Last week I wrote an article that I write after the conclusion of every minor league season where I simply go over the record of the farm system, the record of each team, and when the last time that team had a winning season. The Cincinnati Reds finished with a losing record on the farm in 2023, going 324-331 overall. It was the 14th time in the last 16 seasons that the farm system was under the .500 mark. Pointing that out seemed to really upset a few people in the comments section for some reason.
One comment, though, sparked an idea for an article. Chris In Venice was curious about how the Reds farm system’s winning percentage stacked up to the rest of baseball. I went through and gathered the record for each organization, as well as if they had a winning or losing season with their various teams.
The Reds have six farm teams. Four of them had winning seasons. One of them finished at .500. And one of them had a losing season. The four teams that finished over .500 all were only a few games over, though, and the one losing team was well below .500 and it dragged down the record.
Still, four teams out of six finishing with a winning record sounds good. But is it? How does that compare to other organizations?
Not every team has six farm clubs. Two organizations – the Giants and the Diamondbacks have eight. 18 other organizations have seven teams. 10 have six – including the Reds. One organization had all of their farm teams put up a winning record. The Seattle Mariners have six teams and they were all winners. The San Francisco Giants have eight teams and seven of them were winners. Both the Los Angeles Dodgers and the Philadelphia Phillies have seven teams and had six teams with winning records. Cincinnati’s four of six teams with winning records would put them in the 10th spot if we calculated things by teams/teams with winning records. The Reds and Mariners were the only clubs with six teams on the farm and at least four of those six teams having winning records.
When it comes to the overall winning percentage for each organization, the Reds are right in the middle of the pack. Their .495 winning percentage put them 15th in baseball. The Dodgers led baseball with a .582 winning percentage. They saw their farm system go 414-297.
One interesting wrinkle that stood out to me was that the Reds had a winning record at the three highest levels of the minor leagues. Only two other teams can make that same claim – the Seattle Mariners, of course, and the Tampa Bay Rays. They both had winning records for all four of their full-season clubs. 17 other clubs had two of three teams between High-A, Double-A, and Triple-A put together winning records.
The Data
Part One:
| Organization | Wins | Losses | Teams | Winning Teams |
| Dodgers | 414 | 297 | 7 | 6 |
| Phillies | 390 | 315 | 7 | 6 |
| Mariners | 359 | 301 | 6 | 6 |
| Rays | 385 | 324 | 7 | 5 |
| Brewers | 369 | 334 | 7 | 4 |
| Twins | 336 | 317 | 6 | 3 |
| Rangers | 361 | 343 | 7 | 4 |
| Orioles | 356 | 352 | 7 | 3 |
| Red Sox | 352 | 349 | 7 | 5 |
| Reds | 324 | 331 | 6 | 4 |
| Blue Jays | 322 | 330 | 6 | 3 |
| Cubs | 348 | 357 | 7 | 3 |
| Dbacks | 378 | 394 | 8 | 4 |
| Athletics | 297 | 362 | 6 | 2 |
| Yankees | 381 | 326 | 7 | 5 |
| Pirates | 371 | 330 | 7 | 4 |
| Tigers | 368 | 337 | 7 | 5 |
| Rockies | 368 | 337 | 7 | 4 |
| Giants | 395 | 374 | 8 | 7 |
| Padres | 347 | 366 | 7 | 4 |
| Marlins | 342 | 363 | 7 | 3 |
| Angels | 317 | 340 | 6 | 2 |
| Cardinals | 310 | 339 | 6 | 3 |
| Guardians | 335 | 370 | 7 | 2 |
| Royals | 335 | 375 | 7 | 3 |
| Astros | 332 | 375 | 7 | 4 |
| Mets | 327 | 371 | 7 | 3 |
| Braves | 304 | 349 | 6 | 1 |
| Nationals | 280 | 359 | 6 | 1 |
| White Sox | 284 | 370 | 6 | 2 |
Part Two:
| Winning Season? | ||||||||
| Org | AAA | AA | A+ | A | US RK | US RK | DSL RK | DSL RK |
| Dodgers | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | – | Yes | Yes |
| Phillies | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | – | Yes | Yes |
| Mariners | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | – | Yes | – |
| Rays | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | – | No | Yes |
| Brewers | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | – | No | No |
| Twins | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | No | – | No | – |
| Rangers | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | No | – | No | Yes |
| Orioles | Yes | No | Yes | No | No | – | Yes | No |
| Red Sox | Yes | Yes | No | No | Yes | – | Yes | Yes |
| Reds | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | No | – | Yes | – |
| Blue Jays | Yes | No | Yes | No | No | – | Yes | – |
| Cubs | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | No | – | No | No |
| Dbacks | Yes | Yes | No | No | No | Yes | No | Yes |
| Athletics | Yes | Yes | No | No | No | – | No | – |
| Yankees | No | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | – | Yes | Yes |
| Pirates | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | – | No | Yes |
| Tigers | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | – | No | Yes |
| Rockies | No | No | No | Yes | Yes | – | Yes | Yes |
| Giants | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Padres | No | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | – | Yes | No |
| Marlins | No | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | – | No | No |
| Angels | No | No | No | Yes | No | – | Yes | – |
| Cardinals | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | – | No | – |
| Guardians | No | No | Yes | Yes | No | – | No | No |
| Royals | No | No | No | Yes | Yes | – | Yes | No |
| Astros | No | Yes | No | No | Yes | – | Yes | Yes |
| Mets | No | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | – | No | No |
| Braves | No | No | No | No | Yes | – | No | – |
| Nationals | No | No | No | Yes | No | – | No | – |
| White Sox | No | No | No | Yes | No | – | Yes | – |
Part Three:
| Organization | Win% | Win team % |
| Dodgers | .582 | .857 |
| Phillies | .553 | .857 |
| Mariners | .544 | 1.000 |
| Rays | .543 | .714 |
| Yankees | .539 | .714 |
| Pirates | .529 | .571 |
| Brewers | .525 | .571 |
| Tigers | .522 | .714 |
| Rockies | .522 | .571 |
| Twins | .515 | .500 |
| Giants | .514 | .875 |
| Rangers | .513 | .571 |
| Orioles | .503 | .429 |
| Red Sox | .502 | .714 |
| Reds | .495 | .667 |
| Blue Jays | .494 | .500 |
| Cubs | .494 | .429 |
| Dbacks | .490 | .500 |
| Padres | .487 | .571 |
| Marlins | .485 | .429 |
| Angels | .482 | .333 |
| Cardinals | .478 | .500 |
| Guardians | .475 | .286 |
| Royals | .472 | .429 |
| Astros | .470 | .571 |
| Mets | .468 | .429 |
| Braves | .466 | .167 |
| Athletics | .451 | .333 |
| Nationals | .438 | .167 |
| White Sox | .434 | .333 |
Top 5 are really no surprise to me . Dodgers, Mariners, Rays, Brewers…these are all teams that are great at drafting, recognizing and developing talent. Phillies are the only surprise to me. On the other ends a little surprised to see the Braves that low.
I can only speak for Dayton, but there was a major change in the way the Reds approached the minor league games in 2023 compared to recent years. In 2023, they played the games to win, after playing them like instructional league games in previous years. They made pitching changes based on the performance of the pitcher, rather than simply leaving him in until he reached his pitch count even if he was getting pounded. They pinch hit when it was appropriate to do so. They pinch ran in late inning situations. It sent a message to the players that the organization cared about the outcomes of the games, and the players picked up on that (big change from 2022). The last season prior to 2023 when the players really seemed to intensely care about winning in Dayton was 2017, and that intensity was led by TJ Friedl, and the other players picked up on that. You saw that this season at the big league level with Friedl again.
Have to disagree with you a little Tom. As someone who keeps track of that kind of stuff, more than just casually, most of the time pitch and inning counts did cause the pitching changes in Dayton. Pitches under stress came into play a lot with the relief pitchers, which made it seem like there were strategy changes but it was the count that mattered. Good example of innings was Petty who pitched four innings tops regardless of pitch count. It could be 40 or 70 but it was four innings.
Petty was on a different plan than anyone else, and yes, pitch counts are king in minor league baseball. But there were many, many examples of pitchers being lifted from games in the middle of innings in 2023 strictly due to performance, regardless of their pitch count, something that never happened in 2022. When a pitcher entered a game in ’22, it was viewed as “his inning,” and that was not the case in 2023. There were many examples of LaHair making a change, lifting Gayman or Boatman or Roxby or Crawford to get someone else in the game to try to get out of the inning and win the game, something you simply never saw in ’22. Without question, there was much more emphasis on winning strategy in ’23 compared to ’22. LaHair was a completely different manager.
Tom, one of the things that’s overlooked frequently is the Reds use of top to bottom development programs for hitting as well as pitching. This is, I believe, the third year of those and the coordination happening within them.. I’d think, then, that the Dayton practices are little different than those above and below. Whether there is or isn’t an additional emphasis on winning, I don’t know. And I’m sure there are some varying practices given the age, physical development, injury histories, o course. But given the positive development of so many guys this year, I’d ay things are going well, including in the win/loss records.
Why do some organizations have 8 minor league teams and others only 6 or 7? Is it purely a financial commitment?
Some teams field two complex-level teams, and some have two teams in the Dominican Summer League (DSL). The teams are run from the same facility, so the investment is relatively modest–extra coaches and support staff. Notably, the Reds used to have two DSL teams. As they upped their annual investment in the international free agent market, they consolidated into one team in the DSL.
This is more of a philosophical decision on the part of franchises. Some prefer to bring in a few more players, hoping to cash in on undervalued players. Others prefer a more focused approach. The financial commitment to run a couple of extra complex level teams is relatively small for an MLB team.
The Reds went to one DSL team when they picked up the Greeneville team. Then after just a few years MLB took that team (and Billings) away from them.
There’s always been a roster limit for players under contract/active and all of that, but with the elimination of teams, that number got smaller and you really saw it in the complex leagues here stateside as there were far more teams with two ACL/FCL teams and now just two teams have figured out how to juggle the roster numbers everywhere to make it work for them.
Last night in arizona:
Hurtubise 1-4 with a BB and RBI. 1k.
Maxwell: 1 IP 2H 1 ER 2K
Think Hurtubise’s hit must have been a bunt as Gameday said it was a single to the pitcher. The Surprise team really put on a hitting show as the had double digit hit.
From watching him play several times this year, his game really reminds me of Brett Gardner for the Yankees. He may be redundant for the Reds with TJ Friedl, but I think his game could translate to majors very effectively. A 400 on base guy who can steal bases and play sold defense.
Unless someone input it incorrectly, it wasn’t a bunt. Bunts are noted as bunts in the PBP data.
LarkinPhillips, my comp for Hurtubise is Brett Butler. I’d be thrilled if he had Gardner’s power, though.
Lark, I’m not convinced the Reds won’t move Freidl. Odds are he’s probably maxed his talent, unlikely to improve from the season he had. If he can bring a BP piece or a #3 SP they may deal Freidl.
If the Reds really are following the Ray’s model, this is the year to move India, tysteve, and maybe Friedl as he would be a sell high candidate. I’m not saying I want any of that. But I would expect some mix of those guys Senzel, Barrero and Fraley to br dealt this off season.
Makes sense. While I don’t necessarily expect the Reds to market any of those players, I could absolutely see some moved if it shored up other spots on the team. In the offseason, teams that don’t have to make deals can sometimes create some incremental value by dealing with teams that need to make a move. That is really the “Rays” way.
I think the amount of graduated rookies the same year that they were called up should be led by the Reds…
That’s something that would be far more difficult for me to track. I would not be surprised at all if that were the case, and by a few players, too.
Thanks Doug! Worth bookmarking this one for future reference. Are we seeing the future?