BA: John Manuel’s Early Take On The Talent Rankings

Manuel ranks the top five and bottom five teams, then separates the remaining teams into a group of 6-15 and a group of 16-25. He placed us in the 6-15 group, with the following comment: "Impressive depth behind top prospects Pedro Alvarez, Tony Sanchez."

Barring a dramatic change in his thinking, before the book's date of publication, this will be our highest placement in BA's rankings in quite some time. We were 18th in 2009, 26th in 2008, 19th in 2007, 19th in 2006, and 18th in 2005.

It's nice to see the front office get some credit for all their hard work in rebuilding our farm system.

about 2 years ago Vlad 9 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

The other interesting notion

Is that many of our rivals in the NL Central have weak systems. The Cubs, Cards, Reds, and Astros seem to be duking it out in the basement. Only the Brewers, largely by the quirk that Alcides Escobar still gets counted as a “prospect,” are in the upper half.

Viva Clemente!

by Roberto on Dec 4, 2009 5:40 PM EST reply actions

And now that Jack Z has gone to Seattle...

…it’s an open question how well Milwaukee’s system will hold up.

by Vlad on Dec 4, 2009 6:30 PM EST up reply actions

For a look at what a really strong system looks like

Jacob assesses the Indians’ players who got put on the roster and those who did not. His take is that Steven Wright was the top reliever in the Indians organization this year and that Pino is very close to MLB-ready, as per Vlad’s earlier posts.

Viva Clemente!

by Roberto on Dec 4, 2009 7:01 PM EST reply actions

We're getting there

but a lot more work needs to be done to build for a winning team in Pittsburgh in a few years.

by patthatt on Dec 5, 2009 9:14 AM EST reply actions

An excellent sign of progress. I was under the impression that our farm was average at best or just a little bit below. But it seems like the experts are really warming up to Tony Sanchez, as we’re seeing more positive notes and less about him being a terrible choice from Baseball America and the like.

Also, our #11-25 range is as strong or stronger than most other teams, with a lot of players with a decent chance of moving into the “B” range.

by Adam Reynolds on Dec 5, 2009 4:51 PM EST reply actions

The acquisitions are a good argument for the “quality in quantity”." As people have said numerous times, all the Bucs have to do is hit on a few of the guys they acquired in the trades and through the draft.

by NastyNate82 on Dec 6, 2009 6:29 PM EST reply actions

Off subject

Just re-reading an old Tribune-Review article on the Rule 5 fiasco under Littlefield:

The spin from the Pirates’ camp was that the raiding was a testament to the strength of the farm system. The Pirates’ affiliates had the best aggregate winning percentage of any major-league organization last year, and some of the prospects lost yesterday had posted impressive numbers.

“When your farm system has the kind of success we had, what happens is players become attractive,” Graham said.

I know that none of those players ever amounted to much. But what stupidity.

by Bernie6 on Dec 6, 2009 7:01 PM EST reply actions