For the first time since I became a sportswriter, my team (the Twins) is in the playoffs. It feels strange. I'm rather emotionally detached from the situation right now, unlike 1991 or 1987, when I was glued to every utterance by "experts" about Minnesota's chances in the postseason. In any event, I'm gratified that my favorite team will still be playing next week, carrying the banner (along with Oakland) for successful baseball on a reasonable budget.

Word is getting around about the discontinuation of the Minor League Scouting Notebook, so I need to comment on this. STATS will no longer be publishing my book. But I guarantee you that I will be doing a prospect book in 2003, similar in form and content to the seven MLSNs I wrote. The exact publishing details have yet to be worked out, but rest assured that 1) I will be writing a prospect book for 2003, and 2) you'll be the first to know about how/when/where to order it.

David A. writes: I see that Oakland's Double-A Midland team has a four-prospect rotation (Rich Harden, Jason Arnold, Mike Wood, John Rheinecker). All of them have ERAs under 3.50 and seem to have pretty good ratios to go along with that (especially Harden and Arnold).

Are there benefits to having so many talented pitchers all in one rotation like that at such a young age, or would it be better to let them all develop in separate rotations where they can all get more individual attention? Also, what do you think about their potential to make the majors in the near future?

This is a solid quartet of prospects. Here are their numbers this year in Double-A.

Name	DOB	HT	WT	Throws	G	W-L	IP	H	BB	K	ERA
Jason Arnold	5/02/79	6-3	210	Right	13	6-3	75.1	59	29	71	2.75
Rich Harden	11/30/81	6-1	180	Right	16	8-3	85.1	67	51	102	2.95
John Rheinecker	5/29/79	6-2	215	Left	20	7-7	128.0	137	24	100	3.38
Mike Wood	4/26/80	6-3	175	Right	17	11-3	105.2	103	29	63	3.15

Rheinecker, Wood, and Arnold all came out of the 2001 draft. Rheinecker was a supplemental first-round pick out of Southwest Missouri State. Wood was a 10th-round pick from the University of North Florida. Arnold, drafted by the Yankees, was a second-round choice from the University of Central Florida. Harden was picked in the 17th round in 2000, from Central Arizona Junior College.

The first thing to consider is the fact that Midland is an excellent park for hitters. Keeping your ERA below 4.50 there isn't easy, let alone close to 3.00, which right away makes these guys stand out. The four offer a variety of styles and repertoires. Harden has the best fastball, hitting the mid-90s frequently, with a nasty breaking pitch. His command can waiver, but he is overpowering more often than not, and has the highest ceiling in the group. Wood throws 88-92 with sinking action, along with a splitter and slider. Arnold throws 88-92, occasionally hitting 93 or 94, with sharp command of his curveball and changeup. Rheinecker throws 87-91 with a slider and curve, and features the best command of the bunch, though he's also the most hittable.

For every four pitching prospects, you're lucky to have one develop into a real pitcher, though Oakland has been very successful of late. I like all four of these guys, though I'm most impressed with Harden's overpowering stuff. If he can harness his command a bit more, he could be the best right-handed prospect in the game pretty soon. I would rate Arnold and Rheinecker next, with Wood fourth due to his lower strikeout margins, although he's a good prospect in his own right.

As for keeping them together, Oakland has no shortage of pitching on the major-league level, so it seems likely that all four of these guys will move up together to Triple-A next season. Personally, I like the idea of keeping them together, developing a sense of familiarity and camaraderie. Arnold told me a few weeks ago, half-jokingly, that he was trying to teach Harden how to throw strikes. Help from a friend/peer pressure is an effective complement to coaching. Heck, sometimes it's superior to coaching.

Will F. asks: I'm an ever optimistic Tigers fan, and would like to know if you think the Tigers have any hope of fielding a decent team in the future, given their current minor-league talent. Also, was the Brian Moehler for David Espinosa trade worthwhile for the Tigers?

Well, Tigers fan, it's been a rough year for you, but there is reason to hope. Let's start with the Moehler trade, then move to general observations about the Tigers system. Moehler is 31, prone to injury, and unlikely to be an effective pitcher by the time the Tigers are ready to contend again, so trading him made some sense. Espinosa is an excellent athlete, a first-round pick in 2000 from high school in Miami. He's shown flashes of power potential, speed, and patience, but is still rather unpolished. He draws walks, but hasn't developed much home run power yet, despite striking out at a high rate, over 100 times this year. He needs to improve his stealing technique, and sharpen up his middle infield defense. Scouts like his intangibles, but he hasn't been as good as expected when the Reds signed him. His biggest handicap is a major-league contract, meaning he'll have to stick in the Show in 2005 or go on waivers. Will he make it? Maybe, maybe not. But he has a better chance to be helping the Tigers in 2005 than Moehler does.

As for the rest of the farm system, the Tigers don't have one of the best systems in the game, but it's a lot better than it used to be. They've been drafting better of late. I especially like a pitcher they picked up in a trade from Oakland this year, Jeremy Bonderman, who handled himself well in the advanced Class A California League at age 18. He has future ace potential if he stays healthy. Franklyn German and Fernando Rodney have power bullpen arms that will be ready soon. Andy Van Hekken looks like a potential solid No. 3 starter. Eric Munson finally came alive with the bat this year, and I still like Mike Rivera's power potential. Omar Infante's glove is impressive; I don't think he'll keep hitting .373, but he's young enough to develop into just about anything.

Two outfielders they drafted this spring, Brent Clevlen and Curtis Granderson, impress me. Clevlen has outstanding tools and more polish than expected, while Granderson is a pure hitter with a sharp stroke and good command of the strike zone. That's not a comprehensive list of Tigers prospects, but those are the guys that stand out in my mind as names to watch closely over the next few years.

The bottom line is that the Tigers farm system is getting better, thanks to both trades and stronger drafting. The American League Central looks fluid to me over the next few years. The Tigers could pull a Twins-like surprise at some point, probably not in '03 but possibly in '04.

Robert H. writes: The Rangers' Colby Lewis pitched great the other night? He was throwing 95 mph consistently, and hit 97 mph on occasion. I've looked at some top prospect lists, and he isn't on them. How good of a prospect is Lewis?

I like Lewis, and I'm surprised he hasn't received more attention, although all the bad juju in Texas this year may have something to do with that. Well, actually it's his 6.00 ERA, but you know what I mean. You mention his fastball, and he does have a good one. But the thing that I noticed most about him during his minor-league tenure was his curveball. It's not a big loopy curve, but rather a nasty, hard biter, almost like a slider but with a bigger break. It's overpowering when he gets it over, sometimes when he doesn't.

Lewis has problems with command and changing speeds, which probably leaves him more suited for bullpen work. He also has a history of arm problems, including Tommy John surgery, and an occasional sore shoulder. He's got one hell of an arm, and if he harnesses it, he would be a terrific pitcher. When/if he will do so remains to be seen, and Texas doesn't have a great track record with young pitchers.

Chad S. asks: I know the Cardinals farm system is rated as one of the worst in baseball. I wanted to get your thoughts on why it is this way, and does this look like a long-term problem? Is the poor farm system due to bad drafting/scouting, or is the rash of injuries to top pitching prospects mainly responsible?

The Cardinals have an odd history. They pull a good one up every few years. J.D. Drew, though he was something of a no-brainer. Albert Pujols. Rick Ankiel ... ooops, bad example.

Generally speaking, the Cardinals are known for drafting college pitchers, and then having those college pitchers get hurt. Right now, they have several hurlers with live arms, some measure of polish, and significant injuries on their resumes, including Josh Pearce, Justin Pope, Nick Stocks, Chance Caple, Jim Journell, Chris Narveson, and Blake Williams. All of these guys have the natural ability to be good pitchers, with Pope, Narveson, Williams, and Pearce having the best professional records. But they've all been waylaid with arm trouble, though it looks like Pope and Williams are on the comeback trail. Whether this rash of injuries is due to some sort of poor organizational coaching, a training flaw, or if it's just bad luck, we don't know. These things are usually a combination of factors, but trying to untie the threads of causation in individual cases is usually impossible.

There are some interesting pitchers who've managed to stay healthy, including rookie ball right-hander Tyler Adamczyk, strike-throwing Dan Haren, intriguing reliever Scotty Layfield, and the cooly-named Cheyenne Janke. One sleeper to watch is Rhett Parrott, who could sneak his way into the Cardinals rotation sooner than expected. But none of these guys have obvious impact ability. They project as useful, not awesome.

On the hitting side, the system is almost completely barren. First baseman John Gall has a proven track record of hitting over .300 with lots of doubles, but scouts don't like him much. I would compare him to Ron Coomer. A-ball players like outfielder Rick Asadoorian and second baseman Shaun Boyd occasionally show up on prospect lists, but both have serious questions about their ability to hit at higher levels.

The Cardinals have made a conscious effort to go after pitching in their drafts, the theory being that they can always find bats on the trade market, especially if they have young pitching to trade. It's a workable theory, provided you can actually keep said young pitchers healthy. The Cards have been a 90-win team for three years in a row now, but if they want to maintain that, they need to upgrade the farm. A more balanced drafting approach would help.

John Sickels is the author of the 2002 STATS Minor League Scouting Notebook. He is currently writing a biography of Bob Feller. He lives in Lawrence, Kansas, with his wife, son, and two cats. You can send John questions or comments at JASickels@aol.com, or you can visit his homepage at johnsickels.com.