A look at the Reds system and 2006 draft through John Sickels

I am not going to say that I came up with this, becuase I did not. However a user on his website, minorleagueball.com, made this post and I thought I would share it over here. Our system obviously doesn't seem so bad, but our 2006 draft looks pretty poor. Anyways, here is what he says

Quote:

---

I ranked all 30 systems based on John's letter grades from his book (printed with permission). I also ranked the '06 drafts accordingly. My methodology was as follows: 1 point for every C+, 2 points for every B-, 4 points for every B, 8 points for every B+, 16 points for every A-, and 24 points for every A. As you can see, I weighted top-end talent pretty heavily. But some teams were able to rank very highly without any elite prospects, through a lot of depth. Please feel free to disagree with my methodology, as it does very much favor teams like the Royals, who have more depth than I thought but mostly have the best three prospects on any one team. Anyway, here are the teams with their rankings and scores, separated into easily separated tiers:

1. Tampa Bay Devil Rays 115 (wow)

2. Colorado Rockies 87
3. Arizona Diamondbacks 84
4. Kansas City Royals 82

5. Minnesota Twins 76
6. New York Yankees 73

7. Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim 67
8. Los Angeles Dodgers 66
9. Boston Red Sox 66
10. Cleveland Indians 64
11. Milwaukee Brewers 63

12. Cincinnati Reds 58
13. Houston Astros 58
14. Atlanta Braves 57

15. Florida Marlins 51
16. Detroit Tigers 50
17. New York Mets 50
18. Texas Rangers 48

19. Chicago Cubs 43
20. Toronto Blue Jays 42
21. Baltimore Orioles 42

22. San Francisco Giants 38
23. Oakland Athletics 38
24. Pittsburgh Pirates 36
25. St. Louis Cardinals 36
26. Chicago White Sox 35

27. Washington Nationals 31
28. San Diego Padres 29
29. Seattle Mariners 29
30. Philadelphia Phillies 27

And here are the '06 drafts:

1. Detroit Tigers 21
2. Boston Red Sox 20
3. Los Angeles Dodgers 19
4. San Francisco Giants 18
4. Tampa Bay Devil Rays 18
4. Washington Nationals 18
7. Arizona Diamondbacks 17
8. Kansas City Royals 16
9. Minnesota Twins 15
9. New York Yankees 15
11. Baltimore Orioles 14
12. Saint Louis Cardinals 13
13. San Diego Padres 12
13. Seattle Mariners 12
15. Pittsburgh Pirates 11
16. Cleveland Indians 9
16. Oakland Athletics 9
16. Texas Rangers 9
16. Toronto Blue Jays 9
20. Atlanta Braves 7
20. Houston Astros 7
20. Milwaukee Brewers 7
23. Colorado Rockies 6
23. Philadelphia Phillies 6
25. Los Angeles Angels 5
25. New York Mets 5
28. Chicago Cubs 4
28. Cincinnati Reds 4
30. Chicago White Sox 3

---

The Pirates have been an absolute mess since the early 90's and their farm system is close to the bottom according to these rankings makes you wonder what is going on over their with Littlefield and company.

Go Drew Stubbs and Sean Watson

Where's the beef? He doesn't really lay out how he awarded the numbers on any players (or was there more detail elsewhere). It could just be a guy throwing darts at a dartboard.

Redsmetz, all of this information is based on John Sickels Prospect Handbook that recently just came out. He rates prospects on a grade scale like in school. Here is what he ranked the Reds top 20 on the web, which he could have changed his mind on since then.

Quote:

---

1. Homer Bailey, RHP, Grade A (one of the top three pitching prospects in baseball)
2. Jay Bruce, OF, Grade A- (strong tools with developing skills)
3. Joey Votto, 1B, Grade B+ (breakthrough looks real to me)
4. Johnny Cueto, RHP, Grade B- (overlooked prospect with a live arm)
5. Drew Stubbs, OF, B- (outstanding tools but doubts about his bat are legit)
6. Travis Wood, LHP, B- (loss of velocity this year is not a good marker, but his numbers are good)
7. Sean Watson, RHP, C+ (results don't seem to match his tools)
8. Chris Valaika, INF, C+ (hit well in the Pioneer League, but he was a college guy)
9. Sam LeCure, RHP, C+ (possible fourth/fifth starter type)
10. Milton Loo, 3B, C+ (another tools guy with a bat but a long way away)
11. Paul Janish, SS, C (excellent glove, bat prevents him from being a better prospect)
12. Jon Coutlangus, LHP, C (useful bullpen spare part)
13. Calvin Medlock, RHP, C (useful bullpen spare part)
14. Brendan Harris, INF, C (useful infield spare part)
15. Tyler Pelland, LHP, C (good arm but more thrower than pitcher)
16. Chris Dickerson, OF, C (useful outfield spare part, good glove)
17. Brad Salmon, RHP, C (useful bullpen spare part)
18. David Shafer, RHP, C (useful bullpen spare part)
19. Daryl Thompson, RHP, C (live arm, recovering from shoulder trouble)
20. B.J. Szymanski, OF, C (status is slipping quickly due to contact problems)

---

Now I dont agree with all of his assessment skills, but like nearly every list, its all subject to the writers opinion.

Is this all that Sickels does? I want that job.

Quote:

---

8. Chris Valaika, INF, C+ (hit well in the Pioneer League, but he was a college guy)

---

Hitting in the Pioneer League as a college guy isn't that easy....ask Stubbs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dougdirt

Redsmetz, all of this information is based on John Sickels Prospect Handbook that recently just came out. He rates prospects on a grade scale like in school. Here is what he ranked the Reds top 20 on the web, which he could have changed his mind on since then.

Now I dont agree with all of his assessment skills, but like nearly every list, its all subject to the writers opinion.

---

Thanks for the explanation. I wasn't intending to be glib, but it just struck me as easy to assess a system. I don't think our system is where it needs to be. Of course, the new regime has had only one draft and it should be noted that they haven't added much minor league talent through trades. I think it's too early to say whether the ranking for last year's draft (and that's what you were showing originally, right?) is a true assessment.

I see that movement has been made at the top echelons of the scouting department, so we'll see if that reaps any benefits. I understand some question those folks leaving, but it's fair to say that GM's have a right to their own people. If nothing else, the dirth of talent in our system puts into question our ability to identify and develop players.

What will be telling this year is how these folks fare as they move up to Dayton or Sarasota. Likewise, I assume that we will have roster spots to fill out at all levels. I'm interested in seeing who we pick up as minor league free agents as spring begins. Remember we signed Ryan Freel as a 26 year old minor league free agent in November of 2002. I'd like to know our folks are out there looking for those types of guys.

Not to make excuses for the new regime, but turning this ship around will take time. It's good drafts, and, yes, I understand many here believe this was a poor draft, but again, even for the draft, while it was Wayne's draft, I don't know that he had everyone he'd like to be in place. I'm still not clear on who we have in our scouting department and how that's expanded, if at all.

Let's see if I got this right. The 2006 Red's draft ranked very near the bottom of the pack. Yet 3 of the entire minor league system's top 8 players are from that weak 2006 draft. Yikes!

Insane, arbitrary scoring system there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by texasdave

Let's see if I got this right. The 2006 Red's draft ranked very near the bottom of the pack. Yet 3 of the entire minor league system's top 8 players are from that weak 2006 draft. Yikes!

---

I think what it comes down to is that Stubbs, Watson and Valaika were the only guys to even get a C rating as a prospect or higher. No one else from the draft got that....although I think Josh Ravin is easily at worst a C prospect right now...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by texasdave

Let's see if I got this right. The 2006 Red's draft ranked very near the bottom of the pack. Yet 3 of the entire minor league system's top 8 players are from that weak 2006 draft. Yikes!

---

Shows the shallowness of the Reds minor league prospect pool.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by M2

Insane, arbitrary scoring system there.

---

Yeah, really.

I would also submit that the very first pro season means very little. The Baseball America assessment of 2006 draft talent is probably the one that should be taken most seriously at this point. Then, as a performance record builds, the Baseball Prospectus (performance) and Sickels (both performance and projection, perhaps slightly more weight on the former) start to gain ideological traction.

Quote:

---

I would also submit that the very first pro season means very little.

---

Really, this should be obvious. The fact that Sickels tries to do so is ironic, since he covers the minors for a living. Speaks to the thirst for knowledge about prospects and the love of lists. I seem to recall that he disclaims his rankings by saying there's very little difference between C+/B-/B prospects—this for all players in a system, not just the recently drafted—so the whole exercise quickly gets absurd.