How is our player development?

[TJ Wrangler]

I'm not sure what in Frobby's post led you to believe that there haven't been "major changes". I mean, you could be right about that, I'm just not sure what in his post made you think that.

Bottom line is, you're just not going to know an answer to this for some time. Frobby mentioned that there have been plenty of manager/coaching changes. Will this help things, or no? Changes obviously aren't automatically for the good. Furthermore, how good and consistent is the instruction throughout the system? How is the communication? How much attention is paid to detail? These are things that we just don't know, and possibly never will.

Like Frobby said, I think all we can do is take the word of those who cover and are around these teams most.

Just the fact that he listed Stockstill as the major guy in AM's term and the Flanny/Duq term.

[glenn__davis]

Just the fact that he listed Stockstill as the major guy in AM's term and the Flanny/Duq term.

OK, fair enough. Although I think there have been some reports that AM wanted to get rid of Stockstill and was re-buffed, but we don't really know how accurate that is, either.

Look, I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm just saying that this is all behind-the-scenes stuff that is difficult to judge, and that there's no way you're going to be able to tell in "11 months" whether or not things have improved in this area.

[MCO'sFan]

I think the major need in our orgainzation from top to bottom in the Baseball Ops area is continuity. There have been so many changes with the Orioles that no one has been able to establish any type of long-tern sytemic approach to anything. That appears to be changing (no pun intended) with Jordan and the Stockstill brothers. I think that we are about to see the results of their work over the next couple of seasons. The development folks have had better results over the past few years.

With scouting and development you have the "chicken and the egg issue." Did we fail to develop good players becasue we drafted poorly or did we draft well but, fail to develop them. This problem literally goes back 25 years, to the early 80's. I think you can count on one hand the number of impact players (pitchers and position) that we drafted and developed. Heck, I'd even go as far as saying simply average major league players. That's just mind boggling!!!!!

[TJ Wrangler]

OK, fair enough. Although I think there have been some reports that AM wanted to get rid of Stockstill and was re-buffed, but we don't really know how accurate that is, either.

Look, I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm just saying that this is all behind-the-scenes stuff that is difficult to judge, and that there's no way you're going to be able to tell in "11 months" whether or not things have improved in this area.

I heard the reports too, and that Angelos nixed it. If that is true, then we can expect more of the same because the real common denominator is still in power.

I understand that you aren't saying I'm wrong, but during the past 11 months, I wanted to see some signs of change, and I haven't seen that. That is why I'm a little less optimistic than most.

[hoosiers]

I heard the reports too, and that Angelos nixed it. If that is true, then we can expect more of the same because the real common denominator is still in power.

I understand that you aren't saying I'm wrong, but during the past 11 months, I wanted to see some signs of change, and I haven't seen that. That is why I'm a little less optimistic than most.

I am not saying the current system and advisors/coaches/trainers is a strong one - I do not feel qualified to comment as such. But I think you need to point to concrete examples when saying that the system is CURRENTLY broken when criticizing AM for a lack of changes.

We have numerous quality prospects moving through our system now - and doing so successfully. Something is working significantly better than before - whether it is better drafting or better coaching, probably a combination, but guys are indeed moving through our system better than in a long, long time - so I am not sure I can understand the criticism here.

Regarding Beato and a change to his delivery, I think it is easy to criticize. IMO, we do not know the extent of any injuries or whether he was too hard-headed to listen to criticism or whether he received poor coaching. What I do know is that we have let minor leaguers out of the organization in the past (specifically John Maine) who became significantly better players than we expected with some minor tweaking. So, I would think there is some progress that we have corrected Beato's issues before he left the organization.

Regarding a lack of late round surprises in our system, that's an interesting criticism. What system IS able to generated mulitple quality prospects taken after the 10th round - who were not bonus babies? A bonus baby is an organizational decision to spend more $ on the draft and does NOT reflect a superior player development system, IMO.

[Mackus]

Regarding a lack of late round surprises in our system, that's an interesting criticism. What system IS able to generated mulitple quality prospects taken after the 10th round - who were not bonus babies? A bonus baby is an organizational decision to spend more $ on the draft and does NOT reflect a superior player development system, IMO.

Even the "bonus babies" that are drafted in the 10th and later rounds only end up getting 2nd or 3rd round money at absolute most, and usually lower than that.

2nd and 3rd round picks that develop are certainly a testament to their organization. Hell, even developing 1st round picks is a pretty nice accomplishment. There are very few prospects that you can say at the time of the draft that they will pretty much develop regardless of whatever instruction they are given.

Any major leaguer a team drafts and develops should be considered a job well done by that organization. Discounting some players because they are talented is completely arbitraty and quite frankly, silly.

[hoosiers]

Any major leaguer a team drafts and develops should be considered a job well done by that organization. Discounting some players because they are talented is completely arbitraty and quite frankly, silly.

I never discounted any part of any team's player development system.

What I tried to imply was that people are giving some organizations "credit" for turning 20th round players into major leaguers when, in fact, such talent was really second round talent. IMO, that is an organizational decision to spend more $ to accumulate more second round talents regardless of where they were taken in the draft. This discussion should be taken in appropriate context is all I'm saying. If a team spends $1M each on it's second, 15th and 20th round picks, that team might develop one major leaguer out of the three. Let's not give disproportionate credit to that organization for having a strong player development system without a better understand of the facts/context.