Healthiest Franchise (talent division)

by design28 on Nov 17, 2006 9:59 AM EST Comment 39 comments

Just curious what FRANCHISE, simply from a talent perspective, would you like to have today and why? Let's remove the concept of revenue from this execrise b/c the Yankees and Red Sox are off playing a different payroll game than everyone else ... but simply mlb and minor league talent combined, who would you want?

A few factors take into consideration:

How good can you be in the near future?

How good can you be in the long term?

Relative age of impact players and how long will their productive years last?

Make up your own criteria as you go along ... this is essay, not yes/no ... I'd love to hear "why" as much as "who" ...

Me? I'd probably go Marlins ... if finances aren't at play, their talent and youth is frightening ... although the Red Sox, Rockies, D'Backs and Twins can make great cases too ..

Thoughts?

0 recs | Comment 39 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Arizona

Josh Byrnes walked into a great situation.
The Diamondbacks simply have a ton of near-ready talent, so they are in a good position over the next five years. Additionally, I like where they are for the near future. They have a Cy Young winner leading their staff, play in a winnable division, and just cut ties with a couple overpriced outfielders this year so they should have some money to play with and fix some holes.

by FI on Nov 17, 2006 10:04 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

i dont buy the dbacks as a playoff team

Outside of Webb their rotation was full of #5 starters. Then you look into their system and its pretty bare outside of maybe Owings until you get down to the lowest levels. Mock and Nippert did nothing this year, and i dont think many are sold on Owings as a starter. It looks like the Dbacks are gonna have to resort to free agency to fill that rotation, although at least they have Webb locked up for a while as they wait for some of the kids to come up like Anderson and Scherzer if he signs

by PooNani on Nov 17, 2006 10:46 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

long-term

Right, I wasn't saying they are a playoff team right now though.

Their young position players will start entering their prime around 2008/2009 and they have Webb locked up through 2010 (with the club option).
So if I was the Arizona GM I would be looking at making the playoffs for a three-year run from 2008-2010
I could see them adding a couple important arms in the next year or two because they have a lot to offer via trade or free agency because they have some free money to work with. It would be a fun situation to be in.

by FI on Nov 17, 2006 12:33 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Those young bats could be SCARY good ...

... but their rotation does need some beef behind Webb. One thing though: the division is certainly winnable today/this year, but the Rox and Dodgers have buckets of talent coming up now too ... and I'd trust Towers to keep the Pads comeptitive (never good enough to really "matter," but always good ...)

Here's a weird thought: which team's pitching would you rather have RIGHT NOW: Rox, Dodgers or AZ?

Paul Householder, Gary Redus, Tommy Lawless, Duane Walker ... prospects rawk!

by design28 on Nov 17, 2006 11:21 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

The Twins...

Two of the best players in the game, one being the best pitcher in the game.

A farm system loaded with arms.

The only other franchise I could take over them right now is the Marlins.

The Marlins have a future rotation already set, and Olsen, Johnson, Sanchez all look like studs. Willis could easily fetch them some great prospects this year for his overrated ass, and Cabrera is only 23 and one of the best hitters in the game.

So Marlins then Twins. THEN the D'Backs, who don't have enough pitching for me to take. They are still obviously loaded.

by SenorGato88 on Nov 17, 2006 10:08 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

I'll take

a coin flip between Tampa and Dbacks

by slurve on Nov 17, 2006 10:12 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

My thoughts...

D-Backs have the bats and a few pitchers.
Red Sox are not bad either, no where near Ari, LA or LAA, but better then top AL East teams.
TB is rocking too.

by ChrisRef19 on Nov 17, 2006 10:15 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Red Sox farm

is not better than the Yanks or Rays. That's 2 teams just in the East.

Dutin Pedroia .... a poor man's Ronny Cedeno - Theo Epstein

by the pinstripes on Nov 17, 2006 11:35 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Disagree

Quote:

Red Sox farm... is not better than the Yanks or Rays

I'm sorry, but I have a hard time with your ranking of the yanks above the sox in farm system. I think you may be biased here, most would consider the sox' system the superior of the 2, not by a whole lot, but it is.

I vote for the Rays if they decide to spend enough to keep the core together long enough to actually compete in that division.

by jspearlj1 on Nov 17, 2006 12:14 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

not true

baseball america writers have said numerous times that the Yanks have the better system with Hughes and Tabata being the best 2 by a pretty good margin.

Not biased in anyway. I've said many teams during the last 3 or 4 years that the Sox have it all over the Yanks. This is not the case any longer.

Dutin Pedroia .... a poor man's Ronny Cedeno - Theo Epstein

by the pinstripes on Nov 17, 2006 1:18 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Red sox farm system vs Yankees

One thing to consider is that the red sox's #10 prospect (as by BA) Jason Place, was ranked the fifth best prospect in the GCL. Dellin Betances, the yankees #3 prospect (as by BA) was ranked one spot behind him in the GCL rankings. (#6). This is not the end all thing, but it is interesting. Yankees top two top the Red Sox's easily, no questions there.

by wir963 on Nov 17, 2006 2:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Farm system

Didn't the Red Sox have a higher ranked farm system by BA last year (7th I believe) compared to the Yankees who were in the low teens?

And weren't the Red Sox given the highest rating among all teams for their 2006 draft? The only concern about their draft was their ability to sign everyone - which they had very good success in.

by Galt on Nov 17, 2006 2:57 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

sorry

Red Sox were 8th; yankees were 17:

http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/prospects/features/26854.html

and the Red Sox had a MUCH better draft than the Yankees this year.

by Galt on Nov 17, 2006 3:00 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Not true

they did not have a MUCH better draft than the Yanks at all.

Dutin Pedroia .... a poor man's Ronny Cedeno - Theo Epstein

by the pinstripes on Nov 17, 2006 3:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Sox

Sox graduated a few of those guys who fueled the #8 ranking last year. Paps and Lester graduated. Marte was traded away.

Those 3 ranked 14, 22, and 37th on BA's top 100 last year. I have my doubts that even one Red Sox spect (Ellsbury or otherwise) will rank that high this year.

by natsfan2005 on Nov 17, 2006 3:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Nope, wrong

Nowhere did the original poster say anything about "only minor leaguers'

He said, "healthiest franchise". We are not including only minor leaguers.

Second. Hanley and Anibal (November) and Marte (January) were all already traded before BA put out their list in March.

And yes, the Sox had a dramatically better draft than the Yankees.

by Galt on Nov 17, 2006 3:47 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

That's true.......

If you read my first post you would have seen that I acknowledged they had a better farm team for the past several seasons. Didn't the Red Sox graduate most of their upper level prospects? That's right. They traded two of them away.

Dutin Pedroia .... a poor man's Ronny Cedeno - Theo Epstein

by the pinstripes on Nov 17, 2006 3:00 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

that's wrong

The two they traded away in November were not considered when BA ranked them in March, six months later. Check the link for dates.

And what makes you think the poster is only considering players who are in the minors or qualify as prospects.

He didn't even say "system" which could imply "minor league system", he said "healthiest franchise" which to me, includes major league team, minor league team, factoring in age, length of contracts, etc.

I think the Sox are in very good shape, with a deeper system than the Yankees, and a younger team. But the Yankees are dramatically improved over last year.

And though no one else has made the argument against me, I'll make it, since I just forgot. I wasn't including Humberto Sanchez when considering the Yankees franchise.

by Galt on Nov 17, 2006 3:52 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Furthermore

Q: lou pinella from chicago asks:
So now the obligatory "where do they rank" question? Behind the Rays and Sox I would think; right in there with the O's?

A: John Manuel: Ha, Lou . . . I think you're wrong, as I consider the Yankees system superior to that of the Red Sox, as the Yanks have more going on at the upper levels and the best prospect in either system in Hughes, and Tabata, for that matter. I'd go Rays, Yanks, Sox, O's and Jays in this org.

Dutin Pedroia .... a poor man's Ronny Cedeno - Theo Epstein

by the pinstripes on Nov 17, 2006 3:05 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Disagree...

The Red Sox have a far better farm system than the Yankees.

Hughes is the best pitching prospect in the minors, but the rest of that system is like 2-3 years away from helping.

I never even thought of the Red Sox, but they're not a bad team to take over the next 5 years. As much crap as that front office has gotten, it's one of the more competent ones in baseball.

by SenorGato88 on Nov 17, 2006 6:35 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

well...

Even if the Yanks had the "better system" (which I really cant see how 2 guys at the top are better than the ridiculously better depth the sox have throughout) how do you think it stacks up with the sox getting Matsu, who Callis said would be the no.1 "prospect" in baseball. Obviously none of us really view him as one, but signing him will definately put the sox' system in the upper echelon for BA rankings.

by jspearlj1 on Nov 18, 2006 9:08 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Well, there is clearly no argument

for unhealthiest

your Washington Nationals

by NFA Brian on Nov 17, 2006 10:28 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

I'll Take the Dodgers

I mean Arizona probably have a slightly better offensive future but they lack pitching. Tampa Bay has some great offensive talent but their pitching prospects same so far away. The Dodgers have the most well future and they are also contending now.

I almost pitcked the Marlins but Dodgers just seem to be getting richer every draft.

by Havok1517 on Nov 17, 2006 10:39 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Dodgers easy

Pitching and hitting, the majority of it having already gotten a taste (and success) at the major league level.

Elite prospects at the lower levels, although Morris (SP/RP) is shelved for a year with TJ.

I will certainly agree that other teams may have more of one (hitting - Devil Rays, argue Diamond Backs but I think Dodgers are better) than this pick but LA certainly has the most balanced health.

"Strikeouts are good...groundballs are better. Home runs are okay...but walks SUCK!" Mike Caldwell

by Torncuff on Nov 17, 2006 11:06 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I love alot of the Dodgers pitching...

but the way they rush their talent is worrisome.

And their bats are pretty unimpressive after Loney (don't like him), Laroche (the Dodgers don't seem to like him), and Kemp.

by SenorGato88 on Nov 17, 2006 6:41 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Martin,

Either, Repko, & Young.

by Havok1517 on Nov 18, 2006 2:41 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Martin...

is the only one of those three who projects as above average at the position he can stay at.

I like Either, but I plan to hold my judgement on him til a full season in the bigs go by.

by SenorGato88 on Nov 18, 2006 6:33 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I will take the Red Sox or Twins becauseofPitching

Because the core of the core of young pitching. You can find offense from anywhere, but good pitching is the rarest resource in baseball. TB and Ari are both going to be good offenses but their pitching is weak. These days it is impossible to get good young piutchers which is why teams bid over 30 million for "The Gun from the Rising Sun."

Lester (when he hopefully recovers from Cancer), Papelbon, Matsuzaka, Beckett, Buchholz, and Bowden.

Santana, Liriano (if he can regain his form), Garza, Slowey, Perkins, and Swarzak.

These are the kind of young pitchers you need to compete.

by thedude on Nov 17, 2006 12:45 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Marlins?

Willis, Johnson, Olsen, Sanchez, Nolasco

then Jose garcia, Yusmeiro Petit, Chris Volstad, Sean West, Aaron Thompson, Gaby hernandez. I think they got both systems beat, not by a lot though

by FishHead on Nov 17, 2006 2:46 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Dodgers?

Billingsley, Kuo, Broxton, Elbert, Kershaw, Miller, Meloan, Alexander, Hoorelbeke, Morris . . .

Only the Twins can rival that high-end pitching talent.

Add in Martin, Loney, DeWitt, DeJesus/Mattingley, LaRoche/Betemit, Ethier, Kemp . . . And the Dodgers can almost fill out a full team with top end talent.

by hunteralan on Nov 17, 2006 3:43 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I would take the Marlins

Except it has been widely talked about, that they will trade Willis. But i guess you have to include Marlins in the conversation.

by thedude on Nov 17, 2006 3:02 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Mets

The Mets have an amazing core of talent at the ML level, with Pelfrey, Humber, and Milledge all making or about to make the jump.

Also, FMart, Deolis Guerra and Carlos Gomez (i think that's his name) give them some beef in the lower levels as well.

I'll be the first A+ prospect... www.myspace.com/posingforpennies

by ufoboy90 on Nov 17, 2006 5:13 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

reality check

"The Mets have an amazing core of talent at the ML level, with Pelfrey, Humber, and Milledge all making or about to make the jump."

Does anyone else think that's really an "amazing" core?

That's certainly an above-average group of advanced minor leaguers, but I think there are at least half a dozen organizations with a similar or better combo in terms of talent.

by FI on Nov 17, 2006 5:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

My guess

Is that the amazing core is actually Wright, Beltran and Reyes....with the three listed about to join them. If he put a semi-colon after ML Level, I think it would have read correctly.

by drwmsu1 on Nov 17, 2006 5:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

yup

Yea, sorry about the punctuation goof. My AP English teacher would be disgraced.

I'll be the first A+ prospect... www.myspace.com/posingforpennies

by ufoboy90 on Nov 18, 2006 10:52 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Don't worry

It's a blog.

by drwmsu1 on Nov 19, 2006 9:49 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

This is impossible.

I think if you get the on-field coaching staff, it's clearly the Twins. Without the magic ability to turn any pitcher except Kyle Lohse into the best pitcher possible given his talent level, they lose a little of their edge. :>

Some other random thoughts:

Arizona's Gonzalez and Gonzalez duo could turn out to be a reasonable 3 and 5 in a rotation, IMO. With their surplus of young hitters, they are one of the few teams who could trade for a legitimate #2 starter from somewhere. They are near the top IMO.

And two of my favorite teams, both of which I think are "above average", but both of which have a bad rep:
If you listen to the sports radio around Chicago, you'd think the Cubs' farm system is beyond terrible. And I openly agree that the Pierre trade did really hurt the farm. But it's not that bad! They still have a lot of arms with GREAT stuff. If Marshall, Marmol, and even Mateo weren't forced to pitch above their readiness level last year, I think they'd be viewed as legit pitching prospects now. Considering Hill (just "graduated"), Gallagher, and Veal, and the Chain O' Pitching just keeps on running to Chicago (at least until Uncle Lou starts demanding trades). Sure, it's easy to "not count" Mark Prior, but if he's even nearly healthy, he and Z are a formidable duo that any team would love to have.

The Mariners keep making questionable moves, IMO. Choo wasn't special, but I love Asdrubal Cabrera. And trading them away for a vain push at the 2006 playoffs was silly. Granted that their FO is likely to keep making questionable moves, I still love their team makeup... outstanding defense up the middle, power on the corners, a killer bullpen (even after pissing away Thornton), and a starter with the potential to rock the world if he develops to his potential. Like the D-backs, they need a viable #2 starter, but I think that Washburn is fine as a #3, and their other arms are okay as #4/#5 guys - Woods, Feierabend, Baek, etc - and if not, then finding such pitchers shouldn't be impossible, given the good park and defense.

As a comparison between organizations, I think the Angels have a lot more "tools", but they seem to be scattered all around the workshed, with many being highly under-utilized. The M's may have fewer tools, but they seem to have a well-defined role for each of them, and they're all being used in concert well. Now, if they would just stop throwing them away (e.g. Cabrera) when they don't see an immediate use for them, they'd be in better shape.

* As an aside, I suspect the Indians and Royals will be on a lot of people's lists in a year.

by BobbyMac on Nov 17, 2006 11:25 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Healthiest/Sickest

Healthiest? The D'Rays.

Sickest? The Giants.

by DrBGiantsfan on Nov 18, 2006 12:17 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Dodgers or Marlins

First, let me say that Arizona has a completely ridiculous amount of talent among position players. Perhaps unparalleled in the free agency era.

As a Denver native and Rockies fan I get to watch the Diamondbacks play quite a few times each year. The combination of prospects who have established themselves as solid big league players (even if they never improve from where they currently are) who still have considerable potential that they haven't yet reached (Conor Jackson, Drew, Quentin, etc.) and high ceiling guys (Upton, Gonzalez) is really, really scary.

The pitching void, however, makes them impossible to pick.

The Marlins have tons of pitching talent not to mention a few impact position players (Cabrerra, Ramirez, can Uggla repeat?) and quite a few guys who look to be solid big league players.

The Dodgers hitting prospects over the last few years seem to be over-hyped or perhaps under-developed. The guys who are projected to be impact players end up being solid or above average players but not stars. That said, they have a lot of those guys and some are sure to pan out. Thier high end pitching prospects are drool inducing and they consistently prove that they can fill the system with hard throwers and high upside guys who, if they fail to cut it as starters, can fill a high quality and deep bullpen.

Edge: Dodgers because of thier latin american resources and thier ability to sign high risk draft picks (even if money was not supposed to be an issue).

by madness on Nov 18, 2006 1:37 PM EST reply actions 0 recs