Minors

by roxfan4life on May 14, 2007 2:51 AM MDT

i was thinking...

if we want our players to grow and win (and we do except management) and we are soooooooooo commmited to our farm systems which we are and thats fine. why arent our farm systems winning? why are all of them in last save for tulsa last year. if all of our starters go through the minors losing all the time then what r they gonna do when the get to the bigs? LOSE. i think we need to start winning more in the minors if we wanna win in the bigs. i know at the same time we wannna save our prospects and not tire em out but teach them to win also...... what do you think?

Eat. Drink. Be Merry. But the above FanPost does not necessarily reflect the attitudes, opinions, or views of Purple Row's staff (unless, of course, it's written by the staff [and even then, it still might not]).

Tweet Comment 6 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Current Records:

Colorado Springs 17-17, second place, three games out
Tulsa 19-17, first place
Modesto 19-18, third place, 5 games out
Asheville 26-10, second place, half a game out of first

These, same as the minor league records last year, are somewhat meaningless when it comes to what to expect from major league play. Winning in the minors is a great sign of what's to come only as long as it's not being done by a bunch of old fogey's who are beating up in leagues they're too mature for.

by Rox Girl on May 14, 2007 7:27 AM MDT reply actions

Agreed.....

In fact, teams like Tulsa last year "could" have been dominate in the 2nd half, but the Rockies decided to promote guys like Iannetta, Tulo, Ulbaldo....etc...to Colorado Springs.

None of our minor league teams have a losing record, so what's the problem?

by sg8335aa on May 14, 2007 8:20 AM MDT up reply actions

Hate putting words

in other peoples mouths, but I'm going to. I think Roxfan4life is addressing the "culture of loosing". If we teach batting and pitching and fielding in the minors why not try to teach winning?

But winning in the minors isn't a concern. A good young group gets broken up, and and players moved up. Most winning is like Rox Girl points out with older guys on their way down, which doesn't really teach winning to the young guys.

Now how do you actually teach winning? I'm sure I don't have that answer. Is it even teachable?

We may stink, but we won't be swept!

by Redhawk on May 14, 2007 8:29 AM MDT reply actions

"winning" isn't the correct term

I think its that competitive drive in certainly individuals to "HATE" losing.....and not just dislike it or not like how it feels....but to truely hate it. (see Michael Jordan)

Its that drive to do whatever it takes to win a ballgame. You can't teach it....you can help motivate, but ultimately you can't teach it.

by sg8335aa on May 14, 2007 10:26 AM MDT up reply actions

its difficult in baseball though

as compared to other, more physical, hustle driven sports. in football, if you HATE losing, you can dig deep and overpower your opponents late in games. in basketball, you can sustain your defensive intensity for all 48 minutes. in hockey, you can absolutely refuse to give up on a scramble for a puck along the boards and give your team a better chance at digging it out and turning it into something. (ok, im not that much of a hockey fan so i had to think for a while to come up with that, but the point remains that hockey is more physical than baseball.) but in baseball, there are basically no chances to outmuscle or overpower an opponent. all you can really do is focus harder. and even when you do, if youre a batter, what if you hit a scorcher straight at an outfielder and he catches it? if youre a pitcher, what if you put a perfect pitch right where you want it and the batter hits it out of the park anyways? when youre in the field, what if the ball never gets hit to you in a key situation? except for a truly out of this world, johan santana type pitcher, baseball really is more dependant on luck than any other sport. as a batter the difference between a 0-4 day and a 3-4 day might be a total of 30 feet of distance (either left/right or deep/shallow) on those 3 hits or outs. unlike a point guard or a quarterback, even great baseball players (except for the santanas/carpenters/halladays on a good day, as i already said) have trouble taking over a game on a good day. its just not that easy. so i cant really answer your question about what it takes to teach not losing, but i will say its much harder in baseball than in other sports. all the david ecksteins in the world cant magically come up with the key hit or play at the rate a jordan or a john elway did.

Rockies in October.

by LarryB303 on May 14, 2007 1:42 PM MDT up reply actions

I always took it as this

That at least lower than triple A, many times the games are as much instructional/refining work as they are to win. So often the goal is to win, but it's even more to test and evaluate the talent.

Does that make any sense?

by comedian on May 14, 2007 10:39 AM MDT reply actions