The Value Production Standings:  2005-2007

It was all the way back in August of 2006 that we launched this long series, and now we’re finally completing the journey to the present day. Along the way, we’ve examined the competitive status of each major league franchise’s farm system production in each of the following periods:

1946-1950
1951-1955
1956-1960
1961-1965
1966-1970
1971-1975
1976-1980
1981-1985
1986-1989
1990-1993
1994-1997
1998-2001
2002-2004

For a review of our methodology, please see the References and Resources section below.

Here’s the key to the figures we’ve been examining:

WSP = Win Shares Produced: the total of major league Win Shares produced that season by all players credited to the organization
Lg. WSP = League Win Shares Produced: the percentage of the league total of WSP credited to the organization
MLB WSP = Major league baseball Win Shares Produced: the percentage of the MLB-wide total of WSP credited to the organization
W = Wins: the actual win total of the team that season
Lg. W = League Wins: the percentage of the league win total won by the team
W% – WSP% = League Wins minus League Win Shares Produced: a measure of how much better or worse a team actually performed than the league-wide value produced by its organization
Avg WSP = Average Win Shares Produced: the average WSP of the teams in a given division or league
%MLB Avg = Percentage of the major league baseball average: how the average WSP for a given division or league compares with the overall major league average

The 2005 Value Production Standings

AL Organization    WSP Lg. WSP  MLB WSP    W  Lg. W   W% - WSP% Avg. WSP % MLB Avg.

Blue Jays          425   12.4%     6.0%   80   7.0%       -5.4%
Yankees            274    8.0%     3.8%   95   8.3%        0.3%
Red Sox            224    6.5%     3.1%   95   8.3%        1.8%
Orioles            157    4.6%     2.2%   74   6.5%        1.9%
Devil Rays         116    3.4%     1.6%   67   5.9%        2.5%
East Division     1196   34.8%    16.8%  411  35.9%        1.1%      239  100.8%

Indians            331    9.6%     4.7%   93   8.1%       -1.5%
Twins              229    6.7%     3.2%   83   7.3%        0.6%
Royals             205    6.0%     2.9%   56   4.9%       -1.1%
White Sox          196    5.7%     2.8%   99   8.7%        3.0%
Tigers             185    5.4%     2.6%   71   6.2%        0.8%
Central Division  1146   33.3%    16.1%  402  35.1%        1.8%      229   96.6%

Athletics          317    9.2%     4.5%   88   7.7%       -1.5%
Mariners           279    8.1%     3.9%   69   6.0%       -2.1%
Rangers            262    7.6%     3.7%   79   6.9%       -0.7%
Angels             238    6.9%     3.3%   95   8.3%        1.4%
West Division     1096   31.9%    15.4%  331  28.9%       -2.9%      274  115.5%

AL Total          3438  100.0%    48.3% 1144   100%        0.0%      246  103.5%

NL Organization    WSP Lg. WSP  MLB WSP    W  Lg. W   W% - WSP% Avg. WSP % MLB Avg.

Nationals          370   10.1%     5.2%   81   6.3%       -3.8%
Braves             339    9.2%     4.8%   90   7.0%       -2.2%
Phillies           221    6.0%     3.1%   88   6.8%        0.8%
Mets               217    5.9%     3.0%   83   6.5%        0.6%
Marlins            188    5.1%     2.6%   83   6.5%        1.3%
East Division     1335   36.3%    18.8%  425  33.0%       -3.2%      267  112.5%

Astros             403   11.0%     5.7%   89   6.9%       -4.0%
Pirates            244    6.6%     3.4%   67   5.2%       -1.4%
Cardinals          217    5.9%     3.0%  100   7.8%        1.9%
Cubs               206    5.6%     2.9%   79   6.1%        0.5%
Brewers            177    4.8%     2.5%   81   6.3%        1.5%
Reds               175    4.8%     2.5%   73   5.7%        0.9%
Central Division  1422   38.7%    20.0%  489  38.0%       -0.6%      237   99.9%

Rockies            242    6.6%     3.4%   67   5.2%       -1.4%
Diamondbacks       182    4.9%     2.6%   77   6.0%        1.0%
Giants             181    4.9%     2.5%   75   5.8%        0.9%
Dodgers            168    4.6%     2.4%   71   5.5%        1.0%
Padres             149    4.1%     2.1%   82   6.4%        2.3%
West Division      922   25.1%    13.0%  372  28.9%        3.9%      184   77.7%

NL Total          3679  100.0%    51.7% 1286 100.0%        0.0%      230   96.9%

MLB Total         7117    n/a      100% 2430   n/a         n/a       237  100.0%

Colorado had long been a franchise that was, shall we say, not noted for shrewd executive decision-making. After coming into existence in 1993, the Rockies had found some early success: They’d been a box-office smash from the get-go, leading the National League in attendance in each of their first seven seasons, and under GM Bob Gebhard they’d put a competitive team on the field for a few years in the mid-to-late 1990s.

But they’d been unable to convert their enormous revenue resources into a sustained program of on-field success, and among their organizational failings was an apparent inability to understand the nature of the playing conditions their mile-high home created. Over and over, the organization seemed to be fooled by altitude-inflated numbers into thinking it had a better-hitting ball club than it did.

By the 2000s, the bloom was off the rose. Denver fans tired of the mediocrity, and attendance dramatically waned. Dan O’Dowd took over as GM in late 1999, and for several seasons he seemed almost comically incapable of making headway. O’Dowd spent vast sums on high-profile free agent busts in pitchers Mike Hampton and Denny Neagle and he announced a new master strategy about every three months.

In general, he appeared eager to exploit high elevation as an excuse instead of acknowledging that the Rockies weren’t winning because they simply hadn’t done a good job of amassing and deploying talent. Under O’Dowd, through 2005 the Rockies had won, in succession, 82, 73, 73, 74, 68 and 67 games; worse than getting nowhere, the Rockies seemed to be slowly moving backwards.

But underneath that dismal surface, O’Dowd had been doing one thing extremely well. His executive team (in particular, scouting and farm system directors Bill Schmidt, Bill Geivett and Marc Gustafson) had taken the nascent farm system created by Gebhard and built on it with great skill.

In 2005, the Rockies were a loser, in last place in the NL West and in 14th among the 16 NL teams in attendance. But in value production, for the first time they led the NL West. The ball club that struggled in 2005 did so while providing space for outstanding young system-produced talent to develop, including outfielders Matt Holliday and Brad Hawpe, third baseman Garrett Atkins and pitchers Jeff Francis and Aaron Cook. It wasn’t yet obvious, but the foundation of the 2007 National League champions was being poured.

The 2006 Value Production Standings

AL Organization    WSP Lg. WSP  MLB WSP    W  Lg. W   W% - WSP% Avg. WSP % MLB Avg.

Blue Jays          396   11.4%     5.7%   87   7.5%       -4.0%
Yankees            293    8.5%     4.2%   97   8.3%       -0.1%
Red Sox            292    8.4%     4.2%   86   7.4%       -1.0%
Orioles            143    4.1%     2.0%   70   6.0%        1.9%
Devil Rays         118    3.4%     1.7%   61   5.2%        1.8%
East Division     1242   35.9%    17.7%  401  34.5%       -1.4%      248  106.4%

Indians            314    9.1%     4.5%   78   6.7%       -2.4%
Twins              237    6.9%     3.4%   96   8.3%        1.4%
White Sox          237    6.9%     3.4%   90   7.7%        0.9%
Tigers             200    5.8%     2.9%   95   8.2%        2.4%
Royals             163    4.7%     2.3%   62   5.3%        0.6%
Central Division  1151   33.3%    16.4%  421  36.2%        3.0%      230   98.6%

Athletics          333    9.6%     4.8%   93   8.0%       -1.6%
Mariners           254    7.3%     3.6%   78   6.7%       -0.6%
Rangers            249    7.2%     3.6%   80   6.9%       -0.3%
Angels             230    6.6%     3.3%   89   7.7%        1.0%
West Division     1066   30.8%    15.2%  340  29.3%       -1.6%      267  114.2%

AL Total          3459  100.0%    49.4% 1162   100%        0.0%      247  105.9%

NL Organization    WSP Lg. WSP  MLB WSP    W  Lg. W   W% - WSP% Avg. WSP % MLB Avg.

Braves             337    9.5%     4.8%   79   6.2%       -3.3%
Nationals          291    8.2%     4.2%   71   5.6%       -2.6%
Marlins            238    6.7%     3.4%   78   6.2%       -0.6%
Phillies           231    6.5%     3.3%   85   6.7%        0.2%
Mets               223    6.3%     3.2%   97   7.7%        1.4%
East Division     1320   37.3%    18.9%  410  32.4%       -4.9%      264  113.1%

Astros             347    9.8%     5.0%   82   6.5%       -3.3%
Pirates            283    8.0%     4.0%   67   5.3%       -2.7%
Cardinals          194    5.5%     2.8%   83   6.6%        1.1%
Cubs               166    4.7%     2.4%   66   5.2%        0.5%
Brewers            132    3.7%     1.9%   75   5.9%        2.2%
Reds               125    3.5%     1.8%   80   6.3%        2.8%
Central Division  1247   35.2%    17.8%  453  35.8%        0.5%      208   89.1%

Rockies            247    7.0%     3.5%   76   6.0%       -1.0%
Dodgers            225    6.4%     3.2%   88   6.9%        0.6%
Diamondbacks       207    5.8%     3.0%   76   6.0%        0.2%
Giants             168    4.7%     2.4%   76   6.0%        1.3%
Padres             128    3.6%     1.8%   88   6.9%        3.3%
West Division      975   27.5%    13.9%  404  31.9%        4.4%      195   83.6%

NL Total          3542  100.0%    50.6% 1267 100.0%        0.0%      221   94.9%

MLB Total         7001    n/a      100% 2429   n/a         n/a       233  100.0%

For a decade, the National League East Division had presented a curious juxtaposition. The Montreal Expos, recently relocated to Washington and re-christened the Nationals, had dominated in value production, leading the division in WSP every season since 1992. But their inability to retain the best of their talent in the face of free agent defections rendered them chronically noncompetitive on the field; they hadn’t been a serious contender since 1996, and their 71-91, last-place performance of 2006 was typical.

Meanwhile the Atlanta Braves had been phenomenally dominant on the field, winning the division title every year since 1995, after having finished second to the Expos in ’94. Yet the Braves accomplished this extraordinary success with good-but-not-great farm production.

They had long featured a core of system-produced stars, most notably third baseman-outfielder Chipper Jones, center fielder Andruw Jones, and pitcher Tom Glavine, but their championship status had been achieved primarily through the tremendous work of GM John Schuerholz in filling nearly every hole with the just the right free agent signing, trade acquisition, or scrap-heap scavenge, as well as the equally tremendous skill of field manager Bobby Cox and pitching coach Leo Mazzone in getting the very most out of the resources at hand.

But in 2006, two unexpected things occurred: At last, the Braves nosed ahead of the Nationals in organizational value production, yet simultaneously Atlanta failed to present a winning ball club for the first time since 1990, struggling in at 79-83. This Braves team still retained the Jones boys as veteran stars, and they were now joined by younger system-produced standouts in catcher Brian McCann, second baseman Marcus Giles and first baseman Adam LaRoche, but they were unable to mount a sufficient supporting cast around them, especially in the pitching staff—perhaps significantly, with Mazzone having now departed.

Atlanta products excelling elsewhere in 2006 included shortstop Rafael Furcal (Dodgers), outfielder Jermaine Dye (White Sox), pitchers Jason Schmidt (Giants) and Kevin Millwood (Rangers) and infielder-outfielder Mark DeRosa (Rangers).

The 2007 Value Production Standings

AL Organization    WSP Lg. WSP  MLB WSP    W  Lg. W   W% - WSP% Avg. WSP % MLB Avg.

Blue Jays          340   10.3%     5.0%   83   7.2%       -3.1%
Red Sox            243    7.4%     3.6%   96   8.4%        1.0%
Yankees            227    6.9%     3.3%   94   8.2%        1.3%
Devil Rays         160    4.9%     2.3%   66   5.8%        0.9%
Orioles            147    4.5%     2.2%   69   6.0%        1.6%
East Division     1117   34.0%    16.3%  408  35.6%        1.7%      223   98.1%

Indians            347   10.5%     5.1%   96   8.4%       -2.2%
White Sox          236    7.2%     3.5%   72   6.3%       -0.9%
Twins              185    5.6%     2.7%   79   6.9%        1.3%
Tigers             175    5.3%     2.6%   88   7.7%        2.4%
Royals             168    5.1%     2.5%   69   6.0%        0.9%
Central Division  1111   33.8%    16.3%  404  35.3%        1.5%      222   97.6%

Mariners           305    9.3%     4.5%   88   7.7%       -1.6%
Athletics          292    8.9%     4.3%   76   6.6%       -2.2%
Rangers            237    7.2%     3.5%   75   6.6%       -0.7%
Angels             228    6.9%     3.3%   94   8.2%        1.3%
West Division     1062   32.3%    15.5%  333  29.1%       -3.2%      266  116.6%

AL Total          3290  100.0%    48.2% 1145   100%        0.0%      235  103.2%

NL Organization    WSP Lg. WSP  MLB WSP    W  Lg. W   W% - WSP% Avg. WSP % MLB Avg.

Nationals          305    8.6%     4.5%   73   5.7%       -2.9%
Braves             286    8.1%     4.2%   84   6.5%       -1.5%
Phillies           235    6.6%     3.4%   89   6.9%        0.3%
Marlins            234    6.6%     3.4%   71   5.5%       -1.1%
Mets               209    5.9%     3.1%   88   6.8%        0.9%
East Division     1269   35.8%    18.6%  405  31.5%       -4.3%      254  111.4%

Astros             286    8.1%     4.2%   73   5.7%       -2.4%
Pirates            256    7.2%     3.7%   68   5.3%       -1.9%
Cardinals          212    6.0%     3.1%   78   6.1%        0.1%
Brewers            200    5.6%     2.9%   83   6.5%        0.8%
Cubs               188    5.3%     2.8%   85   6.6%        1.3%
Reds                81    2.3%     1.2%   72   5.6%        3.3%
Central Division  1223   34.5%    17.9%  459  35.7%        1.2%      204   89.5%

Rockies            288    8.1%     4.2%   90   7.0%       -1.1%
Diamondbacks       252    7.1%     3.7%   90   7.0%       -0.1%
Dodgers            211    6.0%     3.1%   82   6.4%        0.4%
Giants             152    4.3%     2.2%   71   5.5%        1.2%
Padres             147    4.2%     2.2%   89   6.9%        2.8%
West Division     1050   29.6%    15.4%  422  32.8%        3.2%      210   92.2%

NL Total          3542  100.0%    51.8% 1286 100.0%        0.0%      221   97.2%

MLB Total         6832    n/a      100% 2431   n/a         n/a       228  100.0%

The American League East has been widely noted for displaying an extraordinary degree of competitive stability. Since the Devil Rays were hatched in 1998, every season the division’s standings, with minimal exceptions, have been (1) New York, (2) Boston, (3) Toronto, (4) Baltimore and (5) Tampa Bay. Through this period, the value production of the AL East has been remarkably stable as well, with the Blue Jays virtually always on top, then the Yankees and the Red Sox, and then the Orioles and Devil Rays trailing in the distance.

While obviously displeasing in the extreme for Baltimore and Tampa Bay fans, this circumstance has probably been most frustrating for Toronto. The vast talent reservoir emanating from the Blue Jays’ system isn’t merely a legacy of long-departed veterans, like Jeff Kent (Dodgers), Carlos Delgado and Shawn Green (Mets), Shannon Stewart (Athletics), David Wells (Padres-Dodgers) and Woody Williams (Astros).

None among standout middle infielders Michael Young (Rangers), Orlando Hudson (Diamondbacks) and Felipe Lopez (Nationals) was over 30 in the 2007 season, but all three were among the latest bountiful cohort that Toronto hasn’t adequately leveraged. Without the financial resources to compete with the Yankees and Red Sox in payroll, the Blue Jays haven’t been a serious contender since the early 1990s, despite continuously pumping from a talent well that neither the Yankees nor Red Sox has been able to match.

Not that the value production of either of the big-bucks behemoths hasn’t been solid. Yankee organizational products currently on their roster include not just the familiar veterans in shortstop Derek Jeter, catcher Jorge Posada, starter Andy Pettite and closer Mariano Rivera, but also second baseman Robinson Cano, pitcher Chien-Ming Wang and outfielder Melky Cabrera. Former Yankee farmhands include third baseman Mike Lowell (Red Sox) and outfielder Alfonso Soriano (Cubs).

On the 2007 World Champion Boston roster, the only home-grown stars were first baseman Kevin Youklilis, second baseman Dustin Pedroia and closer Jonathan Papelbon, but the list of Red Sox products now elsewhere includes shorstops Hanley Ramirez (Marlins) and David Eckstein (Cardinals), third baseman Freddy Sanchez (Pirates) and relief ace Rafael Betancourt (Indians).

In contrast, the standings in the AL Central have been topsy-turvy, producing four different post-season qualifiers in the past three years, and with all the division’s winners having experienced hard times as well in recent seasons. Yet meanwhile, the division’s value production picture has been rather static, with the Cleveland Indians dominating the top spot, leading in WSP in 10 of the past 11 years.

The young Indians team that advanced to the ALCS this year has been largely home-grown, including catcher Victor Martinez, pitchers C. C. Sabathia and Fausto Carmona, shortstop Jhonny Peralta and first baseman Ryan Garko.

Cleveland’s talent production has been so robust that the Indians are thriving despite having unloaded designated hitter Jim Thome (White Sox), outfielders Brian Giles (Padres), Manny Ramirez (Red Sox), Ryan Church (Nationals), Willy Taveras (Rockies) and Luke Scott (Astros), infielders Kevin Kouzmanoff (Padres) and Maicer Izturis (Angels) and pitcher Jeremy Guthrie (Orioles).

The Arizona Diamondbacks achieved extraordinarily immediate success, reaching the postseason three times in their first five seasons while featuring a roster studded with high-priced free agent veterans. But the morning after that party was a harsh one, with the D-backs collapsing into a 51-111 heap in 2004.

Following that, Arizona’s recovery again has been swift, as the farm system constructed under former GM Joe Garagiola Jr. is yielding exceptional results. This season’s division-winning Diamondbacks club was led by organizationally produced pitchers Brandon Webb, Jose Valverde, Micah Owings and Tony Pena, catcher Chris Snyder, shortstop Stephen Drew, third baseman Mark Reynolds and first baseman Conor Jackson.

While the Giants’ and Padres’ systems remain quite unimpressive, the remarkable young talent emerging not only in Arizona and Colorado, but also now from the Los Angeles Dodgers suggests that the National League West, long the weak sister in value production, may be poised for an era of WSP leadership.

Meanwhile, just what in the world has happened to the farm system of the Cincinnati Reds? One has to look back all the way to the Kansas City Athletics of the late 1950s/early 1960s to find a non-expansion franchise with a talent well as dry as that of the 2007 Reds. Just two players (outfielders Adam Dunn and Austin Kearns, with 21 Win Shares apiece) accounted for more than half of Cincinnati’s extremely meager organizational production this season.

The Value Production Standings Summary, 1946-2007

American League

 Year  NYY     DET     BOS     CLE     OAK     MIN     BAL      CHW      CAL       WAS     AL WSP
1946   1       2       3       4       5       6       7        8        x         x       56.5%
1947   1       2       4       3       5       6       8        7        x         x       55.3%
1948   1       3       4       2       5       7       6        8        x         x       55.6%
1949   1       3T      3T      2       5       7       6        8        x         x       51.9%
1950   1       3       4       2       7       6       5        8        x         x       50.5%
1951   2       4       3       1       5       6       8        7        x         x       49.0%
1952   1       4       3       2       5       6       8        7        x         x       47.9%
1953   2       4       3       1       7       6       8        5        x         x       46.2%
1954   1T      4       3       1T      7       6       8        5        x         x       47.5%
1955   1       4       2       3       5       6       8        7        x         x       46.7%
1956   1       4       2       3       7       5       8        6        x         x       47.1%
1957   1       4       2       3       6       8       7        5        x         x       46.3%
1958   1       4       3       2       8       7       6        5        x         x       46.4%
1959   1       4       3       2       8       7       5        6        x         x       46.5%
1960   1       5       3       2       8       7       4        6        x         x       46.0%
1961   1       4       3       2       8       7       5        6        9         10      48.3%
1962   1       3       4       2       8       6       5        7        10        9       43.1%
1963   1       5       4       2       8       7       3        6        10        9       43.6%
1964   1       3       4       5       8       7       2        6        9         10      45.0%
1965   1       2       7       4       8       6       3        5        9         10      44.5%
1966   1       3       6       5       7       8       2        4        9         10      44.4%
1967   7       4       1       6       8       3       2        5        9         10      45.5%
1968   7       1       4       5       2       8       3        6        9         10      45.8%

American League East Division

Year  BAL     DET     BOS     NYY     CLE     WAS           Avg. WSP % ML Avg.  ALW WSP   AL WSP
1969   1       2       3       4       5       6               259    108.3%     27.1%     45.3%
1970   2       4       1       3       5       6               260    108.3%     27.1%     44.7%
1971   2       3       4       1       5       6               244    101.5%     25.4%     46.0%

      BAL     DET     BOS     NYY     CLE     MIL           Avg. WSP % ML Avg.  ALW WSP   AL WSP
1972   1       5       2       4       3       6               219     95.4%     23.9%     43.0%
1973   1       5       2       4       3       6               219     91.5%     22.9%     42.0%
1974   2       3       1       4       5       6               215     90.5%     22.6%     43.8%
1975   2       4       1       3       5       6               193     81.6%     20.4%     44.4%
1976   2       4       1       5       3       6               204     85.9%     21.5%     44.3%

      BAL     DET     BOS     NYY     CLE     MIL     TOR   Avg. WSP % ML Avg.  ALW WSP   AL WSP
1977   1       3       2       5       4       6       7       193     82.2%     22.1%     46.1%
1978   2       3       1       5       4       6       7       210     88.9%     23.9%     46.7%
1979   2       3       1       6       5       4       7       213     90.7%     24.4%     47.7%
1980   3       2       1       6       4       5       7       199     84.9%     22.8%     49.4%
1981   3       2       1       6       4       5       7       138     89.2%     24.0%     49.0%
1982   2       3       1       6       5       4       7       215     91.0%     24.5%     47.7%
1983   2       5       1       4       6       3       7       222     94.7%     25.5%     48.0%
1984   2       4       1       3       5       6       7       206     87.0%     23.4%     47.1%
1985   3       4       1       2       7       5       6       206     87.6%     23.6%     47.7%
1986   3       5       1       2       6       4       7       200     85.6%     23.0%     47.7%
1987   5       4       1       3       6       2       7       216     91.3%     24.6%     49.3%
1988   6       5       1       3       4       2       7       216     91.7%     24.7%     49.1%
1989   4       6       1       3       5       2       7       211     88.6%     23.8%     49.9%
1990   6       5       1       2       7       4       3       215     90.6%     24.4%     50.0%
1991   6       4       1       2       7       4       5       212     89.0%     24.0%     50.8%
1992   4       6       3       2       7       1       5       219     91.3%     24.6%     51.5%
1993   6       5       3       1       7       4       2       227     95.7%     23.9%     51.3%

      BAL     DET     BOS     NYY     TOR                   Avg. WSP % ML Avg.  ALW WSP   AL WSP
1994   4       5       3       2       1                       190    113.6%     20.3%     52.9%
1995   5       4       3       1       2                       222    105.5%     18.8%     53.0%
1996   4       5       3       1       2                       251    106.0%     18.9%     53.8%
1997   4       5       3       2       1                       272    114.4%     20.4%     53.4%

      BAL     TBD     BOS     NYY     TOR                   Avg. WSP % ML Avg.  ALW WSP   AL WSP
1998   4       5       3       2       1                       227     96.5%     16.1%     51.4%
1999   4       5       3       1       2                       224     95.1%     15.9%     52.2%
2000   4       5       3       2       1                       221     93.7%     15.6%     50.9%
2001   4       5       3       2       1                       221     94.3%     15.7%     51.3%
2002   4       5       3       2       1                       239    102.8%     17.1%     50.9%
2003   4       5       3       2       1                       240    103.2%     17.2%     49.5%
2004   4       5       3       2       1                       253    107.4%     17.9%     49.5%
2005   4       5       3       2       1                       239    100.8%     16.8%     48.3%
2006   4       5       3       2       1                       248    106.4%     17.7%     49.4%
2007   5       4       2       3       1                       223     98.1%     16.3%     48.2%

American League Central Division

Year  KCR     MIN     CHW     MIL     CLE                   Avg. WSP % ML Avg.  ALC WSP   AL WSP
1994   1       2       3       4       5                       163     97.5%     17.4%     52.9%
1995   1       2       5       4       3                       210     99.6%     17.8%     53.0%
1996   2       1       5       3       4                       241    101.5%     18.1%     53.8%
1997   4       2T      5       2T      1                       231     97.3%     17.4%     53.4%

      KCR     MIN     CHW     DET     CLE                   Avg. WSP % ML Avg.  ALC WSP   AL WSP
1998   3       2       5       4       1                       243    103.4%     17.2%     51.4%
1999   4       2T      2T      5       1                       269    114.0%     19.0%     52.2%
2000   4       2       3       5       1                       249    105.6%     17.6%     50.9%
2001   3       2       4       5       1                       269    114.9%     19.1%     51.3%
2002   4       2       3       5       1                       253    108.7%     18.1%     50.9%
2003   3       1       4       5       2                       226     97.0%     16.2%     49.5%
2004   3       2       4T      4T      1                       230     97.7%     16.3%     49.5%
2005   3       2       4       5       1                       229     96.6%     16.1%     48.3%
2006   5       2T      2T      4       1                       230     98.6%     16.4%     49.4%
2007   5       3       2       4       1                       222     97.6%     16.3%     48.2%

American League West Division

Year  OAK     MIN     CHW     CAL     KCR     MIL           Avg. WSP % ML Avg.  ALW WSP   AL WSP
1969   1       2       3       4       5T      5T              175     73.0%     18.2%     45.3%
1970   1       2       3       4       5       6               169     70.4%     17.6%     44.7%
1971   1       3       4       2       6       5               198     82.3%     20.6%     46.0%

      OAK     MIN     CHW     CAL     KCR     TEX           Avg. WSP % ML Avg.  ALW WSP   AL WSP
1972   1       2       3       4       6       5               177     76.8%     19.2%     43.0%
1973   1       2       3       4       6       5               183     76.5%     19.1%     42.0%
1974   1       2       5       4       6       3               201     84.7%     21.2%     43.8%
1975   1       2       5       3       6       4               228     96.2%     24.0%     44.4%
1976   1       4       5       2       6       3               217     91.5%     22.9%     44.3%

      OAK     MIN     CHW     CAL     KCR     TEX     SEA   Avg. WSP % ML Avg.  ALW WSP   AL WSP
1977   1       2       6       4       5       3       7       209     88.9%     23.9%     46.1%
1978   1       3       6       4       5       2       7       200     84.5%     22.7%     46.7%
1979   1       4T      6       2       4T      3       7       203     86.5%     23.3%     47.7%
1980   1       4       6       5       3       2       7       231     98.7%     26.6%     49.4%
1981   1       5       6       3       4       2       7       143     92.6%     24.9%     49.0%
1982   1       5       6       4       3       2       7       204     86.2%     23.2%     47.7%
1983   2       5       6       1       4       3       7       196     83.5%     22.5%     48.0%
1984   3       4       6       1       2       5       7       207     87.8%     23.6%     47.1%
1985   3       5       7       2       1       4       6       210     89.6%     24.1%     47.7%
1986   2       5       7       1       4       3       6       213     91.4%     24.6%     47.7%
1987   2       6       7       4       1       3       5       217     91.9%     24.7%     49.3%
1988   2       4       7       3       1       6       5       214     90.8%     24.5%     49.1%
1989   4       5       7       3       2       5       1       230     96.7%     26.0%     49.9%
1990   3       6       7       4       2       5       1       226     95.2%     25.6%     50.0%
1991   1       7       6       5       3       4       2       237     99.5%     26.8%     50.8%
1992   1       6       5       2       4       3       7       239    100.0%     26.9%     51.5%
1993   4       6       7       3       2       1       5       260    109.7%     27.4%     51.3%

      OAK     TEX     SEA     LAA                           Avg. WSP % ML Avg.  ALW WSP   AL WSP
1994   1       2       4       3                               178    106.1%     15.2%     52.9%
1995   2       1       4       3                               241    114.3%     16.3%     53.0%
1996   2       1       4       3                               278    117.4%     16.8%     53.8%
1997   3       2       4       1                               260    109.3%     15.6%     53.4%
1998   1       2       4       3                               319    135.6%     18.1%     51.4%
1999   2       1       3       4                               306    129.9%     17.3%     52.2%
2000   1       2       4       3                               313    132.6%     17.7%     50.9%
2001   1       2       3       4                               289    123.6%     16.5%     51.3%
2002   1       4       2       3                               274    117.7%     15.7%     50.9%
2003   3       2       1       4                               281    120.8%     16.1%     49.5%
2004   3       1       2       4                               271    115.0%     15.3%     49.5%
2005   1       3       2       4                               274    115.5%     15.4%     48.3%
2006   1       3       2       4                               267    114.2%     15.2%     49.4%
2007   2       3       1       4                               266    116.6%     15.5%     48.2%

National League

Year  STL     LAD     CHC     CIN     PHI     PIT     ATL      SFG      HOU       NYM     NL WSP
1946   1       2       3       4       5       6       7        8        x         x       43.5%
1947   1       2       4       3       7       6       8        5        x         x       44.7%
1948   1       2       3       4       6       7       8        5        x         x       44.4%
1949   1       2       3       4       5       7       8        6        x         x       48.1%
1950   1       2       5       6       4       7       8        3        x         x       49.5%
1951   1       2       5       4       6       7       8        3        x         x       51.0%
1952   1       2       5       4       6       8       7        3        x         x       52.1%
1953   2       1       7       4       5       8       3        6        x         x       53.8%
1954   2       1       7       5       6       8       3        4        x         x       52.5%
1955   3       1       6       5       7       8       2        4        x         x       53.3%
1956   2       1       8       4       6       7       3        5        x         x       52.9%
1957   2       1       7       5       4       8       3        6        x         x       53.7%
1958   4       1       8       6       7       5       2        3        x         x       53.6%
1959   3       1       7       5       8       6       2        4        x         x       53.5%
1960   3       1       8       6       7       5       4        2        x         x       54.0%
1961   2       1       7       5       8       6       3        4        x         x       51.7%
1962   4       1       7       5       8       6       2        3        9         10      56.9%
1963   5       1       7       4       8       6       3        2        9         10      56.4%
1964   6       3       7       4       8       5       2        1        9         10      55.0%
1965   6       2       8       3       7       5       4        1        9         10      55.5%
1966   6       4       7       2       8       5       3        1        9         10      55.6%
1967   5       3       6       2       7       8       4        1        9         10      54.5%
1968   5       4       6       2       8       7       3        1        9         10      54.2%

National League East Division

Year  PIT     STL     CHC     NYM     PHI     MON     FLA   Avg. WSP % ML Avg.  NLE WSP   NL WSP
1969   1       2       3       4       5       6       x       218     91.1%     22.8%     54.7%
1970   1       2       4       5       3       6       x       221     91.9%     23.0%     55.3%
1971   1       3       5       2       4       6       x       230     95.7%     23.9%     54.0%
1972   1       2       4       3       5       6       x       244    106.1%     26.5%     57.0%
1973   1       3       5       2       4       6       x       239     99.7%     24.9%     58.0%
1974   1       4       5       3       2       6       x       249    104.9%     26.2%     56.2%
1975   1       2       5       3       4       6       x       247    104.2%     26.1%     55.6%
1976   1       2       5       3       4       6       x       254    106.8%     26.7%     55.7%
1977   1       2       5       4       3       6       x       290    123.4%     28.5%     53.9%
1978   1       3       5       4       2       6       x       285    120.7%     27.9%     53.3%
1979   1       3       6       4       2       5       x       289    123.5%     28.5%     52.3%
1980   1       2       6       4       3       5       x       280    119.7%     27.6%     50.6%
1981   1       2       6       3       4       5       x       185    119.5%     27.6%     51.0%
1982   1       3       6       5       2       4       x       289    122.3%     28.2%     52.3%
1983   3       1       6       5       2       4       x       272    115.8%     26.7%     52.0%
1984   2       3       6       4       1       5       x       280    118.5%     27.4%     52.9%
1985   4       2       6       3       1       5       x       276    117.7%     27.2%     52.3%
1986   4       3       6       2       1       5       x       280    120.0%     27.7%     52.3%
1987   5       2       6       3       1       4       x       272    115.2%     26.6%     50.7%
1988   2       5       4       1       3       6       x       281    119.1%     27.5%     50.9%
1989   2       6       4       1       3       5       x       272    114.0%     26.3%     50.1%
1990   2       6       4       1       5       3       x       282    119.0%     27.5%     50.0%
1991   1       6       5       2       4       3       x       271    113.7%     26.2%     49.2%
1992   2       3       4       5       6       1       x       273    114.0%     26.3%     48.5%
1993   2       3       5       4       6       1       7       236     99.6%     24.9%     48.7%

      WAS     ATL     FLA     NYM     PHI                   Avg. WSP % ML Avg.  NLE WSP   NL WSP
1994   1       2       5       3       4                       149     89.2%     15.9%     47.1%
1995   1       2       5       3       4                       184     87.6%     15.7%     47.0%
1996   1       2       5       3       4                       200     84.3%     15.0%     46.2%
1997   1       2       5       3       4                       215     90.4%     16.2%     46.6%
1998   1       2       5       3       4                       233     99.2%     16.5%     48.6%
1999   1       2       5       3       4                       228     96.6%     16.1%     47.8%
2000   1       3       5       2       4                       257    108.9%     18.1%     49.1%
2001   1       2       5       3       4                       237    101.4%     16.9%     48.7%
2002   1       2       5       3       4                       261    112.2%     18.7%     49.1%
2003   1       2       4       3       5                       257    110.4%     18.4%     50.5%
2004   1       2       4       5       3                       244    103.9%     17.3%     50.5%
2005   1       2       5       4       3                       267    112.5%     18.8%     51.7%
2006   2       1       3       5       4                       264    113.1%     18.9%     50.6%
2007   1       2       4       5       3                       254    111.4%     18.6%     51.8%

National League Central Division

Year  STL     PIT     CHC     CIN     HOU     MIL           Avg. WSP % ML Avg.  NLC WSP   NL WSP
1994   1       2       3       4       5       x               175    104.7%     18.7%     47.1%
1995   2       1       3       4       5       x               223    106.0%     18.9%     47.0%
1996   2       1       3T      3T      5       x               243    102.4%     18.3%     46.2%
1997   2       1       4       5       3       x               238    100.2%     17.9%     46.6%
1998   6       1       4       5       3       2               230     97.7%     19.5%     48.6%
1999   4       6       5       3       1       2               221     93.8%     18.8%     47.8%
2000   4       2T      6       5       1       2T              221     93.6%     18.7%     49.1%
2001   2       3       4       6       1       5               234     99.9%     20.0%     48.7%
2002   2       4       5       3       1       6               208     89.2%     17.8%     49.1%
2003   4       2       3       5       1       6               222     95.5%     19.1%     50.5%
2004   3       2       5       4       1       6               234     99.3%     19.9%     50.5%
2005   3       2       4       6       1       5               237     99.9%     20.0%     51.7%
2006   3       2       4       6       1       5               208     89.1%     17.8%     50.6%
2007   3       2       5       6       1       4               204     89.5%     17.9%     51.8%

National League West Division

Year  SFG     CIN     ATL     LAD     HOU     SDP     COL   Avg. WSP % ML Avg.  NLW WSP   NL WSP
1969   1       2       3       4       5       6       x       306    127.7%     31.9%     54.7%
1970   1       2       3       4       5       6       x       311    129.4%     32.3%     55.3%
1971   1       2       3       4       5       6       x       289    120.4%     30.1%     54.0%
1972   2       1       4       5       3       6       x       280    121.7%     30.4%     57.0%
1973   1       2       5       3       4       6       x       317    132.2%     33.1%     58.0%
1974   2       1       5       3       4       6       x       285    120.0%     30.0%     56.2%
1975   1       2       5       4       3       6       x       279    118.0%     29.5%     55.6%
1976   1       3       5       2       4       6       x       275    115.9%     29.0%     55.7%
1977   1       3       5       2       4       6       x       259    110.3%     25.5%     53.9%
1978   1       3       4       2       5       6       x       261    110.3%     25.5%     53.3%
1979   1       3       5       2       4       6       x       242    103.1%     23.8%     52.3%
1980   4       1       5       2       3       6       x       233     99.5%     23.0%     50.6%
1981   4       2       3       1       5       6       x       157    101.6%     23.5%     51.0%
1982   5       2       3       1       4       6       x       247    104.4%     24.1%     52.3%
1983   5       2       3       1       4       6       x       258    109.7%     25.3%     52.0%
1984   4       2       3       1       5       6       x       262    110.9%     25.6%     52.9%
1985   5       2       3       1       4       6       x       256    108.9%     25.1%     52.3%
1986   3       2       4       1       6       5       x       249    106.9%     24.7%     52.3%
1987   3       2       4       1       6       5       x       247    104.4%     24.1%     50.7%
1988   3T      2       3T      1       6       5       x       238    101.2%     23.4%     50.9%
1989   3       1       5       2       6       4       x       246    103.2%     23.8%     50.1%
1990   3       1       4       2       6       5       x       232     97.6%     22.5%     50.0%
1991   4       1       3       5       6       2       x       237     99.6%     23.0%     49.2%
1992   5       3       4       1       6       2       x       231     96.2%     22.2%     48.5%
1993   5       4       3       1       6       2       7       225     95.0%     23.8%     48.7%

      SFG     SDP     COL     LAD     ARI                   Avg. WSP % ML Avg.  NLW WSP   NL WSP
1994   3       2       4       1       x                       147     87.7%     12.5%     47.1%
1995   3       2       4       1       x                       184     87.2%     12.5%     47.0%
1996   3       2       4       1       x                       213     90.0%     12.9%     46.2%
1997   3       2       4       1       x                       209     87.7%     12.5%     46.6%
1998   3       2       4       1       5                       177     75.1%     12.5%     48.6%
1999   2       3       4       1       5                       184     77.9%     13.0%     47.8%
2000   2       3       4       1       5                       173     73.4%     12.2%     49.1%
2001   2       3       4       1       5                       166     70.8%     11.8%     48.7%
2002   3       2       4       1       5                       175     75.0%     12.5%     49.1%
2003   2       3       5       1       4                       182     78.1%     13.0%     50.5%
2004   4       3       2       1       5                       188     79.8%     13.3%     50.5%
2005   3       5       1       4       2                       184     77.7%     13.0%     51.7%
2006   4       5       1       2       3                       195     83.6%     13.9%     50.6%
2007   4       5       1       3       2                       210     92.2%     15.4%     51.8%

References & Resources

Methodology

First, we identify every player in the major leagues each season with at least five career Win Shares. Then we identify which major league organization was responsible for originally signing and developing that player (or perhaps not originally signing him, but clearly being the organization most responsible for developing him). Finally, we credit every season’s production of major league Win Shares by that player to that organization, regardless of whether he actually played that season for that organization.

Sometimes it’s impossible to assign a player to one organization. Lots of players were signed by one team, but then acquired by another organization while still young minor leaguers. For such players, we assign half-credit to each of the two organizations (and in a few cases, we assign one-third-credit to each of three organizations).

In this era, a non-insignificant number of players aren’t the products of any major league team’s farm system, having been purchased or signed as free agents from independent teams, either in the Mexican League, the Northern League, or the Japanese Leagues. The Win Shares of such players aren’t counted in this analysis.