The Hardball Times -- Victor Wang http://www.hardballtimes.com/main Baseball. Insight. Daily. en studes@hardballtimes.com Copyright 2013 2013-06-19T08:32:15+00:00 An Interview with Vince Gennaro http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/an-interview-with-vince-gennaro/ http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/an-interview-with-vince-gennaro/#When:05:03:15 Diamond Dollars was a groundbreaking book that was one of the first to look at the economics of baseball. Vince has also had some of his work featured on THT in the past. I talked with Vince to inquire as to how Major League Baseball has been affected by the present economic circumstances.

Please note that this interview was originally conducted during the offseason and a past version was first published in the Northwestern Business Review (NBR). NBR, a quarterly business-oriented magazine, seeks to engage Northwestern students and other business-minded individuals through a variety of content that highlights captivating trends, innovative technology and business practices. NBR provides insight as to how business influences and shapes our collegiate community as the ultimate resource for future business leaders. NBR is a product group of ISBE, the Institute for Student Business Education.

THT: In general, how would you say the economy has been affecting free agent salaries?

Vince Gennaro: Using my free agent valuation model, I compared this year’s free agent deals versus what they would have gotten last in last year’s market. After adjusting for the quality of the player, pitcher compensation (average annual value) was down about 12 percent while position players were down 5 percent. Over the last five years, the compound annual growth is around 12 percent, so it’s essentially been a reversal, particularly for relief pitchers. I think a lot of this has to do with the economy. I think teams are nervous about corporate sponsorship dollars and season ticket renewal rates, which are down significantly in some markets. With unemployment rates very high and the housing market in the tank, there are some huge risks out there so I think teams are being understandably conservative. However, the new stadiums in New York are an entirely different story. Even with many unsold premium seats, the Yankees’ revenues will escalate dramatically this year and they put those dollars to work in the free agent market with their high-profile acquisitions. Their actions have served to support the market, particularly at the high end.

THT: Have certain types of players been hurt more than others?

VG: My sense is that you’re seeing much more of a focus on defense. I think players who are predominantly offensive contributors are getting more accurately valued than in the past. Teams have come to appreciate the defensive contributions a player makes (or fails to make). My model valued Abreu at $8 million per year—a long way from his contract last year with the Yankees and much closer to his deal this year with the Angels. I had Adam Dunn valued at $11 million. There is a “supply” issue as well. If you look at the mix of the free agent class, it was very heavy with relief pitchers. I think some relievers have paid the price because of this. The market for starting pitching held up very well, particularly top of the rotation guys. The fact that the Yankees were active in that segment of the market help support prices.

THT: Does the economy make losing worse? For example, will it be harder than normal to draw fans if a team starts out playing poorly?

VG: Absolutely. Think of a team’s win-loss record as its barometer of “product quality.” In tough economic times fans are going to be less willing to support poor quality. I think in this difficult economy a team’s win-curve—the relationship between a team’s revenues and its on-field performance—has a steeper slope. There will be a bigger revenue penalty for losing. I could make the case that winning is more important in this economy. For teams that fall out of contention, I do think this reality will encourage them to deal players and shed salary earlier in the season than in the past.

THT: The Mets and Yankees will be opening up new stadiums this year. Will the economy impact this in any way?

VG: I think the long-term impact is that the Yankees have moved their chips to the middle of the table because of their ticket prices. They’ve raised the stakes of winning vs. losing. They need to reach the postseason, at a minimum, to sustain this pricing. They’ve developed a two-tier pricing structure. You can get in the ballpark for $25 but you’ll have to pay $325 a game to get 15 rows from the infield. So what they’ve done is make themselves extremely vulnerable to both the economic downturn and the team’s on-field performance.

THT: Oakland has been traditionally known as a small-market team. How have they been able to be so aggressive this past offseason?

VG: I think they’ve made an effort to return to competitiveness quickly as they try to resolve their stadium situation. Billy Beane does an excellent job of managing the peaks and valleys of the competitive cycle, intervening to make the valley more shallow and shorter. Part of that approach is to act as a portfolio manager buying and selling playing assets based on valuations. His acquisitions are less about what the A’s need, from a position standpoint, and more about arbitraging value. His acquisition of Holliday is a perfect example. It wasn’t important if Holliday fit into the A’s plans. It was important that he acquired an asset in the last year of his contract, that the Mets, Red Sox and a few other teams might covet by mid-year. The risk he took on was whether or not Holliday could make the transition to the AL and away from Coors Field. I think the price for Holliday was worth the risk. Acquiring Holliday should ultimately shorten the A’s track back to competitiveness.

THT: Do you think the trend with free agent salaries will continue in next year’s offseason?

VG: One of the things we haven’t talked about is contract length. I’ve always believed that the bigger issue is in the area of contract length (rather than average annual value of contracts). Historically, most multi-year contracts are twice as long as they should be, given the AAV of the deals. One of the things we have seen is risk mitigation by teams shortening their contracts. This is a trend that we’ve seen over the last couple of years, but it accelerated in 2009. I would expect it to continue. I think we’ll see it be more difficult for anything other than the top players to get lengthy, long term deals. Historically, one of the reasons teams were okay with contract length, was that the risk factor, especially with regard to injuries, was somewhat offset by the inflation rate in the free agent market. What we’ve seen now is a shock to the system, if you can’t count on the inflation rate, you need to find a way to offset the injury risk factor. One way to do that is with shorter contracts.

THT: Will the economy change how teams trade players during the year? For example, will teams that get off to a bad start be more willing to trade their more expensive players?

VG: I think teams that are not in contention will be more aggressive in terms of looking to deal players. I really think it will be a buyer’s market and I would expect teams to start shopping players earlier, leading to more transactions in June. There’s very little financial upside in being a 74-win team vs. a 70-win team. Yet a player who might be able to push a team into the postseason may hold the key to unlocking a $30 million revenue stream. It’s always interesting to watch how playing assets get reallocated mid-year to situations where they have the highest return. There are a few teams that have publicly said that they’re stashing some dollars in order to become an acquirer in July. They should be able to make some key additions at a reasonable price.

THT: How do you think the economy will affect how teams draft and deal with international signings this year?

VG: I would expect teams to continue to be relatively aggressive in these areas. With the downturn in the economy putting revenue pressure on many teams, these low cost sources of talent are even more important to the long term health of low revenue teams. Teams know that taking a pass on the draft by not stepping up and signing draftees, or pulling back from signing international prospects can set them back a couple of years in their quest to become or maintain competitiveness.

THT: If you were the Washington Nationals, how would you approach negotiations with Stephen Strasburg (assuming they will select him)?

VG: First, they can’t afford to not select him. Having the first pick this year is like a super lotto ticket. It’s not a free ticket, but there’s great value in the pick due to the upside that Strasburg presents. The good news is the Nats still have the leverage in these negotiations, although I’m sure Boras will come up with several angles that will shift some of it back to the player. Rationally, even with a conservative set of assumptions the Nats could easily justify a $20 million signing bonus, but I’m sure they’re hoping to pay a $10 to $15 million bonus. If we use a conservative assumption that Strasburg has a 50 percent chance of being a No. 3 starter ($130 million over the next six years, as valued by the free agent market) and a 50 percent chance of being a complete bust (no value) and never contributing at the major league level, that translates into a $65 million of value in the free agent market. Even if Strasburg becomes a Super 2, the $65 million of value will cost about $27 million. Even if we use a high discount rate—the triple C bond rate—to reflect the risk associated with a prospect that has never thrown a professional pitch, you can comfortably justify a $20 million signing bonus.

THT: Ultimately, what do you think Strasburg will sign for? How much do you think he would be able to receive if he was available as a free agent?

VG: It’s hard to say what Strasburg will ultimately sign for. It probably has more to do with the individuals involved than with the underlying economics of the situation. Perhaps, the Nats will commit $15 to $20 million guaranteed to him to get the deal done. If Strasburg were truly a free agent, I could envision at least one team giving him at least Kyle Lohse money (four yrs at $41 million).


Click here to learn about THT's download subscriptions.]]> Victor Wang 2009-06-08T05:03:15+00:00 John Dewan Speaking at Northwestern http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/blog_article/john-dewan-speaking-at-northwestern/ http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/blog_article/john-dewan-speaking-at-northwestern/#When:01:32:15
Click here to learn about THT's download subscriptions.]]> Victor Wang 2009-05-12T01:32:15+00:00 Farm system value rankings (Part 4) http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/farm-system-value-rankings-part-4/ http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/farm-system-value-rankings-part-4/#When:05:07:15 done by factoring in one's risk preference and using basic utility theory. Now, with that being said, let's take a look at the top 15 farm systems in baseball.

15. Seattle Mariners, NPV: $113.6 million
Strengths: Good mix of young talent. Deep at third base. Continue to do great with acquiring international prospects.
Weaknesses: A lot of their prospects are relatively raw. No immediate impact starters on the way. Lack a true lefty starting prospect.
Looking forward: Jack Zduriencik did a great job running drafts in Milwaukee and brought in Tom McNamara to become Seattle's scouting director. With most of their talent being young and a high draft pick in this year's draft, Seattle's farm system has a good chance to move up.
Prospect to watch: Dennis Raben, OF. Raben brings a patient approach with plus power but needs work on making more consistent contact. He could put up some big numbers in the California League next year.

14. Toronto Blue Jays, NPV: $118.34 million
Strengths: Travis Snider is one of the top hitting prospects in baseball. J.P. Arencibia is one of the top catching prospects in the game. They have a few arms that should be able to help quickly.
Weaknesses: Not very deep. Lack high upside arms after Brett Cecil. Still looking for high school hitters from their 2007 draft to produce.
Looking forward: Toronto will have a tough time in the AL East this year. There have already been a few rumors that Roy Halladay may be moved at the deadline this year, which would really help out this farm system. Rebuilding might be the best option given the current state of their team and the competition they face. Travis Snider will almost certainly graduate this year.
Prospect to watch: David Cooper, 1B. Cooper was one of the most polished college bats in last year's draft. While his power projection falls short of the other top first basemen from last year's draft, he should be able to move quickly.

13. Milwaukee Brewers, NPV: $128.52 million
Strengths: System is filled with hitting prospects. Jack Zduriencik was able to add a number of intriguing prospects in his final draft with Milwaukee. System had enough depth to deal Matt Laporta and others to acquire CC Sabathia.
Weaknesses: Pitching is weak as even top pitching prospects have question marks.
Looking forward: Milwaukee may trade some of their surplus of hitting prospects for some pitching help. Next year's farm system will depend a lot on how their 2008 draft prospects perform.
Prospect to watch: Cutter Dykstra, OF. The son of Lenny Dykstra, Cutter has great speed and a good approach at the plate. He's likely maxed out, but he has the tools to profile as an everyday center fielder.

12. Minnesota Twins, NVP: $129.19 million
Strengths: Have two really good outfield prospects in Aaron Hicks and Ben Revere. Wilson Ramos is one of the more underrated catching prospects in the game. Good depth.
Weaknesses: Top prospects at least a year or two away. Could use some more quality infield prospects.
Looking forward: Minnesota continues to a good job with the farm system as the major league team stays competitive. A lot of the top guys in their system will likely remain prospects next year.
Prospect to watch: Shooter Hunt, SP. Hunt can be dominant when he's on with his two plus pitches. He needs work with his control and command, but he's in the right system to improve these.

11. Kansas City Royals, NPV: $136.42 million
Strengths: Two elite hitting prospects in Mike Moustakas and Eric Hosmer. Lots of pitching depth behind them.
Weaknesses: Not much depth with hitting prospects after Moustakas and Hosmer. Most of the pitching is young and/or raw.
Looking forward: Moustakas and Hosmer and a lot of the pitchers should remain. The number 12 pick should add another good prospect to the system.
Prospect to watch: Tim Melville, SP. Melville was one of the top high school pitching prospects coming into the 2008 draft but fell to the fourth round. With the chance for three above average pitches, Melville may have the highest upside among Royals' pitchers.

10. St. Louis Cardinals, NPV: $142.72 million
Strengths: Colby Rasmus is one of the top center field prospects in the game. Brett Wallace might be the best pure hitter in the minors. Good depth, especially with relievers and at third base.
Weaknesses: Starting pitching needs improvement. Question marks with middle infield prospects.
Looking forward: Jeff Lunhow has done a nice job improving the system as St. Louis had one of the worst farm systems in the league a few years ago. The system could lose a few players to the majors so they'll need some guys to take steps forward.
Prospect to watch: Adam Reifer, RP. A nice find from college, Reifer has the chance for two plus-plus pitches and could rocket through the minors in 2009.

9. Cleveland Indians, NPV: $145.85 million
Strengths: Carlos Santana is one of the top catching prospects in the game. Pretty good depth. Made multiple above slot signings in last year's draft.
Weaknesses: A lot of their position prospects project to play first base. Could also use some more up the middle talent.
Looking forward: Cleveland continues to do well trading for prospects but has struggled drafting the past few years. They'll need to improve this if they want to keep producing a top-10 farm system.
Prospect to watch: Kelvin de la Cruz, SP. The young, projectable lefty did very well in his full season debut last year. He's a bit raw but has a big upside.

8. Baltimore Orioles, NPV: $157.63 million
Strengths: Matt Wieters is the top prospect in all of baseball. Good pitching depth behind Wieters, led by Brian Matusz and Chris Tillman.
Weaknesses: Hitting talent falls off after Wieters.
Looking forward: Joe Jordan has been little underrated as he has done a great job improving Baltimore's system. While they will likely lose Wieters to the majors, the No. 5 pick should help lessen the blow.
Prospect to watch: L.J. Hoes, 2B. Hoes has a good idea at the plate along with solid power. Converted to second base after being drafted, Hoes needs a lot of work on defense but could end up being a nice offensive second baseman.

7. San Francisco Giants, NPV: $158.35 million
Strengths: Excellent top-level prospects as their top four guys stack up among any organization in the game.
Weaknesses: Solid but not great depth. Big decline with starting pitching prospects after Madison Bumgarner and Tim Alderson.
Looking forward: The Giants have done an excellent job quickly rebuilding their farm system. With an excellent major league rotation and more pitchers coming, San Francisco could be real dangerous if they could develop some hitters.
Prospect to watch: Conor Gillaspie, 3B. Gillaspie's reminds some of Bill Mueller with his polished approach. He should be able to move quickly and profiles as a solid everyday player.

6. Boston Red Sox, NPV: $158.53 million
Strengths: Lars Anderson is an elite first base prospect. Michael Bowden would be in the big league rotation for most major league teams. Tremendous depth.
Weaknesses: Lots of their prospects could take a few years to develop. Still looking for a catching prospect.
Looking forward: Boston's farm system could go in a lot of different directions with the youth of their farm system. However, with their commitment to the draft, I would expect to keep seeing Boston near the top.
Prospect to watch: Kyle Weiland, SP. A reliever in college, Boston will try out Weiland as a starter. He has the stuff to succeed in the rotation as he works on building up his stamina and improving his command.

5. Tampa Bay Rays, NPV: $180.82 million
Strengths: David Price is the top pitching prospect in baseball. Very deep pitching. Talented prospects at up the middle positions.
Weaknesses: Lack a big time power prospect. Weak at the corner infield positions.
Looking forward: The system is very deep and should stay near the top. How the team drafts without having top draft picks will determine if they are able to keep producing top farm systems.
Prospect to watch: Nick Barnese, SP. Barnese is a polished pitcher who still has some projection remaining. While he has some work left with his secondary pitches, Barnese could be Tampa's best pitching prospect going into 2010.

4. Florida Marlins, NPV: $181.42 million
Strengths: System filled with top hitting prospects as they likely have the best crop of hitting prospects in baseball. Some interesting arms behind their hitters.
Weaknesses: Lack a legitimate shortstop prospect. Starting pitching could use some improvement.
Looking forward: Cameron Maybin will likely graduate in 2009, but the rest of Florida's top prospects have a good chance of remaining on the list. Look for Florida to focus on pitching in the near future.
Prospect to watch: Issac Galloway, OF. Galloway is loaded with tools but is raw at the plate. He'll need some time in the minors, but he has a big ceiling.

3. Texas Rangers, NPV: $191.06 million
Strengths: Excellent high-end talent with seven top-100 prospects. Terrific pitching depth.
Weaknesses: Not much at third or the corner outfield.
Looking forward: Texas has done an excellent job rebuilding their farm system. A big test will be how they develop this talent in the majors as they've had trouble establishing pitching prospects in the past.
Prospect to watch: Robbie Ross, SP. Ross is a small, left handed pitcher but has big time stuff. Texas may take it slow with Ross, but he has the repertoire to move fast.

2. Atlanta Braves, NPV: $197.99 million
Strengths: Arguably the top 1-2 prospect combo with Jason Heyward and Tommy Hanson. Two top center field prospects. Lots of lefty pitching.
Weaknesses: They're a bit weak at catcher.
Looking forward: Atlanta continues to do well with scouting and player development. They'll likely lose Hanson and Jordan Schafer to the majors but have a few pitchers who could shoot up the prospect lists along with the number seven pick in the draft.
Prospect to watch: Cole Rohrbough, SP. A nice draft-and-follow find by Atlanta, only Tommy Hanson has better stuff in the Braves' system. He needs some more work with his command but could easily rocket up the Braves' system with his stuff.

1. Oakland Athletics, NPV: $200.7 million
Strengths: Ridiculous pitching depth. Tied Texas with seven prospects in the top 100. Good hitting depth as well.
Weaknesses: Lack a top-notch hitting prospect. Weak at third base.
Looking forward: Oakland quickly went from having one of the weaker farm systems to having the best in the game. We'll see if Oakland is tempted to trade a few prospects if they're in contention come July. Sustaining this level of depth could be difficult, especially with a few prospects likely to graduate this year.
Prospect to watch: Jemile Weeks, 2B. The brother of Rickie Weeks, Jemile is a better defender than his brother and has surprising pop for his size with a good approach at the plate.

Click here to learn about THT's download subscriptions.]]> Victor Wang 2009-04-15T05:07:15+00:00 Projecting playing time http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/projecting-playing-time/ http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/projecting-playing-time/#When:05:02:15
We can think of a player's risk in two main areas: performance risk and playing time risk. By performance risk I mean how certain are we that a player will perform near his projected statistics? In other words, what are the chances a player breaks out or collapses, relative to his projection? It can be hard to determine whether a risky (by this I mean higher variance in his projection) player in this situation is preferred to a player who is less risky. A lot will depend on a team's situation.

When we talk about playing time risk, I simply mean how accurately can we project how much a player will play? This factor usually involves injury risk, but it also can involve the chances a player gets demoted or benched. The tricky thing about this is that these risks can be correlated. For example, a player might lose playing time because his performance worsens. Or a player's performance might decline because he is playing hurt. However, this is a topic for another time. In this article I am going to focus on projecting playing time.

We've come pretty far in projecting performance. As this article shows, multiple projection systems out there, including THT's own developed by David Gassko, do pretty well. The next step, though, is to project how often a player will play. This information is arguably more important now given the number of quality projection systems there are available. This got me wondering how accurately we could project a player's playing time, given certain information we have on players before a season begins. I used multiple linear regression to try to find out.

Here's what I did. From 2007 and 2008 Marcel projections, I took every player who was projected for at least 300 plate appearances. This got rid of players who may have received projections only because they were injury replacements or September call-ups. Next, I recorded several variables I thought would be important for projecting playing time. These included such things as whether the player was projected to be a starter, what position he played, his past injury history, etc. Finally, I recorded how many plate appearances that player actually received in 2007 and 2008. I compared these results to the Marcel projections, and then ran a regression using the variables I recorded to see if they had any relationship with a player's playing time.

First, it's important to know how Marcel did trying to project playing time, because if we can't beat this monkey, then it's not really worthwhile using a new system. Marcel projects playing time by adding a player's plate appearances from a year ago multiplied by .5 to a player's plate appearances from two years ago multiplied by .1. From that sum, he adds in a constant of 200. When I ran a correlation between Marcel's projected plate appearances and a player's actual plate appearances, I came up with an R of .28 and an R-squared of about .08. This means Marcel's playing time projections explains about eight percent of the variation in a player's actual playing time.

Now let's look at the results of the multiple regression. The results were basically what you would expect. While I looked at a number of variables, these ended up being the highly significant ones:

1. Age: The older a player is, the lower his plate appearances total is expected to be. This makes sense because older players typically have an increased chance of getting hurt or seeing a large dropoff in performance. This also suggests that we could consider health or playing time a young player's skill, meaning players who struggle to stay healthy will age worse relative to their peer group.

2. Starter: This was a dummy variable in which I recorded if a player was an Opening Day starter. You have to be very careful using this variable. It is very easy to assume a player was a starter given the amount of playing time he had at the end of the year. The result of this variable is very obvious. Starting players get more playing time than bench players.

3. PA1: This was the number of plate appearances recorded in a player's previous year. Plate appearances from two and three years ago were not statistically significant.

4. WAR1: This was the Wins Above Replacement a player had in his previous year. WAR from two and three years ago was not statistically significant. WAR data were taken from FanGraphs. Clearly, a player who did well in his previous season will receive regular playing time his next year; managers generally expect players to perform as they did in the past.

5. DL1: This was the number of disabled list days a player had in his previous year. DL days from two and three years ago were not statistically significant. DL data were taken from Ron Shandler's Baseball Forecaster. In most cases, players with more DL days in the past are more likely to get hurt in the future. No specific injuries were statistically significant at a five percent level. Groin injuries had the highest significance, being significant at an eight percent level (insert jokes here).

Using these five variables and a constant, the model was able to achieve an R-squared of .74 and an R of about .86. Each variable was significant at the 0.1 percent significance level. This suggests that these five variables can account for 74 percent of the variance in a player's playing time.

Other factors can cause some trouble predicting playing time. For example, playing time for back-ups is dependent on how healthy the starters stay. Case in point: Jose Molina got a little bit more playing time last year due to Jorge Posada's injury.

What if you aren't able to project starters for a team accurately? When I take the "Starter" variable out of the regression equation, the model is still able to achieve an R-squared of .67. These results are very encouraging, suggesting we can accurately predict a player's playing time for next year given a few key variables. While the variables used are fairly obvious, it's still nice to see our intuition backed up by significant results.

Obviously, there is more we can do with projecting playing time. The next steps will likely include creating probability distributions and projecting injury risk separate from a playing time projection.

Click here to learn about THT's download subscriptions.]]> Victor Wang 2009-04-07T05:02:15+00:00 Farm system value rankings (Part 3) http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/farm-system-value-rankings-part-3/ http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/farm-system-value-rankings-part-3/#When:05:04:15 last two articles looked at farm system rankings based off of how a team's prospects rated in various top 100 lists. In the next two parts of the series, I'll look at a team's complete set of prospects and use their prospect rankings to find the worth of each farm system in baseball. For a more in depth look at how I measure prospect value, I would recommend reading my article in the 2009 Hardball Times Annual. A quick note, the prospect to watch section shows a prospect not rated in the the top 100 (shown in the first article) who I think has a good shot to break out next year. Now let's look at the bottom half of the THT farm system rankings.

30. Detroit Tigers, NPV: $59.19 million
Strengths: Rick Porcello is really good. The relievers selected from the 2008 draft should move fast.
Weaknesses: Huge drop off in talent after Porcello. No position prospects really project as everyday players. Other starting pitching prospects are a ways away.
Looking forward: With a top-10 pick next year, Detroit should be able to add at least one impact prospect to its farm system. However, with talks of Porcello possibly making Detroit's opening day rotation, the Tigers will need a really good draft and improvement from a few of their prospects to make a major move up the farm system rankings.
Prospect to watch: Cody Satterwhite, RP. Satterwhite will likely come out of the bullpen for Detroit. He brings a plus fastball but lacks a good secondary pitch. He'll only need to come up with one now that he's a reliever.

29. Houston Astros, NPV: $61.51 million
Strengths: Brian Bogusevic impressed in his first year as a position player. Jason Castro projects as an everyday catcher. The Astros drafted some interesting arms in last year's draft.
Weaknesses: No impact talent. Their depth with position players really drops off after Bogusevic and Castro.
Looking forward: Bobby Heck's first draft looks promising, though passing on Justin Smoak still looks questionable. The farm system could take a while to improve. The Astros desire to continue to try and contend for the playoffs certainly doesn't help.
Prospect to watch: Samuel Gervacio, RP. Gervacio has put up excellent numbers in the minors and has good stuff to back up his stats. He could be a closer sleeper this year if anything happens to Jose Valverde.

28. Washington Nationals, NPV: $71.5 million
Strengths: Jordan Zimmerman has looked really good so far. They have an intriguing group of younger prospects with breakout potential. Jack McGeary has shown promise and will now be pitching full time.
Weaknesses: Big drop off after Zimmerman. Still looking for a few prospects to take the next step. Lacking talented middle infield prospects.
Looking forward: The legend of Stephen Strasburg continues to grow each day, including potential record bonus demands. With two top ten picks in this year's draft, Washington's farm system could take a big leap forward next year.
Prospect to watch: Derek Norris, C. While raw as a catcher defensively, Norris has a polished approached with solid power.

27. Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim, NPV: $74.76 million
Strengths: Jordan Walden broke out last year. A few young arms like Trevor Reckling and Mason Tobin showed interesting potential.
Weaknesses: Very poor depth and talent with position prospects. Nick Adenhart really struggled with his command last year.
Looking forward: Los Angeles has two first round picks and two supplemental first round picks next year, which should give the farm system a nice boost.
Prospect to watch: Will Smith, SP. A nice find by the Angels, Smith is an advanced arm who shows a great feel for pitching. He could move quickly and projects as a mid-rotation starter.

26. Chicago Cubs, NPV: $78.32 million
Strengths: Jeff Samardjiza finally broke out last year. Josh Vitters still shows excellent hitting skills. A good-looking 2008 draft, so far, produced a nice sleeper in Jay Jackson.
Weaknesses: Not much immediate impact help after Samardjiza. Drafts haven't produced much over the last few years. No lefty pitching to speak of.
Looking forward: The Cubs are in a win-now mode and attempted to trade for Jake Peavy in the offseason. Prospects could very easily be moved in the right deal.
Prospect to watch: Ryan Flaherty, SS. A first round supplemental pick last year, Flaherty offers a solid bat but like won't be able to stay at short. He should hit fine next year as we learn more about where he will eventually play.

25. San Diego Padres, NPV: $80.84 million
Strengths: Good depth after loading up on college hitters in their latest draft. Showed aggression in last year's international market.
Weaknesses: Lack high upside talent. Matt Antonelli had a season to forget. Could use some up the middle talent.
Looking forward: San Diego's 2008 was a complete disaster. Having the number three pick in this year's draft will help. It would be nice to see them mix in up some high risk, high upside talent in the draft. Trading Jake Peavy would also help rejuvenate the farm system.
Prospect to watch: James Darnell, 3B. Darnell offers the solid approach at the plate that the Padres like to see with their hitters. He also adds some intriguing tools, with above-average power and speed.

24. Arizona Diamondbacks, NPV: $82.78 million
Strengths: Jarrod Parker has looked like a pretty good pick so far. They have good pitching depth behind him.
Weaknesses: Don't have many position player prospects as there is a huge dropoff after Gerardo Parra. The Diamondbacks have drafted very conservatively the past few years.
Looking forward: Trades and major league graduation have really thinned out the farm system the past few years. Having the number 16 and 17 picks in this year's draft should help.
Prospect to watch: Trevor Harden, SP/RP. It looks like the Diamondbacks may try Harden out as a starter, though he may end up profiling better as a reliever. With a good fastball/slider combo, Harden has the stuff for either role.

23. Los Angeles Dodgers, NPV: $84.71 million
Strengths: James McDonald contributed to the Dodgers' postseason success. The 2008 draft has looked good so far, including Devaris Gordon, who was a nice scouting find.
Weaknesses: Poor depth, mostly due to major league graduation. Ivan DeJesus will likely miss most of the year.
Looking forward: The Dodgers consistently produced top notch farm systems under Logan White. With a lot of that talent now in the majors, it remains to be seen if Tim Hallgren can reproduce White's success.
Prospect to watch: Josh Lindblom, SP. A closer in college, the Dodgers will try out Lindblom as a starter. He has very good stuff and could move quickly through the system.

22. Chicago White Sox, NPV: $94.73 million
Strengths: Did a nice job adding impact prospects, with four prospects in the top 100. Gordan Beckham has done nothing but hit so far.
Weaknesses: Not much after their top four prospects. Some intriguing pitching prospects, but they all have questions marks.
Looking forward: The White Sox have done a nice job improving their talent towards the top of their system. Now they need to work to add more depth to the system.
Prospect to watch: Dexter Carter, SP. Carter was a nice 13th round find in last year's draft. He struggled in college but may have figured things out with the White Sox, as he has shown the potential for two plus pitches.

21. Cincinnati Reds, NPV: $95.57 million
Strengths: Have a fairly deep system, involving a mix of different skill sets. Have shown the willingness to invest in young international talent.
Weaknesses: Weak pitching depth. Lost a lot of high end talent due to graduations.
Looking forward: The number eight pick should help the Reds get an impact type prospect. With a lot of talent moving to the majors lately, the Reds farm system is in a bit of a transition stage.
Prospect to watch: Zach Stewart, RP. Moved to the bullpen as a pro, Stewart can now focus on using his two plus pitches to go after hitters. Stewart could move very quickly in 2009.

20. New York Mets, NPV: $98.56 million
Strengths: Continue to do a great job of finding international talent. Wilmer Flores rocketed up prospect lists. Brad Holt had an excellent debut.
Weaknesses: Lack depth in system. More immediate pitching help, except for Jon Niese, will come through relief pitchers.
Looking forward: The Mets typically adhere to slotting rules in the draft and lost their first round pick by signing Francisco Rodriguez. While Niese is the only major prospect who is at risk of losing his prospect status, the Mets will need some prospects to take some steps forward to avoid dropping down.
Prospect to watch: Reese Havens, SS/2B. While Havens was the Mets first draft pick in 2008, he has been jumped by Brad Holt by most prospect evaluators. He provides good secondary skills at the plate, and while he likely won't stay at shortstop, he could profile nicely as an offensive second baseman. I wouldn't be surprised to see Havens jump back over Holt in next year's prospect lists.

19. Colorado Rockies, NPV: $109.39 million
Strengths: Good talent at the front, led by Dexter Fowler. Christian Friedrich is looking like a steal.
Weaknesses: Talent level drops off quickly after top four prospects. Casey Weathers will miss the 2009 season.
Looking forward: The Rockies are another team that has lost some talent to the majors. Fowler and Jhoulys Chacin could move on to the majors so the Rockies will need a good draft to keep up with graduations.
Prospect to watch: Charlie Blackmon, OF. A senior sign, Blackmon is raw but possesses tools not typically seen from college seniors. He's raw at the plate but has a lot of potential if he can figure things out.

18. Philadelphia Phillies, NPV: $109.87 million
Strengths: Good depth, able to put four prospects in the top 100. Dominic Brown and Michael Taylor had great 2008 seasons. Toolsy players drafted provide a lot of potential.
Weaknesses: Pitching talent falls off quickly after Carlos Carrasco. Drafting style means a lot of prospects with risk.
Looking forward: With Carrasco and Jason Donald both having a chance to graduate and the loss of their first round pick, a lot will depend on how the Phillies' lower level prospects develop.
Prospect to watch: Kyle Drabek, SP. After recovering through Tommy John surgery in 2008, Drabek should be fully healthy for the 2009 season. He has some of the best stuff in the Phillies' system and could really take off if healthy.

17. New York Yankees, NPV: $110.74 million
Strengths: Two top hitting prospects in Austin Jackson and Jesus Montero. Lots of pitching depth behind them.
Weaknesses: After Jackson and Montero there is not much hitting depth. Pitchers all have question marks.
Looking forward: The Yankees lose their top three draft choices because of their free agent signings, though they do pick up a second rounder after failing to sign Scott Bittle. A lot could depend on how aggressive the Yankees are going after potential over slot draftees.
Prospect to watch: Jairo Heredia, SP. The youngster handled low-A ball as an 18 year old. Still has some things he needs to work on but the future is bright.

16. Pittsburgh Pirates, NPV: $113.15 million
Strengths: Two elite hitting prospects in Andrew McCutchen and Pedro Alvarez. Jose Tabata played great after coming over in the Xavier Nady trade. Were able to add additional talent by trading Jason Bay.
Weaknesses: Huge drop off after top three prospects. Pitching needs a lot of work. Daniel Moskos had a very disappointing year.
Looking forward: The new Pirates' management continues to make progress with the farm system as they spent money to go get Pedro Alvarez. McCutchen could move on to the majors in 2009 and Alvarez soon after. Continuing to go after top draft talent will definitely help.
Prospect to watch: Robbie Grossman, OF. An above slot signee taken in the 6th round, Grossman had first round potential going into the 2008 draft before having a poor senior season. He still possesses good hitting tools, though he may end up being a tweener.

Next time, we'll finish up the farm system rankings and reveal the top farm system in all of baseball (hint: it is an AL West team).

Click here to learn about THT's download subscriptions.]]> Victor Wang 2009-03-30T05:04:15+00:00 Farm system value rankings (Part 2) http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/farm-system-value-rankings-part-2/ http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/farm-system-value-rankings-part-2/#When:05:05:15
15. Chicago White Sox, NPV: $75.89 million
Top 100 Prospects: Gordan Beckham (26), Aaron Poreda (56), Tyler Flowers (80), Dayan Viciedo (91)
The White Sox have done a pretty good job of restocking their farm system, though they still could use some more depth. However, they appear to be in a contending while trying to get younger stage, which can be quite difficult to execute successfully. The White Sox might be at the point where it's best to just head in one direction.

14. Toronto Blue Jays, NPV: $83.78 million
Top 100 Prospects: Travis Snider (7), J.P. Arencibia (52), Brett Cecil (58)
Snider provides more than half the Blue Jays' value, meaning the Jays could take a big hit next year when Snider graduates. They'll definitely need some of the younger prospects like Justin Jackson and Kevin Ahrens to emerge. Toronto also might want to give some deep consideration to flat out rebuilding given the stiff competition in the AL East.

12. Colorado Rockies, NPV: $86.29 million
Top 100 Prospects: Dexter Fowler (17), Jhoulys Chacin (42), Wilin Rosario (90), Christian Friedrich (96)
It's hard to believe the Rockies were in the World Series a little bit ago. They still have a pretty good amount of young major league talent; now it's up to the Rockies to put the pieces together again. Finding some more pitching and figuring things out with Franklin Morales would help.

12. Boston Red Sox, NPV: $86.29 million
Top 100 Prospects: Lars Anderson (13), Michael Bowden (49), Josh Reddick (78), Junichi Tazawa (100)
Boston has done a tremendous job restocking its system. However, there is a lot of volatility with their prospects after the first few. Prospects like Ryan Westmoreland, Casey Kelly and Ryan Kalish could head in many different directions. Given the volume and the willingness to spend on the draft, though, Boston should be able to figure things out.

11. Pittsburgh Pirates, NPV: $87.35 million
Top 100 Prospects: Pedro Alvarez (12), Andre McCutchen (19), Jose Tabata (60)
This is what happens when teams spend on elite hitting talent in the draft. I hate to bring this up with Pirates fans, but Pittsburgh would be in the top five on this list if it had drafted Matt Wieters. Their top end hitting talent brings the Pirates near the top 10, but they lack depth. Still, this is a good start for Pittsburgh.

10. Milwaukee Brewers, NPV: $94.62 million
Top 100 Prospects: Alcides Escobar (34), Mat Gamel (54), Jeremy Jeffress (64), Brett Lawrie (86), Angel Salome (94)
Milwaukee has done a really impressive job with its farm system, ranking in the top 10 even after trading Matt Laporta. The Brewers continue to do well developing position players, though they could improve their pitching. It'll be interesting to see how Milwaukee deals with its surplus of position players, and how the Brewers draft without Jack Zduriencik.

9. Cleveland Indians, NPV: $97.67 million
Top 100 Prospects: Carlos Santana (25), Matt Laporta (27), Adam Miller (65), Nick Weglarz (70)
Cleveland continues to do well acquiring prospects in trades. The Indians have depth, but a lot of their guys seem to be destined to play first base—withVictor Martinez, Travis Hafner and Ryan Garko already at the major league level. With a lot of pitching depth, they should be in good shape over the season. Adam Miller is a big wild card—he has some filthy stuff. Cleveland has the potential for a nasty back end of the bullpen with Miller, Kerry Wood and Rafael Perez.

8. St. Louis Cardinals, NPV: $106.48 million
Top 100 Prospects: Colby Rasmus (6), Brett Wallace (30), Chris Perez (85), Daryl Jones (95)
The Cardinals have done well building up their system. They have impressive depth behind their top end guys. However, they lack a lot of young major league talent. After building up the farm system, the big test for the Cardinals will be to continue to churn out a top farm system while their current to prospects graduate to the majors.

7. Baltimore Orioles, NPV: $112.03 million
Top 100 Prospects: Matt Wieters (1), Brian Matusz (23), Chris Tillman (24), Jake Arrieta (62)
Someone could make a legitimate case that the Orioles have the top farm system in baseball simply because of Matt Wieters. Baltimore's system may be the most top heavy farm system in the game. The fact that three of the top four are pitchers adds to the risk.

6. San Francisco Giants, NPV: $122.95 million
Top 100 Prospects: Madison Bumgarner (3), Buster Posey (10), Tim Alderson (40), Angel Villalona (41)
The Giants drastically improved their farm system from the beginning of 2008. They continue to be one of the top teams, if not the top, with drafting and developing pitchers. Normally I'm against investing so many top picks in pitchers, but it's hard to argue with the Giants' results.

5. Florida Marlins, NPV: $131.26 million
Top 100 Prospects: Cameron Maybin (11), Mike Stanton (22), Logan Morrison (37), Matt Dominguez (57), Kyle Skipworth (93)
If Florida can develop some of its younger pitchers, which should be feasible given the high number in the system, this could be a really dangerous team over the next few years. This leads to a question of how much impact defense has on developing young pitchers. I ask this because Florida has had a pretty poor defense over the last few years while Texas appears to have thought about this in the move of Mike Young to third base. The next team on the list also has done pretty good job with defense and developing pitchers . . .

4. Oakland Athletics, NPV: $133.32 million
Top 100 Prospects: Trevor Cahill (15), Brett Anderson (16), Michael Ynoa (35), Chris Carter (68), Adrian Cardenas (82), Aaron Cunningham (98), Gio Gonzalez (99)
Oakland probably has the deepest farm system in the game. While its top position prospects have weaknesses and none project as an elite player, they have a ridiculous amount of pitching depth. If I were Oakland, I would try to manage some of the risk that comes with pitching prospects by trading for some position players. Given this, the overhaul of Oakland's farm system has been very impressive.

3. Atlanta Braves, NPV: $137.93 million
Top 100 Prospects: Jason Heyward (4), Tommy Hanson (9), Jordan Schafer (43), Freddie Freeman (69), Gorkys Hernandez (75)
Atlanta continues to excel in drafting and developing players. The Braves look like they have a decent shot to contend with the Mets and Phillies this year. Frank Wren did well to improve the major league team without giving up any of its top prospects. Keep on eye on how the Braves integrate guys like Hanson and Schafer. And yes, Atlanta would easily have the top farm system if it had its prospects from the Mark Teixeira trade.

2. Tampa Bay Rays, NPV: $141.16 million
Top 100 Prospects: David Price (2), Tim Beckham (14), Wade Davis (31), Desmond Jennings (45), Reid Brignac (59), Jeremy Hellickson (75)
After graduating Evan Longoria, the Rays still are able to come in with the No. 2 system. With young, established major league players and prospects near major league ready, the Rays will have some decisions to make in the near future. Sustaining a top farm system without having top draft picks also will be a new challenge for Tampa Bay.

1. Texas Rangers, NPV: $144.86 million
Top 100 Prospects: Neftali Feliz (5), Justin Smoak (20), Derek Holland (28), Taylor Teagarden (63), Michael Main (66), Martin Perez (76), Elvis Andrus (84)
Texas earns the top spot with a slight edge over Tampa Bay. The battle between Texas and Oakland should be entertaining in the near future. The big key will be which team develops its pitchers—both have talent and depth.

This brings us to another question: How much credit should go to the scouting and development staff when evaluating prospects and young major leaguers? And what impact does the major league coaching staff have on this? I'm not sure, but I hope we'll be able to better quantify this in the future.

Next up, part three of the series. We'll look at the bottom half of farm system rankings after including prospects not rated in the top 100.


Click here to learn about THT's download subscriptions.]]> Victor Wang 2009-03-13T05:05:15+00:00 Steroids debate tonight at Northwestern http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/blog_article/steroids-debabe-tonight-at-northwestern/ http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/blog_article/steroids-debabe-tonight-at-northwestern/#When:19:10:15
Click here to learn about THT's download subscriptions.]]> Victor Wang 2009-03-09T19:10:15+00:00 Farm system value rankings (Part 1) http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/farm-system-value-rankings-part-one/ http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/article/farm-system-value-rankings-part-one/#When:05:06:15 here and in my THT annual article.

Before I could allocate prospect values, I had to find a way to rate the top 100 prospects in baseball. To do this, I took prospect rankings from four sources: Baseball America, Kevin Goldstein, Keith Law and Deric McKamey. For each list, I took the No. 1-rated prospect and gave him 100 points, 99 points to No. 2, 98 points to No. 3 etc.

Finally, I added up all the points each player got and rated them from highest to lowest, creating a top 100 list. Here were the results:
Rank  First Name  Last Name    Team
1     Matt        Wieters      Baltimore
2     David       Price        Tampa Bay
3     Madison     Bumgarner    San Francisco
4     Jason       Heyward      Atlanta
5     Neftali     Feliz        Texas
6     Colby       Rasmus       St. Louis
7     Travis      Snider       Toronto
8     Rick        Porcello     Detroit
9     Tommy       Hanson       Atlanta
10    Buster      Posey        San Francisco
11    Cameron     Maybin       Florida
12    Pedro       Alvarez      Pittsburgh
13    Lars        Anderson     Boston
14    Tim         Beckham      Tampa Bay
15    Trevor      Cahill       Oakland
16    Brett       Anderson     Oakland
17    Dexter      Fowler       Colorado
18    Eric        Hosmer       Kansas City
19    Andrew      McCutchen    Pittsburgh
20    Justin      Smoak        Texas
21    Mike        Moustakas    Kansas City
22    Mike        Stanton      Florida
23    Brian       Matusz       Baltimore
24    Chris       Tillman      Baltimore
25    Carlos      Santana      Cleveland
26    Gordon      Beckham      Chicago (AL)
27    Matt        Laporta      Cleveland
28    Derek       Holland      Texas
29    Jarrod      Parker       Arizona
30    Brett       Wallace      St. Louis
31    Wade        Davis        Tampa Bay
32    Fernando    Martinez     New York (NL)
33    Jordan      Zimmmerman   Washington
34    Alcides     Escobar      Milwaukee
35    Michael     Ynoa         Oakland
36    Josh        Vitters      Chicago (NL)
37    Logan       Morrison     Florida
38    Austin      Jackson      New York (AL)
39    Aaron       Hicks        Minnesota
40    Tim         Alderson     San Francisco
41    Angel       Villalona    San Francisco
42    Jhoulys     Chacin       Colorado
43    Jordan      Schafer      Atlanta
44    Jesus       Montero      New York (AL)
45    Desmond     Jennings     Tampa Bay
46    Yonder      Alonson      Cincinatti
47    Wilmer      Flores       New York (NL)
48    Carlos      Carrasco     Philadelphia
49    Michael     Bowden       Boston
50    Ben         Revere       Minnesota
51    Carlos      Triunfel     Seattle
52    J.P.        Arencibia    Toronto
53    James       McDonald     Los Angeles (NL)
54    Mat         Gamel        Milwaukee
55    Jordan      Walden       Los Angeles (AL)
56    Aaron       Poreda       Chicago (NL)
57    Matt        Dominguez    Florida
58    Brett       Cecil        Toronto
59    Reid        Brignac      Tampa Bay
60    Jose        Tabata       Pittsburgh
61    Nick        Adenhart     Los Angeles (AL)
62    Jake        Arrieta      Baltimore
63    Taylor      Teagarden    Texas
64    Jeremy      Jeffress     Milwaukee
65    Adam        Miller       Cleveland
66    Michael     Main         Texas
67    Greg        Halman       Seattle
68    Chris       Carter       Oakland
69    Freddie     Freeman      Atlanta
70    Nick        Weglarz      Cleveland
71    Philippe    Aumont       Seattle
72    Jason       Castro       Houston
73    Kyle        Blanks       San Diego
74    Andrew      Lambo        Los Angeles (NL)
75    Gorkys      Hernandez    Atlanta
76    Martin      Perez        Texas
77    Jason       Donald       Philadelphia
78    Josh        Reddick      Boston
79    Jeremy      Hellickson   Tampa Bay
80    Tyler       Flowers      Chicago (AL)
81    Dominic     Brown        Philadelphia
82    Adrian      Cardenas     Oakland
83    Chris       Perez        St. Louis
84    Elvis       Andrus       Texas
85    Mat         Latos        San Diego
86    Brett       Lawrie       Milwaukee
87    Michael     Saunders     Seattle
88    Todd        Frazier      Cincinatti
89    Ethan       Martin       Los Angeles (NL)
90    Wilin       Rosario      Colorado
91    Dayan       Viciedo      Chicago (AL)
92    Wilson      Ramos        Minnesota
93    Kyle        Skipworth    Florida
94    Angel       Salome       Milwaukee
95    Darryl      Jones        St. Louis
96    Christian   Friedrich    Colorado
97    Michael     Taylor       Philadelphia
98    Aaron       Cunningham   Oakland
99    Gio         Gonzalez     Oakland
100   Junichi     Tazawa       Boston


With this complete, I gave each prospect a net present value (NPV) based on his tier. I then sorted values by teams to find farm system values for each team. The following list shows values for teams rated from 16-30:

Rankings


30. Houston Astros, NPV: $18.73 million
Top 100 Prospects: Jason Castro (ranked 72)
Houston ranks on the bottom of the list. When the rebuilding eventually starts, it could be a real long process. Castro's general rankings continue to make the decision to draft him over Justin Smoak particularly questionable.

28. Washington Nationals, NPV: $22.48 million
Top 100 Prospects: Jordan Zimmerman (33)
I would say that Washington's situation isn't as bad as it looks based on this ranking. The Nationals have a few guys who were on the cusp of breaking into the composite top 100 and have a few breakout candidates for next year. Also, having two top-10 picks in next year's draft will help a lot.

28. Arizona Diamondbacks, NPV: $22.48 million
Top 100 Prospects: Jarrod Parker (29)
Arizona's farm system has struggled, as it's in the transition stage. The Diamondbacks have graduated a lot of their past top prospects. They've been college-heavy in the last few drafts, and it might be time for them to mix in a few high-upside type players.

27. Detroit Tigers, NPV: $23.49 million
Top 100 Prospects: Rick Porcello (8)
Porcello is an interesting prospect to project. His performance, while still very good, has been a little different than what scouts had thought. Jon Garland seems to be a popular comparison that's getting thrown around; they do have similar minor league performances as 19-year-olds. Porcello may be a player with no great comp.

26. Chicago Cubs, NPV: $28.28 million
Top 100 Prospects: Josh Vitters (36)
The Cubs might want to look into trading Vitters, maybe restarting talks with the Padres for Jake Peavy. The team is clearly in a win-now situation, and it will be a few years until Vitters is ready.

25. San Diego Padres, NPV: $32.6 million
Top 100 Prospects: Kyle Blanks (73), Mat Latos (85)
The Padres get hurt in a ranking system like this because they lack elite-level prospects. However, their farm system is pretty deep. They could shoot up in value after having the No. 3 draft pick and having their prospects develop.

24. Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim, NPV: $32.7 million
Top 100 Prospects: Jordan Walden (55), Nick Adenhart (61)
The Angels' farm system has been hurt by the loss of draft picks over the last few years. However, they have a number of picks this year, so this draft will be very important for their future. The A's and Rangers' deep farm systems will make this a very tough division, and there aren't any guarantees about this year either.

23. Cincinnati Reds, NPV: $43.91 million
Top 100 Prospects: Yonder Alonso (46), Todd Frazier (88)
Cincinnati lost a ton of talent from last year. The big question is if the talent will be enough to get the Reds back in contention. They don't have any pitching that will help in the immediate future, except maybe Daryl Thompson. The Reds are headed in the right direction, but they seem to be stuck. They'll need a few more pieces to go along with their current talent.

22. Los Angeles Dodgers, NPV: $48.95 million
Top 100 Prospects: James McDonald (53), Andrew Lambo (74), Ethan Martin (89)
The Dodgers have done a great job of drafting and developing players over the last few years. The one thing the farm system has struggled to produce is a big time impact hitter, though Matt Kemp or James Loney could change that. Like Arizona, the Dodgers are in a bit of a transition period, since a lot of talent has graduated.

20. New York Mets, NPV: $56.56 million
Top 100 Prospects: Fernando Martinez (32), Wilmer Flores (47)
The Mets have done a great job with international signings, as prospects like Martinez and Flores show. It will be interesting to see what effect the economy has on the international market. International signings are one area teams might look to cut costs in. With the refusal to go above slot in the draft, the Mets will have to stay strong with international signings if they want to continue to improve their farm system.

20. New York Yankees, NPV: $56.56 million
Top 100 Prospects: Austin Jackson (38), Jesus Montero (44)
The Yankees roster construction provides an interesting case with opportunity costs and roster spots. With the number of long-term contracts they've signed, there isn't much flexibility with roster spots. This might be something to look at in the future when dealing with long-term contracts, as I briefly explored in the past. While Montero is blocked at first base for the near future, the DH spot should be cleared up by the time he is ready. This would provide an interesting dilemma for the Yankees if Montero were closer to the majors.

19. Kansas City Royals, NPV: $68.62 million
Top 100 Prospects: Eric Hosmer (18), Mike Moustakas (21)
The Royals are slowly gathering more and more talent. A potential stumbling block with their current farm system setup is that by the time guys like Moustakas, Hosmer and most of their pitchers are ready, their young major league players like Alex Gordon and Billy Butler will be nearing free agency.

18. Philadelphia Phillies, NPV: $69.37 million
Top 100 Prospects: Carlos Carrasco (48), Jason Donald (77), Dominic Brown (81), Michael Taylor (97)
The Phillies have done a great job of developing big-time stars for the major league team. Now we'll see if guys like Carrasco, Donald and J.A. Happ can help provide a little more depth for the majors.

17. Seattle Mariners, NPV: $69.44 million
Top 100 Prospects: Carlos Triunfel (51), Greg Halman (67), Phillipe Aumont (71), Michael Saunders (87)
The Mariners have an interesting collection of minor leaguers. They aren't the most polished bunch, but they provide some upside. We'll see what kind of influence Jack Zduriencik has on the draft, and if he changes their player development approach—the Mariners had been known to move prospects quickly.

16. Minnesota Twins, NPV: $72.19 million
Top 100 Prospects: Aaron Hicks (39), Ben Revere (50), Wilson Ramos (92)
Ben Revere is a unique prospect. My only concern is that he won't hit for enough power to make pitchers respect him. However, Revere may be so unique he finds a way to succeed with his skill set. He'll be an interesting prospect to follow.

In the next part of this series, we'll look at the top 15 farm systems.


Click here to learn about THT's download subscriptions.]]> Victor Wang 2009-03-03T05:06:15+00:00 Overrated for 2009 http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/fantasy/article/overrated-for-2009/ http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/fantasy/article/overrated-for-2009/#When:05:08:15
Ian Kinsler, 2B, Texas: Kinsler clearly has a great skill set with strong power and speed skills while playing a premium position. However, remember that Kinsler is still a guy who has yet to put together a full season worth of at bats. Kinsler has been around a late first round pick in most drafts I've seen. I think Kinsler just has too much risk to invest a first round pick in.

Evan Longoria, 3B, Tampa Bay: Longoria was very good in his major league debut last season and showcased some serious power skills. However, he's a guy who has still only played in one major league season, meaning there's less reliability with his projection. Additionally, there is some batting average downside with Longoria. With the risk he brings, I would make lean towards a guy like Aramis Ramirez over Longoria, even though Longoria might provide some additional upside.

Cole Hamels, SP, Philadelphia: Hamels has a tremendous skill set, one of the best in the game. However, he will be coming off a innings increase (don't forget the postseason innings he pitched). He definitely has the skill and talent of a starter who should be picked in the top three or four rounds. But is Hamels' injury risk something you want to take on that early?

Chris Davis, 1B/3B, Texas: I took a more in depth look at Davis in a past article. A lot of people will be tempted by Davis' power potential. However, like the guys mentioned before him, Davis carries quite a bit of risk. With the spots he has gone in in recent mock draft, I would try to avoid Davis. You can get power elsewhere without taking as much risk.

Carlos Zambrano, SP, Chicago (NL): Zambrano showed signs of his past workload catching up with him last year, and the injury risk with him still remains. He has another big warning flag with his declining strikeout rate over the last few years. All in all, Zambrano is guy whose skill set is not that impressive. When you combine this with his injury risk, Zambrano is a player who carries a lot of downside risk.

Daisuke Matsuzaka, SP, Boston: On the surface, Matsuzaka had an excellent year last year with an 18-3 record and a sparkling 2.90 ERA. However, his skills really declined as his walk rate shot up and his strikeout rate went down. Overall, the skill set he has displayed over his first two major league seasons has not been that impressive. Many people have noted that Matsuzaka's approach last year was to try and avoid hard contact, which would help explain why he had such a low BABIP. However, it's really easy to fit a story to a past event. I wouldn't want to take the risk that would be involved with finding if Matsuzaka has a unique skill to help control his BABIP.

Jermaine Dye, OF, Chicago (AL): Dye has been pretty durable during his stay with the White Sox. In fact, he has been fairly durable for the last five years. However, Dye will be entering his age-35 season next year and his risk of collapse and injury only continue to climb as he gets older. You should be able to get a player with a little more upside and less risk, maybe someone like Andre Ethier, at a similar position as Dye.

Click here to learn about THT's download subscriptions.]]> Victor Wang 2009-03-02T05:08:15+00:00 Steroids Debate at Northwestern http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/blog_article/steroids-debate-at-northwestern/ http://www.hardballtimes.com/main/blog_article/steroids-debate-at-northwestern/#When:08:12:15
Click here to learn about THT's download subscriptions.]]> Victor Wang 2009-02-24T08:12:15+00:00