Much of our promising talent is in the low minors, and as Keith pointed out, it’s tough to really evaluate guys in A ball or short season ball. Some of these guys might turn into dynamos over the next 2 seasons, and if they do, it will be reflected in the strength of our system. If they don’t, we’ll remain where we are.

I think many are way too quick to come to defense of the current Phillies farm and ignore the tremendous extent to which management has shifted resources away from the farm through FA signings that lost draft picks, trading away mid-level (or in the case of Gio and Floyd, high level) prospects for help now, and most seriously drastically decreasing the budget for signing draftees and international amateurs. You can’t do all of these things and maintain a strong farm.

As you suggest, it is a logical fallacy to defend the current farm by proving how strong it was 5 or 6 years ago. The state of farm systems is very dynamic and totally dependent on the resources devoted to them and the extent to which they are raided in trades.

Due to the importance of resourcing, knocking the current state of the farm is very different from knocking the talent of Arby. Wolever, and the scouts, which seems to remain very high.

I wonder how much better the good farm systems are. So I took a quick look at players who were still rookies in ML farm systems in 2002. Anyway, 39 of them became All-Stars. The Dbacks had 4, the Phils, Mets, and Angels had 3 each. (The Phils would have had 4 except Estrada lost his rookie status filling in for Lieberthal the previous year.) 6 teams had 2, 14 teams had 1, and 6 had none. (Obviously, there are likely several future All-Stars in there, too.) Small numbers, and so it may not mean much, but the Dbacks’ system had to be better than the six that had no All-Stars, right?

I looked at 5 teams in terms of the number of ML regulars they produced. That definition is arbitrary, but I found the Phils with 11, Dbacks 14, Angels 12, Twins 9, and Pirates 12. Note that the Pirates, of course, had more openings for regulars than most teams (Arizona maybe as well).

I didn’t have time to do more, but this seems to indicate that maybe the Phils had an above average farm system 5 years ago. Was it considered such then? I remember Byrd being touted, and Myers. Utley and Howard were probably on the radar screen. Hamels had just signed. Ruiz didn’t seem to be in sight yet. Madson had a good year. It’s hard to remember exactly when people were considered prospects, but I don’t remember the Phils being considered loaded at the time. I would hear about “great” farm systems like the Twins’, but they produced fewer regulars and All-Stars than the Phils.

I guess it means that maybe there will be some current Phils’ farmhands who will surprise us. But maybe not!