The problem with taking a one-month break in between installments of a series containing analysis is that your clever pre-season work can be made to look silly in a month. No, the Indians aren’t nearly this good, but I also may have spoken too soon when I dropped the “pathetic” tag on the franchise.
Still, continuing where I left off, at #20 in my organizational rankings:
20. Seattle Mariners
Ranked 17th by Fangraphs
Financial Resources: C
Present Talent: D
Baseball Operations: C
Future Talent: C
Given that this team has lost more than 100 games in two of the past three seasons, ranking at #20 isn’t such a terrible thing. The main problem is that despite the furious work put in by new GM Jack Zduriencik and his staff, the team is clinging to a small core of impact talent (basically Ichiro and King Felix). They do have some big-time prospects on the move; second baseman Dustin Ackley and starting pitcher Michael Pineda have star potential, and both of them should affect an immediate improvement. Even considering that, though, the M’s will still have a small core of useful talent that will get a lot smaller when (if?) Ichiro’s batting average starts to slip.
I like a lot of what Jack Z has done in Seattle, so I feel kind of bad throwing out that “C” in operations. It hasn’t been all roses for the new GM, but what really affected my rating was a difficult clubhouse environment that doesn’t reflect kindly on the on-field personnel.
As 100-loss teams go, the Mariners have some promise, but they’re still the fourth-best team in a four-team division.
19. Baltimore Orioles
Ranked 15th by Fangraphs
Financial Resources: C
Present Talent: D
Baseball Operations: C
Future Talent: C
The Orioles franchise is in better shape than it’s been in a decade. This is mainly represented by the strong talent the organization has on hand, both at the major league level and in the high minors. It’s also an indication of the good work done by team executive Andy MacPhail, as well as the non-interference by feisty owner Peter Angelos.
Still, the Orioles are the fifth-best team in a five-team division. Sure, I guess you could argue them past the Blue Jays, but their best-case scenario is finishing third, and that’s assuming that a tremendous catastrophe befalls one of the division’s powerhouses.
The Orioles do have an impressive array of young talent and low-cost veterans. The days of splurging on C-level players like Jay Payton and Kevin Millar seem to be a thing of the past, with a new emphasis on low-cost talent. The Orioles start the season with nine good position players and no obvious hole anywhere in the starting lineup (unless you’re really pessimistic about Vlad Guerrero). They’ve got three or four legitimate pitching prospects in the majors, with at least one more on the way. In any other division, they’d be contenders. Unfortunately, they’re stuck behind the Yankees, Red Sox and Rays.
18. Los Angeles Dodgers
Ranked 23rd by Fangraphs
Financial Resources: C
Present Talent: C
Baseball Operations: D
Future Talent: C
The Dodgers are facing two major, potentially fatal problems heading into the 2011 season. The first, and most obvious, is the battle for ownership of the team, a contentious public display that has limited the ability of the front office to properly utilize the still-potent team revenues.
The more immediate problem is that the core talent developed by Logan White is getting ever-closer to free agency with little sign that it will be enough to push the team into contention. This isn’t to say that there aren’t some really bright spots on the team. Clayton Kershaw has the upside of a #1 starter, and by that I mean the #1 starter in all of baseball. Chad Billingsley is a solid #2, and the team has some strong relief options, starting with closer Jonathan Broxton. The front office was also able to add some good depth to the starting rotation, re-signing the underrated Hiroki Kuroda and picking up Ted Lilly. If the Dodgers do contend in the next three-to-five years, it will probably be on the strength of their pitchers.
The starting lineup is something else entirely. Player development of position players has been almost uniformly disastrous. Catcher Russell Martin was broken (probably by Joe Torre) and discarded, but not before the team also traded away a potential superstar replacement in Carlos Santana (in exchange for non-superstar Casey Blake). Center fielder Matt Kemp has shown the ability to turn his potent tools into run production, but not with consistency, leaving many to wonder if he’ll ever really be that guy.
Perhaps the most amazing thing here is that the Dodgers were supposed to have a dynamic, homegrown infield. The idea was that James Loney would play first, with Andy LaRoche manning third. The middle infield would be covered by some combination of Chin-Ling Hu, Ivan DeJesus, Jr., Blake Dewitt and Delwyn Young. Three of those middle-infield guys have already bombed out of the organization, as has LaRoche. DeJesus, age 24, still could be a contributor, whereas James Loney looks like a capable if utterly uninspiring first baseman (career 286/346/435).
The Dodgers’ Plan B for dealing with this failure hasn’t been uniformly bad. They picked up Andre Ethier in a steal of trade from Oakland. They signed Rafael Furcal to a free agent deal. And while he’s not as good as Santana, Casey Blake has been pretty useful. But the combination of brittle veterans, busted prospects and a woeful defensive outfield leaves the Dodgers placing all their faith in the pitching staff to get them back to October.
It may seem a stretch to give the Dodgers a “D” in Baseball Operations, especially since the team was able to develop a tremendous crop of young talent in a short period of time (their big-league performance notwithstanding). The drag on this rating isn’t just the batsh*t-crazy McCourts, but bumbling GM Ned Colletti. If not for the work of White’s minor league machine, Colletti’s time in L.A. would have been a dismal failure, punctuated as it was by the terrible contracts handed out to the likes of Juan Pierre, Jason Schmidt and Andruw Jones, not to mention the unforgivable loss of Carlos Santana to the Indians.
The Dodgers’ window of opportunity has probably closed, and while they did manage to make a couple of trips to the NLCS, it will probably be looked upon as a failure in light of the tremendous potential that was squandered.
17. Detroit Tigers
Ranked 16th by Fangraphs
Financial Resources: C
Present Talent: C
Baseball Operations: B
Future Talent: D
The Tigers are squeezing the last drops of contention out of the team that won the 2006 pennant. And while Justin Verlander and Miguel Cabrera are two guys you can build a franchise around, the Tigers’ list of impact players ends there.
Like many teams that experience unexpected success, the Tigers spent a lot of money rewarding the team that went to the ‘06 World Series. Contract extensions were handed out to Verlander, Jeremy Bonderman, Brandon Inge, Carlos Guillen and Nate Robertson. Other than Verlander’s deal, those contracts have been uniformly embarrassing. Bonderman and Robertson are out of the organization, and Guillen will be soon. But instead of taking the opportunity to find a new core of young talent, the Tigers seem obsessed with wringing one last year of contention out of the present group, spending big money on mid-level guys like Jhonny Peralta, Joaquin Benoit and Jose Valverde. The commitments to these players have left the team with a few stars surrounded by several gaping holes filled by marginal major-league talents such as Brennan Boesch and Brad Penny.
The Tigers have consistently fielded a payroll that seems to suggests a bigger market than they currently enjoy. Those numbers are coming down, though, and given the current state of the city of Detroit, I can’t anticipate any great increase in revenues. I wouldn’t expect the Tigers to outspend the Red Sox again in the near future.
16. Milwaukee Brewers
Ranked 22nd by Fangraphs
Financial Resources: C
Present Talent: B
Baseball Operations: C
Future Talent: D
I think I’m much higher on the Brewers than most people. I seem to have them a letter grade higher than the general consensus. I’ll try to justify that in a few short words.
As to financial resources, the Brewers do reside in one of baseball’s smallest media markets, but they’ve also managed to average about 3 million in attendance over the past four years. They also have an owner who has proven willing to commit money to the team to keep key talent in place. Their payroll is a bit low this year (~$80 million), but I feel safe in giving the team a rating above what you’d expect based simply on the size of their market.
I picked the Brewers to win the NL Central, so it should come as no surprise that I like their present talent. Even with Zack Greinke on the DL, the Brewers have a fine starting rotation of Greinke, Yovani Gallardo, Shaun Marcum, Randy Wolf and Chris Narveson. I don’t think the bullpen is as bad as many are expecting, and while the defense is bad, I think there are enough bright spots there to prevent a catastrophe. When you consider that the Brewers have a potent middle of the order, and I don’t see why everyone considers this to be a third-place team.
While I think GM Doug Melvin has made his share of mistakes on the player acquisition front (namely Randy Wolf and Jeff Suppan), he’s also done an awful lot to bring a formerly moribund franchise back to life. He presided over the drafting and development of an impressive nucleus of talent, made some very impressive trades (none moreso than the Richie Sexson deal) and managed to acquire some very useful veteran pieces (Doug Davis, Ray Durham, Mike Cameron) without having to commit to ten-figure annual salaries. I don’t want to marginalize his errors, but surely this is what a small market franchise is supposed to do.
Future talent includes all talent contributing to the team in the near future, not just the farm system. This helps the Brewers, who have (by acclamation) the worst farm system in baseball, having cleaned house to acquire Shaun Marcum and Zack Greinke. The Brewers won’t be adding a lot of new talent in the new few years, but they will still have Ryan Braun, Yovani Gallardo, Rickie Weeks, Corey Hart and Casey McGehee.
15. Cincinnati Reds
Ranked 9th by Fangraphs
Financial Resources: D
Present Talent: B
Baseball Operations: C
Future Talent: B
The Reds end up at #15 because they play in one of the smallest media markets in baseball and, despite notching a division title last year, have had trouble attracting fans to a lovely ballpark.
Last year, the Reds drew 2,060,551 fans to Great American Ballpark. This was an 18% increase over 2009, which looks great until you put it in context; in 2009 attendance dropped 15% from 2008 levels. So the division title win in 2010 only got the Reds a minor boost over 2008 levels, a bounceback that still saw them ranked 12th in the NL.
It’s true that a winning team typically sees their biggest attendance increase in the following season. According to ESPN.com, however, the Reds are drawing fewer fans this year; they’re on pace to draw a little over 1.8 million fans, which would be a 12% decrease from last year’s high. Even if you account for the league-wide drop in attendance this year, this can’t be too encouraging for the Reds. It will take a while for the franchise to erase memories of the forgotten decade from 2000-2009, and until it does, cash will be hard to come by.
The Reds get a B in Present and Future Talent, and neither rating seems too far-fetched to me. The Reds probably aren’t a 90-win team, but they’re a strong contender in the NL and should be for a while longer. They’ve got a very strong core of young talent (the best in their division by far) which should serve them quite well for the near future.
I’m not the biggest fan of what Walt Jocketty’s done so far as Cincinnati GM, as a lot of his moves seem like they stem from a basic misunderstanding of roster construction. This has been offset somewhat by a strong crop of young talent (most of which was in place before he came. To be fair, though, it was Jocketty who won the bidding for Aroldis Chapman, and he also made moves to lock up Joey Votto and Jay Bruce to team-friendly contracts. I do have confidence in Jocketty’s management abilities, having seen him do a lot of good work in St. Louis. My optimism is tempered, though, by the continued presence of Dusty Baker, holding a talented crop of young pitchers in his scissor-hands.
This may seem like a low ranking for the Reds, but I’m really optimistic about the team in most things not involving cash flow.
14. Los Angeles Angels
Ranked 12th by Fangraphs
Financial Resources: B
Present Talent: C
Baseball Operations: C
Future Talent: C
When I started this list, I gave the Angels an “A” in Financial Resources. It was a stretch, sure, but I thought they were a top-tier team when it came to cash. After the Vernon Wells deal, I downgraded them to a “B.” I just can’t ignore a team that throws that much cash down a sinkhole.
I did not downgrade the team’s baseball operations after the Wells deal, although you could argue that I should have. The grade didn’t so much reflect confidence in Tony Reagins and his staff, who have done little of note outside of vulturing Dan Haren from the Diamondbacks. I stuck to my “C” rating because, despite his narrow-minded attitude toward team-building, I do think Mike Scioscia is an asset.
The Angels aren’t a bad team now and probably won’t be anytime soon. But even with the arrival of uber-prospect Mike Trout, I think they’ll be stubbornly mediocre for some time to come. It’s hard to look at the colossal failure of their infield prospects and still be upbeat about their future.
13. Chicago Cubs
Ranked 19th by Fangraphs
Financial Resources: A
Present Talent: C
Baseball Operations: C
Future Talent: C
How in the world could you rank the Cubs as the 19th-best franchise in baseball when financial resources are such a large part of your formula? Considering the financial troubles currently plaguing the Mets and Dodgers, the Cubs are the highest-rated team in their league when it comes to money. That’s important, even if every other factor surrounding the team is average at best.
The current iteration of the Cubs isn’t really a bad team at all. Their offense isn’t great, certainly, but Alfonso Soriano isn’t dead yet, and they’ve got two key young talents in Geovany Soto and Starlin Castro. Depth is non-existent until some prospects arrive, but compared to the rest of the NL Central, their short- and long-term prospects aren’t too bad, especially with the possibility that they add Albert Pujols in the offseason.
12. Minnesota Twins
Ranked 6th by Fangraphs
Financial Resources: B
Present Talent: B
Baseball Operations: C
Future Talent: C
The big surprise here is giving the Twins a “B” in Financial Resources. Surprising, since former owner Carl “Penury” Pohlad was reluctant to put money into the team. But with a new ballpark finally extorted from approved by the taxpayers, the Twins have shown that they’re ready to spend money by plunking down Yankee-esque money to keep Joe Mauer in town. 3.2 million fannies in the seats will change things.
I feel I might have overrated the team by giving them a “B” in Present Talent. This was influenced, obviously, by the presence of Joe Mauer and Justin Morneau. Plus, I think they’re in pretty good shape, returning as they are the same club from last year plus Joe Nathan and a healthy Morneau. What makes me pause is the number of things that could go wrong (these have already begun in earnest).
11. Colorado Rockies
Ranked 10th by Fangraphs
Financial Resources: C
Present Talent: B
Baseball Operations: B
Future Talent: B
Did you notice that the Rockies became one of the best franchises in the National League? It happened without any great fanfare, maybe because they’re so un-sexy and un-magnificent. They don’t get an A in anything, but they’re surprisingly good in every aspect. The only thing that keeps them out of the top 10 is a lack of cash.
The Rockies have stars aplenty in Troy Tulowitzki, Ubaldo Jimenez and Carlos Gonzalez. The bottom of the lineup is thin (Jose Lopez?), as is the bottom of their rotation, but there are no juggernauts in the NL West, making it anyone’s game.
It surprised me as much as anyone to give this team a “B” in Baseball Operations, but haven’t they built a darn good team? The only good reason I could think of to give them a “C” was the always-infuriating manager, Jim Tracy. The Rockies don’t have a catchy turn of phrase to describe their organizational philosophy, but it’s worked pretty darn well for them over the past few years, and it should continue to do so for some time to come.
UP NEXT: The Top 10
No comments:
Post a Comment