MASN: Steve Meleswski with Brian Graham - We are absolutely one of the premier development systems

[weams]

Well, I recollect you being high on the Red Sox farm system for many years now. I'm just not seeing where they have contributed much to the ML team over the past few years. They haven't produced any decent pitchers. They have sent more heavily in free agency. Guys like Jackie Bradley Junior and Middlebrooks have been failures and they've been forced to spend crazy money on Panda and Ramirez to play LF. Now they spent 63 million (I believe that is the net amount) for a Cuban prospect. For as lame as the Orioles farm system has supposedly been it appears to me we have gotten much more value from our farm system than they have from theirs over the past few years. That's not even taking into account the value that we've gotten from from the fringe Major Leaguers,

As far as Hamels goes, sounds like the Phillies are insistent on Betts and/or Swihart and maybe not that impressed with the rest of it as you are. Not that I'm claiming the Phillies be some great organization or anything.

Trading for Boston prospects is much like trading for Yankee farm hands, no?

[Stotle]

Well, I recollect you being high on the Red Sox farm system for many years now. I'm just not seeing where they have contributed much to the ML team over the past few years. They haven't produced any decent pitchers. They have sent more heavily in free agency. Guys like Jackie Bradley Junior and Middlebrooks have been failures and they've been forced to spend crazy money on Panda and Ramirez to play LF. Now they spent 63 million (I believe that is the net amount) for a Cuban prospect. For as lame as the Orioles farm system has supposedly been it appears to me we have gotten much more value from our farm system than they have from theirs over the past few years. That's not even taking into account the value that we've gotten from from the fringe Major Leaguers,

As far as Hamels goes, sounds like the Phillies are insistent on Betts and/or Swihart and maybe not that impressed with the rest of it as you are. Not that I'm claiming the Phillies be some great organization or anything.

There's nothing really specific here to respond to. What years are we talking about? Boston has traded away some guys, some guys got injured, etc. There current crop of prospects has been on the farm for the past few years -- they haven't really had to graduate anyone. I'd love to discuss but am not exactly sure what you are getting at, or whether you are basing the thoughts on anything specific.

[CA-ORIOLE]

There's nothing really specific here to respond to. What years are we talking about? Boston has traded away some guys, some guys got injured, etc. There current crop of prospects has been on the farm for the past few years -- they haven't really had to graduate anyone. I'd love to discuss but am not exactly sure what you are getting at, or whether you are basing the thoughts on anything specific.

1. I can recall you being high on the Red Sox farm system for many years now.

2. Not sure why the Red Sox farm system contributing very little to their ML team over the past few years isn't specific enough. For simplicity lets call that number the past 3 years.

3. For example Middlebrooks and Jackie Bradley Junior were certainly counted on to a great degree these past couple years and have failed pretty miserably. I can't think of one single good pitcher (from their farm system) that has significantly contributed to the Red Sox ML team over the past few years and that they could now count on going forward.

If they had gotten better contributions from their farm system over that time (i.e the past 3 years) they may have been able to keep Lester and their current lack of pitching wouldn't be as significant. Instead they needed to invest heavily in free agency for positional players like Panda and Ramirez.

Just saying that the results and contributions from the Red Sox farm system to the ML team over the past 3 years don't really correlate to your past optimism imo.

Clear?

[CA-ORIOLE]

Trading for Boston prospects is much like trading for Yankee farm hands, no?

The Yankees have produced some pretty good arms at least.

[Crazysilver03]

Well, a lot of what the Red Sox acquired in their fire sale in 2012 pretty much busted and has been traded away for a few pieces they acquired this year.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[MurphDogg]

There's nothing really specific here to respond to. What years are we talking about? Boston has traded away some guys, some guys got injured, etc. There current crop of prospects has been on the farm for the past few years -- they haven't really had to graduate anyone. I'd love to discuss but am not exactly sure what you are getting at, or whether you are basing the thoughts on anything specific.

Among players under 29 last season, the Red Sox accrued 3.2 rWAR from hitters and -1.6 rWAR from pitchers that they either drafted or acquired as amateur free agents.

The Orioles accrued 5.6 rWAR from hitters and 3.5 rWAR from pitchers of the same group (excluding Wei Yin Chen).

Neither of these numbers are particularly impressive but the Sox's number is worse.

In 2013 among players under 29, the Red Sox accrued 1.8 rWAR from hitters and 5.1 rWAR from pitchers (4.3 from then 28 year-old Buchholz) that they either drafted or acquired as amateur free agents.

The Orioles accrued 6.6 rWAR from hitters (6.4 from Machado) and 0 rWAR from pitchers of the same group (excluding Wei Yin Chen).

If you want to give the Orioles credit for Tillman (or Chen), those numbers would be even more in the Orioles favor. The Red Sox system hasn't graduated a successful MLB player since Clay Buchholz.

[CA-ORIOLE]

Among players under 29 last season, the Red Sox accrued 3.2 rWAR from hitters and -1.6 rWAR from pitchers that they either drafted or acquired as amateur free agents.

The Orioles accrued 5.6 rWAR from hitters and 3.5 rWAR from pitchers of the same group (excluding Wei Yin Chen).

Neither of these numbers are particularly impressive but the Sox's number is worse.

In 2013 among players under 29, the Red Sox accrued 1.8 rWAR from hitters and 5.1 rWAR from pitchers (4.3 from then 28 year-old Buchholz) that they either drafted or acquired as amateur free agents.

The Orioles accrued 6.6 rWAR from hitters (6.4 from Machado) and 0 rWAR from pitchers of the same group (excluding Wei Yin Chen).

If you want to give the Orioles credit for Tillman (or Chen), those numbers would be even more in the Orioles favor. The Red Sox system hasn't graduated a successful MLB player since Clay Buchholz.

Brock Holt appears to be the best.

[Frobby]

I have to admit, that first season I thought Middlebrooks was going to be a stud. I'm glad I was wrong. I do think Mookie Betts is a player, and expect Bogaerts will turn out to be at least OK.

[MurphDogg]

I have to admit, that first season I thought Middlebrooks was going to be a stud. I'm glad I was wrong. I do think Mookie Betts is a player, and expect Bogaerts will turn out to be at least OK.

I agree with this. But it is fair to say that the results haven't (yet) been there (save 52 games of Betts). And I doubt that any of them end up being better than Machado.

[Crazysilver03]

Brock Holt appears to be the best.

Didn't Holt come over from Pittsburgh?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Stotle]

1. I can recall you being high on the Red Sox farm system for many years now.

2. Not sure why the Red Sox farm system contributing very little to their ML team over the past few years isn't specific enough. For simplicity lets call that number the past 3 years.

3. For example Middlebrooks and Jackie Bradley Junior were certainly counted on to a great degree these past couple years and have failed pretty miserably. I can't think of one single good pitcher (from their farm system) that has significantly contributed to the Red Sox ML team over the past few years and that they could now count on going forward.

If they had gotten better contributions from their farm system over that time (i.e the past 3 years) they may have been able to keep Lester and their current lack of pitching wouldn't be as significant. Instead they needed to invest heavily in free agency for positional players like Panda and Ramirez.

Just saying that the results and contributions from the Red Sox farm system to the ML team over the past 3 years don't really correlate to your past optimism imo.

Clear?

1. Agreed -- Boston has had a strong system for a long time. Top half of baseball consistently and often times a top ten system, even top 5 (like right now).

2. The Red Sox haven't really promoted much internal talent at all over the last three years. They've traded guys for established major leaguers while continuing to develop from the lower levels (HS guys like Swihart, Cecchini, Betts, Owens, and college guys they've just taken their time with over the past four seasons, like Barnes and Johnson).

Middlebrooks had a nice debut, bad sophomore year, and wasn't really relied upon at all last year. JBJ hasn't been good offensively. At all. Agreed. Excellent defender that got passed by Betts on the depth chart (we can ignore Betts for now, though my guess is the hype of a player like Betts would be through the roof around here were he an Oriole). Mostly back-end guys and roll players, though, as far as players specifically promoted in the last three years (ignoring Betts).

3. You don't have a good grasp on the Lester issue -- he wasn't staying in Boston. Signing Panda/Ramirez had nothing to do with Middlebrooks/JBJ and everything to do with having money to spend. Cespedes/Betts/Castillo/Victorino and they still signed Ramirez to play an outfield corner. If you ask a Boston FO member I'm wagering they tell you their analytics department really likes Sandoval (curious where Cecchini ends up -- yet another MLB ready player by the way, and one who looked pretty good in his call-up last September).

You did clear up your post, so thank you. I disagree with your analysis, but whatever. I'm not trying to hype the Red Sox to you. Maybe they get nothing out of these kids...

[Stotle]

Among players under 29 last season, the Red Sox accrued 3.2 rWAR from hitters and -1.6 rWAR from pitchers that they either drafted or acquired as amateur free agents.

The Orioles accrued 5.6 rWAR from hitters and 3.5 rWAR from pitchers of the same group (excluding Wei Yin Chen).

Neither of these numbers are particularly impressive but the Sox's number is worse.

In 2013 among players under 29, the Red Sox accrued 1.8 rWAR from hitters and 5.1 rWAR from pitchers (4.3 from then 28 year-old Buchholz) that they either drafted or acquired as amateur free agents.

The Orioles accrued 6.6 rWAR from hitters (6.4 from Machado) and 0 rWAR from pitchers of the same group (excluding Wei Yin Chen).

If you want to give the Orioles credit for Tillman (or Chen), those numbers would be even more in the Orioles favor. The Red Sox system hasn't graduated a successful MLB player since Clay Buchholz.

This is silly. Lowrie, Reddick, Masterson, Nava, Bard, Drubont, Iglesias, and Holt were all post-Buchholz. Ellsbury was same year. Ranaduo/Workman/Brentz were just recently given opportunities.

I guess we can ignore Boegarts and Betts. I think closing the book on JBJ is premature, though it doesn't look like he'll get an opportunity in Boston. Webster has only gotten a taste of the bigs -- maybe he's scrap, maybe he is useful filler. I don't know.

It's possible all of Betts/Bogaerts/Cecchini/JBJ/Owens/Barnes/Johnson/ERod fall flat.

Who do you think produces more WAR over the next four years? Boston's 25 and under or Baltimore's? Pretty good question -- there's a little bit of potential star power on both sides. Take away the top two players from each team and does your answer change?

[MurphDogg]

This is silly. Lowrie, Reddick, Masterson, Nava, Bard, Drubont, Iglesias, and Holt were all post-Buchholz. Ellsbury was same year. Ranaduo/Workman/Brentz were just recently given opportunities.

I forgot Josh Reddick. Sorry about that. I was just jumping on here to say that before someone else called me out on it.

I was considering Buchholz as produced in 2009 not his debut in 2007, since he made 16 minor league starts in both '08 and '09 but he probably should be considered '08 since that is when he exhausted rookie eligibility. Masterson and Lowrie exhausted their rookie eligibility the same year. Nava and Holt were not drafted by the Red Sox. Holt played 24 games with another MLB team and the Sox acquired Nava at age 25. Bard qualifies I guess (in the same way Luis Matos and Larry Bigbie were once successful MLB players), Doubront is a replacement level player and I don't consider Iglesias a successful MLB player yet, although he definitely still could be.

[Stotle]

I forgot Josh Reddick. Sorry about that. I was just jumping on here to say that before someone else called me out on it.

I was considering Buchholz as produced in 2009 not his debut in 2007, since he made 16 minor league starts in both '08 and '09 but he probably should be considered '08 since that is when he exhausted rookie eligibility. Masterson and Lowrie exhausted their rookie eligibility the same year. Nava and Holt were not drafted by the Red Sox. Holt played 24 games with another MLB team and the Sox acquired Nava at age 25. Bard qualifies I guess (in the same way Luis Matos and Larry Bigbie were once successful MLB players), Doubront is a replacement level player and I don't consider Iglesias a successful MLB player yet, although he definitely still could be.

There have been flops -- everyone has them, right? But there have also been a lot of top guys traded (some of whom have been injured)

• Casey Kelly (traded and has been injured)
• Jose Iglesias (traded and has been injured)

Some have been traded and look good, okay, or TBD

• Anthony Rizzo (traded and has been pretty good)
• Josh Reddick (traded and now solid MLBer)
• Stolmy Pimentel (traded and last year first extended time in Pittsburgh pen -- not sure what he is yet)
• Anthony Ranaudo (traded and hasn't really spent much time in the bigs yet)

And there is a pretty solid list of guys still in house that are just now reaching the bigs (which we've already been through a bunch).

I mean, if people want to call Boston bad at this whole acquire and develop thing that's their prerogative. Maybe it's 100% accurate. Maybe that line of thinking looks pretty silly a year or two from now. Shrug...

[MrOrange82]

This has already been alluded to, but why does it feel like Baltimore's system is getting credit for developing tradeable pieces (who were traded), but Boston's is being knocked strictly based on who's personally contributed to their ML roster? It doesn't seem like all the apples are being compared to other apples, IMO.