Photo by Cyrus Melchor - AngelsWin.com
Intro by David Saltzer - AngelsWin.com Senior Columnist
In many ways, 2009 was a tale of two seasons for the Angels’ organization. At the upper levels of the organization, several players were needed to fill the needs of the parent club. As a result, the records for the upper level clubs suffered. At the lower levels of the organization, an incredible draft led to an infusion of talent that blossomed. As a result, the teams did much better. Ironically, due to the Minor League Playoff format, the Angels’ farm team that posted one of the worst records for any of the affiliated Minor League teams (Single-A Rancho Cucamonga Quakes with a 61-79 record) went the furthest in its league’s playoffs.
Looking at the stats only tells a limited story. Without context, most stats are meaningless. Because of differences in the leagues, the size of ballparks and a myriad of other factors, a player’s stats won’t always show linear progression. Moving from a hitter’s league or ballpark to a pitcher’s league or ballpark will affect the overall numbers. But, a sudden rise or drop in production due to those factors shouldn’t affect the player’s potential or value as a prospect. For example, hitting 15 homeruns at Double-A Arkansas is a tremendous feat considering the overall nature of the league and the cavernous dimensions of the Travelers’ home field. We at Angelswin.com include an assessment of those factors when determining our final rankings for this list.
Similarly, how a player’s stats trend often affect a player’s ranking. Many of the Angels’ prospects showed a tale of two seasons in their statistical trends. Several of those who posted lower numbers overall for the season still showed strong trends in their second half. For some it was because they adjusted to their leagues and the higher level of competition. For others it was because they recovered from injuries. In either case, the overall stats don’t reflect the full story of their 2009 season. At Angelswin.com, we reviewed those trends to try and determine a more nuanced understanding of the player’s season prior to finalizing this list.
Measuring the impact of an injury, particularly a season-ending injury, is difficult. While the player may fully recover from the injury, trying to gauge the loss of a year of development is challenging. If, say the velocity of the player’s fastball returns, how will the year off affect his command? We, at Angelswin.com consider the impact not only of the physical injury to the player, but also the injury to the player for the lost year of development.
For those of us working on the weekly Hot Prospect lists last year and on this year’s Top-50 Prospect List, the biggest tale of two seasons was the incredible disconnect between our evaluation of the Angels’ organization overall and the national analysts’ evaluations for the same teams. We believe that a Minor League system exists to serves two primary functions: 1) to develop players to make the major league club; 2) to supply players for trades to fill the needs of major league club.
Using that as a guideline, the Angels in 2009 went into Spring Training last year with 66 players. Of those 66 players, 53 of them were home-grown. Over the course of the season last year, the Angels had many needs, especially for starting pitchers. Their Minor Leagues teams responded by producing Trevor Bell and Sean O’Sullivan (both of whom started the year in Double-A Arkansas), who went a combined 5-4 in 14 starts over the summer at the Major League level. Additionally, the Angels’ Minor League system provided depth with Matt Palmer and Shane Loux who went a combined 13-5 in 19 starts for the team. Overall that’s an 18-9 record provided by the organization’s Minor League players in 1/5th of all the starts for the parent club. Considering that the parent club won 97 games last year with 20% of its starts provided by the Minor Leaguers, it seems that the system developed the players necessary for the parent club.
At the same time, using the depth in the Angels’ organization, Tony Reagins was able to pull off a trade for a frontline pitcher. The Angels gave up three talented players to get Kazmir, but were able to do so because they had plenty of depth at those. Again, it seems that the system fulfilled its secondary function.
When discussing an organization’s system overall, many national analysts like to focus on the quality of the premium talent in the organization. They will often focus on nationally ranked Top-100 prospects within the organization. Essentially, they try to zero in on the perceived impact players. While every team would love to produce a Longoria or a Lincecum, very few of those premium talents exist, and even fewer are developed in any given year. Most minor league teams produce at most one or two average major league players per year. Since the Angels often draft near the bottom of the first round (due to their Major League successes), and have surrendered several of their first round picks due to free agent signings over the past few years, it’s highly unlikely that the Angels will be in a position to draft those premium talents with the national pedigree.
Focusing on the premium talents ignores the advantage of producing a large number of very good players. Take Aybar and Kendrick for example. While both may not be the top player at their respective positions, both would be in the upper echelons compared to their peers. Based on the number of trade inquiries the Angels received for both players, it is clear that many clubs are jealous that they do not have them in their fold. The Angels have relied on and continue to rely on their farm system to produce a quantity of quality players to keep the parent club operating an elite level without having to resort to prohibitive economics. While the Angels organization may not be producing an All-Star player every year, it did produce 53 out of 66 players in a camp to be on a team that won 97 games.
At Angelswin.com, we believe that analyzing an organization requires a broader understanding of the system overall. For that reason, we disagree with the low rankings that the Angels have received over the past two years by national organizations. Based on the numerous debates and discussions that we have had in trying to rank the players in our Top-50 list (this year’s rankings have gone through more iterations than any other year’s to date), and the number of and the quality of the players in our system who did not even make this list, we believe that the Angels’ Minor League organization is much stronger and better than has been reported by other sources.
But, all of that may be changing. In 2009, under the direction of Eddie Bane, the Angels made a tremendous draft. And, with five of the first forty picks in the 2010 draft, the Angels are set to bring in another tremendous haul. Between these two years, the Angels should establish a stockpile of premium talent that would get the attention of the national analysts as well as for those who are more familiar with the club.
Los Angeles Angels 2010 Top 50 Prospects
Scouting reports 1-30 by Chuck Richter - AngelsWin.com Executive Editor
In many ways, 2009 was a tale of two seasons for the Angels’ organization. At the upper levels of the organization, several players were needed to fill the needs of the parent club. As a result, the records for the upper level clubs suffered. At the lower levels of the organization, an incredible draft led to an infusion of talent that blossomed. As a result, the teams did much better. Ironically, due to the Minor League Playoff format, the Angels’ farm team that posted one of the worst records for any of the affiliated Minor League teams (Single-A Rancho Cucamonga Quakes with a 61-79 record) went the furthest in its league’s playoffs.
Looking at the stats only tells a limited story. Without context, most stats are meaningless. Because of differences in the leagues, the size of ballparks and a myriad of other factors, a player’s stats won’t always show linear progression. Moving from a hitter’s league or ballpark to a pitcher’s league or ballpark will affect the overall numbers. But, a sudden rise or drop in production due to those factors shouldn’t affect the player’s potential or value as a prospect. For example, hitting 15 homeruns at Double-A Arkansas is a tremendous feat considering the overall nature of the league and the cavernous dimensions of the Travelers’ home field. We at Angelswin.com include an assessment of those factors when determining our final rankings for this list.
Similarly, how a player’s stats trend often affect a player’s ranking. Many of the Angels’ prospects showed a tale of two seasons in their statistical trends. Several of those who posted lower numbers overall for the season still showed strong trends in their second half. For some it was because they adjusted to their leagues and the higher level of competition. For others it was because they recovered from injuries. In either case, the overall stats don’t reflect the full story of their 2009 season. At Angelswin.com, we reviewed those trends to try and determine a more nuanced understanding of the player’s season prior to finalizing this list.
Measuring the impact of an injury, particularly a season-ending injury, is difficult. While the player may fully recover from the injury, trying to gauge the loss of a year of development is challenging. If, say the velocity of the player’s fastball returns, how will the year off affect his command? We, at Angelswin.com consider the impact not only of the physical injury to the player, but also the injury to the player for the lost year of development.
For those of us working on the weekly Hot Prospect lists last year and on this year’s Top-50 Prospect List, the biggest tale of two seasons was the incredible disconnect between our evaluation of the Angels’ organization overall and the national analysts’ evaluations for the same teams. We believe that a Minor League system exists to serves two primary functions: 1) to develop players to make the major league club; 2) to supply players for trades to fill the needs of major league club.
Using that as a guideline, the Angels in 2009 went into Spring Training last year with 66 players. Of those 66 players, 53 of them were home-grown. Over the course of the season last year, the Angels had many needs, especially for starting pitchers. Their Minor Leagues teams responded by producing Trevor Bell and Sean O’Sullivan (both of whom started the year in Double-A Arkansas), who went a combined 5-4 in 14 starts over the summer at the Major League level. Additionally, the Angels’ Minor League system provided depth with Matt Palmer and Shane Loux who went a combined 13-5 in 19 starts for the team. Overall that’s an 18-9 record provided by the organization’s Minor League players in 1/5th of all the starts for the parent club. Considering that the parent club won 97 games last year with 20% of its starts provided by the Minor Leaguers, it seems that the system developed the players necessary for the parent club.
At the same time, using the depth in the Angels’ organization, Tony Reagins was able to pull off a trade for a frontline pitcher. The Angels gave up three talented players to get Kazmir, but were able to do so because they had plenty of depth at those. Again, it seems that the system fulfilled its secondary function.
When discussing an organization’s system overall, many national analysts like to focus on the quality of the premium talent in the organization. They will often focus on nationally ranked Top-100 prospects within the organization. Essentially, they try to zero in on the perceived impact players. While every team would love to produce a Longoria or a Lincecum, very few of those premium talents exist, and even fewer are developed in any given year. Most minor league teams produce at most one or two average major league players per year. Since the Angels often draft near the bottom of the first round (due to their Major League successes), and have surrendered several of their first round picks due to free agent signings over the past few years, it’s highly unlikely that the Angels will be in a position to draft those premium talents with the national pedigree.
Focusing on the premium talents ignores the advantage of producing a large number of very good players. Take Aybar and Kendrick for example. While both may not be the top player at their respective positions, both would be in the upper echelons compared to their peers. Based on the number of trade inquiries the Angels received for both players, it is clear that many clubs are jealous that they do not have them in their fold. The Angels have relied on and continue to rely on their farm system to produce a quantity of quality players to keep the parent club operating an elite level without having to resort to prohibitive economics. While the Angels organization may not be producing an All-Star player every year, it did produce 53 out of 66 players in a camp to be on a team that won 97 games.
At Angelswin.com, we believe that analyzing an organization requires a broader understanding of the system overall. For that reason, we disagree with the low rankings that the Angels have received over the past two years by national organizations. Based on the numerous debates and discussions that we have had in trying to rank the players in our Top-50 list (this year’s rankings have gone through more iterations than any other year’s to date), and the number of and the quality of the players in our system who did not even make this list, we believe that the Angels’ Minor League organization is much stronger and better than has been reported by other sources.
But, all of that may be changing. In 2009, under the direction of Eddie Bane, the Angels made a tremendous draft. And, with five of the first forty picks in the 2010 draft, the Angels are set to bring in another tremendous haul. Between these two years, the Angels should establish a stockpile of premium talent that would get the attention of the national analysts as well as for those who are more familiar with the club.
Los Angeles Angels 2010 Top 50 Prospects
Scouting reports 1-30 by Chuck Richter - AngelsWin.com Executive Editor
