Re: Drew Stubbs: Uncle
Scouting for the draft and int'l free agents has been pretty good. The Reds have been just bad enough for top 10 picks, but not bad enough for a top 5 pick. The picks between 2000-2003, were horrendous, but we can attribute that to the cheapness of Allen/Lindner and Bowden's crew. But the 2004 draft was very good, 2005 was too. 2006 was considered a weak year, but the Reds got a lot out of that draft. 2007 is starting to look fantastic.
But... Frazier has no position. The Reds have yet to develop a TOR starter. The IF has one player developed by the Reds in Votto. The OF is better, but has no superstars. The C position has been a running joke for a decade, but certainly looks promising in the minors right now.
There have been 4 regime changes in the last 7 years. That takes a toll on development, as philosophies change. Krivsky smartly cleaned house when he came on board, something DanO should have done. Jocketty didn't as I think he helped WK build the infrastructure. Probably a good idea there. Get the Jimbo people gone.
Here is a case in point. Strasburg was considered more polished than Chapman, but WAS sent him to AA to start the year. Why? Development. get him used to the 5 day grind while facing talent he could better handle. That is smart development. It's also smart from a PR standpoint, but that's another discussion.
Stubbs was rushed through the minors, even though his bat wasn't even close to ready. His glove was, certainly. But so was Dickerson's, and he was held back because of his bat. They have very similar skills, excellent defenders, some power, great speed. So why was one rushed and the other on a slower development track?
Why is the Reds top pick from 2 years ago (Alonso) OPSing .631? Was he a bad pick or is he being developed wrong.
Does anyone really look at the Reds as an organization and have the words professional, plan, organized, roadmap come to mind? To me, on the development side, they seem to react more than plan. They seem willing to take wild chances like Soto to catcher or Gil to pitcher. Which is fine. But how do you not have a position for one of your top prospects? Why would you move your #1 pick to LF at AA when he's clearly a 1B? I don't care that Votto is the Reds 1B. Alonso only has value at 1B, not LF. If he never plays an inning as a Red, but fetches value in a trade, then the pick isn't wasted. But if he's a sub .800 OPS corner OF that is, well, not a good defender, then the pick was pointless.
Now going forward, the Reds could be developing a plan to better train their minor leaguers. I don't see it, but it could be there. IMO they are hurting Frazier and Alonso, could have done Chapman better by starting him in AA and have yet to find and develop that TOR pitcher. I think they have two TOR arms in Bailey and Cueto, but haven't developed them into that yet. No one in the minors other than Chapman fits that TOR bill. In fact, Bailey was handled so poorly, he could have been Reithed.
Is it because of scouting or development?
Hey, its just my opinion.
"don't end up with a grandson with a dog collar."
Last edited by TRF; 06-08-2010 at 12:44 PM.