Free Trial Ad
Why Subscribe?
  • Player/Prospect News
  • Exclusive Insider Info
  • Members-Only Forums
  • Exclusive Videos
  • Subscribe Now!
Inbox
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
  Page of 2  Next >

Baseball America farm system ratings

Avatar

Posted: 10/28/2013 10:07 AM

Baseball America farm system ratings 


The Pirates' system is ranked #14 of 30.

http://www.baseballamerica.com...pact-potential/

___________

 

  

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 10/28/2013 10:13 AM

Re: Baseball America farm system ratings 



gr1111 wrote: The Pirates' system is ranked #14 of 30.

http://www.baseballamerica.com...pact-potential/
Cardinals ranked 8th.  Looks like the Cards will be a constant thorn during the coming good years for the Pirates.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 10/28/2013 10:24 AM

Re: Baseball America farm system ratings 



Sangue wrote:
gr1111 wrote: The Pirates' system is ranked #14 of 30.

http://www.baseballamerica.com...pact-potential/
Cardinals ranked 8th.  Looks like the Cards will be a constant thorn during the coming good years for the Pirates.


Yes, and the Cubs are tied for 5th.  OTOH, the Reds are #25 and the Brewers #30.

___________

 

  

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 10/28/2013 10:28 AM

Re: Baseball America farm system ratings 


This is more skewed towards ready talent. The scoring is tilted towards more advanced talent. The Pirates have prospects at low levels that will be rising. The Pirates have depth along with impact talents. I'm cautious because the Indian's system was top 5 in the late '00's, but the results on the field haven't bore that out.

Overall the Pirates system will be higher ranked around the time the top 100's start to come out. They stand to place quite a few names on that list. Regardless if the rank #1 or #15, all that matters to develop the players you have. Matt Carpenter wasn't a high rated prospect. Todd Frazier wasn't a high rated prospect. You need these kind of guys on your team. The prospect rankings aren't insignificant, but most of the guys on the list will end up having less impact than Todd Frazier.
Blame it on "a certain someone"
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 10/28/2013 11:34 AM

Re: Baseball America farm system ratings 



fishmong wrote: This is more skewed towards ready talent. The scoring is tilted towards more advanced talent. The Pirates have prospects at low levels that will be rising. The Pirates have depth along with impact talents. I'm cautious because the Indian's system was top 5 in the late '00's, but the results on the field haven't bore that out.

Overall the Pirates system will be higher ranked around the time the top 100's start to come out. They stand to place quite a few names on that list. Regardless if the rank #1 or #15, all that matters to develop the players you have. Matt Carpenter wasn't a high rated prospect. Todd Frazier wasn't a high rated prospect. You need these kind of guys on your team. The prospect rankings aren't insignificant, but most of the guys on the list will end up having less impact than Todd Frazier.



All true, and a good reason why chickens should never be counted before they hatch.

It is also a good reason to fire Clint Hurdle immediately.  We could do so much better.  biggrin

___________

 

  

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 10/28/2013 1:02 PM

Re: Baseball America farm system ratings 


Hurdle's 94 wins beat all 3 Pythagorean Theories (87.8 / 91.0 / 91.9)

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/standings/

That gives Hurdle a WAR of +3.77 right?

According to this Hurdle's WAR is +5.0 (they should have won 89 games):

http://espn.go.com/mlb/stats/rpi

Last edited 10/28/2013 1:04 PM by Sangue

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 10/28/2013 1:34 PM

Re: Baseball America farm system ratings 



Sangue wrote: Hurdle's 94 wins beat all 3 Pythagorean Theories (87.8 / 91.0 / 91.9)

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/standings/

That gives Hurdle a WAR of +3.77 right?

According to this Hurdle's WAR is +5.0 (they should have won 89 games):

http://espn.go.com/mlb/stats/rpi


Nah.  We can do better.

___________

 

  

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 10/28/2013 1:36 PM

Re: Baseball America farm system ratings 



gr1111 wrote:
Sangue wrote: Hurdle's 94 wins beat all 3 Pythagorean Theories (87.8 / 91.0 / 91.9)

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/standings/

That gives Hurdle a WAR of +3.77 right?

According to this Hurdle's WAR is +5.0 (they should have won 89 games):

http://espn.go.com/mlb/stats/rpi


Nah.  We can do better.

Right - any Stats major would have won at least 100 games by never bunting.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 10/28/2013 1:51 PM

Re: Baseball America farm system ratings 



Sangue wrote:
gr1111 wrote:
Sangue wrote: Hurdle's 94 wins beat all 3 Pythagorean Theories (87.8 / 91.0 / 91.9)

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/standings/

That gives Hurdle a WAR of +3.77 right?

According to this Hurdle's WAR is +5.0 (they should have won 89 games):

http://espn.go.com/mlb/stats/rpi


Nah.  We can do better.

Right - any Stats major would have won at least 100 games by never bunting.
I will say that an argument could me made to support that.  Reason being, these stats/numbers are compiled from events that took place, they're predictive.  In theory, one could say that if Hurdle didn't bunt in certain situations, the data that was used to compile these results could have changed for the better and in a sense, worse for Hurdle.  Meaning, it's possible that had Hurdle elected to not bunt, a run could have scored where one did not because there was 1 less out to work with.  So, if the run scores, than Hurdle's "WAR" as you put it could drop because the Pirates scored more runs.  Increase that over the course of the season, it's possible to calculate a possibility where the Pirates could have had 98 wins.

Do I believe that?  Not really.  But I'd at least give merit to it and accept that it could have gone that way.
#fringeprospect
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 10/28/2013 1:57 PM

Re: Baseball America farm system ratings 



TBayXXXVII wrote:
Sangue wrote:
gr1111 wrote:
Sangue wrote: Hurdle's 94 wins beat all 3 Pythagorean Theories (87.8 / 91.0 / 91.9)

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/standings/

That gives Hurdle a WAR of +3.77 right?

According to this Hurdle's WAR is +5.0 (they should have won 89 games):

http://espn.go.com/mlb/stats/rpi


Nah.  We can do better.

Right - any Stats major would have won at least 100 games by never bunting.
I will say that an argument could me made to support that.  Reason being, these stats/numbers are compiled from events that took place, they're predictive.  In theory, one could say that if Hurdle didn't bunt in certain situations, the data that was used to compile these results could have changed for the better and in a sense, worse for Hurdle.  Meaning, it's possible that had Hurdle elected to not bunt, a run could have scored where one did not because there was 1 less out to work with.  So, if the run scores, than Hurdle's "WAR" as you put it could drop because the Pirates scored more runs.  Increase that over the course of the season, it's possible to calculate a possibility where the Pirates could have had 98 wins.

Do I believe that?  Not really.  But I'd at least give merit to it and accept that it could have gone that way.
Whew - I thought we were losing you there buddy.  I was waiting for the passive aggressive slam followed by lol.  Thanks for the last 3 sentences...
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 10/28/2013 2:29 PM

Re: Baseball America farm system ratings 



Sangue wrote:
TBayXXXVII wrote:
Sangue wrote:
gr1111 wrote:
Sangue wrote: Hurdle's 94 wins beat all 3 Pythagorean Theories (87.8 / 91.0 / 91.9)

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/standings/

That gives Hurdle a WAR of +3.77 right?

According to this Hurdle's WAR is +5.0 (they should have won 89 games):

http://espn.go.com/mlb/stats/rpi


Nah.  We can do better.

Right - any Stats major would have won at least 100 games by never bunting.
I will say that an argument could me made to support that.  Reason being, these stats/numbers are compiled from events that took place, they're predictive.  In theory, one could say that if Hurdle didn't bunt in certain situations, the data that was used to compile these results could have changed for the better and in a sense, worse for Hurdle.  Meaning, it's possible that had Hurdle elected to not bunt, a run could have scored where one did not because there was 1 less out to work with.  So, if the run scores, than Hurdle's "WAR" as you put it could drop because the Pirates scored more runs.  Increase that over the course of the season, it's possible to calculate a possibility where the Pirates could have had 98 wins.

Do I believe that?  Not really.  But I'd at least give merit to it and accept that it could have gone that way.
Whew - I thought we were losing you there buddy.  I was waiting for the passive aggressive slam followed by lol.  Thanks for the last 3 sentences...
LOL... I do believe there is legitimacy to the Saber world and all these algorithms that are in circulation.  I think a lot of the "loyalists" are too extreme.  I think there's merit to them and should not be ignored, the same with "the eye-ball test".
#fringeprospect
Reply | Quote

Posted: 10/28/2013 3:02 PM

Re: Baseball America farm system ratings 


We had two top prospects come up last season in Cole and Marte. If they were still there, the ratings would be higher. You could say the same about the Cards' rookie pitchers. And I hate Hurdle's excessive bunting, playing for 1 run early in games.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 10/28/2013 3:22 PM

Re: Baseball America farm system ratings 


From the write-up on the Pirates, it looks like Cole was included in the Pirates score. Marte was not.

Wacha and Martinez were included in the Cardinals score.

---------------------------------------------
--- BBG65 wrote:

We had two top prospects come up last season in Cole and Marte. If they were still there, the ratings would be higher. You could say the same about the Cards' rookie pitchers. And I hate Hurdle's excessive bunting, playing for 1 run early in games.

---------------------------------------------

___________

 

  

Reply | Quote

Posted: 10/28/2013 7:28 PM

Re: Baseball America farm system ratings 


This isn't a ranking system of the top minor league systems lol.  It is a ranking on where players ranked for their respective leagues that they played in, and has heavy weight on the upper levels. 

Also, most of the guys beefing up teams' points aren't prospects anymore.  I think I counted 17 guys that are currently MLB players ahead of the Pirates, many of whom won't be prospects anymore (I did it quick).  The Pirates only graduated one player (Cole), and he was also the only top prospect to play in the big leagues. 

Baseball America will come out with their farm system rankings later in the offseason.  This is just a recap of this season.  I would expect the Pirates to be ranked somewhere in the top 5 when they do.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 10/29/2013 5:40 AM

Re: Baseball America farm system ratings 



BBG65 wrote: We had two top prospects come up last season in Cole and Marte. If they were still there, the ratings would be higher. You could say the same about the Cards' rookie pitchers. And I hate Hurdle's excessive bunting, playing for 1 run early in games.
Marte didn't come up this year, he came up last year.  He was on the ML roster in March.  He rightfully should not have been included in this report.
#fringeprospect
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 10/29/2013 8:54 AM

Re: Baseball America farm system ratings 



cferrel3 wrote: This isn't a ranking system of the top minor league systems lol.  It is a ranking on where players ranked for their respective leagues that they played in, and has heavy weight on the upper levels. 

Also, most of the guys beefing up teams' points aren't prospects anymore.  I think I counted 17 guys that are currently MLB players ahead of the Pirates, many of whom won't be prospects anymore (I did it quick).  The Pirates only graduated one player (Cole), and he was also the only top prospect to play in the big leagues. 

Baseball America will come out with their farm system rankings later in the offseason.  This is just a recap of this season.  I would expect the Pirates to be ranked somewhere in the top 5 when they do.


Of course it is a ranking of farm systems, and it explains exactly how the rankings were derived and the information used to derive them.  The link is there fore everyone to read and digest.

___________

 

  

Reply | Quote

Posted: 10/29/2013 12:58 PM

Re: Baseball America farm system ratings 



gr1111 wrote:
cferrel3 wrote: This isn't a ranking system of the top minor league systems lol.  It is a ranking on where players ranked for their respective leagues that they played in, and has heavy weight on the upper levels. 

Also, most of the guys beefing up teams' points aren't prospects anymore.  I think I counted 17 guys that are currently MLB players ahead of the Pirates, many of whom won't be prospects anymore (I did it quick).  The Pirates only graduated one player (Cole), and he was also the only top prospect to play in the big leagues. 

Baseball America will come out with their farm system rankings later in the offseason.  This is just a recap of this season.  I would expect the Pirates to be ranked somewhere in the top 5 when they do.


Of course it is a ranking of farm systems, and it explains exactly how the rankings were derived and the information used to derive them.  The link is there fore everyone to read and digest.

Not a ranking of the full system.  It is simply ranking the farm systems that have the best "immediate" help.  And it is using the preseason 2013 rankings as a guide, not the 2014 top 100 list they will come out with in a few months.  The Pirates will be ranked in their top 5 (or close to it) when they release their rankings this offseason.  The rankings using the new 2014 list, as well as factoring A-ball players as well.  This was just a little article they did for fun, and the Pirates would even jump way up this list after the 2014 rankings as Kingham will jump in and be at an upper level, Polanco will move up 40 or 50 spots on their list, and Taillon will be in AAA.  That would REALLY boost the Pirates. 

From the link:

"This method rewards organizations for having players in close proximity to the majors who stand out in talented leagues and who play demanding positions. This way, we get a rough idea which systems have the highest probability of delivering premium talent in 2014 or ’15."
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 10/29/2013 1:05 PM

Re: Baseball America farm system ratings 



cferrel3 wrote:
gr1111 wrote:
cferrel3 wrote: This isn't a ranking system of the top minor league systems lol.  It is a ranking on where players ranked for their respective leagues that they played in, and has heavy weight on the upper levels. 

Also, most of the guys beefing up teams' points aren't prospects anymore.  I think I counted 17 guys that are currently MLB players ahead of the Pirates, many of whom won't be prospects anymore (I did it quick).  The Pirates only graduated one player (Cole), and he was also the only top prospect to play in the big leagues. 

Baseball America will come out with their farm system rankings later in the offseason.  This is just a recap of this season.  I would expect the Pirates to be ranked somewhere in the top 5 when they do.


Of course it is a ranking of farm systems, and it explains exactly how the rankings were derived and the information used to derive them.  The link is there fore everyone to read and digest.

Not a ranking of the full system.  It is simply ranking the farm systems that have the best "immediate" help.  And it is using the preseason 2013 rankings as a guide, not the 2014 top 100 list they will come out with in a few months.  The Pirates will be ranked in their top 5 (or close to it) when they release their rankings this offseason.  The rankings using the new 2014 list, as well as factoring A-ball players as well.  This was just a little article they did for fun, and the Pirates would even jump way up this list after the 2014 rankings as Kingham will jump in and be at an upper level, Polanco will move up 40 or 50 spots on their list, and Taillon will be in AAA.  That would REALLY boost the Pirates. 

From the link:

"This method rewards organizations for having players in close proximity to the majors who stand out in talented leagues and who play demanding positions. This way, we get a rough idea which systems have the highest probability of delivering premium talent in 2014 or ’15."


It is one way, among others, of ranking farm systems.

It reflects that most of the Pirates good prospects are in the lower minors, whereas other systems have more good prospects at higher levels.  Why that obvious conclusion bothers you so much, I have no idea.

___________

 

  

Reply | Quote

Posted: 10/29/2013 1:10 PM

Re: Baseball America farm system ratings 


It doesn't bother me at all, and I wasn't even referencing you in my original post, just clearing up confusion on saw in the thread.  It isn't a whole system ranking, just one of who has the most MLB ready talent.  But, even that isn't accurate as they should wait until they release their 2014 rankings and use that.  Realistically there isn't very many teams that can match Taillon, Polanco, Kingham, and Hanson in the upper levels.  Actually I'd be hard pressed to find a single team with 3 top 50 and another top 100 all in AA or higher.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 10/29/2013 1:13 PM

Re: Baseball America farm system ratings 


I'll stick with Baseball America for the expertise in this area.

___________

 

  

Reply | Quote
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
  Page of 2  Next >