Organizational Rankings: #9 – Philadelphia
Let me get this out of the way and save you the troube: “You ranked the two time defending NL champions ninth, behind teams that haven’t won anything in years – you are a biased moron!”
First, thanks for reading. Second – if it’s not obvious by now, a team’s record in the past means nothing in this series. This is not a backwards-looking reward for best recent performance, in either the regular season or the playoffs. This series is not designed to identify teams who have dominated baseball over the last few years. If it were, the Phillies (and Angels) would rank significantly higher.
That the Phillies rank just ninth here is not any kind of knock on what they have accomplished the last two years. It is simply a reflection of the questions that surround their ability to play at that level going forward. And there are legitimate questions surrounding this team.
Here are the core players on this team are under 27: Cole Hamels. That’s it. Last year’s Phillies team was the second oldest in baseball, barely behind the Astros, and after a series of trades that ripped apart the farm system, they have one impact prospect left (Domonic Brown). This team is straight up old.
They’re good, certainly. They should be the favorites to win the NL East, though the Braves are catching up very quickly. But as the Yankees learned the hard way, the combination of having a lot of high salaried older players without much of a farm system to support them is not the best way to build a team. And that’s exactly the situation the Phillies face going forward.
It can work. There’s enough star power on the roster that they’re a championship team if everyone stays healthy and plays as expected. But they’ve opened themselves up to problems if injuries arise or players age earlier than they’re hoping. They’ve tied themselves to Raul Ibanez for the next two years, but may not be able to afford to keep Jayson Werth beyond 2010.
The rotation after the big three is not good, and they can’t afford to have any of Halladay, Hamels, or Blanton hit the disabled list for a long period of time. Utley and Rollins are backed up by Juan Castro. Ryan Howard‘s replacement, should he get injured, is Ross Gload or Greg Dobbs.
There is a significant lack of depth here, and combined with the age of the players they’re relying on, the Phillies have taken on quite a bit of risk. Risk isn’t inherently bad, but given the amount of vulnerability here, they need to win this year to make it worthwhile, or they could end up looking more like the current Mets team than they would want.
22
Oh snap.
As far as risk goes, here are the pitchers under contract for more than 3 years:
” ”
Although this team has a lot of salary $$$$ tied up this year and next year, they don’t have a lot after that. This flexibility gives them the chance to make some decisions. If Brown develops into a ML outfielder, they will continue to have a solid core for at least the next 3 to 4 years without any major FA signing. They can choose to let Howard walk if they want more flexibility.
Heck, they have one of the top stadiums and payrolls in baseball. They have most of their players on short to mid term contracts. This allows them to, if they happen to have a terrible year, jettison some of their older players quite easily and reload with some FAs and their upcoming prospects. I’m not complaining about a top 10, but I am saying that I don’t think the Phils other advantages are being taken enough into account here.
This is essentially the same argument Tigers fans made. I don’t buy it. You can’t build a team through free agency, unless you have the Yankees payroll. No team besides the Yankees does.
They don’t build through FA, but other than the Rays and Marlins, what teams don’t rely of FA to some extent? And comparing the Tigers with the Phils is sort of silly, if you ask me.
I do agree it’s not just the size of the payroll, it’s how you use it! :) But other than Moyer, which was just a 2 year K, I don’t see a lot of bad, dead payroll on this team, and certainly no killer contracts handed out like candy. What I see is focused, generally effective targeting of players with skills needed by the Phils (Palanco).
Also you ignore the fact that the Phils have a proven track record of building through the draft, they just chose to use a lot of their best picks to trade for the best pitcher in baseball.
While there’s numerous things wrong with this comment, I’ll temper my response:
First, the Yankees did not build a team through free agency, yes they acquired a lot of FA superstars that helped them win a world series, quite a bit of that talent was home grown, or acquired via trade. On the WS 25 man the only players originally acquired through free agency were: CC Sabathia, AJ Burnett, Mark Teixeira, Johnny Damon, and Hideki Matsui. They made shrewd moves and had homegrown players contribute at elite levels too. So even if you have the Yankees budget, you still need to acquire players through all fronts (trade, free agency, IFA, and the draft)
Second, the Phillies do not need to build through free agency completely. They’ve developed MVP candidates in Ryan Howard and Chase Utley, a fine young starter in Cole Hamels (yes I know), and players that are more supporting cast members like Jimmy Rollins and Shane Victorino. They’ve also made some good moves and acquired players like Roy Halladay, Cliff Lee, and Joe Blanton. They have the budget to spend in the draft and international free agency too. While Ruben Amaro does have some “bull in a china shop” tendencies, he’s not as bad of a GM as people make him out to be, and seems to be learning.
Overall, I feel that 9th is too low for the Phillies, yeah they don’t have a brilliant GM or a flowing farm system, but is what they do have is a pitcher who buttfucked the best division in baseball for a decade the second best player in the NL in their primes and lots of money. That should make them bigger WS contenders than teams like the Rockies, Mariners, and Braves for the next three years.
>>So even if you have the Yankees budget, you still need to acquire players through all fronts (trade, free agency, IFA, and the draft)>>
You’re being too literal. You’re also not including things like:
Takeing on other team’s ridiculous contracts via trade.
Using their vast payroll wealth to keep the good players on their team.
Other teams would have had problems extending Posada, Jeter, Rivera, etc. Not the Yankees. Other teams would have had problems taking on A-Rod’s contract. Not the Yankees. Here’s a quick thought: Do you believe the Phillies can do the kinds of things that both New York and Boston are regularly able to do? Seriously?
As for your second point, as Dave already pointed out, how long do you expect all those players to remain healthy, productive, and / or cost effective for the Phillies? Where’s the depth to cover those players when / if they get hurt?
The Phillies, GOING FORWARD, have a lot of question marks. That’s the whole damn point of this exercise.
I see no reason why the Phillies can’t keep up with Boston in terms of payroll…it’s not like Philadelphia is Milwaukee and their stadium seats 30,000 fans. They just won back to back NL Championships and the WS in 2008, that should keep a fan base interested enough to support a high payroll, one would think.
Yeah the Phillies have questions going forward, so do other organizations:
The Mariners: How many players in the lineup will post an OPS over.800? How much ass will the 3-5 blow? Will they be able to keep Cliff Lee? What happens if they fall out of contention early?
The Rangers: Aside from Kinsler do they have an elite everyday player? Will Feliz be able to start? What to do with the rotation? Will Nolan Ryan run every starter’s arm into the ground?
The Braves: Why in god’s name did they give D-Lowe that massive contract? What if Heyward ***GGASSSPS**** IS A BUST?!???!?
The Twins: Will the Pohlands stop being such tightwads? (that’s a pretty damn big one) What to do with a rotation full of 3s and 4s? Will Cuddyer and Kubel be able to maintain a high level of production?
The Red Sox: Will they find another elite hitter like Ortiz and Ramirez were from 03-07? What to do with the line up if Youkilis ages and Drew gets hurt? Will they keep Beckett? Has New York’s FO and scouting department caught up?
The Yankees: Age, money, too many long term deals, etc, etc. You guys know these
The Rays: Can they possibly jump the Red Sox or Yankees?
See, every team has a good amount of question marks going forward. That’s no reason to rank so lowly a team with such a good ML roster RIGHT NOW. As to your question how long do I expect Philly’s roster to stay this good? Meh…two more years or so, that should still put them in better position than about 25 major league teams or so.
Dave never claimed that the Yankees built their team through free agency – only that to do so would require a Yankee-sized payroll.
Learn to read.
“they will continue to have a solid core for at least the next 3 to 4 years without any major FA signing.”
What? 3-4 years is a long time in baseball. I love Chase Utley, but I don’t see him being one of the premire hitters in baseball in 3 years. Jimmy Rollins recent season is reason to wonder how well he’s going to age. Blanton doesn’t have 3 years in him. Victorino doesn’t. Werth is departing. Howard–honestly his skill set says “young collapse” to me. Don’t even get me started on Raul Ibanez. Hamels and Halladay seem like as good as long term pitching bets get, which is to say that they the prettiest girls in the burn ward. No farm, questionable GM, old, old, old. This is not a recipe for success, so let’s hand it to them that they’re a top ten team.
“What? 3-4 years is a long time in baseball.” If so then why do they waste so much time developing players in the minor leagues?
I think the body of the article means to say “ninth” instead of “eighth”
What hard lesson did the Yankees learn from having a lot of high salaried older players without much of a farm system to support them? That you might miss the playoffs occasionally (read: once in twelve years)? That you will win only — *gasp* — four World Series in that same span?
All but the most recent championship came with an incredibly strong young core of homegrown talent led by Jeter, Rivera, Posada, Williams, and Pettitte.
Whenever someone even tangentially mentions the Yankees and high salaries in the same sentence, someone else makes the counter about how much homegrown talent they have. It sounds convincing, and is a valid point, but that’s not the entire story. I would be interested in how much the Yankees have spend/currently spend on scouting and player development relative to other clubs, because while all of those players came through the Yankee farm system, guys like Rivera, Williams, and Pettitte were signed as amateur free agents. More money spent on scouting, especially internationally, means more opportunities to sign players as FAs instead of getting them through the draft. Sure, they’re homegrown, but that doesn’t automatically mean there was no financial advantage used in acquiring them.
That has absolutely nothing to do with anything I just said. bagofries made the argument that the Yanks won 4 WS with a lot of high salaried older players without much of a farm system to support them. I pointed out that the first 3 of those came with a young, homegrown core. Whether or not the Yankees financial might had anything to do with them getting those players in the first place really isn’t relevant to the subject at hand.
Oh, and while Pettitte was “signed as a minor league free agent” according to baseball reference, that’s not exactly accurate. He was a draft and follow from the previous year that the Yanks inked before he re-entered the draft.
Snap Alex, proved us all wrong didn’t you?
The Yankess chance of success is predicated on the terms of Pettitte’s original signing..
Way to add to the discussion!!!!!
I was confused when janus first said that and when I checked baseball reference because Pettitte is from America so I didn’t know how he could sign as a free agent. Just thought I might as well point out what was going on. Its not something they do for more recent draft and follows so I have no idea why they do it for Pettitte.
BTW just to be clear I couldn’t be anything further from a Yankees fan.
The only reason I mentioned this was because of the terrible point bagofries tried to make. I fully believe that most of the Yankees success is due to their financial resources, whether it be in free agency, scouting, or whatever else.
..in terms of adding to the discussion, might I refer you to LibertyBoy?..haha
Hey I got a laugh out of his posts…that’s gotta count for something right?
Just so everyone(Janus, Alex, and anyone else confused by the exchanges here) is clear:
An amateur free agent is someone eligible to be drafted who is NOT drafted, but instead signs with an MLB club.
Having said that, Andy Pettitte actually was drafted in the 1990 MLB amateur draft, in the 22nd round. He decided to attend San Jacinto College North during the 1990-91 acdemic year, during which he pitched for the college’s baseball team.
Under the rules of draft and follow(or DFE), the Yankees retained the rights to him and continued to follow his progress, and signed him on May 25, 1991, which was about a week before the 1991 draft and which is allowed under the DFE rules. Specifically, the rules state that a player who is drafted the previous year and attends a junior college can still be signed up to 51 weeks after he was drafted by the team who drafted him.
So, no, he was not technically an amateur free agent, as he had been drafted by the Yankees. ;)
Thanks for the clear explanation Dave (you’re still going to catch crap about ranking the M’s above them and calling the Phils 8th under a headline that reads 9th). There are certainly concerns about this current roster and how it will transition to the next roster. My personal biggest concern is with Ruben’s seemingly inability to roster roulette. It’s likely the Phillies are really going to need to find a lucky gem in the next couple years like a Shane Victorino or Jayson Werth (both essentially cut by the Dodgers…I’m waiting for Xavier Paul).
I’m not sure those concerns are quite enough to add up to a 9th place ranking. The farm system is not the barren heath that many prospect analysts make it out to be, by raw talent it is among the best in the majors despite the trades and lack of early picks in ’09. How much of that raw talent learns some baseball skills is anyone’s guess, but it’s there and some of it will improve. Completely dismissing it because it’s 3 or more years away seems disingenuous.
Ultimately though, the difference between the fangraphs ranking and the opinion of most of the posters in the other two threads seems to come down entirely to opinion and interpretation.
This is what almost every fan of a team with a bad farm system will say. Almost every single major league team has a ton of raw talent down in the low minors. The Phillies are no different than anyone else in that respect. Its just that because you are a Phillies fan you know about the Phillies raw talent guys, but not about the same sort of guys in other organizations.
I know about other team’s raw talent too, I follow several other teams just as closely as the Phillies on the prospect front. The Phillies collection simply stands out because of the draft profile. A lot of other systems have low minors filled with tons of guys who look like 5th starters, middle relievers, or utility men. The Phillies system is filled with the kind of prospect who has 5 tools and only knows how to use one at a time. A certain amount of these become impact players and most of them will bust. A system with a handful of impact players is healthier than a system with a buttload of role players.
Mind listing the guys you’re talking about. I’m not all that familiar with the Phils system and I wouldn’t mind reading up on the guys you’re talking about.
Other teams have more of those theoretical 5-tool guys than you think, A Team. It’s just that most of them get their tools-first guys from Latin America and not the draft. The Phillies low minors is Sebastian Valle (who I like quite a bit) and a bunch of guys who are nothing to write home about. Collier and Hewitt aren’t going to excite anyone anytime soon.
If Collier and Hewitt are the low level guys you think A-Team is talking about then I understand why you think our low farm system isn’t good, haha.
JoeDE,
Do you mind listing some of those guys then? I’m trying to get a list of sleepers to keep an eye on this season for my next fantasy prospect draft, so I really would like some direction on this.
Here’s a rough list. I’m basically stealing this from PhuturePhillies. I’m skipping over the obvious guys.
Anthony Gose
Sebastian Valle
Harold Garcia
Trevor May
Matt Way
Austin Hyatt
Much appreciated my good man.
There is also this 19 year old Jarred Cosart but he’s just getting to A Lakewood. 6’2, righthander, 96 mph fastball, power curve and as is developing a change-up.
It seems odd that the article about the 9th ranked team is so negative. There isn’t one positive paragraph in the entire thing.
My sense is that most people expect the Phillies to be much, much higher, so the text was spent explaining why I’m not as high on them as I perceive the crowd at large to be.
Well at least it is a 5 place jump from last year’s 14th ranking
Hence the straw man ‘Let me get this out of the way and save you the troube: “You ranked the two time defending NL champions ninth, behind teams that haven’t won anything in years – you are a biased moron!”’
I agree with David above – listing too many negatives and not enough positives.
Negative – Aging core players
Positive – they ain’t that old!
Negative – They don’t have a lot of ready for the ML minor leaguers
Positive – That’s because they traded them for the best pitcher in baseball.
Negative – The rotation after the big 3 is not good
Positive – I’ll takes my chances with any big three that starts like that, and there’s no real reason to think any of them will be injured any time soon.
Other positives, my frequently mentioned higher payroll, the short contracts for pitchers, the great revenue, the proven ability to develop both through the draft and through project pickups, a roster which will get a lot younger when Moyer and Ibanez falls off, a FO which hasn’t made any bone headed decisions, a team and manager which has proven they can win it all…..
I don’t know, maybe your straw man wasn’t so hollow after all :)
Is it really a straw man when the “current talent” post immediately spawned half a dozen comments precisely to this effect?
JH, please link a single comment to that effect in that thread. I just re-read it and maybe I missed it. Or maybe disagreeing with the article is the same as calling someone a biased moron???
Here are some quotes:
“The same team that has gone to back to back WS is behind the Mariners who have a poor farm as well and has not proven anything”
“Btw, putting the Mariners above the Phillies (2 time defending NL champs, 1 WS champ in that time) is grounds for a giant LOL.”
Nobody called Dave a moron, but a few called him biased, and more than a few called for a higher ranking based on the fact that the Phillies were very successful in 2008-2009.
JH, you give me some quotes, but then make a strange conclusion. The fact is the quotes disagree with the article, and even say it’s laughable, but that’s a far cry from saying there are a half a dozen posts to the effect that the author is a biased moron.
A term like “biased” has a very specific definition, and I failed to see a single instance of that in your quotes or in any of the posts.
Furthermore, the term “moron” is also extremely loaded, and as you conceded, there is not a single instance of that. Therefore, please explain where, if anywhere, he was called a biased moron, or anything like it.
Mind you I know what he was doing with the straw man, and it’s a common enough device so I didn’t take any exception to him using it except to point out he did so when making my point. I just took exception to you stating that he had a valid reason for doing that. He had none except for trying to deflect disagreement before it started through his rhetorical device.
Err, Dave’s statement is an exagerration, but no straw man. Maybe nobody has literally called him a “biased idiot,” but that is not the substance of his hypothetical argument. A strawman does not require a literal repeating of the hypothetical argument; that would be ridiculous.
The quotes disagree with him on the basis that the Phillies were in the World Series the last 2 years. That’s exactly what Dave predicted he’d be attacked for.
On bias, you really think it’s coincidence that multiple posts mention the Mariners, who happen to be Dave’s favorite team? Another post specifically mentioned bias, but it was really long.
Personally, I still get a good giggle every time people call Dave a blind Mariners fanboy.
Let me get this out of the way: who backs up albert pujols? that’s what i thought. there are very few teams that could lose a player that has produced something like 20 WAR over the last four years and keep rolling. in fact, one might argue that the phillies, given their tremendous talent on the field, not on necessarily on the bench, are one of them.
with that said, you either ranked them too high or too low on this list, depending on how far into the future you are looking. for two more seasons, they will be world series competitors due to their talent. after that year, when they have to decide on howard and rollins, the team is old, and the barren farm system yields no fruit, their decline will be precipitous.
As I’ve noted, the widespread “barren farm system” belief is blown way out of proportion. This farm system will produce some very nice talent for the 2012, ’13, and ’14 rosters. Who that talent is is anyone’s guess, but there’s too many high ceiling athletes in the lower minors for none of them to become at least an average MLB’er.
Well, I too think the system will produce some good players in those years. However, the talent that they will need to replace–due to FA or skill attrition–at the mlb level will be near elite. That’s the reason for my ‘tude towards the farm system.
The Phillies are definitely in trouble if Utley or Rollins have a major injury. Polanco can slide over ably enough, but who fills in for Polanco at 3b? The same goes for Howard to a lesser extent (It’s easier to pluck a Michael Aubrey-type from another system).
But the talent on the way out consists solely of Jayson Werth. Tyson Gillies and/or Dom Brown will be asked to fill those shoes if they fail to re-sign him and the only negative I see about that is it’s asking one of those two to contribute a couple months too early. We’ll see how they do this year though, that will change some things.
Given that Utley has been worth something like 30 WAR over the last four years, I concede that they are in trouble if they lose him for a significant stretch. However, it’s worth mentioning that when Utley broke his wrist two years ago, the Gillick/Amaro team promptly traded for Tad Igutchi, who filled in with a servicable 1.5 WAR in half of a season, a far cry from what Utley, but was a fine replacement. They’ve shown that they’ll make a move in that spot and not just stand pat with their roster.
My concern isn’t 2011, but after the next two seasons when Howard and Rollins are FA and everyone else is two years older.
Hamels is 26. Happ is 27. Utley, Ruiz and Rollins are 31. Howard and Werth are 30. Victorino, Madson, and Blanton are 29. Halladay is 32. They’re not that old, though they are past peak age except for Hamels.
Having said that, giving 3 year deals to Ibanez and Polanco were big mistakes, especially since they can’t afford Werth now. Their biggest mistake was trading Cliff Lee. They’d have been better off taking the draft picks at the end of the year, especially considering the meager return they got from Seattle.
The Phillies are hoping Tyson Gillies is a true leadoff. He has decent plate discipline and good contact skills to go with his blazing speed. His speed makes up for his bad route running in the OF so he should be no worse than average in CF. The one thing the Phillies are hoping for is that they can break him of his Juan Pierre-like flailing at the plate. Gillies has solid power but his swing plays it down significantly. The Phillies development staff is very hands on, they’re implementing major changes on all 3 components of the Lee trade, but Gillies seems to be the reason the trade happened. They want Aumont and Ramirez to turn into high leverage relievers, although they recognize their dearth of advanced SP prospects and will give them a chance to stick in a rotation.
The return they got from Seattle was better than what you’d expect to get in draft compensation by a long shot, though obviously having a Halladay, Lee, Hamels top of the rotation for a year would be a great thing to have.
People loved to hammer the Ibanez deal but by the “dollars/WAR” on this site it was a win last year and would have to be a pretty big loss over the next two years to wind up as a terrible deal overall. More likely it’ll be close to par. Polanco fills a need, is an okay hitter, and isn’t terribly expensive. I’m not sure how that’s a terrible deal either.
Unless he has a really bad year this year, Werth is going to end up signing a deal after this season that makes him no longer a bargain. Sure, he’s talented, but there are talented free agents at market rate every year.
The make or break moment for the future of the Phillies, in my opinion, will be what they do with Ryan Howard after 2011. If they sign him for something like 5yrs/$100M, it’ll seriously hamstring the team down the road, and it’s a definite possibility.
On meager return from Seattle: Amaro’s VP, Benny Looper, was the Mariners’ VP in charge of player development when he left the org at the end of the 2008 season. So the Phils know Seattle’s system much much better than anyone else’s, and you can be sure they like what they got.
And the time frame for two picks after Lee left? They’d get drafted in Summer 2011, and even if they rose meteorically through the system (meaning the Phillies picked two incredibly great players – two players who could get to the majors faster than anyone else they’ve picked since Luzinski – they wouldn’t be mlb ready until 2013 at the earliest. That’s too late for what the Phils need, which is good players who will play for minimum wage after this year. The payroll can’t grow much more, if at all, and the Phils are at the stage where they have to find cheap rookies to take some of the roster spots. Aumont et al are starting the year at AA, putting them on course to be potentially ready to join the team in 2011, if everything goes well. That’s a huge improvement over the situation that would exist if the Phils took two comp picks for Lee. (And the assumption that the two picks would be better players than Aumont, Gillies, and the other guy is already extremely tenuous.)
Hard to say the deals for Ibanez and Polanco were bad, unless you’re writing this from the future.
Dave I give you credit for being clear on your reasoning. I disagree with the Phillies 9th, but I don’t disagree with any single thing you said. I just think the Phillies should at least be ahead of a team with a much weaker MLB roster, not significantly stronger farm system and unproven front office, even if I think there is a good reason to think the latter team can be a stronger organization soon.
And before anyone gets confused by the screen name, the Phil is not for Phillies. I’m a Rangers fan who would put the Phillies slightly ahead of Texas.
I’m a Phillies fan who has the Rangers slightly ahead of the Phillies. Hi.
Soooo. . . are we both just pessimists?
The Phillies’ state of the organization ranking the last two years has focused on all the things that could go wrong, as if the Phillies couldn’t handle it if bad things happened. But last year (and the year before) the Phillies had loads of things go wrong: Lidge was a disaster, the whole ‘pen was worse than 2008, Rollins was bad at the plate, Moyer was ineffective, Hamels took a step back, and the farm system had little help available at the mlb level. But we all know how things turned out. The Phillies have adapted and won the division 3 years in a row because they are good enough – as an organization – to deal with the normal sort of unanticipated outcomes that send most teams’ seasons down the drain.
The Braves, fwiw, have shown conclusively that they can’t handle these sorts of problems. I don’t know why that should change anytime soon, unless getting rid of Cox is supposed to mark an improvement.
“The Braves, fwiw, have shown conclusively that they can’t handle these sorts of problems. I don’t know why that should change anytime soon, unless getting rid of Cox is supposed to mark an improvement.
”
Lol wut?
Last year, 5 out of 8 crappy, opening day starters were replaced during the season with good players.
Francoeur~Church
Shafer~Mclouth
Anderson~Diaz
Johnson~Prado
Kotchman~LaRoach
LaRouche looks like Bert from Seasme St.
Have fun in the rearview slick.
@ The Internet.
Sure the Braves made moves. It’s not the lack of activity that’s the problem, it’s the lack of results. When the Braves make moves, they have little to show for it. And by little to show for it, I mean no post season.
No reason to think this year they’ll make the right moves, especially when the big offseason splash was Vazquez for a (above average) 4th outfielder and wishcasting for Troy Glaus.
And need it even be said that part of the problem in 2009 was relying on Frenchy, Schafer, Kotchman, and Anderson in the first place?
1) you’re welcome!
2) I feel a Red Sox #1 ranking coming on…wait for it…
3) I’m going to list a number of players, and I would like you, in the interest of sportsmanship, to tell me what they all have in common:
Derek Jeter, Jorge Posada, Andy Pettitte, Mariano Rivera, Joba Chamberlain, Phil Hughes, David Robertson, Francisco Cervelli, Robinson Cano, Melky Cabrera, Brett Gardner, Alfredo Aceves, Phil Coke
They’re all current or former (Coke) Yankees. I’m not sure what the point of this exercise is.
He’s trying to show that the Yankees have a ton of homegrown guys that help them win except he’s neglecting to point out the odds of getting 4 HoF or near HoF calibre guys coming up at the same time is nearly unheard of. That and the fact that after the first 4 only Cano has had any meaningful impact to this point.
He’ll probably come back and tell me Aceves/Robertson are 8th inning relievers, that Gardner/Cabrera are better than fourth OF’s, that Cervelli is better than a backup C, that Coke was useful since he got Granderson, and that Hughes & Chamberlain have awesome potential in the rotation. To which I’ll save you the time, and say that every organization develops backups, and that Hughes and Joba still have to prove they can actually pitch meaningful innings in the rotation before we consider them as having a meaningful impact.
We’ll likely have this discussion in the Yankees or Red Sox thread, so I’ll save it for then.
Players developed through the Yanks farm system. I assume you’re going for the “see we produce players too” angle. After the top 6 it’s a bunch of non impact bullpen arms & 4th outfielders oh and a back up catcher.
The positive thing is all the current talent on the roster. The reason for their “low” ranking at 9th is the lack of depth. They simply have no ability to cover a loss to their top heavy roster. Its an Organizational Talent ranking, not a Major League talent ranking. Minor leagues have to be taken into account.
The Phillies do have a lot of toolsy guys in the minors but they are hardly among the best in the majors for total talent. Especially when you factor in the upper levels of their system.
This is a World Series contender for 2010 and 2011. This ranking is reflective of the fact that they are going to have a hard time replacing their aging talent beyond that to remain competitive. If this was a ranking of the 2010 Big League Talent, then they’d be in the Top 5 teams in baseball. Its not, don’t act shocked.
Well at least this was a better ranking than last year, when we were told the org was the #14 ranked org in baseball.
It’s funny though, the whole age thing is kinda overstated no? Yes the average of the team was rather old last year, but Jaime Moyer is a pretty big outlier being that he’s 47, plus Ibanez at 37. Then add in role players who had very little of an impact on the team: Matt Stairs (41), Miguel Cairo (35), Paul Bako (37), Chan Ho (36), Pedro Martinez (37). It’s easy to see why the average age was so high. The average
Looking at the core of the team everyone’s in their prime and around age 30. Ryan Howard (30), Chase Utley (31), Jimmy Rollins (31), Jayson Werth (30), Shane Victorino (29). Carlos Ruiz (31). Roy Halladay (33), Joe Blanton (29), Cole Hamels (26), JA Happ (27), Ryan Madson (29), Brad Lidge (33).
The teams definitely not young anymore, but they aren’t ancient where you can project all of these guys to just fall apart in the next 2 years or so.
The trades this past year took out the upper minors depth that we had going before, but there’s actually some talent there. Just less proven and in the low minors.
I think the farm will look better this time next year as there are a lot of high upside unproven kids in the lower minors that I think will break out this year. But then again we shall see.
Forgot to mention, I’m perfectly fine with this ranking. I think it’s much more accurate than last year. Anywhere within 6-10 is perfectly fine with me.
Last year’s ranking of the Phillies was not one I’m proud of. I will freely admit that.
Getting warm…they were all home-grown from the Yankee farm system, never played for another team BUT the Yankees, and all were on last year’s world series roster:
1) 1 of 3 starters (Pettitte)
2) 6 of 8 relievers (Rivera, Hughes, Joba, Coke, Robertson, Aceves)
3) 2 of 3 catchers (Posada, Cervelli)
4) 2 of 4 infielders (Jeter, Cano)
5) 2 of 4 outfielders (Cabrera, “Crazy Legs” Gardner)
The statement was made:
“This is essentially the same argument Tigers fans made. I don’t buy it. You can’t build a team through free agency, unless you have the Yankees payroll. No team besides the Yankees does.”
I assume that “NOT building a team via free agency” will weigh the rankings favorably. And, after the statement is made that the Yanks are “built with free agents”, I assume the Yanks will rate low.
IF anyone here can name ANY playoff-caliber team that can boast such a large proportion of home-grown players on the roster, I would be VERY surprised.
Pettite played for Houston for a few years. For whatever that’s worth…
“IF anyone here can name ANY playoff-caliber team that can boast such a large proportion of home-grown players on the roster, I would be VERY surprised.”
How about: The Phillies, the Rays, the Twins, the Rockies, the Dodgers, and the Braves.
Fowler, Helton, Tulo, Atkins, Hawpe, Barmes, Jimenez, Morales, Spilborghs, Daley, Ian Stewart, Seth Smith, Aaron Cook, Eric Young, I’m pretty sure Iannetta was on the playoff roster…
So thats 14-15 homegrown players for the Rockies who were on the playoff roster. I might have even missed someone.
The difference being the Yanks homegrown squad has 5 meaningful players (Cano, Pettite, Rivera, Jeter & Posada) with only one of them being developed in the last 10 years. Meanwhile, we’ve got the Rockies who basically have every starting spot in the lineup as homegrown. And their top pitchers, and their top bullpen arms.
But you’re right, it’s not like Tex, ARod, CC or Burnett had any impact on the Yankees..
Pardon, yes he did spend four (?) years with the Astros, and Aceves came out of the Mexican leagues. Grey area! Again, by comparison, how many other playoff-aspiring rosters could boast as many homegrowns? I won’t dilly dally if it’s within one or two players!
Can you not waste everyone’s time complaining about the Yankees placement on the list until we actually write about them?
Especially since the Yankees top three WAR producing pitchers last year were acquired via FA and 2 out of 3 of their top three WAR producing batters were acquired via FA. Thanks. Wait for the Yankee’s post.
And also use the reply button.
Faithdies, I’ll have you know Alex Rodriguez was acquired through TRADE, asshole.
Omar: So when he opted out of the original contract he was under when the Yankees *first* acquired him(by trade), thus becoming a free agent, you’re saying that the Yankees the reacquired him by trading for him? How did that work, pray tell!?!
And nice attitude, BTW. Real nice.
Wasting? I call that “time wasted prevention”! I am SAVING everyone’s time!
Perhaps you can share the methodology of your rankings (SHARING=CARING), and, if you don’t want discussion to happen, switch the comments to “off” in your admin section!
We will have three posts about the Yankees, all with comments on. If you still need to complain when you find out where we rank them, you can do so in those three posts.
Guys, Dave’s pretty much admitting the Yankees are coming up next.
No, the team was not comprised 100% of home growns, I’m not saying that, I am saying that a larger portion of home growns were on that roster than not, and, I challenge anyone here to go diving into rosters and surface with ANY playoff-caliber team rostered suchly.
Two thirds of your three man rotation in the playoffs last year were huge free agent signings.
Technically, Pettitte was also a FA signing, so all of them were.
So, what ranks the Mariners above them? Great defense and Felix-Lee? Besides that, they have nothing else.
ZERO offense, terrible 3-5 in the rotation, and Lee isn’t likely to be better than the combined years of Washburn and Bedard last year.
Farm system. Front Office. Age. In general – The future.
Hey Man — You sound like the ‘There is always next year guy’ Congrats. Ichiro isn’t getting any older, he’ll be around for quite a while still. I’m sure you’ll continue to use up a roster spot for Griffey until he is as old as Moyer. And M. Bradley isn’t going to get depressed living where it rains 50% of the year and go postal on some poor unspecting team mate. And we all no Figgins is really 25, not 32, not older than the guys on the Phils starting IF, and will not regress only old guys like Utley should regress. And so far C. Lee is demonstrating that he will be ready around what, June 1? He clearly doesn’t lose any value missing the first month of the season.
Hey man
I’m not sure who “there is always next year guy” is. But he sounds cool. You should give me his IM if you have it.
Anyway, I was just replying to why the M’s are ranked in front of the Phillies, and basically just pointing out that Rich’s arguments are all about the current season, not the future. I didn’t say I necessarily agreed with the ranking.
Ichiro’s not getting younger, but he hasn’t really shown much decline. And considering his conditioning and skillset, he’s not likely to fall off the cliff.
Griffey’s on his swan song. Even he knows that.
Bradley won’t have any weather issues. He’ll be here for the spring and summer months, which are beautiful in Seattle. Plus, he has the friendliest sports media in the nation following him, and his idol Griffey on the bench to keep him in line.
Dave just did a post on USSM about Cliff Lee & Co’s injury troubles. The Ms face off against the likes of the Orioles, the Tigers and the Royals during the first month. If there was ever a time to run out the replacements while the big guns heal up, it’s April.
What farm system though? Everyone is saying that about the M’s but name me a publication or a talent evaluator who puts Seattle’s farm system anywhere near a top 10 ranking for 2010. Sickel, Law, SI, AOL Fanhouse all have Seattles farm system ranked somewhere between 15 and 20…
I agree about the M’s. What core players do the M’s have that are under 30? Felix and Gutierez? Is there anybody else I’m missing? They also have an impact prospect in Ackley but so do the Phils in Brown and it’s not like the M’s have the Rangers farm system either, I have yet to see a ranking of them being in the top 1/2 of the league.
And unlike the Phils the M’s don’t have near the collection of talent on their roster right now. And also unlike the Phils the Mariners haven’t been to 2 World Series the past 2 years. In fact this is a team coming off of a 100 loss season 2 years ago and a season where they were outscored by over 50 runs last year.
Their offense consists of aging players like Ichiro, injury plagued guys like Bradley and a guy in Figgins who managed to put up a career season in a contract year(surprise suprise) and is 32 years old.
So really why do they deserve to be ranked higher? I’m sure people will bring up their front office but what has their front office done that has actually been shown on the field? The only thing they’ve done was make moves this offseason that look good on paper but that’s it. We’ve yet to see how this team is going to look on the field.
I’m not necessarily saying that the Mariners moves were bad or aren’t going to pan out but I’m just saying don’t you think it’s a bit premature to rank them so high because of what looks to be 1 great offseason? The fact is according to anything I’ve read outside of this site they don’t have top 10 current talent on their team, don’t have a top 15 farm system, and have very few impact players on the team that are young yet there gonna garner atleast a top 8 ranking on here. I’m sorry but I just think that’s being a little too optimistic.
Lecko, not to take on most of your points, but you might want to read up on what whether in Seattle is like during baseball season before you perpetuate ignorance.
OK, we have an appointment!
Ok! I can’t wait!!! Before your appointment, you should probably learn how to use the “reply” button. I know it’s confusing, since ESPN doesn’t have this feature.
I am huge yankee fan and hate the phillies. That being said, here was the hoem grown talent on the phillies last year:
Howard, Utley, Rollins, Hamels, Ruiz, Coste, Happ, Madson
Those first 4 are probably better, at this point, then the top 4 on the yanks list.
And to remind, ARod was actually acquired via trade NOT FA and the Yankees gave up a homegrown guy under 30 coming off back to back 30/30 seasons and went on to have a 30/30 season AND a 40/40 season.
Whose homegrowns are more valuable is an interesting topic, but I take Pettitte over Hamels in hindsight, in that series, Utley over Cano, Jeter over Rollins, Posada over Howard. If they play it over, who knows.
If you fell in a ditch, I would point and laugh.
This is the best comment ever made on Fangraphs. Well done, sir.
The number of times I would vote for this post can only be expressed through scientific notation.
Wow….nerd bullies.
Ummm, Alfonso Soriano was not “homegrown”.
He was lovingly raised and developed by Carp. ;)
Oh Fangraphs, lol.
Is Hammels a legit #2 starter long term? I know people like the BABIP/unlucky argument for last year, but his curveball rate and effectiveness were considerably off from 2008 and that might also explain some of the rise in BABIP (not to mention his 2008 #’s could also be considered a bit on the ‘lucky’ side). Blanton is solid #3 but come playoff time, he will likely be facing a better #3 from most teams. I look at the rotation as the Big one, a couple of #3′s, and hope our offense carries the #4′s/5′s
I think the starting pitching makes this ranking about right – there doesn’t seem to be any short term prospects from the minors and the Phils are going to have to choose between retaining their core offensive players, or going after a front line starter. There is also no depth in case of injury (as is the case with all but a few teams), but one of the problems of having ‘toolsy’ guys in low A and no real depth is if an injury does occur they do not have the depth in farm system to get a mid-level replacement.
Larry, is your nickname “Chipper?”
Legend ;)
He’s got a career 3.8 FIP and 3.7 K/BB as a starter. He was lucky in ’08 and unlucky in ’09 but either way he’s above certainly an above average pitcher.
I don’t disagree with this ranking but I just don’t see how Seattle is ranked so high. Like other people have said, Seattle’s current talent is King Felix, Lee and awesome Defense. That is nowhere near the top 10 in baseball as far as current major league talent goes. And as far as I can tell, every publication i’ve looked at that rank prospects has Seattle right in the middle of the pack (between 15 – 20)… But whatever I have more for when you (finally) post Seattle.
The Phillies are definately aging offensively, but their core superstars should still have at least 2 years of elite level production left (Utley, Howard, Halladay). This franchise peaked in 2008 when they won the title, and now they are slowly declining. But I still think for the Braves to win the division in 2010 one of the Philly superstars or a couple of their role players will have to miss a significant amount of time.
You and Rich from above must be twins, because your posts are almost identical–although you kind of repeated your earlier response to his post above with some of the points he made in his post, and voila! More of the same.
Seattle’s strengths must just be King Felix and Lee, good defense, and that’s it. Oh, maybe Dustin Ackley. But nothing else. Not a good market with strong revenue, the appeal of Ichiro, a great GM who has turned the team around in just 2 offseasons, and a solid core of major league talent.
Nope, just what you said, and nothing more.
So we’re down to the final eight teams (not in any meaningful order):
New York Yankees
Boston Red Sox
Tampa Bay Rays
Minnesota Twins
Texas Rangers
Seattle Mariners
Atlanta Braves
Colorado Rockies
Outside of the usual Yankees, Red Sox, Rays triumvirate we’ve got an interesting collection of teams near the top. I’m most interested in reading about the Rockies.
I think the Phillies should have been ranked higher. And I say that as a Mets fan.
How can team success on the field the previous year NOT play a huge part in these rankings? If that’s the case, then I can’t see a good reason for the Yankees to place ahead of the Phillies unless the ranking is based heavily on current talent and it shouldn’t be — at least not more so than on results. It doesn’t matter how talented a team is if it doesn’t translate into results. And most of the current Yankee elite talent (Sabathia, A-Rod, Teixiera, Burnett) is there through free agency. So is fangraphs rewarding teams for their financial resources more than for their achievements? Maybe this should be the Forbes Awards as the Yankees are clearly the leaders in revenue generation.
And from what I’ve seen, the Yankees current farm system is not ranked any higher than the Phillies. So the rankings wouldn’t appear to be based on future talent.
I think these rankings would be received better if there were some clear and consistent criteria being used to rank teams. It seems that it varies from team to team, is somewhat arbitrary, and you end up with teams being docked for such things like divorce squabbles (Dodgers) which haven’t yet impacted play on the field and potential FUTURE dissension in the front office (Cardinals). Things which haven’t negatively impacted on field play should not be factored in, IMO.
What might help is to have clear cut categories for measuring teams, and then each team is rated on those categories. For example, each team would be rated on a scale of 1 to 10 for the following categories: 1) On Field Success 2) Payroll-Efficiency 3) Ownership & Management 4) Current Talent and 5) Farm System
Categories 1 & 2 would be formulaic and so subjectivity would not even enter into the ratings there. I think payroll efficiency is an important barometer of an organization’s success and some sort of rating could be worked out as was done here:
http://baseballanalysts.com/archives/2009/03/20062008_payrol.php
This is the first year I’ve read Fangraph’s rankings and I’m often baffled by some of the rationale in these articles. In this case I also question the ranking itself.
The category thing was done last year with the use of letter grades. Unfortunately, people seemed MORE confused with the grading and either had problems with certain grades or couldn’t understand the grades in general. Then there’s the fact that the overall grade used last year wasn’t based on an average (as explained multiple times back then). The comment threads were nightmarish up the wazoo.
I wouldn’t mind a scoring system that helps identify how relatively far apart the teams are in terms of health. Having said that, it almost seems like the more complicated the scoring algorithm the worse the comments get.
As for “How can team success on the field the previous year NOT play a huge part in these rankings?” This reminds me of something once upon a time. From 2000 through 2003, the Mariners came off two playoff appearances and two 90-win seasons respectively. Based on past results, the Mariners were in a great position going forward back then. Based on actual health, however, the team was in danger of collapsing. 2004, then, yielded the absolute worst case scenario (63-99 record).
Past results are just that, in the past. They tell you what the organization has been though but now how things will work out in the future.
Good point, and IMO a good ranking system would account for such a balloon – is the payroll sustainable? If there is a recent history of success, is it sustainable? What is the formula of the team’s success?
So what you’re saying is last year they graded certain categories but those grades had no relation to the final rankings? Wow. No wonder people were confused. If the final rankings are independent of the category ratings well then that pretty much negates the validity of the ratings and vice versa.
What I am advocating is a numerical ratings that would directly translate into the rankings. For example:
Team Performance: 8/10
Ownership & Management: 7/10
Future Talent: 8/10
etc, etc
Without any clear consistent criteria for these rankings, the articles become just a jumble of opinions, arbitrariness and oddities such as a penalty to the Dodgers for the owners’ pending divorce.
As for on-field performance, I still don’t understand how the previous year’s results don’t factor in. Makes no sense to me. That really isn’t the “past” but more just the “latest” manifestation of an organization’s efforts on the field where it really counts. A baseball organization is nothing if not for it’s on-field accomplishments. And it’s not as if anyone is suggesting they use multiple years to factor in. Just the most recent year. So what you seem to be saying is that these fangraphs rankings are essentially just forecasts and health reports but not so much a barometer or assessment of “success.” I don’t see the value in that as its just reading tea leaves then.
As for your Mariners example, I don’t think in the spring of 2002, anyone would have forecasted the 2004 downturn, and the organization should have been ranked highly due to its success the year before. I wonder how fangraphs would have ranked the Rays in the spring of 2008 before their success on the field that year which no one in baseball predicted.
The first org rankings I ever did, posted just after the 2007 season ended:
http://www.ussmariner.com/2007/10/12/organizational-rankings/
Tampa Bay ranked 3rd. We saw this coming. Tampa was only to surprise to people who think you should judge organizations based on how they’ve performed in the past.
Dave, props to you for your TB 2008 ranking, but then what’s with the Phillies being 24 when they won the WS that year? You certainly did not see that coming. They had been in the playoffs the previous year too. If the rankings are supposed to be somewhat of a horoscope for that team, the 2008 one for the Phillies failed.
I don’t see the prior year’s performance as “past” success so much as the latest manifestation of the current regime. I don’t think a ranking should center solely around the prior year on-field performance, but it should be a part of it.
CaseyB,
I don’t think Dave is doing a good job of explaining it. Past year’s performance *does* matter, but not in the sense of saying, “Phillies were in the WS last year, so this year they should be good”. Instead, they use past year’s performance when coming up with the player projections (e.g. CHONE). So it does matter b/c the largest contributer to projecting next year’s performance is last year’s, but after you add in all the other factors (including aging, which could certainly hurt the Phils), there are concerns if the Phillies can repeat.
Add in some concerns about the farm system, and the fact there are other teams in the division who could challenge them, and yes, ninth seems fair. Yeah, maybe fifth would have been “more” fair. But I think 2nd half of the top 10 is right.
Aside from the Rays pick, the 07 org rankings are pretty terrible. Sure looks like Dave harbors some serious bias towards certain teams for whatever reason.
Only 4 teams from the top 11 are in the top 15 in wins over the past two years. 6 of the most successful teams over the past 2 years were ranked 18th or lower. 4 of the top 8 most successful clubs were ranked 19th or lower on the list.
this is the best thread in ages. great job.
You’re welcome!
Don’t really understand the Mariners over the Phillies ranking. Especially with the farm systems being close or equal.
2007 rankings Seattle was above the Phillies too. No good ranking column goes unpunished.
If the Phillies have to build a team through free agency god help us. Reuben would be giving out 2-3 year above market contracts to aging players like hot cakes.
moyer
ibanez
polanco
ibanez has basically earned his contract in one year(4 war).
if moyer has a good year this year, he’ll earn his contract as well(only 6.5m a season).
i’m fairly certain that polanco will outperform his contract as well. he’s going from second to third. so he’ll get a positional bump for his fielding ratings. add in his bat in the best lineup in baseball and he’ll be fairly good. he’s only making ~6m a year. thats a 2 war player. if he’s a 3 war player for 3 years he clobbers his contract.
What Jamie said. The whining over Ibanez’s deal (in particular) is so stale. RAJ schooled the conventional wisdom. Tip your hat and move on.
Sanders makes the point that J.A. Happ is under 30, not just Hamels. And while you state the rotation gets frightening after the 3rd starter, Sanders says Happ should be about average for 2010. A league average pitcher for your 4th starter doesn’t sound too bad.
Which is it? Is Happ under 30 or not? Is Happ projected to be average, or not?
First rule of group work…read the other contributers’ submissions and make sure your facts don’t contradict each other.
(That being said, I agree with most of the other points…just would like a little consistency.)
Ok, i am a phillies fan, but have in the past defended you when you took a bearish stance on the phillies.
This is fairly off though, dave.
First, retrospectively, you had the phillies 13th(?) and the mets first. I dont know the weights for future rankings, but if you do something like:
Weight of 5 for 2010 performance
Weight of 4 for 2011 performance, etc to 2014, then the phillies arent in bad shape if you project their likelihood of success over 5 years.
The fact that you haven’t really said what the weightings are, just that this takes into account future performance past this year leaves it wildly open to subjective asssessments, which is decisively not your strongsuit.
If you look deep into the future, the phillies are a top 5ish revenue team, playing in a fairly major market as the only game in town, with what should be a destination stadium for the foreseeable future, helped by lax policing of tailgating to get a young crowd in, increasing the likeliness of lifetime fans.
If you heavily weight performance over the next few years, the phillies still probably have a 2 year window of relative NL dominance, in which they aren’t guaranteed to win the NL (even a surefire and dominant playoff team might only be 35-40% to make the world series), but this phillies team is as good as anyone in the National League, and will always have a 42-45%ish chance in a world series if they make it against a AL east team.
Is there an intermediate timeframe (say in years 2013-2016) where the phillies might not win 320 games on aggregate? probably. But the only way you can justify this low of a ranking is if you really heavily weight intermediate timeframes.
I just dont see how that makes sense. I realize it’s easy to hate on the phillies for their relatively backwards front office, and some of the process scares me as well. With that said, this is an awakened franchise that was winning 85 games a season with a memorably incompetent GM (thank you Ed Wade!). With a semi-competent Ruben Amaro (who effectively traded inferior prospects for 1/2 a season of cliff lee + higher ceiling prospects), I feel OK in even the intermediate term.
Besides, if Ed Wade gets 2-3 more years, the phillies may yet be able to dump Raul on the astros!
correction, you ranked the mets 5th last year. the phillies were ranked 13th, you gave their current talent a B+, and they rolled to the world series. You apologized for your horrendously blown mets projection, but I’d argue you were probably off on the phillies current talent, (A- to A instead of a B+), future talent (brutal now, but their high upside players developed enough to land halladay), and the front office might be a push, if you are grading on the curve to a c.
This article is terrific and up to date. I totally agree with the writer regarding all this stuff.
I also came across a site that seemed interesting to me regarding the same issue,you can also check out them at http://bit.ly/cRE66j
BUMP.
I eagerly await the 2011 rankings. Nationals over the Phillies? They should be good in 2015 after all.
So many goodies in this comment section, particularly:
-don’t merit for the past
-can’t spend on FA in the realm of the Red Sox
-weak rotation
-depleted farm system
-look out for Braves
since then:
-best record in baseball
-Signed Cliff Lee, highest relative payroll in team history
-best rotation in baseball
-top 5 farm system
-trounced Braves in division race