The front office has concentrated its rebuilding efforts on the pitching side of the equation. Below is my attempt to organize some thoughts on how this has gone. I divide up the starting pitchers in the system along the following lines:
1. The Bulk Acquisitions. None of the individuals in this group were top prospects but all had an outside chance of being a late bloomer and turning into major league starters. They included: Gant, Whalen, Jenkins, Thurman, Ellis, Bird. The idea of acquiring these kinds of prospects in bulk in the hopes that one will pan out is not a bad one. But so far nada.
2. The Top 100 Guys. Wisler, Folty, Blair, Newcomb. These were all bona fide if perhaps not quite elite pitching prospects. I think one of them making it as at least an average major league starter would be the equivalent of holding serve. Having two of them make it would put the pitching side of the rebuild in good shape.
3. The Special Cases. Fried and Toussaint. Undeniably these two were high upside talents. But the risk was very high too. Due to injury in Fried's case and youth and wildness in Toussaint's. Having one of them develop into an average or above average major league starter would be a very good outcome.
4. The High Draft Picks. Allard, Soroka, Anderson, Wentz, Muller. We've made the choice to go with high upside high school pitching with our top picks. This group represents a major investment. And we need two of them to make it to say the investment is justified.
5. The Ancien Regime Holdovers. Sims and Povse. We've traded one away and Sims remains a bit of an enigma.
6. Lower Draft Picks Who Have Shown Promise. Weigel and Withrow. If the yield in the above groups turns out to be disappointing the rebuild could yet be rescued by one of those two.
The two major components of the pitching rebuild have been groups 2 and 4. I think the guys in those two groups will determine its success or failure. They are complementary in the sense that the group 2 pitchers were acquired at an older age and closer to the majors while the group 4 guys were very young and far from the majors. I think the outlook for 2017-2019 very much turns on group 2. The outlook for the team beyond 2019 will probably be determined by group 4.
Reply With Quote