, in turn, threw a runner out. I didn't even know you could get credit for an assist doing that!

I'm not ready to give up on Eddy yet. His arm could get stronger as he recovers further from surgery. He could suddenly get enthusiastic about conditioning. He could learn better routes to the ball in the OF. He could move to 1B. His D certainly is a problem though.

by DrBGiantsfan on Nov 23, 2005 8:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

After the Delgado trade...

Mets get my vote. Milledge and then?

by PooNani on Nov 23, 2005 10:35 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

at this point....

it'd probably be gaby hernandez, though if pelfrey were signed he'd be ahead of him. humber obviously drops cuz of the surgery. after that there isn't much, a few guys who might have some worth depending on how they do this year. my question is if that is worse than the nats tho. zimmerman is gonna be starting at 3b in 2006, so he isn't a minor leaguer anymore. but even including him, what is there after that?

by DavidWrightismyGod on Nov 23, 2005 12:44 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Mets have spent big money on Latin amateurs

Andy Soler (Cuba), Fernando Martinez (Dominican Republic), and Deolis Guerra (Venezuela) are three big name signings the Mets have made recently to bolster their farm system. Until they play professional baseball, they are no different from a blue chip college football recruit who has yet to step on the gridiron.

by sdbaseballfan on Nov 23, 2005 3:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs