Re: Organizational Rankings
Quote:
Originally Posted by
koolzach1
Sure sure... I know it is all about the future outlooks. I just don't see the Rays being all that great the next few years. It'll all depend on next year, IMO; if they win and the fans show up, then maybe, but if they win and the fans still don't show up, well, I cannot say for sure that the Rays will have the money to pay their players and fix their holes.
They don't NEED the money for a good 4-5 years from now. Their core of talent is mostly locked up long-term already. Then, they have a bunch of young prospects about to make it to the show that will be cheap and under club control for 3+ years themselves. The Rays, without a doubt, have the best combination of youth and talent in the league. They combine that with one of the best ownership groups and one of the best GMs. You have to be severely blinded by their previous futility (under a different ownership group and GM), to deny their bright future.
Re: Organizational Rankings
Quote:
Originally Posted by
200tang
looks like Toronto is 20
Yeah..I'd put St. Louis ahead of them too. But they'd still be ahead of Seattle, for me.
Re: Organizational Rankings
Quote:
Originally Posted by
HoustonGM
They don't NEED the money for a good 4-5 years from now. Their core of talent is mostly locked up long-term already. Then, they have a bunch of young prospects about to make it to the show that will be cheap and under club control for 3+ years themselves. The Rays, without a doubt, have the best combination of youth and talent in the league. They combine that with one of the best ownership groups and one of the best GMs. You have to be severely blinded by their previous futility (under a different ownership group and GM), to deny their bright future.
They may very well have a bright future, but who's to say that their prospects will even develop? They have a good core of Upton, Longoria, Kazmir, Shields, Garza, etc..., but I would not rate them anywhere near the Red Sox/Yankees/Mets/Phillies due to money reasons.
Re: Organizational Rankings
I just don't see how their "money reasons" should affect their ranking. As I said, there's very few players that they have to worry about money with for a while. They're really overflowing with talent...talent that they have under their control for a very long time...and that, combined with their fantastic ownership and front office, easily outweighs any financial concerns when discussing which teams have the best near/mid-term future. I think you're placing too much emphasis on money which, while important, is not nearly the be-all-and-end-all that you seem to be implying. A smart team that makes efficient use of its resources will easily overcome a small/medium budget.
Re: Organizational Rankings
Quote:
Originally Posted by
HoustonGM
I just don't see how their "money reasons" should affect their ranking. As I said, there's very few players that they have to worry about money with for a while. They're really overflowing with talent...talent that they have under their control for a very long time...and that, combined with their fantastic ownership and front office, easily outweighs any financial concerns when discussing which teams have the best near/mid-term future.
It's just that in a few years when this talent either needs resigned or released, it will come down to whether they have the money to resign them or not. By then, their prospects might have flopped and their they go having to rebuild again. Big market teams that have a much better financial outlook really won't have to worry about that, so their pretty much set no matter what, unless they make just awful decisions.
Re: Organizational Rankings
Quote:
Originally Posted by
HoustonGM
Yeah..I'd put St. Louis ahead of them too. But they'd still be ahead of Seattle, for me.
I was actually thinking about this a little while ago and another reason I thought of why Seattle is ahead of St. Louis might be because of Seattle's influence in Japan. The only other team I really consider to have anywhere near as much strength when signing a Japanese player would be Boston. Seattle is owned by Nintendo of Japan, they have Ichiro/Johjima, they're located close to Japan and they also have a large Asian community. We'll have to see what else he says to justify the Mariners being so high, but I would imagine this would at least be some sort of advantage.
I also wonder how much of an influence the Mariners have on Venezuelan players (if any). Felix reportedly chose the Mariners partly because of one of his favorite player Freddy Garcia. We've also got Jose Lopez, Carlos Silva (if that counts :p) and Endy Chavez. I doubt our influence there is very big, but does anybody know for sure if any team has a large influence there?
How cool would it be to get the next big thing from Venezuela because of Felix? :p
Re: Organizational Rankings
Quote:
Originally Posted by
200tang
I was actually thinking about this a little while ago and another reason I thought of why Seattle is ahead of St. Louis might be because of Seattle's influence in Japan. The only other team I really consider to have anywhere near as much strength when signing a Japanese player would be Boston. Seattle is owned by Nintendo of Japan, they have Ichiro/Johjima, they're located close to Japan and they also have a large Asian community. We'll have to see what else he says to justify the Mariners being so high, but I would imagine this would at least be some sort of advantage.
I also wonder how much of an influence the Mariners have on Venezuelan players (if any). Felix reportedly chose the Mariners partly because of one of his favorite player Freddy Garcia. We've also got Jose Lopez, Carlos Silva (if that counts :p) and Endy Chavez. I doubt our influence there is very big, but does anybody know for sure if any team has a large influence there?
How cool would it be to get the next big thing from Venezuela because of Felix? :p
I gotta figure that the Tigers have a pretty strong Venezuelan influence, what with Carlos Guillen, Magglio Ordonez, Miguel Cabrera, and Armando Galarraga on the roster.
Re: Organizational Rankings
Quote:
Originally Posted by
haveacigar
I gotta figure that the Tigers have a pretty strong Venezuelan influence, what with Carlos Guillen, Magglio Ordonez, Miguel Cabrera, and Armando Galarraga on the roster.
That's true.
Re: Organizational Rankings
Quote:
Originally Posted by
koolzach1
It's just that in a few years when this talent either needs resigned or released, it will come down to whether they have the money to resign them or not. By then, their prospects might have flopped and their they go having to rebuild again. Big market teams that have a much better financial outlook really won't have to worry about that, so their pretty much set no matter what, unless they make just awful decisions.
Even big market teams have trouble holding onto talent just by virtue of the market for players. The Indians are probably in a much better position financially, but look how last year went for them. But I don't think you're giving enough respect to just how stacked their organizational depth is. Even if you count on a few flops, there's reason to assume that they can't fill most of the holes. And looking at things like the Pat Burrell signing, they're showing a willingness to spend some money on players to supplement the team. They may not have Boston spending power, but they aren't the Marlins either.
Also, it's easy to see the pennant as catching lightning in a bottle with everything coming together, but they haven't been *that* lucky. Keep in mind the team has gotten absolutely nothing out of Elijah Dukes and Rocco Baldelli, who were supposed to be studs coming up.
Re: Organizational Rankings
Quote:
Originally Posted by
haveacigar
Keep in mind the team has gotten absolutely nothing out of Elijah Dukes and Rocco Baldelli, who were supposed to be studs coming up.
Delmon Young too
Re: Organizational Rankings
Quote:
Originally Posted by
200tang
Delmon Young too
They got Matt Garza and Jason Bartlett out of him.
Re: Organizational Rankings
Quote:
Originally Posted by
HoustonGM
They got Matt Garza and Jason Bartlett out of him.
Oh I thought we were just talking about their talent 'failures'. Yeah they got some nice talent for him.
Re: Organizational Rankings
Quote:
Originally Posted by
koolzach1
Sure sure... I know it is all about the future outlooks. I just don't see the Rays being all that great the next few years. It'll all depend on next year, IMO; if they win and the fans show up, then maybe, but if they win and the fans still don't show up, well, I cannot say for sure that the Rays will have the money to pay their players and fix their holes.
No
Re: Organizational Rankings
Quote:
Originally Posted by
KowboyKoop
No
No what? Someone agreeing with me? :confused:
Re: Organizational Rankings
Quote:
Originally Posted by
koolzach1
No what? Someone agreeing with me? :confused:
No to pretty much everything you're written on the Rays not having that bright of a future. You pretty much could not be more wrong. Resigning all of their players isn't necessary to them contending for a long time. They've already started locking up some of their young players and for the ones they lose, they will be replaced. That doesn't mean every single prospect they have will work out, but with how loaded with young talent they are (both at the minors and majors), their future is bright for at least the next five years.
