By John A. Tures, Professor of Political Science, LaGrange College

Every Spring, I write a column after reading the Major League Baseball assessment of a team’s farm system. Other columnists with sports publication usually rank the Atlanta Braves dead last, or close to the bottom of the barrell. And yet every year, the “Cream of Cobb County” seems to rise to the top, as Atlanta’s baseball team produces either a Rookie of the Year winner, or a top-three candidate. Perhaps after Catcher Drake Baldwin’s award, the critics will give the Braves a second look.

In the book/movie “Moneyball,” Billy Beane and his baseball staff build winners for the low-budget team, the Oakland Athletics. Beane and his associates go beyond what the scouts are focusing on, which is looks and myths. For example, these traditionalists get into a player’s muscles and physique as marks of “future success.” Another claims to focus on a player’s wife. If she’s hot, it shows the player has confidence, and so he should be signed, or so the myth goes.

By the way, a college football coach said that what he learned from “Moneyball” was to hire assistants with hot wives, because it showed they had confidence. This coach was fired from his position, as his team failed to meet expectations this year.

Now, some of the scouts do use data, but they focus on home runs and runs batted in. They aren’t bad statistics, but they aren’t the best stats. We learn that getting on base may matter more, which leads to more runs, then more wins, then more attendance in Oakland, and therefore profits.

The Braves seem to be one of the few franchises which “gets it,” when it comes to what to do with minor leaguers. One of the frequent criticisms by others who follow MLB is that the Braves’ MiLB (minor leaguers) don’t always win games.

Is that the point? Shouldn’t a farm system be about developing players? If your small city wacky nickname team is winning championships, does it guarantee major league player success? If your team loses MiLB games, but takes home awards for best rookies, or makes the short list, isn’t that a good thing?

Look at the Braves over the last few decades: Drake Baldwin, Ronald Acuna Jr., Michael Harris and Craig Kimbrel. Freddie Freeman, Spencer Strider and Spencer Schwellenbach were also finalists. And wouldn’t Austin Riley qualify for top marks somehow when he was a prospect?

What’s more is that you can look at Rookie of the Year Award winners who are flashes in the pan, out of Major League Baseball a short time later? All of those players had long, productive careers. By the way, here’s my article touting Baldwin’s ROY’s qualities, from May 29 this year.

Speaking of Freeman, there’s a recent move by some Dodger fans to claim Freeman as one of their own. “He won two championships in four years for the Dodgers, but only one in 12 years with the Braves,” the meme shows.

“Well, from 1989 to 2023, the Dodgers won one World Series title, while the Braves won two during that time.” Sounds like Freeman helped the Dodgers more than the other way around. L.A. is the best at signing good free agents from other teams. But when it comes to developing young players, the crown can now be found in Cobb County.

John A. Tures is a professor of political science at LaGrange College in LaGrange, Georgia. His views are his own. He can be reached at jtures@lagrange.edu or on “X” at @johntures2. His first book “Branded” will be coming out this Fall, published by Huntsville Independent Press (https://www.huntsvilleindependent.com/).