Bloom move your asssssss

[moonslav59]

Resetting only makes sense if one believes that the Lux Tax regime will continue after the CBA is renegotiated.j It probably won't. The Red Sox total revenues increased by a whopping 63 million dollars from 2017 to 2018. Total revenues were a half a billion dollars in 2018. With revenues like that the Sox have more to lose financially from resetting than from any Lux Tax penalty. That why I say I will believe it when I see it not before.

 

The farm will take care of itself. No cares about the farm except a few posters on this board. If the farm is so important why does MLB want to abolish so many minor league teams.

 

There's no draft penalty unless you go over by $40 million or more.

You get less bonus pool money for IFAs- an area we used to do well in

[moonslav59]

Resetting only makes sense if one believes that the Lux Tax regime will continue after the CBA is renegotiated. It probably won't. The Red Sox total revenues increased by a whopping 63 million dollars from 2017 to 2018. Total revenues were a half a billion dollars in 2018. With revenues like that the Sox have more to lose financially from resetting than from any Lux Tax penalty. That why I say I will believe it when I see it not before.

 

The farm will take care of itself. No cares about the farm except a few posters on this board. If the farm is so important why does MLB want to abolish so many minor league teams.

 

Most fans can not name anyone in the Red Sox farm system except those on the 40 man roster and could care less.

Mlb's baseball move to sever ties and restructure the minor leagues portends the future.

 

The farm is becoming less important in the grand scheme of things. The trend towards younger and younger players making the majors and the improvement in College baseball is expediting the process of MLB moving toward a player development system more akin to that of the NBA and NFL. The movement to increase the pay for players in the lower minors is only going to acceralate this transition.

 

Teams are valuing prospects more than ever. You couldn't be more wrong.

[Elktonnick]

Wrong. Plus, a strong farm helps keep a winning team on the field and revenues pouring in.

Does it! I love to see the empirical proof of such a contention in the era of free agency.

[harmony]

A strong farm allowed the Red Sox to trade for Chris Sale, Craig Kimbrel, Nathan Eovaldi and Drew Pomeranz.

[moonslav59]

Resetting only makes sense if one believes that the Lux Tax regime will continue after the CBA is renegotiated. It probably won't. The Red Sox total revenues increased by a whopping 63 million dollars from 2017 to 2018. Total revenues were a half a billion dollars in 2018. With revenues like that the Sox have more to lose financially from resetting than from any Lux Tax penalty. That why I say I will believe it when I see it not before.

 

The farm will take care of itself. No cares about the farm except a few posters on this board. If the farm is so important why does MLB want to abolish so many minor league teams.

 

Does it! I love to see the empirical proof of such a contention in the era of free agency.

 

Lol. Proof is everywhere.

[Elktonnick]

Teams are valuing prospects more than ever. You couldn't be more wrong.

 

Valuing prospects does not necessarily translate into a strong farm. Teams need only a few highly valued solid prospects not an entire farm system.

 

That is the argument and rationale behind MLBs restructuring of the minor leagues. The game is about change radically in the next few years. No one is going recognize the system that is coming.

 

MLB will subsidize the independent leagues to a greater degree. We are about to enter into an era where farm teams will be far fewer than today and more player moving directly from College ball to the major leagues all driven by higher payroll costs at the minor league level forced by legislation.

[Elktonnick]

Lol. Proof is everywhere.

 

If it is then cite the causality and statistical data that proves the hypothesis.

[moonslav59]

If it is then cite the causality and statistical data that proves the hypothesis.

 

Prove to me farms don't help teams win.

 

Cite some data.

[moonslav59]

Valuing prospects does not necessarily translate into a strong farm. Teams need only a few highly valued solid prospects not an entire farm system.

 

That is the argument and rationale behind MLBs restructuring of the minor leagues. The game is about change radically in the next few years. No one is going recognize the system that is coming.

 

MLB will subsidize the independent leagues to a greater degree. We are about to enter into an era where farm teams will be far fewer than today and more player moving directly from College ball to the major leagues all driven by higher payroll costs at the minor league level forced by legislation.

 

I never said or implied a strong farm means deep or shallow with just a few top prospects.

 

The Sox are a fine example of how a strong farm led to rings we never saw before we had strong farms.

 

Even our weak farm now was what led to the 2018 ring, since we traded away a strong farm to win it.

[Elktonnick]

A strong farm allowed the Red Sox to trade for Chris Sale, Craig Kimbrel, Nathan Eovaldi and Drew Pomeranz.

 

So the strong farm is good for trading proven talent. But if you are the GM who trades away the strong farm and you no longer have one, you get fired because you traded away the strong farm. Is that how it works. Sort of like the self licking ice cream cone.

[Elktonnick]

I never said or implied a strong farm means deep or shallow with just a few top prospects.

 

The Sox are a fine example of how a strong farm led to rings we never saw before we had strong farms.

 

Even our weak farm now was what led to the 2018 ring, since we traded away a strong farm to win it.

 

So you do not actually need a strong farm since you can win with a weak one. Or do you need a strong farm so you can trade it away for a weak one so you can win. Does that summarize your argument which means you can win with either a strong farm or a weak one but not both or neither?

[Elktonnick]

Prove to me farms don't help teams win.

 

Cite some data.

You are the one making the contention. Besides any first year student of logic knows you can not prove a negative like proving some one is not guilty of something .

[moonslav59]

You are the one making the contention. Besides any first year student of logic knows you can not prove a negative like proving some one is not guilty of something .

 

If there was proof there is no correlation, you could find it.

 

Here's a positive proof to prove: prove weak farms lead to winning more.

[notin]

Most fans can not name anyone in the Red Sox farm system except those on the 40 man roster and could care less.

Mlb's baseball move to sever ties and restructure the minor leagues portends the future.

 

The farm is becoming less important in the grand scheme of things. The trend towards younger and younger players making the majors and the improvement in College baseball is expediting the process of MLB moving toward a player development system more akin to that of the NBA and NFL. The movement to increase the pay for players in the lower minors is only going to acceralate this transition.

 

 

Sox fans have always hyped and overhyped their prospects. Fans do care about the farm when they don’t have one. Just because YOU don’t care about it does not mean you get to speak for everyone...

[notin]

So you do not actually need a strong farm since you can win with a weak one. Or do you need a strong farm so you can trade it away for a weak one so you can win. Does that summarize your argument which means you can win with either a strong farm or a weak one but not both or neither?

 

The Sox wouldn’t have won in 2018 if the farm wasn’t strong enough to acquire Sale and Kimbrel...

[Elktonnick]

If there was proof there is no correlation, you could find it.

 

Here's a positive proof to prove: prove weak farms lead to winning more.

 

So you can not prove your hypothesis that strong farms keep teams winning on the field and revenues pouring in.

 

As for your challenge about weak farms they prove nothing since they are meaningless in the grand scheme of things which is exactly the reason why MLB is proposing its radical overhaul of the minor leagues.

 

Moreover it is going to become increasingly more expensive for club's especially the low revenue teams such as the Rays to maintain large farm systems that currently exist.

[harmony]

Prove to me farms don't help teams win.

 

Cite some data.

https://www.drivelinebaseball.com/2019/05/developing-less-efficiency-player-development-lead-success/

 

Something for everyone to chew on.

 

Or not.

[Bellhorn04]

You get less bonus pool money for IFAs- an area we used to do well in

 

You only lose pool money if you exceed the tax threshold AND sign a free agent who has rejected a QO.

 

http://m.mlb.com/glossary/transactions/international-amateur-free-agency-bonus-pool-money

[Bellhorn04]

The Sox wouldn’t have won in 2018 if the farm wasn’t strong enough to acquire Sale and Kimbrel...

 

Not to mention producing Betts, JBJ, Benintendi, Devers, Barnes etc.

[Elktonnick]

The Sox wouldn’t have won in 2018 if the farm wasn’t strong enough to acquire Sale and Kimbrel...

Like I said the farm is only good if you have one or two valued prospects that you can trade. I'm any case, the farm system as we currently know it will be unrecognizable in the next two years. Teams will have much smaller systems. Congress will force legislation to require teams to pay minor leaguers a living wage. Low revenue club's will be unable to afford to maintain the number players under minor league contracts like they have today. It all is going to change big time.

[Bellhorn04]

So you can not prove your hypothesis that strong farms keep teams winning on the field and revenues pouring in.

 

It's one of those things that's just obvious.

 

When we talk about the farm, what we're really talking about is being successful at scouting, drafting and developing players.

[moonslav59]

Not to mention producing Betts, JBJ, Benintendi, Devers, Barnes etc.

 

...and Bogey.

[moonslav59]

Like I said the farm is only good if you have one or two valued prospects that you can trade. I'm any case, the farm system as we currently know it will be unrecognizable in the next two years. Teams will have much smaller systems. Congress will force legislation to require teams to pay minor leaguers a living wage. Low revenue club's will be unable to afford to maintain the number players under minor league contracts like they have today. It all is going to change big time.

 

It's "only good" if you have one or two to trade? Did we trade Betts & Bogey?

 

I'm done with this debate or whatever you call it.

[Bellhorn04]

As far as obvious concrete examples go, you can't do any better than the '16 Cubs and the '17 Astros. Both teams somewhat notoriously tanked for a few years, scoring high draft picks that were integral to building championship teams.

[Bellhorn04]

...and Bogey.

 

Yes, a big miss on my part.

[moonslav59]

Dan D left Theo with a decent core of young players and prospects.

 

Theo mastered farm building and used the comp pick system and IFA market to build winning seasons after winning season.

 

Many prospects were traded away for key players- other made an impact on the Sox.

Nomar

Lester

Pedey

Freddy Sanchez

Fossum (Got us Schilling)

HRam & A Sanchez (Got us Beckett & Lowell)

Shoppach

David Murphy

Jorge dela Rosa

Youkilis

Papelbon

Ellsbury

Lowrie

Buchholz

Masterson (Got us VMart)

D Bard

Reddick

Kelly (Got us AGon)

Tazawa

Iggy (Got us Peavy)

Bogey

Betts

JBJ

Barnes

Alex Wilson

Vaz

Workman

Moncada & Kopech (Sale)

Margot, Guerra, Allen (Kimbrell)

Espinoza (Pom)

Shaw & Dubon (Thornburg)

ERod (from BAL)

Devers

Beni

 

Now, we have

Casas

Mata

Jimenez

Dalbec

Groome

Duran

 

It's no wonder our future looks bleak.

[Swiharts Ghost]

Not trying to get people excited but it seems to reason if The Dodgers don't get Lindor .Boston will be open for business .Kuechel landed a team tonight in the Whitrsox so the chairs are about filled for teams that could even need Pitching .

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

I'd have to say Elk has some decent points about the tenuous future of farms. But as far as qualitative data showing the impact of a solid farm -- if posters here haven't pointed out enough proof already -- how about Alex Speier's recent book: Homegrown: How the Red Sox Built a Champion from the Ground Up

 

Since free agency, deep minor league systems have not been quite as crucial for teams with deep pockets. All four of Boston's titles this century were led by pitchers acquired from other clubs (with Lester and Papelbon the main exceptions). But the best point is that it sure helped to have prospects available when proposing the key trades.

 

In the period between when the draft was instituted in the mid-60s to the advent of free agency in the mid-70s, the teams that always seemed to be in contention had the best systems, including Baltimore and Oakland in the AL, and Cincinnati and Pittsburgh in the NL. They developed a lot of MLB talent and flipped a lot of prospects to fill needs; some pieces they landed included Frank Robinson, Mike Cuellar, Reggie Jackson, Joe Morgan, George Foster, Ken Holtzman and Bert Blyleven.

 

All of these small market clubs won titles back then, but haven't even been to a World Series in 30 years. It shows how much the landscape has changed, by not just being able to afford free agents, but to also afford good front office people, domestic and international scouting, and the funds to sign high draft picks.

[Elktonnick]

It's one of those things that's just obvious.

 

When we talk about the farm, what we're really talking about is being successful at scouting, drafting and developing players.

 

It was obvious to Aristotle that heavier objects would fall faster than lighter ones. It was obvious to Ptolemy that the fixed stars were 20,000 times the radius of earth and sun revolved around the earth.

 

What I am saying is all that is going to be done quite differently in the future than we have seen in the past. If you have been listening to the discussions on the MLB radio and elsewhere you would understand that developing prospects up through the lower minors, the short season leagues, lower A, upper A and double AA is going to be outdated probably by the next CBA and be radically changed. Major league clubs know over 90% of minor leaguers will never have a cup of coffee in the bigs. The are just sparring partners for the few bona fide blue chippers that each club has. You will see the NCAA baseball be relied upon more and more for developing players. The FARM systems as clubs currently have them could disappear. We are about to embark on a major controversy between the major leagues and the minor leagues. The living wage for minor leaguers will be driving it. It is not beyond the realm of possibilities that minor league clubs will be affiliated with more than one club or several clubs or possibly none at all. To make matters worse Congress will likely step in. Senator Sanders has already sent a strong letter to the commissioner. This could well be a bipartisan issue with broad support from both political parties. It is going to get very interesting. So the idea of a team having strong farm system could well become meaningless.

[moonslav59]

I'd have to say Elk has some decent points about the tenuous future of farms. But as far as qualitative data showing the impact of a solid farm -- if posters here haven't pointed out enough proof already -- how about Alex Speier's recent book: Homegrown: How the Red Sox Built a Champion from the Ground Up

 

Since free agency, deep minor league systems have not been quite as crucial for teams with deep pockets. All four of Boston's titles this century were led by pitchers acquired from other clubs (with Lester and Papelbon the main exceptions). But the best point is that it sure helped to have prospects available when proposing the key trades.

 

In the period between when the draft was instituted in the mid-60s to the advent of free agency in the mid-70s, the teams that always seemed to be in contention had the best systems, including Baltimore and Oakland in the AL, and Cincinnati and Pittsburgh in the NL. They developed a lot of MLB talent and flipped a lot of prospects to fill needs; some pieces they landed included Frank Robinson, Mike Cuellar, Reggie Jackson, Joe Morgan, George Foster, Ken Holtzman and Bert Blyleven.

 

All of these small market clubs won titles back then, but haven't even been to a World Series in 30 years. It shows how much the landscape has changed, by not just being able to afford free agents, but to also afford good front office people, domestic and international scouting, and the funds to sign high draft picks.

 

Don't fall for the elk's alternative facts.

 

We got all those star pitchers because we had a farm full of prospects other teams wanted.