AFJF Posted January 27, 2007 Share Posted January 27, 2007 The Yankees have long had the game's biggest payroll, but their farm system has lain fallow for several years, the result of some uninspired draft picks and trades that rid the system of the few prospects who remained. Over the last 18 months, however, the Yanks' system has made a stunning turnaround, going from one of the five worst systems in the game to one of the 10 best. What sets the Yankees' system apart from most others is the presence of two of the 10 best prospects in baseball, something no other organization can claim. The first of these two is right-handed pitcher Philip Hughes, who should show up in the Bronx in the first half of this season. The Yanks' first-round pick in 2004 has rocketed through the system, and would likely have reached Triple-A this year had the Yanks not been keeping their best prospects away from the Columbus clubhouse. Hughes has two consistent plus-plus pitches in a 93-95 mph fastball with fair sink, and a 12-to-6 curveball, and he has a promising changeup as well. Hughes pounds the strike zone and his command made some strides late in the 2006 season, although he still relies a bit too much on his secondary stuff. A year ago, Hughes had promise, but had missed time with minor shoulder injuries and had command issues. Now he's one of the top two pitching prospects in the game. Hughes' hitting counterpart on the Yanks' prospect depth chart is teenaged center fielder Jose Tabata, who spent all of 2006 in the full-season Sally League; only the Mets' Fernando Martinez and the Braves' Elvis Andrus were younger among such players. Tabata has an outstanding package of tools, but also has a degree of baseball acumen not often seen in players so young. He has a quick bat with developing power and good command of the strike zone. He has good instincts in center, with a plus arm that will allow him to move to right if he outgrows center. His season ended in early August due to a thumb injury, but he's playing in the Venezuelan winter league and swinging the bat with no trouble. The Yanks' system also now boasts depth that it hasn't had in years. Trading Gary Sheffield netted the Yankees another top pitching prospect in Humberto Sanchez as well as two live arms in Kevin Whelan and Anthony Claggett. Randy Johnson didn't bring as much back, but the Yanks did grab another live arm in Ross Ohlendorf. Meanwhile, Tyler Clippard passed the Double-A test and looks like at least a fifth starter in the majors, while 2006 sandwich pick Joba Chamberlain, who fell out of the top 10 picks due to serious concerns about the state of his shoulder, threw extremely well in the Hawaiian Winter League. The Yanks also added two more tough signs in Mark Melancon and sashimi-raw flamethrower Dellin Betances. It's a significant improvement for such a short period of time, and it's very bad news for the other four teams in the AL East. Five more 1. Tampa Bay: The Devil Rays have the best farm system in the game right now, and it's not particularly close. They're stacked with impact bats like Delmon Young, Elijah Dukes, Evan Longoria, and possibly Reid Brignac, and they have a wave of young arms coming behind those hitters, including Wade Davis and Jeremy Hellickson. The question dogging them is whether they can get the pitching to the majors before their offense starts to hit free agency. 2. Colorado: Despite some odd first-round selections in recent years (Greg Reynolds, Chris Nelson), the Rockies have still managed to stack their system with promising hitters. Shortstop Troy Tulowitzki and catcher Chris Iannetta will see a lot of big league time this year, and corner infielder Ian Stewart and outfielder Dexter Fowler are both promising. The system is short on pitching prospects, though, with oft-injured right-hander Ubaldo Jimenez the closest to the majors. 3. Arizona: Former scouting director Mike Rizzo can still claim a good chunk of the credit for the wave of young talent showing up in Phoenix, and there's more coming, including homegrown products like outfielders Justin Upton and Carlos Gonzalez, catcher Miguel Montero and right-hander Micah Owings, as well as players acquired by GM Josh Byrnes via trades, including second baseman Alberto Callaspo and the system's jewel, center fielder Chris Young. 4. Kansas City: The Royals' system lacks depth, although new GM Dayton Moore has tried to fill in some of the gaps by acquiring guys like left-handed pitcher Tyler Lumsden. The Royals make the cut here, however, because their top three prospects are as good as any team's top three -- third baseman Alex Gordon, DH Billy Butler and right-handed starter Luke Hochevar. Outfielder Chris Lubanski and right-hander Chris Nicoll aren't in the same class, but both have promise as well. 5. Cleveland: Unlike Kansas City's top-heavy system, Cleveland's boasts tremendous depth but just one impact prospect, right-handed starter Adam Miller, who sits in a class with Hughes and Homer Bailey among the game's best pitching prospects. Left-handed starter Chuck Lofgren and outfielder John Drennen could make the leap into the top prospect ranks in 2007, and the system is stacked with useful prospects like left-handers Scott Lewis and Tony Sipp, slick-fielding shortstop Asdrubal Cabrera and outfielder Trevor Crowe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mangenious420 Posted January 27, 2007 Share Posted January 27, 2007 I can see it now, come October. THE YANKEES WIN, THEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE YANKEES WIN! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECURB Posted January 27, 2007 Share Posted January 27, 2007 Yanks will win 8 of the next 10 World Series.... bank on it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thor99 Posted January 27, 2007 Share Posted January 27, 2007 That sounds an awful lot like Yankee fans since the end of the century. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharrow Posted January 28, 2007 Share Posted January 28, 2007 They should have the best farm system, there's no reason they shouldn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kidhuman Posted January 28, 2007 Share Posted January 28, 2007 They should have the best farm system, there's no reason they shouldn't. Ditto Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mavrik Posted January 29, 2007 Share Posted January 29, 2007 Yanks will win 8 of the next 10 World Series.... bank on it You must have some good crack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shutout Posted January 29, 2007 Share Posted January 29, 2007 You must have some good crack. Cocaine is a hell of a drug...hehehe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AFJF Posted January 29, 2007 Author Share Posted January 29, 2007 They should have the best farm system, there's no reason they shouldn't. I'd have to disagree on that one Sharrow. Only because I've been told for the last decade or so that all the Yankees do is run around signing the best free agents in baseball which should cause them to lose several draft picks on a regular basis. If you add to that the fact that they're regularly in the playoffs puts them at the bottom of every round that they do have a pick. Also consider the fact that just two years ago all of the "experts" were telling us that the Yankees had traded away all of their best propects and their farm system had no talent worth mentioning. In my opinion, the combo of those three things does not translate in to a top notch farm system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharrow Posted January 29, 2007 Share Posted January 29, 2007 I'd have to disagree on that one Sharrow. Only because I've been told for the last decade or so that all the Yankees do is run around signing the best free agents in baseball which should cause them to lose several draft picks on a regular basis. If you add to that the fact that they're regularly in the playoffs puts them at the bottom of every round that they do have a pick. Also consider the fact that just two years ago all of the "experts" were telling us that the Yankees had traded away all of their best propects and their farm system had no talent worth mentioning. In my opinion, the combo of those three things does not translate in to a top notch farm system. Two or three years in theory could turn any farm system around. They were doing things that they shouldn't have been doing and now they aren't. Add that to their ability and advantage to acquire foreign prospects and that they should probably be spending more on development than other teams by getting the best coaches, scouts, etc. to help out. And as their prospects develop, they should be trading away some of their aging players like they did sheffield and randy johnson for even more depth in the minors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECURB Posted January 29, 2007 Share Posted January 29, 2007 You must have some good crack. Just wait, 8 of 10... bank on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thor99 Posted January 29, 2007 Share Posted January 29, 2007 Just wait, 8 of 10... bank on it. They haven't won one since last century. What makes you think they're going to start now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barton Posted January 29, 2007 Share Posted January 29, 2007 They haven't won one since last century. What makes you think they're going to start now? 2000 isnt last century. Hence the reason that MLB named the team of the decade & team of the century after the 1999 season, not after the 2000 season. Oh and the Yankees were the team of the decade in the 1990s. As they will also be in the 2000s. Its nice to be a Yankee fan! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted January 29, 2007 Share Posted January 29, 2007 2 As they will also be in the 2000s. Exactly what basis do you have to say that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barton Posted January 29, 2007 Share Posted January 29, 2007 Exactly what basis do you have to say that? OK, so who has been the team of the 2000s thus far? Most Wins. Most Division Titles. Most World Series appearances. 1 WS win. Yeah, what could I be basing it on? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted January 29, 2007 Share Posted January 29, 2007 OK, so who has been the team of the 2000s thus far? Most Wins. Most Division Titles. Most World Series appearances. 1 WS win. Yeah, what could I be basing it on? Seems to me, lollypop dreams and rainbow wishes. But that doesn't make it so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barton Posted January 29, 2007 Share Posted January 29, 2007 Seems to me, lollypop dreams and rainbow wishes. But that doesn't make it so. So, most wins, most division titles, most WS appearances, and 1 WS title (nobody has 2), means nothing to you? You're the won with the willy wonka dreams scott, the *Yankees are FAR AND AWAY the team of the 2000s thus far. Bring something to the table that says otherwise. Oh wait, I covered everything there is to cover. You lose. You get nothing! Good day sir! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted January 29, 2007 Share Posted January 29, 2007 So, most wins, most division titles, most WS appearances, and 1 WS title (nobody has 2), means nothing to you? You're the won with the willy wonka dreams scott, the Jets are FAR AND AWAY the team of the 2000s thus far. Bring something to the table that says otherwise. Oh wait, I covered everything there is to cover. You lose. You get nothing! Good day sir! Barton, what type of acid trip are you on? What brought the JETS into this convesation? If you want to crown teams of the decade, merely half way into the decade, fine. just don't expect me to buy into your delusion, my little oompa loompa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barton Posted January 29, 2007 Share Posted January 29, 2007 Barton, what type of acid trip are you on? What brought the JETS into this convesation? If you want to crown teams of the decade, merely half way into the decade, fine. just don't expect me to buy into your delusion, my little oompa loompa. I said Jets instead of Yankees, my bad. Tell me why I am so delusioned though. You are the dillusioned one. Tell me scott, who is the team of the 2000s thus far, if its not the Yankees? Is there another team out there with more wins, division titles, WS apperances (pennants), and more WS wins than the Yankees in the 2000s. I think not. You have no leg to stand on in this debate, Scott. Not even close, sorry. FYI, only 3 more yrs left in the decade for baseball. 2007, 2008, 2009. 2010 counts for the next decade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thor99 Posted January 29, 2007 Share Posted January 29, 2007 We've gone over it over and over again. The century ended January 31st, 2000. The Yankees have yet to win a WS in this century. They are the biggest chokers of the new millenium, though. So congrats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mangenious420 Posted January 29, 2007 Share Posted January 29, 2007 We've gone over it over and over again. The century ended January 31st, 2000. The Yankees have yet to win a WS in this century. They are the biggest chokers of the new millenium, though. So congrats. How many world series has your favorite baseball team won? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted January 29, 2007 Share Posted January 29, 2007 I said Jets instead of Yankees, my bad. Tell me why I am so delusioned though. You are the dillusioned one. Tell me scott, who is the team of the 2000s thus far, if its not the Yankees? Is there another team out there with more wins, division titles, WS apperances (pennants), and more WS wins than the Yankees in the 2000s. I think not. You have no leg to stand on in this debate, Scott. Not even close, sorry. FYI, only 3 more yrs left in the decade for baseball. 2007, 2008, 2009. 2010 counts for the next decade. Barton, You are WRONG on so may counts here it is laughable: -Barton, how did the 2006 season get wiped from existence? You just give up on that? -What do the Yankees have over say the Cardinals? One more division title? One more WS appearance? You saying it is IMPOSSIBLE for the Cardinals (if not 10 other teams) to surpass what the Yankeees have accomplished thus far? -Crowning Temas of theh decades, half way through the decade is like pronouncing a winner after the 5th inning. People who do so, look foolish. Guess where that puts you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barton Posted January 29, 2007 Share Posted January 29, 2007 We've gone over it over and over again. The century ended January 31st, 2000. The Yankees have yet to win a WS in this century. They are the biggest chokers of the new millenium, though. So congrats. Baseball doesnt look at it like that. The "Team of the Decade" award goes from the start of the 90' season to the end of the 99 season. It is not different in the 2000s. Look, why did they vote and award team of the decade after the 1999 season? Because thats the end of the 1990s. The 2000 season is not part of the 1990s, at least not in baseball awards like Team of the Decade, and Team of the Century. Yankees were awarded team of the decade and team of the century AFTER THE 1999 season. Its as simple as that. The next decade and century starts in 2000, at least in terms of baseball it does. I really cant make this more clear. Its pretty frickin simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barton Posted January 29, 2007 Share Posted January 29, 2007 Barton, You are WRONG on so may counts here it is laughable: -Barton, how did the 2006 season get wiped from existence? You just give up on that? -What do the Yankees have over say the Cardinals? One more division title? One more WS appearance? You saying it is IMPOSSIBLE for the Cardinals (if not 10 other teams) to surpass what the Yankeees have accomplished thus far? -Crowning Temas of theh decades, half way through the decade is like pronouncing a winner after the 5th inning. People who do so, look foolish. Guess where that puts you? I said "thus far", that means up until now, scott. If the cards go out and win another WS or 2, and the Yankees DO NOT, then the cards will win team of the decade. But I CLEARLY said "thus far who is the team of the decade 2000s" Is this really that hard to understand? Jeez. Thus far (2000 - 2006) is in the record books, scott. So no, I dont see any other teams surpassing what the yankees did from 2000 to 2006, because it is already done - helloooooooo. You look really foolish right now, not me, I must say. Reading Comp 101, scott. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thor99 Posted January 29, 2007 Share Posted January 29, 2007 How many world series has your favorite baseball team won? I don't see what that has to do with the discussion. That's the sign of losing an argument, change the subject. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thor99 Posted January 29, 2007 Share Posted January 29, 2007 Baseball doesnt look at it like that. The "Team of the Decade" award goes from the start of the 90' season to the end of the 99 season. It is not different in the 2000s. Look, why did they vote and award team of the decade after the 1999 season? Because thats the end of the 1990s. The 2000 season is not part of the 1990s, at least not in baseball awards like Team of the Decade, and Team of the Century. Yankees were awarded team of the decade and team of the century AFTER THE 1999 season. Its as simple as that. The next decade and century starts in 2000, at least in terms of baseball it does. I really cant make this more clear. Its pretty frickin simple. It's nice that Yankee fans can bend the space/time continuum so that they can break their arms patting themselves on the back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted January 29, 2007 Share Posted January 29, 2007 I said "thus far", that means up until now, scott. If the cards go out and win another WS or 2, and the Yankees DO NOT, then the cards will win team of the decade. But I CLEARLY said "thus far who is the team of the decade 2000s" Is this really that hard to understand? Jeez. Thus far (2000 - 2006) is in the record books, scott. So no, I dont see any other teams surpassing what the yankees did from 2000 to 2006, because it is already done - helloooooooo. You look really foolish right now, not me, I must say. Reading Comp 101, scott. Please tell us Barton, the records and WS winners for all teams 2007-2010. You seem to know so much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barton Posted January 29, 2007 Share Posted January 29, 2007 It's nice that Yankee fans can bend the space/time continuum so that they can break their arms patting themselves on the back. Are you retarded thorr? What gives? I clearly explained it to you. The baseball writers who vote for these awards look at it from 1990 - 1999, 2000 - 2009 If your theory is correct, and IT IS, but it doesnt pertain to the baseball awards. That so hard to understand? Why did they award the team of the decade and team of the century after the 1999 season, and not after the 2000 season? Read between the lines, homeslice. Its not very hard to figure out. Jesus Christ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barton Posted January 29, 2007 Share Posted January 29, 2007 Please tell us Barton, the records and WS winners for all teams 2007-2010. You seem to know so much. Holy crap, are you facking mad or crazy? I said "THUS FAR", that means UP TO NOW I cant make it any clearer. I facking said it so damn simple. THUS FAR, that means UP TILL NOW, the Yankees are TEAM OF THE DECADE. I didnt say "The Yankees are the team of the decade", but SO FAR, UP TILL NOW, THUS FAR..........THEY ARE. Jesus Christ. So facking hard to understand. Learn how to read and comprehend, this is baby stuff. My God. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thor99 Posted January 29, 2007 Share Posted January 29, 2007 Are you retarded troll? What gives? I clearly explained it to you. The baseball writers who vote for these awards look at it from 1990 - 1999, 2000 - 2009 If you theory is correct, and IT IS, but it doesnt pertain to the baseball awards. That so hard to understand? Why did they award the team of the decade and team of the century after the 1999 season, and not after the 2000 season? Read between the lines, homeslice. Its not very hard to figure out. Jesus Christ. The rest of the sane world knows that the century started in 2001. Like I give a **** what baseball writers do or think? The Yankees have yet to win a World Series this century. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barton Posted January 29, 2007 Share Posted January 29, 2007 The rest of the sane world knows that the century started in 2001. Like I give a **** what baseball writers do or think? The Yankees have yet to win a World Series this century. Well than stfu and why are you arguing with me on this subject? The guys who vote for team of the decade, and team of the century, count the year 2000 as this decade, and this century. You are blasting me, but I am just reporting what I know to be truth. They count 2000 in the decade and century for these 2 awards. Get over it. Move on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Dierking Posted January 29, 2007 Share Posted January 29, 2007 2000 isnt last century. Hence the reason that MLB named the team of the decade & team of the century after the 1999 season, not after the 2000 season. Oh and the Yankees were the team of the decade in the 1990s. As they will also be in the 2000s. Its nice to be a Yankee fan! AHEM Barton-You may want to edit your post. You DIDN"T say they will be in the 200's? You sadi thus far? Little boy, little boy. Don't tell lies Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thor99 Posted January 29, 2007 Share Posted January 29, 2007 Well than stfu and why are you arguing with me on this subject? The guys who vote for team of the decade, and team of the century, count the year 2000 as this decade, and this century. You are blasting me, but I am just reporting what I know to be truth. They count 2000 in the decade and century for these 2 awards. Get over it. Move on. The truth is, the writers are wrong to do it that way. And the Yankees are chokers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barton Posted January 29, 2007 Share Posted January 29, 2007 AHEM Barton-You may want to edit your post. You DIDN"T say they will be in the 200's? You sadi thus far? Little boy, little boy. Don't tell lies Oh excuse me, scott. But the Yankees will be team of the decade in 2000, *barring ultimate collapse, and the slim odds of the cardinals, sox or angels winning another WS. You are really pissing me off. Stop facking with me. I said it clear as day. Thus far, the Yankees are team of the decade. If you disagree with that, you're stupid. Its very clear. More wins. More division titles. More pennants. 1 Ws win. Nobody comes close, have a good day, and go learn how to read comp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barton Posted January 29, 2007 Share Posted January 29, 2007 The truth is, the writers are wrong to do it that way. And the Yankees are chokers. That is fine. Maybe you are right. But it is still fact, they count it. 26 time WS chockers. I'll take it. Enjoy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.