Originally Posted by lollipopcurve
Have the Reds drafted poorly much of the time in the last decade? Yes, without a doubt. However, right now the system is in decent shape. Folks are holding Oakland and Atlanta up as models because they seem to have recognizable approaches to drafting amateur talent. My guess is that all teams have what they consider to be "an approach," and it often goes by "best player available." Right now, Baseball America rates the minor league talent for the Reds as a B, while Oakland and Atlanta have Cs. Now, I don't consider Baseball America an infallible fountain of truth, but in the context of this discussion I think it's valuable to point out that other evaluators like the Reds system quite a bit at the moment. You want an approach to drafting well? Look at Tampa Bay. They have what some believe is the best talent on the way to the majors. How did they get it? By losing 100 games year after year. How did the Twins get Johan Santana? They sank to the bottom of the league and had a top selection in the Rule V draft. They got Joe Mauer the same way. The Reds got Homer Bailey by stinking the previous year. I think it's safe to say that if you want the surest approach to consistently mining top talent from the amateur ranks in the US, make your major league team really bad for a few years.
Yes but take Homer from the mix and the Reds system rates as a C at best.....and they've been consistently bad on the major league level...