In defense of player development
by David Tokarz on Aug 2, 2010 2:34 AM EDT
in Detroit Tigers Links
Email
PrintI'M MAD AS HELL AND I'M NOT GOING TO TAKE IT ANYMORE.
And no, unlike the guy from Network, I'm not having a mental breakdown. Much. But I am having a bit of a problem with some of the offseason planning (and trade talk, though that's passed) some of the commenters are doing.
I'm going to try not to point fingers but instead to make a clear, logical, impassioned case for why, for lack of a better term, the Tigers are doing this whole "building a contender" thing wrong and what can be done to help arrest the fall.
First, however, a few caveats. First, I do want to see the Tigers do well. I want a World Series desperately--in fact, I want more than one. But I am a minor league writer. it's in my best interest to see the Tigers with a strong farm system. So I am going into this with a biased perspective. But hey, at least I tell you.
I'm not opposed to making trades, even if they involve top prospects. The Cabrera trade? Do it. Smoltz for Alexander? Sure. If Detroit has the ability to trade prospects, even blue-chippers, for players that will help us compete in the long-term, then so be it. That's one of the functions of a farm system.
That being said, there are two points that need making. First, that a thriving farm system is absolutely crucial to the long-term health of an organization. Teams with good farm systems contend year after year -- think the Angels or the Theo Epstein-led Red Sox. Second, prospects are risky, but the risk is low and the reward is high.
The first point is the more controversial, though it shouldn't be. Teams with good farm systems have three advantages over those with mediocre ones. First is depth. Take Philadelphia, for instance. The reason they shopped Jayson Werth for big-league help was because they have a blue-chip replacement in-house in Domonic Brown. The bonus there is that if they suffer an injury in the outfield (like they just did), they can plug in Brown to solve it. The Rays have the same insurance in the outfield and the rotation with Desmond Jennings and Jeremy Hellickson, respectively. But even teams without blue-chip prospects can improve their fortunes with a deep farm club. If Detroit had a prospect, any prospect, heck, even Mike Hessman at third base, losing Brandon Inge wouldn't hurt as badly. Or if we had some outfield depth in the minors (besides Casper Wells and Ryan Strieby who both have some problems to work through) maybe the Maggs loss wouldn't hurt as much.
Second, teams with good farm systems can develop superstars instead of spending millions of dollars in the free agent market or trading for them. These superstars are often cost controlled for their primes- take a look at players like Troy Tulowitzki from Colorado, David Wright from New York or Felix Hernandez from the Mariners. Guys like this cost a ton of money as free agents. Take Cliff Lee and Carl Crawford. You're talking $20 million per and five years as a starting point for these guys. Yes, they're very good players, but that's a lot of risk to take (more on this later). With Justin Verlander, for instance, we got four very good years for under $4m. That allows room to sign more expensive players, whether free agents or extensions -- and no, there's nothing wrong with having a big contract or two on the books. The key is to make sure you don't have too many (so there's no risk of crippling payroll for, say 3 years, because of injuries or ineffectiveness).
Third, teams with good farm systems have the ability to trade those blue-chippers for stars and rental players. Having three or four very good prospects allows you to make a big trade while still preserving depth in case of emergency. Philly, for instance, traded three very good players in Kyle Drabek, Travis d'Arnaud and Michael Taylor for Roy Halladay and their system was still ranked fifth by Baseball America's farm system rankings. The Rangers did the same thing with the Cliff Lee trade (and Jorge Cantu, but Lee's the big one). The reason they can afford to do that is because they have strong systems. The Tigers could have acquired Dan Haren, yes, but at the cost of our best two prospects and what little remains of our starting pitching depth for the future. We could acquire Adam Dunn, but the same problem exists. You want good reasons to have depth? Take a look at the Red Sox, who were able to deal Hanley Ramirez (among others) for Josh Beckett and Mike Lowell. And they still produced assets after the trade, including studs like Kevin Youkilis, Jon Lester and Dustin Pedroia.
The other argument people constantly make regarding prospects is that they are no sure thing. Prospects are risky- even first round picks can miss the majors. Anyone remember Dan Moskos (4th overall, 2007) or Pete Kozma (18th overall, 2007)? I get the risk factor, and a lot more than people understand. I've seen favorite prospects fall by the wayside because they just couldn't cut it (James Skelton broke my heart, so to speak). And yes, the Tigers have gotten lucky in recent trades (most of the Cabrera package turned into busts, though I still hold out hope for Cameron Maybin).
That doesn't mean that young players are not a worthy investment. Teams get six years of control for players that do make it to the big leagues: two or three at the league minimum and then three or four with costs capped by the arbitration process. It is also significantly easier to develop superstar talent than it is to buy it. Many of the best free agents go to New York and Boston simply because that's where the money is, and those who don't have a ton of leverage. Successful prospects have little leverage for at least two years and often three. I think it was Michael Lewis that compared the first six years most players spend in the Major Leagues to baseball's version of indentured servitude.
Younger, cheaper players mean more money for the owners, but more importantly more money for the free agent market and player development. And controlling above-average players at low rates means that you can afford to spend a little more on veterans that don't have huge upside or to extend a very good player that is about to hit free agency. And if you have a system that is churning out top-flight talent it doesn't matter so much if your GM ties up payroll with bad contracts for, say, 3 years.
Some people will respond by saying, "David, I understand prospects are a good thing, and can turn into good players, but you yourself admit that we should sign free agents with the money we free up. And as you know, we're freeing up a ton next year!" Those same people will therefore use that as a justification to sign a ton of free agents in the offseason next year. Ah, but building teams via free agency seldom works. And while signing one or two free agents is fine (I've suggested 4/30 for Ordonez, and 5/60 for Beltre), building a roster with them seldom works. The reason? Free agents are known quantities- insofar as we know their ceilings. But nobody knows when players, even good ones, will collapse.
Like a pitcher with a No. 2 ceiling signed to a seven-year deal. Or an impact outfielder. Or a great third baseman. Or a Hall-of-Fame caliber outfielder. Or a great leadoff guy. Or an ace pitcher. Or a 22-game winner. I'll stop here, but I could go on. t
Hey, take a look at all the extensions that Dombrowski handed out. They looked good at the time too (except for Willis, of course). Please, please, please don't suggest to me that free agents are "proven." This is baseball, people, a sport in which a player can lose all ability to play in an instant, and it happens so often that it has an instantly recognizable name. Free agents have less risk than prospects, yes. But they're also post-peak players for the most part and are signed at the beginning (or often in the middle) of their decline years. That's risk too. Players fall off the edge- even the best. And it's funny to see fans who have suffered through three years in which the Tigers have had a payroll constrained by players like this- free agents-to-be that didn't do so well.
So yeah, Jacob Turner may never become an ace, but if he doesn't we're out his $4.7 million bonus. $4.7 million won't buy you a year of Placido Polanco, let alone an impact player. You could make four deals like that for the price of Cliff Lee, maybe five. And that's only if Turner collapses entirely. If he becomes a No. 3 starter, that's still valuable enough to make the bonus look good. There are even middle relievers that get $4.5mm per year, so even if that's his ultimate outcome we still don't lose. And if he doesn't pan out at all, we're out, what? 5 million bucks? As compared to being out 50 million if we trade for Danny Haren and something goes "pop"?
In the end, I think that if we truly want a Tigers team for the ages we have to be willing to wait on the talent we have. Personally, I don't want some pansy one-off team that uses every single year to try to rebuild itself back to its former glory only to end up in some hellish place stuck bouncing between first and worst with little success in between. I want a team that will win CHAMPIONSHIPS. Plural, as in more than one. And I want a team that owns the Central pennant for 10 years. And it won't happen until we give the farm system what it needs.
94 comments
|
2 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Good article David. I think few would argue with the need to develop talent from within, but the Tigers are not doing enough.
As we head into the off season with some $ 75 million coming off the payroll, mostly in bad contracts that DD couldn’t give away for nothing even if he wanted to, there will be a multitude of vacancies all over the diamond in Detroit at 2B, SS, 3B, Catcher, RF, DH, at least one starting pitcher, and a set up man. Two of these have to replace Damon and Ordonez in the 2 and 3 spots in the lineup. Sure, DD could go back to his old ways and sign extensions, but with the exception of Polanco, those deals have blown up in his face.
What’s really sad is that there isn’t a single player within the organization that’s ready to fill any of those vacancies. I’m already counting Brennan Boesch in as the LF’er, and AJax in CF. Turner and Oliver are at least a year or two away, IMO, and the only place where we may have help ready to step in is in the bullpen.
Part of what’s gone wrong is the quality of talent that DD has drafted. In his nine years as Tiger boss, the Tigers have developed two all stars in Verlander and Granderson, one good pitcher in the majors in Porcello, one fleeting freak show in Zumaya, and he’s managed to swing a couple of trades, one for AJax, Scherzer, Shlereth, and Coke, and another for Miguel Cabrera.
Another part of the issue is that DD has not been able to stockpile many draft picks by offering arbitration to departing free agents. For one thing, he extended everything in sight after the 2006 season and nobody left town. Then there was the decision to let Polanco walk without an offer of arbitration, probably costing two first round picks (yeah, I know what Polanco said afterwards). After this season, will arbitration be offered to Damon, Inge, or Ordonez, or even Laird if he can manage to climb up to Type B status? The probability of a player making it to the majors goes up significantly for first round picks, even supplemental picks. Theo managed to get Ellsbury, Buchholtz, Jed Lowrie, and Michael Bowden by this method, while the Yanks picked up Joba Chamberlain and Phil Hughes, with picks that they got for letting a free agent walk away. Further, Theo likes to trade for pending Type A free agents most years, as he did with Billy Wagner last year. The benefits of trading for a “rental” can last long after the rent is paid.
I’ve been a supporter of the way that DD has gone about the draft. I agree with the emphasis on drafting starting pitchers in the first round, because those are the riskiest players to spend a bundle on in free agency, and they are at a premimum with so few true ACEs making it to the market. I agree with going over slot, because the cost effectiveness of landing a blue chip prospect is much better than paying for one after his servitude of six years in the majors has been completed. But for whatever reason, DD’s picks have come up short in terms of position player prospects, including those that have been dealt away, and therein lies the major share of the problem we see today.
Wait til next year, again.
Part of what’s gone wrong is the quality of talent that DD has drafted. In his nine years as Tiger boss…he’s managed to swing a couple of trades, one for AJax, Scherzer, Shlereth, and Coke, and another for Miguel Cabrera.
You say swing a couple of trades like it’s nothing. We got one of the best hitters in MLB in one of those trades. Come on that was a great trade. Also that trade shows why it is good to trade prospects for proven talent. Are any of those prospects on the Marlins major league roster now? Plus the other trade seems to be working out pretty well so far.
by The Duke of Ankh on Aug 2, 2010 8:12 AM EDT up reply actions
I have no problem with those trades.
I didn’t like the Jurrjens trade because of Renteria’s lack of range and probability that his production at the plate could not be repeated in the AL. There was no reason to be surprised at his lack of range. I figured at the time that Jurrjens would have been dealt anyway, and if he wasn’t sent to Atlanta, the strong likelihood is that he’d go to FLA in the Cabrera deal, since the Fish were given basically any six that they wanted.
Wait til next year, again.
Addressed this in the piece
Just because trades worked out before doesn’t mean they’re destined to do the same now.
Assist. Editor, Minor League Division, Bless You Boys
Daniel Fields is better than you.
I want to agree, but I don't at all.
Here’s the problem with your entire article: the Tigers as an organization are not walking around going "hey, let’s not have any prospects in our farm system, so we can sign free agents for everything.
They’re just simply bad at farm system. After a few rounds, the Tigers are so clueless as to which players to gamble on, they start drafting friends and family.
There is a little bit of organization to the chaos of the Tigers’ farm system: we draft pitchers primarily, because pitchers are a lower-risk gamble, and are worth more as prospects. The last position player the Tigers took in the 1st round is Maybin, and only because he was a more-than-sure thing.
We haven’t played much in the position player market.
But give this organization some credit: it did produce a contending team, and that’s coming from a completely empty cupboard when Randy Smith left.
If you are arguing that some of the Tigers’ free agent money should be better spent on having better scouts, you should say that. I would be very very down for doubling the salary of Boston or New York’s best scouts. The Red Wings built a dynasty because when talent started coming from Europe, we already had a scouting machine like no other set up for scouting Europe. The Red Sox have a fantastic farm system because they have done this. The Angels too. The Yankees three, although the Yanks primarily take advantage of the lack of a draft for non-American players. They find and sign these guys like mad. These are all of the Ramirezes and Martinezes named in Yankee deadline deals for sub-.500 teams’ slugging corner outfielders.
If you have a recommendation for how the Tigers can improve their farm system, particularly with regard to position players, I’m all ears. But David, with all due respect, this column is basically a great big whine. You can’t just say “the Tigers need a better farm system, not more free agents,” because the franchise’s job is to do both. If the Tigers’ scouting is only going to MLB games, that’s a real complaint. Simply looking at our pretty bad farm system and declaring “this is unacceptable” is the basest exercise in fan utility next to “fire the basterds!” [sic].
L'Équipe! L'Équipe! L'Équipe!
In Defense
of this article David was trying to respond to the trade rumors that flew around at the deadline and make a case for the Tigers decision to stand pat at the trade deadline. Some people are upset that the rest of this year is going to be for rebuilding, Dave was making his case that this is the best move, tinged with a bit too much “I want better prospects to write about” bias
Okay.
I didn’t read it like that, but I can imagine this as a scuttlebutt reply; I just haven’t been listening to the scuttlebutt I guess.
Still — and anyone who has read enough DD quotes should know this already — blanket statements about whether ‘tis better to keep prospects or MLB talent are silly. It’s about value. If I traded away Cale Iorg, Robbie Weinhardt, and some Erie catcher for, say, Alex Gonzalez, you shouldn’t look at that trade as “Oh, Misopogon is CONTENDING” or “Misopogon is MORTGAGING THE FUTURE.” You look at the value that fresh halibut (or whatever his aquatic nickname is) brings to the franchise, versus the potential value of three prospects. In this deal, if you can re-sign Alex Gonzalez to 3 years $21 million, and that fits in your shortstop budget, then three years of B-level shortstop play at the Major League Level is of much greater franchise value than the potential for Iorg, the sligth bullpen downgrade lost with Robbie, and the slight possibility of losing some catcher depth in 2014-2018. However, renting Gonzalez for two months when we’re already pretty much out of contention is NOT worth that loss.
That’s how you weight these things. Because yes, it’s very important to have a farm system than can provide ready-made replacement-level players and the occasional regular major leaguer. It’s also very important for a franchise to have a shortstop who can play baseball better than half of MLB starting shortstops. DD makes his decisions based on both. Every team does. The only difference between teams is that value shifts based on that particular team’s market: if you have a small market then good contracts are more valuable than a little bit of on-field success; if you have a large market (we do, kinda) then on-field success can be valued a little bit more than good contract, e.g. we can pay Miguel Cabrera a huge sum of money every year to be a Hall of Fame hitter.
L'Équipe! L'Équipe! L'Équipe!
I agree with the gist of what you're saying
But that’s not controversial at all- of course we should make smart trades when they occur. My problem is that the reaction on the board is so often “trade the prospects for established minor leaguers” that people don’t consider the value of minor league players, nor do they consider the risk of free agents.
And this piece isn’t really about the Tigers as an organization- Dombrowski has been very clear that he’s not going to sell the farm unless we can get an impact player, and even then it’s unlikely. For the most part, I trust DD. He makes some idiotic moves (Willis extension) occasionally, but he’s a good GM. It’s specifically targeted toward the “armchair GM’s” that think we can solve all our problems by trading the last vestiges of the farm system and weighing down the payroll with large contracts (again).
Assist. Editor, Minor League Division, Bless You Boys
Daniel Fields is better than you.
Not true
David Chadd’s strategy is to blow most of the budget on high upside picks in early rounds- see picks like Cameron Maybin or Andrew Miller. 2008’s a great example: the Tigers took Turner in round 1, Oliver in round 2 and started taking safer college bats and lower upside players until 6, where they took Fields as a signability risk, and 30, where they took a flier on James Robbins that happened to have passed muster.
Assist. Editor, Minor League Division, Bless You Boys
Daniel Fields is better than you.
Also also
The Mets’ farm system is actually worse than the Tigers’. In fact, they’re the exempli gratia for bad farms who end up having to plant their fields later with borrowed crops.
Their problem is similar to the Tigers but opposite: they focus on high-profile position players. As such, they have brought up Jose Reyes, Wright, David Murphy, and most recently Ike Davis in recent years. That’s our Verlander, Porcello, Galarraga and Weinhardt. If you’ll notice, the Tigers have been plenty deep at pitcher. Q.V.
Really, that’s about what you should expect from a big market team. The truth is, they don’t necessarily have that many great prospects, as they’re able to hold onto them. There are probably more Expos draftees in the majors today than Mets draft picks.
The Mets’ cardinal sin over the last decade has been that they rush players through the system, and in doing so, stunt their growth.
L'Équipe! L'Équipe! L'Équipe!
Galarraga came from the Expos/Nationals via Texas.
Granderson game through Detroit’s system. Murphy is from the Red Sox draft and in Texas. Reyes was an international free agent signing.
The Tigers seem to use pitchers to acquire other players. It’s an odd thing and I’m not sure I like it because of depth issues.
Ryan Raburn antagonist.
Scott Sizemore liberationist.
by 13194013 on Aug 2, 2010 7:21 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
REC'd
Thanks.
The “use pitchers to acquire other players” I would say is not just a “seems” but a modus operandi. The point is to use each move to create greater value for the organization, value being better baseball players under contract.
One thing I loved about DD is that he would sign free agents and trade them. That’s value out of nothing. Placido was the result of signing a free agent closer.
What’s hurting us the most this year is actually the loss of free agents, which subtracted value directly from the team. Instead of Pudge and Placido, we are getting replacement-level performance at those two positions (in Pudge’s case, this hurt us in 2009 as well).
This is a problem that New York and Boston don’t have: they can hold onto high-value players (examples: Lowell, Big Papi, Posada) even as their value dips, paying a premium for a slight upgrade. Jorge Posada is going to be better than the average catcher, but not as good as Jorge Posade used to be, but you’re paying Posada-used-to-be dollars to keep him. This is the same boat the Tigers were in for Pudge and Placido, and are in for Magglio and Guillen. From a pure wins perspective, keeping these guys until they really are producing at a level you can replace is worthwhile, but from a dollar-to-value perspective they may not be. Therein lies your difference between the Tigers and the Yankees/Red Sox.
Detroit can function for a short time with Placido and Magglio and Pudge and Cabby and Guillen, but once younger players need full contracts, something has to leave.
So really, it’s not just that the Tigers are playing with bad depth. It’s that our depth is already playing, because we couldn’t afford to keep all of our starters.
L'Équipe! L'Équipe! L'Équipe!
Detroit is in an odd situation.
There is money to spend and the market/ratings are there but financials are precarious. One or two bad signings can be dealt with but DD made at least 4 (Guillen, Bonderman, Willis, Robertson) in addition to the Renteria, Huff, Washburn, Sheffield,
Continuing to draft pitchers allows some room to make moves because of just how valuable they are as commodities. The downside is that the position players you do draft must develop into at least bench level players or else your franchise is going to overpay and end up with a very shallow pool of players to use. This is the position Detroit is in at the moment.
There is also a “tax” Detroit must pay for being Detroit. The bitter truth is many players may not want to play in Detroit and so extra money is spent to overcome the stigma of being based in Detroit. Detroit, therefore, cannot solve its problems via the free agent market. Additionally, the free agent market does not always have players that remedy problem situations (Shortstop, for instance). You end up overpaying for SS, C and relief pitching.
Certain positions make more sense to draft and develop just because of how valuable players are considered for those positions (C, SS).
Ryan Raburn antagonist.
Scott Sizemore liberationist.
One could argue the Tigers were pretty good at drafting bench-level position players
There’s a lot of homegrown talent on this squad. Some of it is starting when it should be on the bench. Maybe a player or two ought not to be on the MLB roster. But for the most part there are players with the right skill set to provide something off the Tigers bench. Worth, Rhymes, Kelly (originally a Tiger draftee). You’re not going to win a title with them all starting but they hold their own and could serve as defensive replacements.
The list of homegrown Tigers goes on quite a bit. Boesch, Inge, Santiago (who spent what, two years in seattle, but otherwise has a career in the organization), Avila.
So that’s what, half your position players right there?
by Kurt Mensching on Aug 2, 2010 10:10 AM EDT up reply actions
Ramon: 2 years, 17 games in Seattle.
Talk about not giving Ramon a chance.
Kelly has impressed me with his fielding skills. His offense seems to be lacking but at least he can field. Rhymes, Worth, and Raburn are all Tigers products. You are right about the bench level players, something people tend to forget and overlook. That saves the Tigers money.
Ryan Raburn antagonist.
Scott Sizemore liberationist.
so that's what, 8 of 13
who have at least some specific value to the team
And that’s not even including if Scott Sizemore gets a chance to contribute, Clete Thomas who’d be up if not for his knee having surgery, etc.
Meanwhile you can look at the players traded away and other than Jair Jurrjens not really bat much of an eyelash at what was given up.
I think Dombrowski has a pretty good idea at which of his players to keep and which to trade. You can certainly debate whether the organization drafts and develops, but you can’t blame a lack of farm on the Tigers trading away all their top prospects. Even if they did trade a couple on the top 10 rankings, they clearly are not everyday contributors for an MLB team.
by Kurt Mensching on Aug 2, 2010 10:46 AM EDT up reply actions
Did anyone forecast that Jurrjens would pitch well in Atlanta?
Remember the Sheffield deal? Did any of those prospects pan out? I honestly don’t know. Florida ended up getting Maybin (who still can develop) and Bradenhop. Miller is regressing and I think they released everyone else.
Seattle has Robles and the warm body of Luke French. I don’t know who was traded for Huff. Soto is years away (though I really liked what he was doing), if he makes it. Overall, I can’t say I’m sweating the technique.
Ryan Raburn antagonist.
Scott Sizemore liberationist.
2008 4th round righty reliever, brett jacobson
looks like he’s having a decent year for baltimore’s A+ team
Director of the 2010 Free Casper Wells campaign
No Run Support
oops that's who we traded for huff. might help for me to specify that
Director of the 2010 Free Casper Wells campaign
No Run Support
We have a surplus of righty relief arms.
Jacobson was expendable.
Official President of the Team Jacob Turner Fan Club
Sabermetrics Padawan
by DetroitTigersGeek on Aug 2, 2010 11:43 AM EDT up reply actions
The Jurrjens trade was a necessary pain
who’s have thunk Renteria would have gone back so far? I followed Jurrjens’ prospect trajectory and was excited when he got to the big leagues. I was disappointed when he was traded. But it felt like a decent move. You gotta give up something to get something. (speaking of giving up something: also in that trade was Gorkys Hernandez, another one who isn’t panning out!)
I really have a hard time believing if the Tigers never traded those prospects they’d be a better organization today.
Which brings me to this thought: If Dombrowski has been here since 2002 and David Chadd since 2005, what makes David (or others) think that simply holding onto the prospects is going to make any better of a team? They seem to have established their tendencies and level of competency by now, as it regards to the farm. Is a light bulb going to go on and they change the way they do things? Or is it more likely they will continue to produce decent trade assets but not a lot of difference-making stars?
by Kurt Mensching on Aug 2, 2010 11:30 AM EDT up reply actions
Look at how the team was built in 2006
Under the radar acquisitions (Carlos Guillen, Placido Polanco) and smart free agent signings (Maggs, Pudge) along with promotion from within (Verlander, Granderson, Zumaya).
I get that you have to use multiple methods, yes. But to me, the farm system is a great method to produce lots of cheap regulars.
Assist. Editor, Minor League Division, Bless You Boys
Daniel Fields is better than you.
The sheffield trade
Kevin Whelan, Anthony Claggett and Humberto Sanchez. I believe there was grumbling about mortgaging future and selling farm and etc.
One of those was supposed to be a future closer, another a front of the rotation pitcher. 5 2/3 innings in the MLB total for Mr. Claggett and Mr. Sanchez.
by Kurt Mensching on Aug 2, 2010 11:40 AM EDT up reply actions
The point is that there are vacancies and not the talent to fill them from within.
Not one of those is an average or above player at his position. We can argue Inge all day, but he’s clearly on the decline and there is a vacancy. There will be expiring contracts at SS, 3B, RF, DH, at least one SP, set up with Zoomer out, and Catcher. There are needs for a 2 and 3 hitter, and not one player on the farm is ready to step up and perform at least at an average major league level. There is quantity, but not the quality that is needed.
Pitching, on the other hand, looks much more promising, both in the rotation and the pen. Verlander, Porcello, Scherzer, Coke, Weinhardt, Valverde- obtained by various methods, is a good core group to build around. In the lineup, only AJax and Cabrera can be counted on, with Boesch maybe being up to the task. Overall, that’s inadequate, IMO.
Wait til next year, again.
Again
That’s part of Chadd’s strategy (it seems)- draft for upside early (blowing the budget for your best chance there) and sign college players/ role players later. I think it explains his fetish for college relievers.
Assist. Editor, Minor League Division, Bless You Boys
Daniel Fields is better than you.
Actually that's not true
Mets were ranked 22 by Baseball America, Tigers 26. The Mets are incredibly good at finding talent in the international free agent market and tend to have okay drafts (but don’t go over-slot very much, so they’re not great).
Assist. Editor, Minor League Division, Bless You Boys
Daniel Fields is better than you.
The Mets
I had a Mets blog last year and still am close with enough of their bloggers to get the rumblings. Their problem isn’t in finding talent. They have a top-notch organization insofar as finding and signing Latin talent. Perhaps one of the best. Their problem is they rush players, and in the process ruin them. With the raw talent in their system, 22 is really low. There are a number of Mets prospects who got off their development tracks, and ended up in AAA or as AAAA MLB players because they can hit but not field any position well, or with really bad K/BB ratios, not to mention an entire stable of wild pitchers with a fastball and a breaking pitch and that’s it.
L'Équipe! L'Équipe! L'Équipe!
Sounds like us
You know, the organization that rushed both Andrew Miller and Cameron Maybin to the majors after only a few appearances in AA? Or that rushed Rick Porcello after no AA?
Assist. Editor, Minor League Division, Bless You Boys
Daniel Fields is better than you.
by David Tokarz on Aug 3, 2010 11:07 AM EDT up reply actions
So the drafting is awful
The Tigers seem to be making moves in changing that department. How is the Tigers system generally thought of w/r/t player development? I ask because it seems to me that changing the draft quality is something that an be done is a short period of time and show real results within three years, whereas changing the player development system is a huge long-term project.
Our Drafting Department isn't Terrible
Granted, this last draft was confusing, but overall, David Chadd does a good job as a scouting director and generally his drafts are good.
Sure there are a lot of power, throwing pitchers (relievers…), but DD and Chadd’s thinking is that it’s easier to trade pitching (which is always in demand) for a position player.
That being said, I wouldn’t mind actually drafting a position player or three…
However, to get the most out of a draft, you need a really well run player development system, to assure the organization’s prospects don’t fizzle out. This is something we lack: position players with no plate discipline, etc.
Official President of the Team Jacob Turner Fan Club
Sabermetrics Padawan
by DetroitTigersGeek on Aug 2, 2010 11:41 AM EDT up reply actions
I'd say the complaints dont really lie with drafting
David Chadd has an amazing track record- he hasn’t missed on a first round pick insofar as they’ve all turned up value for DET- whether via promotions or trade (see, there’s the dual use of the farm again). Player development… we could use somebody who could straighten some stuff out in the plate discipline department, like Geek said.
Assist. Editor, Minor League Division, Bless You Boys
Daniel Fields is better than you.
It's ALL about the No. 1 picks. See my post with the link below
There are two theories on plate discipline. I think you can teach discipline in terms of an approach to hitting, but it’s much more difficult, if not impossible to teach pitch recognition skills once a player gets to a certain level. A player may be able to learn a pitcher’s arm slot and release point, but mainly he has to rely on picking up the rotation on the ball to know what’s coming.
Wait til next year, again.
I think the issue with the argument here is the examples given of players who succeeded and players who’ve failed. There are a zillion examples of bad free agent signings, and there are just as many examples of one’s that have worked.
What is missing here is the idea of not just good talent development, but good talent evaluation. There’s a reason the Braves let Andruw Jones go. Was 30 and showing signs of deteriorating. Everyone and their brother agreed the Cubs were nuts for paying Soriano that money. These are clubs who don’t make smart choices, they make decisions based on hype surrounding a particular player. This is why the Tigers are rarely involved in these big time deals. Overall, Dombrowski has been pretty on point with signings/trades. Look at the one’s that have worked (Maggs, Rogers, Pudge, Polanco, Sean Casey, Guillen (yes, he was a major reason they made the WS in 06), Cabby, Ajax, Scherzer, Coke, hell even Rondell White (who hit .291 as a Tiger)) compared to the one’s that haven’t (Willis, Renteria, Huff, Washburn, Sheffield, Percival). What was lost there? Jurrjens has been the only real prospect they’ve lost because of signings and trades in the off season. Humberto Sanchez for Sheffield? Ugeth Urbina for Polanco? Brian Rogers for Casey? It’s not like the Tigers are just throwing their prospects around for nothing in return. They evaluate talent very well, and have competed every year since 06 (save for 08, and this year due to uncontrollable circumstances). They make deals when they are available, not because they have pressing needs, and that helps them cultivate talent.
I guess overall, I don’t see the point of this article. Who are you criticizing? The Tigers for being poor shoppers or the fans for over-speculating. Because one really isn’t true and the other is never going to stop.
And to the guy who said the Tigers are so inept at drafting that they start drafting family, this happens everywhere (http://bit.ly/bJU7Eh), and it’s got nothing to do with nepotism. The baseball draft is so massive for a reason, it’s not just to fish for stars in late rounds. It’s to fill out your minor league rosters so they can put a team on the field. And sources across the league agree that Pat Leyland was justified in going where he went to a team with catcher needs. Get over that.
I may not be able to stop the fans from overspeculating
But I can darn sure try.
My stubbornness is legendary.
Assist. Editor, Minor League Division, Bless You Boys
Daniel Fields is better than you.
David, you might not want to watch the 2011 draft
There is a good possibilty the Tigers will sign a Type A player this fall and if they rally a bit to be at 15th slot or higher they could lose there first round pick. Good news they are a dozen good bats that are better than Damon and 3 or 4 catchers in this year free agent crop.
The generic grumbling about "mortgaging the future", or "selling the farm" is misplaced with regard to today's Tigers.
Any average major league regular has higher value than any prospect in the Tiger system other than Oliver and Turner. The generic objections to “trading prospects” is off base. Which prospects on the farm are worth more than a decent major leaguer? None that is near major league ready.
Wait til next year, again.
I woudln't go that far- Fields
Fields and some of the Latin kids on their lower levels are way more valuable than a replacement level player you can sign for the min. Guys like Furbush are much more valuable, even if he is a long reliever or swing man like Bonine it is better than spending 6 million for Jeff Suppan or a Carlos Silva type and that is what the market is, inning eaters even get 8 million.
We need more impact guys for sure though.
Not talking about "replacement level" players. Those are a dime a dozen.
Major league average talent. Fields would be on my short list of players to keep, but if I could get an average or above SS, 3B, starting pitcher, or a no 2 or 3 hitter for him, I’d have to make the move. Charlie is probably top five on my list as well, but the same applies.
Wait til next year, again.
I don't know if anyone saw this at the top of the DetNews page today...
There are some good hitters in the system. Perhaps one of these guys will percolate up to the big league club, who knows?
It’s also worth noting that W. Michigan’s record this year is the worst I remember it being in years. They are on a streak right now, but we’ll see how long it lasts.
You need both hitters and pitchers to win games. I agree that DD is obsessed with hard throwing pitchers that he can trade away later. Maybe what we see lower in the organization is a correction? We’ll see.
I do like Gaynor
He was a sleeper for me coming into the year. Same with Garcia, who still needs to work on the K rate, but is doing well.
Another name to remember is James Robbins, a 1B down in Connecticut. He’s doing well, and despite problems with plate discipline is putting up a good average and hitting for a decent amount of power for a kid.
Assist. Editor, Minor League Division, Bless You Boys
Daniel Fields is better than you.
What can they do to improve the farm?
Specifically, what can be done to improve the farm? The drafting seems good, they are willing to go over slot, development seems good. Other than “having better prospects”, what can be done to improve the system to the point that the Tigers can reap the benefits you describe? To go from the 26th-ranked farm toward the top?
Get lucky in drafting
Improve player development a little, don’t trade prospects so easily, wait.
The real point of this piece was to encourage people to stop relying on “trade prospects and sign free agents” as gut reactions to building a team.
Assist. Editor, Minor League Division, Bless You Boys
Daniel Fields is better than you.
Well, they could've drafted Yordy Cabrera, or Stetson Allie, they could've offered arby to Polanco, etc
DT- the same is true for the pavlovian “don’t gut the farm, don’t mortgage the future, just stand pat” as if trading any prospects is bad and making a move at the deadline is a waste of prospects.
Typically, getting a GOOD major leaguer for prospects is a good deal. Getting a mediocre player may not be so good, especially if you give up top prospects for him.
It all depends on the deal. Who you’re trading and who you’re giving up.
It also matters if there are comp picks coming back in a deal. Even if the Dodgers are eliminated by Labor day, they can get two high picks for Ted Lilly.
Wait til next year, again.
Gah!
Stop reminding me of this year’s draft!
Keep thinking: We still got Castellanos, we still got Castellanos, we still got Castellanos…
/sobs
Official President of the Team Jacob Turner Fan Club
Sabermetrics Padawan
by DetroitTigersGeek on Aug 2, 2010 8:14 PM EDT up reply actions
Thanks for the piece, by the way
I got the point and appreciated it. But it got me curious. How did those teams with great farms get to that point? It sure isn’t overnight, but, man, to have a system consistently deliver high-quality talent to the majors would be a dream.
Latin America weak-Draft- Ok
Honestly it makes no sense not to spend $10 million every year on the draft, (as David goes into detail) the bottom line is there is no doubt in the long run you will get at least 4-5 times the bang for your buck if not more. Yeah the commissioners office would be pissed but who cares,they already are pissed at the first round choice what’s the difference if you make them mad once or twice or 10 times? Its an empty threat anyway. That being said Chadd has done fairly well with the draft, I would like to see some more later round dual sport athletes, like Austin Jackson or Daniel Fields last year. Carl Crawford , the kid in philly all fall into that category and most of those guys got 500k-750k in later rounds. Not much of a risk for a home run upside, actually I would bet if one guy out of 10 makes it would still be a wise investment and it seems at least 1 out of 3 or 4 of these guys hit and if you haven’t noticed the tigers don’t have too much athletic ability in the field.
Latin America I would spend 10 times the money, you don’t need to worry about draft or anything. I don’t really understand our cheap skate strategy there, waiting until after the July 2nd prices come down, I know we spend a million on the kid in Venezuela this year but we should get 5 of thoes guys a year and a lot more of the 250k-750k kids. It seems we only get guys for 100k or less. I really don’t see a downside to this strategy, the farm system sucks now but we ever actually replentished it the $20 million a year on the draft and latin america would keep it rolling. Now we probably spend 7 or 8 million and way more than 12 million on mediocre guys like Laird, Inge and don’t get me started on Guillen, Bonderman, Nate and willis, that was just insanity. Seriously think about it instead of Laird we could probably get 5 good young players and odds are 2 of the 5 would become good major leaguers. Instead we got a guy that is below replacement level.
I'd love to see us investing in LA
We have been a bit- signed a Venezuelan named Danry Vasquez and we’ve got a couple other Latin talents in Avisail Garcia and Francisco Martinez that are doing pretty well. But more investment there wouldn’t hurt. Neither would bumping the draft budget up to $10m.
Assist. Editor, Minor League Division, Bless You Boys
Daniel Fields is better than you.
I'd give Chadd at least $ 10 mil, and it would be much more productive than extending some of the 2006 heroes
Wait til next year, again.
Oh hell yes
I’ve become a huge David Chadd booster.
Assist. Editor, Minor League Division, Bless You Boys
Daniel Fields is better than you.
are these real odds backed by facts or are you just making numbers up
odds are 2 of the 5 would become good major leaguers.
by Kurt Mensching on Aug 2, 2010 6:21 PM EDT up reply actions
Doesn't sound like real odds
If they were first round picks, maybe.
Assist. Editor, Minor League Division, Bless You Boys
Daniel Fields is better than you.
It was from article a couple years ago
It was for bonus over a million in Latin America, said 2 in 5 wound up being above replacement level players, can’t remember if it was baseball america or Sickles site. It would be interesting to see a current study and make a definition, was Mily Mo above replacement level?
Still I would go for one big one a year for an everyday player, they seem much easier. Hell if you get one All star every 5 years it would be worth it, if you got a Cabrera every 10 years it still would be worth it. I know I’ll be pissed if Miguel Sano winds up being good, what did the Twins spend 3.5 million. We spent more on Laird. Hell the 1.5 mil on Everett was insanity, we could have gotten 2 decent high school kids for that in the regular draft and Worth is better than him at everything, heck Iorg probably is. You can even defend the money on him, he at least can field and has some pop and speed, he certainly is better than Don Kelly.
Yeah man, we should definitely trade away our best players for prospects! Then we can be just like the team with the best minor league in the majors… THE CLEVELAND INDIANS!
Hi
You must have missed the point.
Assist. Editor, Minor League Division, Bless You Boys
Daniel Fields is better than you.
what.....?
i know for a fact this isn’t about trading away our best prospects…
David pretty much said that keeping young, controllable, and CHEAP talent is better than going out and getting expensive veterans.
We need to develop this talent, not get rid of it. How well your young talent develops is key to be an annual championship caliber team.
At least, that’s just what I got out of it…
Official President of the Team Jacob Turner Fan Club
Sabermetrics Padawan
by DetroitTigersGeek on Aug 2, 2010 8:19 PM EDT up reply actions
How about we be like the Rays
And just have a really damn good team supported by a great system so they don’t have to worry about the future so much at all.
First, you'd have to get a Scoscia protege as manager
Then, you have to get players that can be aggressive on the bases.
Wait til next year, again.
Has anyone calculated the odds
of a draft pick making it to the majors for, let’s say at least two full seasons (or something) based on where they’re drafted? There has to be some data on this.
What I noticed scanning the lists at baseball-reference is that the odds shoot way up for first rounders, supplemental first rounders, and then drop way off. LINK 2005 See the 2005, for example, first round, then sort the second round and there are just a couple. Do this year by year, and you see that the odds drop way off after the first round.
Any given prospect that’s not a blue chipper has less than an even chance of making it. But there is strength in numbers. Gather ten B level prospects and the odds are much better that one breaks out like a Boesch.
Wait til next year, again.
Why do you ask?
Assist. Editor, Minor League Division, Bless You Boys
Daniel Fields is better than you.
#Pirates have traded OF Brandon Jones to #Tigers for a player to be named later; Jones has been assigned to Detroit’s Double-A Erie club
I agree with the gist of it.
Living and dying by free agents is only something one can do if there is an unlimited budget a la Red Sox or Yankees. The Tigers need to start developing more position players or at least trading pitchers to fill certain needs around the diamond. Just because a player isn’t a sure thing doesn’t mean they can’t be developed. I mean even Strasburg wasn’t a sure thing coming out of high school.
The Tigers really need to reevaluate themselves and decide: Are they contenders and are going to spend money? Or are they rebuilding and have to draft and develop prospects?
They kind of have the same dilemma as the Pistons.
Here's the thing...
if we would have kept Jurrjenns and not given him away for the scrub that was Renteria. If we would have kept our prospects for Huff and primarily Washburn last year…we would have been better off. What have we won? Shit. I hate trading prospects for guys with known ceilings/vets, unless those ceilings are off the charts (Cabrera). Bottom line is, what do you want, to win it all, no? Win a title, perhaps several, be right there, year in and year out, as the article talks about. And if we don’t win it all, and dont even make the playoffs, what have we accomplished? That is why I was against making any moves at this years deadline, Peralta included. Keep your talent, grow your system, give yourself a chance to be great. Dumbrowski licks balls and Leyland is worse. Why on Earth did you give up on Polanco, for Sizemore? Why bring in Damon after the fact when Polanco is every bit the hitter (moreso) than Damon is? Guillen is a POS. I hope Maggs is brought back on a two-year deal. The Tigers piss me off…(and bad luck doesnt help). I’m angry at this organization…
http://thefilmnest.com
Michigan, Pistons, Wings, Tigers, Chargers 'til I die.
I'd take Huff's .950 OPS. He was worth a shot last year. Jacobson may never be anything.
Likewise Washedburnt. Although he had three bad years before having one good half year with Seattle, he was the hottest pitcher in the league for July when we got him. Luke French is nothing, and Mauricio Robles is still a long way off.
Jurrjens was just a bad trade. Although they needed a SS, I think DD blew the scouting on Renteria. No reason for him to be surprised at the lack of range, or be surprised that he didn’t repeat his season where he was third in the NL in batting.
I’m a huge Polanco fan, but I would not give him the contract that Philly gave him. I’d have offered arbitration for sure, and been happy whether he accepted or declined. He was let go because DD could not increase the payroll and he hadn’t yet cleared Granderson and Jackson’s salaries off the roster.
Wait til next year, again.
The Jurrjens trade...
seemed like an amazing deal the the time. Renteria’s average had risen for two strait years and was the defending NL batting Champ… it appeared to be a lot of upside for a relatively unknown. Jurrjens put up great numbers in the NL for two years, this year, eh. AL is a different animal and having to face another batter (and a good one at that) is a receipt for disaster for most that convert. Though I don’t like the trade in hind sight because we really ended up with nothing, it wasn’t the worst trade ever. That said and though it’s no guarantee, I think that if we ever go after pitchers they should be proven AL pitchers. NL pitchers only have to get 8 batters out. Even the best NL pitchers bat like crap compare to a AL DH. Every NL team has Laird/Everett in the nine spot so to speak – even a blind squire finds a nut once in a while, but overall they’re just stumbling around until they get hit by the Minor League bullpen cart.
Jeff
Did not seem like an amazing deal..
Renteria was a guy coming out of his prime, and Jurrjenns was unhittable here in a handful of starts. Never trade young pitching for old hitting. I was so pissed when that deal happened. Pitchers have the ball in their hands and can make or break any game, hitters and fielders get far fewer opps to impact a game. Sheer pct’s prove pitching over hitting. As for Polanco, the guys at 3rd in the NL again, and it is to be expected. Anyway jackass Leyland and Dumbrowski thought that triple-A ceiling Sizemore would be an adequate fill-in means they smoke rock. These r the same a-holes who said Laird would hit. I want these guys gone!!! Lets clean house, seriously. How close are we? Our best pitcher can’t hold Felix Hernandez’s jock. He still cant consistently do anything but throw hard. I am so sick of the Tigers, same shit every year, choke in the second half with this group. No heart at all.
http://thefilmnest.com
Michigan, Pistons, Wings, Tigers, Chargers 'til I die.
Did you miss this part?
Renteria’s average had risen for two strait years and was the defending NL batting Champ
That’s not exactly “coming out of his prime.” Everyone liked this deal when it went down originally. They only turned on it when Renteria didn’t perform.
I think..
there’s factors beyond everyone’s control and that nobody takes them into account. 1st round pics fail, high profile free agents fail, player scouting fails… In fact in this game is all about failure. If you only fail 66% of the time you are a star. Baseball is all about luck. Example: from 2001 to 2009 how many championships did the Yankees win? Donuts.Those teams were stacked, but they couldn’t bring it all together or ran into a buzz saw, a team that was lucky and clicking (‘06 tigers). The Yanks run of championships in the late 90s was a brilliant stroke of luck that will not likely happen for along time. I don’t have a problem with any trade DD makes or doesn’t make. The fact is, since 2006 we have been in a position to contend. Whether the players we have traded for or acquired on draft day have worked out or not, we’ve had a better then average shot at winning. The fact is “shit happens”. If it doesn’t, you go to the series and have a special year. This year shit happened. To say “I want a dynasty” is plain ridiculous. It’s not going to happen because players get hurt, go into slumps that seem to never end or can’t find the strike zone- Even the best players or players that come out of nowhere. That’s the beauty of this game. The best you can do is put yourself in a position to contend and DD has done that.
Jeff
I'll also say I'd rather have
a hundred good pitching prospect then position players. You can turn a quality minor league arm with potential into anything your club needs. There’s a reason they say “you can never have enough pitching”. You can have the best team on the field or in the box but have sub standard pitching and not win crap. See the 1995/1999 Indians. Pitching wins and pitching sells.
Jeff
There's an old adage: there's no such thing as pitching prospects.
Ryan Raburn antagonist.
Scott Sizemore liberationist.
The term prospect means something that is awaited or expected (webster) so that would apply to every player regardless of position and not everyone needs a short stop or left fielder… everyone need another pitcher.
Jeff
The adage means that pitchers either have it or don't.
And that there isn’t too much you can teach them.
Ryan Raburn antagonist.
Scott Sizemore liberationist.
How are you going to teach someone to hit a pitch any more then you are going to teach someone to throw a pitch they cant hit? If you start with a 95 mph fastball, then you already have the first piece. You can teach a change, slider or cutter. See Mariano Rivera. You can’t teach just anyone to hit it or recognize when it’s coming or there would be a league full of .350 hitters. That adage is ludicrous and backwards. : )
Jeff
Rivera discovered his cutter by accident
He was throwing a fastball with a slightly different grip and his bullpen catcher flipped out because of the late break. Thus, the legendary cutter was born.
That
And pitchers get injured so frequently.
Assist. Editor, Minor League Division, Bless You Boys
Daniel Fields is better than you.
by David Tokarz on Aug 3, 2010 11:08 AM EDT up reply actions
To clarify
Dynasty insofar as we win a ton of division titles, therefore setting us up for multiple runs at a pennant.
I know there’s luck involved, but 60% of baseball is talent.
Assist. Editor, Minor League Division, Bless You Boys
Daniel Fields is better than you.
I’d give 10 division titles for one world championship and so would every player in the MLB… and that’s the problem… no player worth his salt is sticking around while the farm grows a core.
Jeff
Sadly the Tigers haven't won a division since 1987.
And their pitchers sure helped throw away the chance in 2006 (along with everyone going cold).
Ryan Raburn antagonist.
Scott Sizemore liberationist.
Luck...
It STL takes care of business in an orderly fashion Tigers don’t go cold and blow them out in the Series.. but it wasn’t to be.
Jeff
Many of the top farm systems have been perennial non-contenders.
It certainly helps your farm system to be in “sell” mode every now and again. (I’m looking at you Oakland!) Detroit hasn’t been in “sell” mode since 2003 – 2005 and, to be honest, we didn’t have anything to sell back then other than a few C-list stars of Dmitri Young likeness.
We’re not an organization that has players that are “simply getting too expensive for the organization” like San Diego or Oakland. Hence, we rarely dump quality MLB talent for 3 or 4 decent prospects. Making a couple of trades like this can put 10 or 11 quality milb players in your system and the Tigers just haven’t made deals like this. I’m happy that we haven’t been dumping; it means we’re generally within sight of contention.
Granderson was my Tiger, then Sizemore, then Willis. Since they're all gone, I'm taking Raburn and hoping the pattern holds.
And there's a couple teams who have managed to bulid up strong systems without being bad
The Angels, for instance. The Red Sox. The Yankees are doing better than us. The Rangers (though part of that is a product of them sucking for so long). Colorado is doing pretty well.
Assist. Editor, Minor League Division, Bless You Boys
Daniel Fields is better than you.
by David Tokarz on Aug 3, 2010 11:13 AM EDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Bless You Boys
Related FanShots on Bless You Boys
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- The Cardinals Hall of Fame can now be found at Bill Clinton’s library in Arkansas (Huh?)
- Will Bryce Harper start the season with the Nationals?
- Mitch Mustain puts football behind him, signs reported rookie deal with White Sox
- Robinson Cano and Denzel Washington face off in Jay Leno’s Yankees trivia contest
- Shane Victorino lands role on ‘Hawaii Five-0′
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
