value of a top farm system: ouch

[Illinest]

Baseball?s Best Farm Systems: How Much Do They Matter? | FiveThirtyEight

This is about us really, but not just about us. It is an attempt to measure the relevance of a top farm system on a team's future success.

After a few attempts to quantify and control for other factors it appears that a team that has the best farm system will generally expect to win 9 to 11 games more per season than the same team with the same conditions would win in the seasons after having the worst farm system.

If that brings us from a 70 win team to an 80 win team then that's all fine and good, but the report also makes mention of findings that show that the teams' payroll is 5 times more predictive of success than a team's farm system.

 

[element1286]

Well it's interesting, not really sure you can take the numbers at face value. Since the plan would be to have a quality farm system year over year, and it only uses the top 100 for it's analysis.

 

[Illinest]

I am certain that a follow-up study would find that having a top farm system is more related to drafting high than drafting well, but that study isn't here so it'll remain an assumption.

Just pointing out that the Pirates homegrown talent isn't due to later round gems. McCutchen was a first round pick. Walker first round. Alvarez, Cole, Taillon, Sanchez, and Sanchez could've been someone more impressive like Shelby Miller. Then of course Matt Weiters who should've been a Pirate.

All of these guys wouldn't be Pirates at all if the Pirates were perennially above .500. I think it would be great to be above .500, but even if the organization is eventually run as well as the Rays you have to cope with the fact that the Rays have won zero championships and are consistently good, but never great. If that's the ceiling of a well-run low budget team then that's not good enough. If you told me the Pirates were about to go on a 30 year streak of above ,500 seasons but would not win a single world series title in that span, i'd rather let Littlefield have the team for 5 more years before i'd ever take that.

 

[element1286]

Well so far for the Pirates, yeah, most of their talent has been first round or from Latin America.

I don't think it's impossible to build through the draft when picking lower. The Rays and Red Sox have kept a pretty healthy farm system throughout their winning years.

As for the playoffs it's a crap shoot. I don't subscribe much more to it than that. I don't think there is one formula for winning in the postseason that can only be possessed by large market teams. Cause there really hasn't been a correlation of what wins in the postseason.

 

[thecrow124]

I am certain that a follow-up study would find that having a top farm system is more related to drafting high than drafting well, but that study isn't here so it'll remain an assumption.

Just pointing out that the Pirates homegrown talent isn't due to later round gems. McCutchen was a first round pick. Walker first round. Alvarez, Cole, Taillon, Sanchez, and Sanchez could've been someone more impressive like Shelby Miller. Then of course Matt Weiters who should've been a Pirate.

All of these guys wouldn't be Pirates at all if the Pirates were perennially above .500. I think it would be great to be above .500, but even if the organization is eventually run as well as the Rays you have to cope with the fact that the Rays have won zero championships and are consistently good, but never great. If that's the ceiling of a well-run low budget team then that's not good enough. If you told me the Pirates were about to go on a 30 year streak of above ,500 seasons but would not win a single world series title in that span, i'd rather let Littlefield have the team for 5 more years before i'd ever take that.

Sanchez could have been Mike Trout or Wil Myers or Nolan Arenado as well, but he isn't. When all is said and done, Sanchez is probably going to be one of the top 10 players taken in the 2009 draft, which I am fine with.

In my opinion, I don't think it is fair to say one way is better than the other. I think there has to be a bit of both, good draft and development of key players and smart spending in free agency. However, I do not believe it is ever a good practice to overspend your budget. Along those lines, if you have 3 weaknesses to fill and $20 million to fill them, it makes no sense to spend $20 million on one player.

Take for example the Brewers, they admittedly have overspend their budget in hopes that fans show up to cover the costs. Now Braun is hurting again and will likely spend time on the DL this year, that is going to basically cost the Brewers their season because they have no one in their entire organization that can fill in for even 50% of the production that Braun can give them. If I were a Brewers fan, I would look at the spending on free agents and be happy, but as an outsider looking in, it just looks like they are spending money they do not have in an effort to remain relevant long enough to cover the cost of their spending, because they simply aren't going to be very good. Melvin seems to think they are still in the American League.

 

[Illinest]

Well so far for the Pirates, yeah, most of their talent has been first round or from Latin America.

I don't think it's impossible to build through the draft when picking lower. The Rays and Red Sox have kept a pretty healthy farm system throughout their winning years.

As for the playoffs it's a crap shoot. I don't subscribe much more to it than that. I don't think there is one formula for winning in the postseason that can only be possessed by large market teams. Cause there really hasn't been a correlation of what wins in the postseason.

The rays have not drafted particularly well. They've been exceptionally aggressive about trading talent at peak trade value, which is a double-edged sword. It maximizes the talent returned but it reduces the time that a player like David Price is on the roster. I do not have a problem with Neil's trading record - I think he's about average - but he needs to be a lot better than that if he wants to be Tampa Bay version 2.

There is a correlation between payroll and making it to the post-season. The teams that have an average payroll in the top third make the playoffs more frequently than the middle third and the teams in the middle third make the playoffs more than the teams in the bottom third.

It might be that winning in the playoffs is a crap-shoot, but you need to make it there first.

 

[Illinest]

Sanchez could have been Mike Trout or Wil Myers or Nolan Arenado as well, but he isn't. When all is said and done, Sanchez is probably going to be one of the top 10 players taken in the 2009 draft, which I am fine with.

In my opinion, I don't think it is fair to say one way is better than the other. I think there has to be a bit of both, good draft and development of key players and smart spending in free agency. However, I do not believe it is ever a good practice to overspend your budget. Along those lines, if you have 3 weaknesses to fill and $20 million to fill them, it makes no sense to spend $20 million on one player.

Take for example the Brewers, they admittedly have overspend their budget in hopes that fans show up to cover the costs. Now Braun is hurting again and will likely spend time on the DL this year, that is going to basically cost the Brewers their season because they have no one in their entire organization that can fill in for even 50% of the production that Braun can give them. If I were a Brewers fan, I would look at the spending on free agents and be happy, but as an outsider looking in, it just looks like they are spending money they do not have in an effort to remain relevant long enough to cover the cost of their spending, because they simply aren't going to be very good. Melvin seems to think they are still in the American League.

At no point have i ever demanded that the Pirates spend more than they can afford. I wish we had owners who had that mentality of prioritizing winning over making a profit, but I don't expect it.

I do expect that our owners would spend and profit in proportion to the expenditures and profits of their peers, which is not what the Nutting family has done to the best of anyone's knowledge. Our owners insist on taking profits as if they're a top half franchise, while building a roster that costs as much as a bottom 5 franchise. Our revenue meanwhile is somewhere around 20th overall.

 

[thecrow124]

At no point have i ever demanded that the Pirates spend more than they can afford. I wish we had owners who had that mentality of prioritizing winning over making a profit, but I don't expect it.

I do expect that our owners would spend and profit in proportion to the expenditures and profits of their peers, which is not what the Nutting family has done to the best of anyone's knowledge. Our owners insist on taking profits as if they're a top half franchise, while building a roster that costs as much as a bottom 5 franchise. Our revenue meanwhile is somewhere around 20th overall.

I never said you did.

My point in referencing your post was not to point at anything in regards to spending, but to the point you made about Tony Sanchez and who he could have been.

I would have modified your post to clarify my point, but I make all of my posts from my cell phone and it is way to labor I extensive for me, to do that. In fact I was not intending to even detract from your points, otherwise I would have had a meltdown over the Littlefield comment.

 

[Darkstone42]

Regardless of your budget, the more pieces you can provide and roles you can fill through your farm system, in general, the more money you will have to retain core pieces in the long run and supplement the team's remaining needs via free agency when the opportunity presents itself. Regardless of supposed correlation in this study (which, to me, is insufficient evidence anyway, as the study seems overly simplistic), there is an obvious advantage to having a strong farm system, just as there is an obvious advantage to having more money to spend on payroll.

The ideal case is quite obviously to be able to build and sustain a strong farm system (and subsequently manage it well once the prospects reach the Majors, maximizing each prospect's value) while also spending the appropriate monies to keep homegrown players around longer and fill holes in free agency.

A truly comprehensive study on the true benefit of a farm system would account for a team's ability to retain players, their ability to sustain the farm system's strength (which was the primary failure of the Pirates in the decade following that strong 1997 crop of prospects), and their ability to maximize the value they get from their farm system. This is precisely the difference between the successful Rays and the unsuccessful 1997-2007 Pirates.

Strength of farm system this year means nothing. Strength of farm system over ten-year spans, on the other hand, means a lot.

 

[thecrow124]

I just looked at the 1997 prospect list, couple of take a ways.

1. Not all prospects, even top prospects pan out.

2. Ramirez and Guillen were rushed to the majors.

3. The destruction of that group of prospects can be directly related to the mismanagement of the budget at the major league level.

4. Littlefield had no patience with prospects, you either come up quickly and perform, or you were shipped out.


However, looking at that prospect list, that was a good list. Lots and lots of star level talent, although some fizzled out quickly.

 

[thecrow124]

I just looked at the 1997 prospect list, couple of take a ways.

1. Not all prospects, even top prospects pan out.

2. Ramirez and Guillen were rushed to the majors.

3. The destruction of that group of prospects can be directly related to the mismanagement of the budget at the major league level.

4. Littlefield had no patience with prospects, you either come up quickly and perform, or you were shipped out.


However, looking at that prospect list, that was a good list. Lots and lots of star level talent, although some fizzled out quickly.

Actually it was Bonifay, I should have known, Littlefield couldn't assemble that much talent if you added the major league roster.

 

[mutigers1fan]

Interesting points here, sorry to jump in but I found it to be an interesting topic. My thought is that sure picking high helps, but talent evaluation and development is still king. Shelby Miller was mentioned above, the Cards took him 19th overall in 2009. In that draft they also grabbed Joe Kelly(3rd round), Matt Carpenter (13), Trevor Rosenthal (21), Matt Adams (23), and Keith Butler (24). A draft like that isn't common at all but getting 20% of our 25 man roster from 1 draft shows that you don't have to have top 10 picks to get contributors.

 

[Illinest]

Interesting points here, sorry to jump in but I found it to be an interesting topic. My thought is that sure picking high helps, but talent evaluation and development is still king. Shelby Miller was mentioned above, the Cards took him 19th overall in 2009. In that draft they also grabbed Joe Kelly(3rd round), Matt Carpenter (13), Trevor Rosenthal (21), Matt Adams (23), and Keith Butler (24). A draft like that isn't common at all but getting 20% of our 25 man roster from 1 draft shows that you don't have to have top 10 picks to get contributors.

Being the Cardinals has a lot to do with that. Your scouting and farm system are excellent.

I think that the Pirates have three major competitive advantage right now
The first is the fact that they've been doing pretty well in LA. I've consistently credited Gayo for finding talent and Neil (or Coonely) for giving him the resources he needs. As the league continues to discuss an international draft and spending caps I think that it would be reasonable to assume that this advantage will be reduced in the near future.

The second advantage that the Pirates have had is drafting early. We already know that one's going away.

The third advantage was a willingness to pay unusually large signing bonuses to 2-10 round talents. This advantage is already gone.

So what's left? Player development is still a question-mark afaic. I'm optimistic but I'll reserve any praise until the team puts some later round draft picks on big league rosters.

 

[mutigers1fan]

Being the Cardinals does help, but rewind to 2007 and we had nothing in the farm. Johnny Mo and Bill DeWitt have built all of this over the last 6-7 years. All the Pirates need is a great leader with a firm direction that drives the organization in the right way. I won't pretend to know anything about the Pirates FO but its clear from the outside whatever they're doing now is excellent compared to the past 2 decades.

 

[thecrow124]

Being the Cardinals does help, but rewind to 2007 and we had nothing in the farm. Johnny Mo and Bill DeWitt have built all of this over the last 6-7 years. All the Pirates need is a great leader with a firm direction that drives the organization in the right way. I won't pretend to know anything about the Pirates FO but its clear from the outside whatever they're doing now is excellent compared to the past 2 decades.

There are the faithful allegiance to Dave Littlefield that you will NEVER be able to convince of that last statement.

 

[mutigers1fan]

There are the faithful allegiance to Dave Littlefield that you will NEVER be able to convince of that last statement.

All I know is I'm 21 years old and it never occurred to me until about 2 years ago to worry about the Pirates in the central. There's been definite improvement.

 

[element1286]

The rays have not drafted particularly well. They've been exceptionally aggressive about trading talent at peak trade value, which is a double-edged sword. It maximizes the talent returned but it reduces the time that a player like David Price is on the roster. I do not have a problem with Neil's trading record - I think he's about average - but he needs to be a lot better than that if he wants to be Tampa Bay version 2.

There is a correlation between payroll and making it to the post-season. The teams that have an average payroll in the top third make the playoffs more frequently than the middle third and the teams in the middle third make the playoffs more than the teams in the bottom third.

It might be that winning in the playoffs is a crap-shoot, but you need to make it there first.

Well I don't disagree that a higher payroll will get you a seat at the table more often.

I agree about the Rays and the aggressive trading, and they have slipped in the past few years as far as hitting on talent, but that's only because they used to be so good.

I agree about Neil and trading he isn't Freidman or even Billy Beane, but I don't think that is his MO, trading guys at peak value. I don't see them doing the whole recycling routine and trading away top talent in their prime. Assuming the Pirates keep drawing fans they are in much better financial shape than Tampa or Oakland, so I don't think they have to.

I'm not sure there is a current 'model' for the Pirates going forward.

 

[mutigers1fan]

The Pirates finished 19th in average attendance last season so there's more money to be made. I don't know the status of their tv contract but in 2011(last full season I can find) they were 9th in Nielsen rating. I would think that number has risen since then so it seems to me that more money can be made once the fans buy in for a full season.

 

[element1286]

There's been discussion on here before, but the ratings of the Pirates aren't a great indicator since great ratings to a small population isn't as big of a deal as decent ratings to a large population. It also limits market potential, especially considering the regions is just now rebounding from decades of population decline to population neutral year over year, and the outlying communities are pretty much Appalachian areas and farm land, so there is no second large/medium population center to draw viewers from.

http://cdn.theatlantic.com/newsroom/img/mt/2014/03/Facebook_MLB_Fandom_Map_1/original.jpg

I think this list is pretty interesting graphic as far as favorite team broken down by county. It's interesting comparing Pittsburgh to Cincy or Milwaukee. Cincy having a large portion of Ohio as well as relatively populous regions of Kentucky (including Louisville) and some of Indiana. And Wisconsin having the entirety of Wisconsin. While Pittsburgh metro area is essentially alone in rooting for the Pirates except a decent size metro area of Erie Pa, which is 10% the size of Pittsburgh. And with the underlying appalachian/rural farm land counties.

Add to that Pittsburgh only has one regional sports network, and thus no competition for services, and their deal is pretty bad comparatively, and it won't likely get any better comparatively in the future.

 

[Illinest]

The pittsburgh metro is far from alone. I told you before, they're #2 to the Phillies throughout central PA. They also have an unusual amount of celebrity support. The yellow P got street cred in certain circles.

Not to mention the displaced pittsburgher phenomenon....

There is no way you can slice this that makes it look like the nuttings are spending enough. Top 5 richest personal wealth, 19th in revenue with room to grow, "top half" tv market with a new deal coming in 2019. The pirates are probably realistically a mid-market team, but we don't spend like one.