|
Re: What makes a good minor league system?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Betterread
What makes a good minor league system? The acquistion of talent, the development of that talent and the proper utilization of that talent.
The Reds acquistion of talent is currently well-regarded. Now that we have some real major league talent - how do we best utilize it?
Trade the talent for talent from other organizations or incorporate talented but inexperienced players into the big league mix? The Reds need to make the right decisions with our top 4 guys.
Then there is development. I have been disappointed for a long time with the Reds development approach - they don't seem to teach plate discipline to a sufficient number of hitters and they don't seem to be able to increase velocity for a sufficient number of pitchers. I think more money should be injected into the development portion of the Reds organization - through staff salaries, better facilities, and better data and analysis. The Reds should be able to isolate and address weaknesses in organizational depth. They may not have the same amount of money as other organizations, but they have enough to improve what they are currently doing.
|
Thanks for the response BR. This is what I'm getting at. Can we distill it down in to a few categories and then rate organizations on how well they do those things? A best practices matrix of quality if you will? I think it would be a fascinating exercise. Flawed and subjective, certainly. But it would be a great talking point. What things matter and in what proportion. How can we measure ability to do those things? How do we measure success?
__________________
Games are won on run differential -- scoring more than your opponent. Runs are runs, scored or prevented they all count the same. Worry about scoring more and allowing fewer, not which positions contribute to which side of the equation or how "consistent" you are at your current level of performance.
|