"The plan three years ago was to attack the draft before the new CBA," D.C. GM Mike Rizzo told reporters this winter. "That was our focus," the general manager of the team initially ranked as the no.1 organization in baseball in 2012 by Baseball America continued, "that was our vision, that was our strategy going into it three years ago and we did it, we attacked it for the last three years and I don't think you'll see a draft class like last year's because of the new CBA rules, so..."
That aggressive approach which included signing no.1 overall picks Stephen Strasburg ('09), Bryce Harper ('10) and 1st Round pick Anthony Rendon ('11) to major league deals, going well-above slot to sign picks like A.J. Cole (4th Round 2010), Robbie Ray (12th Round 2010) and Matt Purke (3rd Round 2011 who got a major league deal), and using compensation picks for the loss of free agents like Adam Dunn to load up on first round picks and sign players like RHP Alex Meyer (23rd overall in 2011) and OF Brian Goodwin (34th in '11). The results? Baseball America, which ranked the Nationals' organization 21st overall in 2009-2010 when Rizzo took over as GM, and had moved them up to 13th last year, had them no.1 overall in 2012.
The recognition, the Nats' general manager told MLB Network Radio hosts Jim Duquette and Kevin Kennedy, was especially important to him because it was, "... such an organizational reward, it's like the ultimate organizational award," in recognition of all the hard work the Nats' rebuilt scouting and development system had done under Rizzo's guidance with the help of the Lerners. The Nationals, however, (after the Baseball America's first prospect list had been published and after the Prospect Handbook which contained the organizational rankings had been sent to the printers), made a deal with Oakland that sent three of the players on BA's original Top 10 list; RHP Brad Peacock (3), A.J. Cole (4) and C Derek Norris (9); and one major-league ready lefty (Tom Milone) to the A's in exchange for Gio Gonzalez and RHP Robert Gilliam.
The trade, which Baseball America's Jim Callis told the Washington Times' Amanda Comak would drop the Nationals in BA's organizational rankings into the "5-10 range," left Washington with just two prospects on Baseball America's Top 100 Prospects list when it was published this morning. Bryce Harper is no.1 overall on the BA Top 100 list, with Baseball America predicting that some time this year the 19-year-old left-handed hitting catcher-turned-outfielder, "... should get to the majors as a teenager; settle in and enjoy it."
Before he's had a professional at bat, 2011 1st Rounder Anthony Rendon has turned up on all the top prospect lists this winter, and he lands at no.19 overall on Baseball America's Top 100 with an ETA in the majors of 2013 and the BA scouts writing that, "Even with one good shoulder, he was the top hitter in last year's draft." D.C. GM Mike Rizzo told 106.7 the FAN in D.C.'s Danny Rouhier and Grant Paulsen, in an interview from Spring Training yesterday, that Rendon, who is in Spring Training with the big league team right now, is, "... a terrific player. The Golden Spikes Award winner at his days in Rice University. He's just a terrific all-around, two-way player."
The plan for Rendon, Rizzo told the 106.7 the FAN hosts, is for the third baseman, "... to start off playing third base, but he may move around a little bit in Spring Training. I know Davey [Johnson] has got some ideas of bouncing around, seeing him a little bit at second base, but primarily he's been a third baseman and that's where he'll be to start the season somewhere in the minor leagues." Bryce Harper is, of course, competing for a spot in the Nationals' Opening Day outfield, but thought likely to return to the minors for at least a little while before he joins the Nats in the nation's capital. They'll have to make some room in the lineup, but at some point in 2013-14 the Nationals will likely have the top hitting prospects from each of the last two drafts and two of Baseball America's Top 20 prospects overall in their lineup on a daily basis.
(ed. note - "The Nationals would have had four prospects in Baseball America's Top 100 before the deal with Oakland. 24-year-old right-hander Brad Peacock was no. 36 on BA's list and 20-year-old A.J. Cole was 57th overall on the list.")
0 recs | 21 comments
Two guys in the top 100, in a 30-team league
Doesn’t sound like a team that should rank in the “5-10 range”. If this list is in any way reflective of what the state of minor league ball is at this moment (a VERY big “if”) then one could argue that with one trade Rizzo has essentially destroyed all he worked so hard to build up.
RobBobS - February 21, 2012
I was wondering about that as I wrote it too.
But as for destroying all his work, a good year by the 2011 picks could put the Nats right back near the top…
Patrick Reddington - February 21, 2012
That's the hope
I find it a bit surprising that Purke and Solis escaped any acknowledgment.
RobBobS - February 21, 2012
Purke is truly a boom-or-bust player, and until he shows something that indicates boom in the minors, he will be ignored.
Based on potential, he would be in the top 100, but you also have to figure in minor league production(in most cases), in which he has none. He needs to show he is healthy and log at least half a season’s worth with some good ball.
Horcasitas4 - February 21, 2012
Depends on how you value farm systems
If the true determinate is value, than no the Nats aren’t ranked too high If it’s quantity than they are way too high. I’ve never thought too much of the latter. For example, if a team had both Babe Ruth and Willie Mays in their farm system along with a group of beer league softball players, in today’s game I would say that that team has the best farm system in baseball and would gladly take that system over the Royals of 2010-2011 or anyone else.
The Nats have both Bryce Harper and Anthony Rendon in their system and all by themselves they make the Nats a top 15 farm system because there are some teams that would trade their entire system for Harper. When you toss in guys like Purke and Goodwin it helps some and I think sneaks them in to the top 10. After all, who cares if you have an entire system full of B prospects at every position who will one day turn in to average to slightly above average big leaguers, wouldn’t you rather have a system that has just one Babe Ruth or Willie Mays, or even Bryce Harper than a system littered with Steve Lombardozzi’s?
Pig.Pen - February 21, 2012
+1
Exactly the point I was going to make. The odds of being a full-time player period, no matter how good, is so so so small that it makes sense to value very highly 2 in the top-20, including #1 overall.
William.Hatheway - February 21, 2012
Yes, but rookies have to come from somewhere
and if (as I postulated before) this list is accurate then most of the rookies in the next few years should come from this list. Granted, some of the worse teams will have to rely on guys that didn’t make this list, and some of the better teams will have guys blocked and languishing in their systems.
Let’s say, for the sake of argument, that a player’s ranking is tied to his likelihood of making it as a marginal/average/star/HoF player. Not knowing what that relationship is, let’s pretend that the likelihood is linear: the number 1 guy has a 99% chance to make it, the #2 guy has a 98% chance, #3 guy has a 97% chance, etc. If the metric is “likely Major League players in the system”, then adding up these values gives a ranking of the system. In this scheme the Nats would rank 13th, still pretty good but not 5-10.
That linear curve may not be a good model though. Let’s say instead that the curve is logistic. In this set-up the top N players are very likely to make it, then there’s a fairly sharp drop off and the bottom M players are not likely to make it at all. This is perhaps a better model, if you can determine the parameters (which you could do by looking at historical data, provided you are willing to suspend all disbelief and assume that BBA’s rankings have ALWAYS been accurate). Anyway, in this case let’s assume that the top 40 players have a 80% or better chance to make it, and the #60 guy has a 50% chance to make it. In this case the Nats would rank 16th.
Are my parameters close in any way? Well, in 2009 the BBA list for players #35-44 looked like:
AJackson, Andrus, Montero, Hicks, BWallace, Zimmermann, Schafer, Arencibia, Villalona
Among this list only Villalona is still a question mark, and he’s wasn’t even projected to arrive until this year… so based on this saying the #40 guy has an 80% chance of making it is reasonable.
The #55-64 list was:
McDonald, Halman, Weglarz, Revere, Frazier, Viciedo, GHernandez, Poreda, MDominguez
There’s a significant drop-off here, but 3 of these guys (McDonald, Revere, Frazier) have significant time already, and a couple more have had at least a cup of coffee and seem like they will get more playing time in 2012.
RobBobS - February 21, 2012
By the way,
in that logistic curve scheme I mentioned, the top 10 looks like:
(10) Cardinals (#8 Shelby, #27 Martinez, #74 Taveras, #88 Cox, #94 Wong)
(9) Cubs (#32 jackson, #47 Rizzo, #61 Baez, #64 Szczur)
(8) Braves (#5 Teheran, #40 Vizcaino, #46 Delgado, #92 Simmons)
(7) Padres (#33 Alonso, #49 Liriano, #53 Grandal, #76 Kelly, #78 Spangenberg, #98 Gyorko)
(6) Pirates (#12 Cole, #15 Taillon, #60 Bell, #73 Marte)
(5) Diamondbacks (#9 Bauer, #13 Skaggs, #25 Bradley, #97 Davidson)
(4) Royals (#23 Montgomery, #24 Starling, #28 Myers, #68 Odorizzi, #84 Cuthbert)
(3) Mariners (#6 Montero, #20 Walker, #21 Hultzen, #52 Paxton, #77 Franklin)
(2) Rangers (#4 Darvish, #7 Profar, #31 Perez, #43 Olt, #79 Mortin, #100 Villanueva)
(1) Athletics (#14 Cespedes, #26 Parker, #36 Peacock, #57 Cole, #65 Gray, #80 Choice)
RobBobS - February 21, 2012
The saying ‘quality over quantity’ definitely applies in this situation.
RossingtonCollins - February 21, 2012
Yeah, but depth is important, too
Bad things happen to good players, and having all one’s eggs in the proverbial basket is a risky venture.
RobBobS - February 21, 2012
Agree 100%, I just meant that in this particular case Harper and Rendon are of a high enough quality to put the Nats high on the list.
RossingtonCollins - February 21, 2012
I appreciate the work you put into that analysis
Really, that took some work and makes good, defensible points. But there is also context and, for the Nats, they have just about the best and deepest core of cost-controlled players in the game, so there won’t be nearly as many holes to fill right away. So, ok, lets say you are right, their system is in the teens, but the case stands for them that they are better off with two very good prospective MLBers than a ton of semi-question marks.
William.Hatheway - February 22, 2012
Fair enough,
but this sort of punts on the idea of ranking farm systems, or even suggests that farm system rankings are not useful. Perhaps this should have been the answer all along…
RobBobS - February 22, 2012
This seems to be a foolhardy idea, and it ignores that teams have different concerns.
For teams like the Royals and Pirates, the need to have 0-3 year players is more important than that of the Yankees. So, the Yankess would be happier to have fewer, but higher rated prospects. Consider the Seattle Mariners, where Felix Hernandez, one of the best pitchers in baseball, counts the days until free agency so he can play on a team that doesn’t loses 85+ games every year. If I was the 2010 Royals, I would want Hosmer, Moustakas, Lamb, Cain, Crow, Perez, Meyers, Montgomery, Duffy, and Ordorizzi, over Babe Ruth and Willie Mays in the minors.
quality>quanity, but moderation in all things.
chubias - February 21, 2012
Farm system rankings aren't just about premium players.
Teams average 3.3 players in the top 100. But every team has a farm system that includes several guys who are not in the top 100 in baseball but can be every day contributors.
A guy with an 88 mph fast ball, three average secondary pitches, and command, is a solid 4th starter. But since there’s no upside there, he’s not a top 100 guy. However, the quality of a farm system is partly determined by the presence of such players.
(Think of it this way: one 4th starter type saves you about $10m when you don’t need to go to the free agent market for a SP.)
philosofool - February 22, 2012
A fourth starter doesn't usually make 10M
E Jackson will, but he’s no ordinary #4 guy.
RobBobS - February 22, 2012 via mobile
A 2 WAR pitcher does.
Okay, maybe that’s a 3rd starter. It’s a solid 4th.
philosofool - February 22, 2012
Here's what Jim Calis, BA Editor in Chief, said about the ranking of the Nats system:
“We ranked the Nationals No. 1 before the Gio Gonzalez trade, which would have given them two more Top 100 guys. Meyer was very, very close, and I voted for him to make the Top 100. He has a lot of upside, but not a long track record of success, and I think the other editors involved (eight of us put together the list) as whole wanted to see more. Same with Goodwin — high upside, want to see more. Purke would have been an easy Top 100 guy if there weren’t questions about his health. This answer is getting long-winded, but I guess what I’m trying to say is that it’s a balance of upside and risk. If you want to focus more on upside and worry less about risk, all three of those guys could make it.”
philosofool - February 22, 2012
Also
keep in mind these weren’t our top selections in the draft. Milone and Peacock were MiLb suprises.
Bsullivan - February 22, 2012
Note that Milone doesn't make the list
Peacock does, as does Cole. If the Nats had those two (even if they had traded Milone and Norris) they would easily be the number one system according to this list. However, the Nats do have a few guys that are probably just outside the top 100, and as mentioned above, could very will move into the list next year.
RobBobS - February 22, 2012
2010 Purke would be top 20 on this list.
So obviously if he is healthy he could be quite high next year.
Doncosmic - February 22, 2012
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Federal Baseball to post a comment.