FredLynn

This is from Feb 8, 2012, by Keith Law, ESPN analyst: Keith Law of ESPN has released his farm system rankings. You need an ESPN Insider subscription to see anything besides the fact that former Red Sox assistant general manager Jed Hoyer, with help another former Sox staffer in Jason McLeod, brought the Padres to first overall, but we can at least give you a taste of it. It's absolutely worth reading the whole thing, of course, to get a sense of where the rest of the league is. The Red Sox rank 18 out of 30 -- not too shabby, considering they lack any kind of elite talent at the upper levels thanks to trades for Victor Martinez, Adrian Gonzalez, and others the past few years.

The truth of the matter is that ALL of those rankings change almost weekly, certainly every month, during the season. Its not a static assessment. I do not view the Red Sox farm system as "Good" right now, partly because of the talent level overall, and partly because there simply aren't enough high quality pitchers to help us in the most needy area for the team. We are going to have to buy our pitchers for the foreseeable future, and thats very expensive.

But the Bleacher Report is unreliable, right? Thrilled to see that we are at the 10th position rather than the 11th position. Not so thrilled that our hitting prospects have more potential than our pitching prospects because pitching is our major weakness right now; our hitting is decent. Maybe we could trade some of those hitters for a good SP.

Top third of 30 teams: ranked 1-10; middle of the pack: 11-20; bottom of the pack: 21-30. Pretty simple. The REASON the Rays and Jays are ahead of us is that they have had better draft positions for years, but that doesn't change the fact that they ARE ahead of us. With all that minor league depth, the Blue Jays will be giving us a run for our money soon too.

Belanger or Visquel...or a few other sub-Smith guys would be fine. Personally, I think he has a lot to prove before his value can accurately be assessed. There is a decent chance that he won't make it in the majors too.

The reason why the Sox farm system is "middle of the pack" Then you agree that the Sox farm system is neither good nor bad; its MIDDLE OF THE PACK, just as that gosh darned Bleacher Report said, right? If you disagree, find me a couple of references to support your position, if such references exist. Also, all those guys who are "developing" are at high risk not to make it at all. Some will come through and help the club; most won't.

I am not sure who you are addressing, but you are correct: the Sox farm system IS average now. Not good: average. There is some potential there, but not as much as either the Yankees or Rays. I don't like it, but thats the way it is.

I found two rankings that place our farm system in the middle of the pack. I found NONE that place us in the upper third. Maybe you can find such a document.

Very well put.

I could not care less what level of credibility I have with you. Why should I? Furthermore, I think this henpecking between you and me has gone far enough. I think we should stick to baseball and try to at least tolerate one another, if not ignore one another. I understand where I stand with you; I trust the reverse is also true.

Gee, 10 games. Do you think I JUST MIGHT have been referring to starting for the team? Or did that along with everything else I have tried to teach you slip past your confused brain.

I am always happy to educate those who are less educated. Stick around...you might learn something.

We are middle of the pack, at best. Both of our major competitors in the ALE rank far ahead of us. If middle of the pack is "good" then sure, we have a "good" farm system. I prefer top third or better before I call it "good". http://www.aolnews.com/2011/02/10/2011-farm-system-rankings/ http://bleacherreport.com/articles/834247-mlb-power-rankings-rating-every-mlb-farm-system#/articles/1071951-mlb-free-agency-grading-every-teams-offseason-heading-to-spring-training

Right now our minor league system does not contain the kind of talent that will produce impact players in the majors. Who is really down there that will make the same impact as Ellsbury and Youkilis and Bard right now? When Theo left he left us a minor league system that is severely lacking.

Like I said, he gets partial credit for the 2004 team. Not full credit; partial credit. He also gets full credit for everyone on the list of failed FA acquisitions I presented. I expect better from our GM.

Sorry. I reserve the right to defend myself here. If SFF can't stand the heat, he shouldn't have started the fire.

Then put me on ignore. Both of us will feel better.

Ah...the old "run prevention" theory again. How did that work out a couple of years ago for us when Theo signed Mike Cameron to defend against runs? Nonsense. Ever read "Moneyball"? The data Billy Beane used to create all those winning teams disregarded "run prevention" and still managed to win 95+ games a year until everyone else caught on to those theories too. Jose Iglesias has played 10 games for the Red Sox and in your mind he is already Ozzie Smith. Talk about rose colored glasses.... I realize this is way over your head to comprehend, but at least I am making an effort to explain it to you, right? As for being a talent evaluator, yes, I do think I could do it with the proper training and access to data. Its largely an educated guess anyway, a calculated crapshoot. Professionals can be wrong, and frequently are wrong. If your doctor tells you to drink a glass of hemlock to cure your acne, are you going to do it or are you going to question him? How about if he tells you to take echinacea for your cold? Learn to think for yourself. It will be a very liberating feeling for you.

I presented the data to support my opinion. I realize that others think he was better than I think he was here. I posted my next post (above) before I read yours. I admit that he was much better at drafting good players than most GMs. On another board I did an extensive review of how his draft picks did relative to other GMs, and his track record was pretty good in that regard. Only Friedman of Tampa Bay is superior to him (that I could find) in terms of the percentage of draft picks that made it to the majors. But there is more to being a GM than drafting well, and in the other areas he fell down. I would grade him a B+ for drafting, but a D for getting good FAs and a C for trades. So overall in my opinion he did C+ work for us. Not horrible, but not up to snuff either.