Orioles farm system ranked no. 2

[Pickles]

15 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Right…which is why I’m taking the top 2..far harder to find that talent, on any level vs the middling guys.

But applied to the real world and not just theoretical guesses, essentially, the 18 is probably the better bet.

[Can_of_corn]

2 minutes ago, Pickles said:

But applied to the real world and not just theoretical guesses, essentially, the 18 is probably the better bet.

I'm a quality over quantity guy but yea, I'd probably blink over the risk and take the 18.

[Sports Guy]

4 minutes ago, Pickles said:

But applied to the real world and not just theoretical guesses, essentially, the 18 is probably the better bet.

Sure..it’s the old, Tiger Woods vs the field.  Tiger was winning at about a 29% clip, which was astounding but still only about 3 out of every 10 tourneys.

But I would have bet on Tiger and I would bet on these 2 as well.

[Pickles]

4 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I'm a quality over quantity guy but yea, I'd probably blink over the risk and take the 18.

It certainly depends on the quality of the quantity.

There are some farm systems where it's a no-brainer to take Adley and Rodriguez.

The O's comp I used earlier was from 2009, which is probably the last time our farm system was as deep as the current version.

Wieters/Matusz vs. Tillman/Arrieta/Britton/David Hernandez/Reimold/Joseph

The quantity here wins out.

It's certainly an interesting thought experiment.  

[Frobby]

24 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Right…which is why I’m taking the top 2..far harder to find that talent, on any level vs the middling guys.

It would be really nice if Rutschman and Rodriguez actually produced at the level postulated here.   To give a sense of scale, J.T. Realmuto had an excess value of about $132 mm in his pre-FA years.   So $112 mm isn’t really asking for the moon.   

[Pickles]

5 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Sure..it’s the old, Tiger Woods vs the field.  Tiger was winning at about a 29% clip, which was astounding but still only about 3 out of every 10 tourneys.

But I would have bet on Tiger and I would bet on these 2 as well.

Well then you'd lose money 70% of the time.

There's not right or wrong answer here.  It's an interesting thought experiment.

But it is extraordinarily rare that one prospect would be more valuable than 9 others by the time they've progressed as far as these lists.

[Can_of_corn]

2 minutes ago, Pickles said:

It certainly depends on the quality of the quantity.

There are some farm systems where it's a no-brainer to take Adley and Rodriguez.

The O's comp I used earlier was from 2009, which is probably the last time our farm system was as deep as the current version.

Wieters/Matusz vs. Tillman/Arrieta/Britton/David Hernandez/Reimold/Joseph

The quantity here wins out.

It's certainly an interesting thought experiment.  

It also depends on what other avenues are open to you to obtain talent.

If Free Agents aren't really an option for you then that would make the quantity option more appealing.

[Pickles]

Just now, Can_of_corn said:

It also depends on what other avenues are open to you to obtain talent.

If Free Agents aren't really an option for you then that would make the quantity option more appealing.

Yeah, that would probably affect my way of thinking.

Certainly, where I'm at in the ML win cycle would have a huge impact on that decision too.

The better I was at the ML level, the more likely I would be to take the quality over quantity.

And the worse I was, the opposite is probably true.

[Sports Guy]

37 minutes ago, Pickles said:

Well then you'd lose money 70% of the time.

There's not right or wrong answer here.  It's an interesting thought experiment.

But it is extraordinarily rare that one prospect would be more valuable than 9 others by the time they've progressed as far as these lists.

Extraordinary rare?  Yea, I call bs on that.  Considering the low hit rate on prospects, I think it’s fairly easy to find elite guys that were worth more than the top 10 in their teams lists.

I would have to see the proof that it’s extraordinarily rare or did you just pull that out of your ass and make it up?

[Frobby]

8 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

It also depends on what other avenues are open to you to obtain talent.

If Free Agents aren't really an option for you then that would make the quantity option more appealing.

Remember, the values given for Rutschman et al. are excess value, not raw value.   A 1 WAR rookie being paid league minimum provides about $7.5 mm in excess value.   A free agent expected to be worth 1 WAR on average costs $8 mm and provides zero in excess value.   Obviously, some FA’s end up exceeding their expected WAR and therefore provide excess value, and sometimes FA’s sign for less than $8 mm per expected WAR.   But on average, you aren’t going to achieve excess value by signing a free agent.  

Honestly, I’m not sure if that means you’d rather have the two, or the 18.   
 

[Frobby]

25 minutes ago, Sports Guy said:

Extraordinary rare?  Yea, I call bs on that.  Considering the low hit rate on prospects, I think it’s fairly easy to find elite guys that were worth more than the top 10 in their teams lists.

I would have to see the proof that it’s extraordinarily rare or did you just pull that out of your ass and make it up?

There used to be a website (I’m blanking on the name) that had historical data on how much value was within each team’s farm system at the end of any given year (judged retroactively, by rWAR).    One probably could have looked at that to answer this question.   Unfortunately, that site no longer exists.   

Again, I think it depends what you are measuring.  Excess value during the years of team control?   Total value over a player’s career?   I think the answer using those two measures wouldn’t necessarily be the same.   

We know from my other thread about the value of a draft that the average WAR produced by a draft is about 23.   We also know that about 30 % of WAR comes from foreign players who weren’t drafted, so make it 33 WAR/year entering the farm system.   The average average player who makes the majors probably takes 3-5 years to get there, though the great ones may only take 1-2 years.   So I’m going to say, finger to the wind, that an average farm system probably has about 100 WAR in it at any given year, and probably 80% of that comes from the top 10 players in the system.  So, if you have a 40+ WAR player in your system, he’s probably worth as much as the next 9 guys combined.   I don’t know how many 40+ WAR guys are lurking in the minors at any given time, but if I had to guess, I’d say 10-15 (of whom 3-5 graduate to the majors each year).   So, I’d guess that roughly 30-50% of the time, a team has a player in its system who is worth more than the next 9 guys combined in terms of total WAR.   All of this is a pretty rough estimate, but I think it’s good enough to say it’s probably not “exceedingly rare” to have a guy in the farm system who will produce more WAR than the next 9 guys combined, though it probably is true less than half the time and maybe less than a third of the time.   

At some point I may try to do a bit more research to confirm this.   


 

[NelsonCruuuuuz]

5 hours ago, Hallas said:

I bet your brain exploded when you learned that Fangraphs has us at number 1.

 

For what it's worth, a top heavy farm system is much more valuable than a moderately balanced one.  You can only field so many players, and the true top prospects like Adley and Grayson are the ones most likely to give your team big production.  Yeah there might be a diamond in the rough somewhere that might surprise you, but by and large the bottom end of the prospect list is filled with role players that might produce 1/10 of what someone like Adley will (hopefully) produce.

I just pray he takes Greene next year with the number 1 pick. I am scared crapless he will go cheap yet again. 

Being a top rated farm system and winning or completely different things. Plus, sale of the team is a huge factor in the timeline. What if Peter lives another 5 years? Adley might be traded in that scenario b4 he hits free agency.

Good to see the improvement but how can they not improve after watching a painfully unwatchable product after how many years?

[Pickles]

2 hours ago, Sports Guy said:

Extraordinary rare?  Yea, I call bs on that.  Considering the low hit rate on prospects, I think it’s fairly easy to find elite guys that were worth more than the top 10 in their teams lists.

I would have to see the proof that it’s extraordinarily rare or did you just pull that out of your ass and make it up?

Always a charmer.  LOL.

Using the adverb "exceedingly" is probably excessive.

I still think it's rare enough, and Frobby's rough estimate suggests it certainly isn't common.

Mind you, I'm not talking about draft picks.  I'm talking about guys established enough- or high enough pedigree- to be listed be seen, for the most part, as legitimate prospects.

[Pickles]

By the way, with hindsight, I concede it is certainly easy to find top prospects who were better than the next 9, or whatever.  Yes, with the power of hindsight, all this speculatin' stuff doesn't matter.

[7Mo]

1 hour ago, NelsonCruuuuuz said:

I just pray he takes Greene next year with the number 1 pick. I am scared crapless he will go cheap yet again. 

 

Is Greene as sure a thing as Kumar Rocker was a year ago?