Why can't the Orioles draft and develop pitchers like Gausman and Britton?(Not a new thread. Bumped)

[mdbdotcom]

Someone had to ask.

Can't wait for Bundy to join the party.

[MrOrange82]

Because they don't.

I looked through the top 100 pitchers in terms of fWAR accumulated since 2007, and then I looked at which teams developed them. In some cases, that wasn't easy to define (e.g., Gio Gonzalez was traded a couple of times before breaking into the majors with the A's). In such cases, I credited the team that had a particular player in the minors for the longest amount of time. Then I just tallied up the number of pitchers every ML organization had "produced" who appeared among the top 100 fWAR producers since 2007, excluding international FA signees like Darvish and Koji.

Here are the teams, and their totals, presented in the order of their first appearances within the top 100 (i.e., the Tigers appear first because Verlander is #1 in pitching fWAR since 2007):

Tigers - 3

Mariners - 6

Indians - 4

Jays - 3

Royals - 2

Red Sox - 7

A's - 3

Phillies - 3

Dodgers - 4

Cardinals - 1

Angels - 4

Giants - 4

Rays - 5

White sox - 4

Marlins - 6

Rockies - 4

Padres - 2

Yankees - 4

Expos/Nationals - 3

Astros - 2

Twins - 5

Rangers - 6

Brewers

Reds - 2

Cubs - 2

Diamondbacks - 2

Orioles - 1 (ERIK BEDARD, 67th in fWAR)

Mets - 2

Braves - 2

Pirates - 3

The Orioles are one of two teams in MLB to only produce one pitcher who stands in the top 100 in fWAR since 2007 (and before you object to "top 100" status as a benchmark, a player only needs 9.5 fWAR over that span to crack the top 100). And to make matters worse, the Red Sox (7), Rays (5), Yankees (4), and Jays (3) have all produced more (and more productive) pitchers on the list than the Orioles. Erik Bedard...just amazing.

So...why can't the O's produce good pitchers? Why are Gausman, Bundy, and (to a lesser degree, given his abject failure as a starter) Britton now the saviors of the organization? Because the Orioles don't develop good pitchers very often...and much, much less often than their peers. Now here's hoping you didn't jinx Gausman/Britton by declaring them successes already...

[weams]

Because they don't.

I looked through the top 100 pitchers in terms of fWAR accumulated since 2007, and then I looked at which teams developed them. In some cases, that wasn't easy to define (e.g., Gio Gonzalez was traded a couple of times before breaking into the majors with the A's). In such cases, I credited the team that had a particular player in the minors for the longest amount of time. Then I just tallied up the number of pitchers every ML organization had "produced" who appeared among the top 100 fWAR producers since 2007, excluding international FA signees like Darvish and Koji.

Here are the teams, and their totals, presented in the order of their first appearances within the top 100 (i.e., the Tigers appear first because Verlander is #1 in pitching fWAR since 2007):

Tigers - 3

Mariners - 6

Indians - 4

Jays - 3

Royals - 2

Red Sox - 7

A's - 3

Phillies - 3

Dodgers - 4

Cardinals - 1

Angels - 4

Giants - 4

Rays - 5

White sox - 4

Marlins - 6

Rockies - 4

Padres - 2

Yankees - 4

Expos/Nationals - 3

Astros - 2

Twins - 5

Rangers - 6

Brewers

Reds - 2

Cubs - 2

Diamondbacks - 2

Orioles - 1 (ERIK BEDARD, 67th in fWAR)

Mets - 2

Braves - 2

Pirates - 3

The Orioles are one of two teams in MLB to only produce one pitcher who stands in the top 100 in fWAR since 2007 (and before you object to "top 100" status as a benchmark, a player only needs 9.5 fWAR over that span to crack the top 100). And to make matters worse, the Red Sox (7), Rays (5), Yankees (4), and Jays (3) have all produced more (and more productive) pitchers on the list than the Orioles. Erik Bedard...just amazing.

So...why can't the O's produce good pitchers? Why are Gausman, Bundy, and (to a lesser degree, given his abject failure as a starter) Britton now the saviors of the organization? Because the Orioles don't develop good pitchers very often...and much, much less often than their peers. Now here's hoping you didn't jinx Gausman/Britton by declaring them successes already...

All before Andy MacPhail took the reigns from Peter and they got handed to Dan and Buck. The whole organization is different. Ask someone who works there. I have.

[MrOrange82]

All before Andy MacPhail took the reigns from Peter and they got handed to Dan and Buck. The whole organization is different. Ask someone who works there. I have.

No, it's not "all before." It's 2007 to the present, and the bar for breaking into the top 100 isn't very high (i.e., 9.5 fWAR or better, which could have been, and was, accumulated by players who came into other organizations since 2007).

[weams]

No, it's not "all before." It's 2007 to the present, and the bar for breaking into the top 100 isn't very high (i.e., 9.5 fWAR or better, which could have been, and was, accumulated by players who came into other organizations since 2007).

I stand on my opinion, which is that nothing before the 2010 draft is even relevant to what we are these days.

[weams]

I stand on my opinion, which is that nothing before the 2010 draft is even relevant to what we are these days.

And really, the Joe Jordan move, and the dislodging of the Stockstills is truly what I mean.

[MrOrange82]

I stand on my opinion, which is that nothing before the 2000 draft is even relevant to what we are these days.

So the seven years between the 2000 draft and the numbers I cited count for nothing, too? It's because I didn't want to count guys like Schilling and Mussina that I set a more "recent" window. Your position on pre-2000 dealings has very little to do with what I'm talking about. Maybe the O's have continued to be bad at developing pitchers for "new and exciting" reasons since 2000, or since AM came to town, or since whenever you want to drive a boundary stake into the ground...but they've continued to be bad, regardless.

[weams]

So the seven years between the 2000 draft and the numbers I cited count for nothing, too? It's because I didn't want to count guys like Schilling and Mussina that I set a more "recent" window. Your position on pre-2000 dealings has very little to do with what I'm talking about. Maybe the O's have continued to be bad at developing pitchers for "new and exciting" reasons since 2000, or since AM came to town, or since whenever you want to drive a boundary stake into the ground...but they've continued to be bad, regardless.

No. I meant 2010. I apologize. You are right in condemning the Orioles of yore. It is your right.

[MrOrange82]

No. I meant 2010. I apologize. You are right in condemning the Orioles of yore. It is your right.

It'll be interesting to see how things look in a few years in re: the last couple of drafting/development seasons. Maybe the O's will turn things around, and maybe Gausman/Bundy are the beginning. But you said it exactly right. The Orioles have been bad at developing pitchers. Whether they are just as bad right now is another question entirely, and one that won't be resolved for quite some time.

[weams]

It'll be interesting to see how things look in a few years in re: the last couple of drafting/development seasons. Maybe the O's will turn things around, and maybe Gausman/Bundy are the beginning. But you said it exactly right. The Orioles have been bad at developing pitchers. Whether they are just as bad right now is another question entirely, and one that won't be resolved for quite some time.

Exactly. I agree completely.

[Chavez Ravine]

We might still be able to add Jake Arrieta to that list

[atomic]

Someone had to ask.

Can't wait for Bundy to join the party.

Wait for the guys to have a couple of season of success in the majors before calling them developed. We have had tons of guys with short spells of good performance only to fall apart.

[Teddy OBP]

So the Cardinals are the other team with the abysmal record of developing pitching? Their approach is widely lauded...

Leads me to believe that luck still plays a big part of it.

[LA2]

So the Cardinals are the other team with the abysmal record of developing pitching? Their approach is widely lauded...

Leads me to believe that luck still plays a big part of it.

Although I appreciate MrOrange82's effort, something's wrong with his method if the Orioles and Cardinals are both at the same end of the scale and the Braves are only one notch higher.

[mdbdotcom]

Wait for the guys to have a couple of season of success in the majors before calling them developed. We have had tons of guys with short spells of good performance only to fall apart.

You wait. I'll enjoy their success while their having it.