To me it has to be Boston given the 2 recent WS wins and shifting ahead of the Evil Empire to become EEII.

NYY are worth considering as they keep bringing in good young talent despite a poor drafting position (helped by being able and willing to spend $$$, hurt by signing free agents). Their drop in the standings hurts and shifts them sub-Boston, plus the unstable ownership could cause some shifts quickly in the front office.

Toronto has a solid situation, but I'm not willing to rate us above NY and the Jays are still a good distance from Boston on this front as well. Until we see JP put a 90 win team together, or he does something to amaze us (a few trade steals plus a big pickup late in a season) I can't push him higher than 3rd in this division (I'd put the Jays ahead of the NL Central, in serious consideration for 2nd in the NL East, but no better than 3rd anywhere else).

Tampa and Baltimore have to move out of the sub-500 world for at least one season out of 10 to be considered for anything beyond a 'poor sucker' slot.

Andrew Friedman is Tampa's GM, not Chuck LaMar.

Oh, and I believe that Andy MacPhail is Baltimore's new GM.

I voted for Epstein, though I admire Cashman too. There is no question that they have a huge financial advantage, but they've made consistently strong decisions and built productive organizations from top to bottom.

Thanks, Chuck. Again, shows what I get for trusting the ESPN.com listings rather than going through the ordeal of MLB.com! Changes have been made. Doesn't affect the voting, really, as neither club is exactly front-running anything.

I voted Epstein, but I love Friedman's moves since he took over.   It is not reasonable to assess Friedman until the end of 2009 or better 2010.

This poll question is almost entirely unanswerable. You've got two seemingly competent GMs with way more money at their disposal than the other three, so you're left speculating how those other three might do in the same situation. The default position, though, would have to be for the team with the rings.

While both Boston and New York have numerous big contracts that didn't pan out, and could thus be used as arguments against their competence, both camps deserve gold stars for the fact they are now producing their own top notch talent. The GMs themselves may have had relatively little to do with the drafting decisions themselves, but this is poll is intended to evaluate front offices as a whole rather than just the performance of the GMs.

I am interested in watching Friedman and company in TB. They clearly represent a departure from LaMar and his cronies. I think there is a temptation to overstate how quickly TB will morph into a quality organization, but they do seem to be moving in a positive direction for the first time in forever.

"They've made consistently strong decisions".

I'm not sure I agree.  Pavano, Giambi, Brown, Wright, Mondesi, and Damon certainly don't look like good moves.  I think Posada and Rivera will prove to be poor moves too.  As for the Sox, Drew and Matsuzaka both look overpaid and Crisp is now useless.  Epstein's been better than Cashman, but he's not perfect either.  A lot of their top prospects were drafted (or purchased) out of slot too.  That's something the other three teams in the AL East can't afford to do, or can but because of self-imposed financial constraints don't (i.e. Toronto).

If you gave Ricciardi a $150-$225 million budget like the Sox and Yanks I think you'd see Toronto get A LOT more votes.  Same thing for the Rays and even the Orioles.

All things being equal, I'd say Epstein and Ricciardi have both made good moves and questionable moves.  I voted for Toronto because I knew Boston and New York would get votes because of their records without their ridiculous budgets being taken into consideration.

Neither Epstein nor Cashman has done anything remarkable except have massive cash at their disposal and not screw up.  Not that I'm voting for either of them, but I'd vote for Cashman before Epstein because he was the first to realize that he can use 200M to break the draft, and as a result New York now has a farm system that's probably better than any two non-Tampa teams combined.

That said, I'm voting Friedman based solely on the 2004 draft. That draft by Tampa was a thing of beauty.

Not that I'm voting for either of them, but I'd vote for Cashman before Epstein because he was the first to realize that he can use 200M to break the draft, and as a result New York now has a farm system that's probably better than any two non-Tampa teams combined.

This is smart?  It's reminiscent of the prisoner's dilemma.  Of course, if a couple teams screw their partners enough times, they'll end up getting screwed themselves.  eg.  luxury tax   How much is that draft strategy really costing the Yankees.

IF nobody ever paid over slot, no draftee would make rumblings about not signing.

I voted for Epstein.  For me, it comes down to him, Friedman and Cashman.  The thing that sets these three guys apart from the other two is the focus that they put on player development.  I find nothing more frustrating than watching teams spend millions of dollars on known ML level mediocrities (such as Hillenbrand, Overbay, Millar, Payton, Baez, Mora, etc.), rather than using that money to secure the best available amateur talent, both in the draft and in the international FA market.  Baltimore has been especially guilty of this, but at least they seem to be realizing the error of their ways now that MacPhail is in control (assuming that the drafting/signing of Wieters in an indication of things to come).  The Jays have not, IMO, put a great enough focus on the drafting and signing of elite amateur talents.  They continually draft signable guys with limited upsides (Adams, Romero, Arencibia, Purcey, Jackson, etc.) while passing up elite talents with much larger pricetags (Porcello, Tulowitzki, Maybin, etc.), instead spending that money on ML players.  In my opinion, that is a great way to win between 75-85 games every year - no team should consider that to be satisfactory outcome.

I find it annoying that Jays fans are always complaining about the amount of money that the Sox and Yankees have to spend.  Sure, that gives them a definite leg up in all facets, and it allows them to make more signings (and patch over mistakes made) in free agency.  However, this financial advantage should not be used as an excuse for mismanagement  and improper allocation of resources on the part of the Blue Jays.  Due to this financial divide, the Blue Jays can't expect to compete with the Sox and Yankees by out-maneuvering them on the FA market.  They need to develop their own stars, and they have not shown the willingness to spend what is necessary (in both the draft and in the international FA market) to make this happen.  They would rather keep the fans happy by using those dollars to acquire and/or retain mediocre to average players such as Overbay, Johnson, Hillenbrand, McDonald, Eckstein, etc.  That is why the Jays have a poor farm system (outside of Snider, of course) and why they could be on the verge of dropping to the bottom of this division, potentially within the next 2 or 3 years. 

That said, I'm voting Friedman based solely on the 2004 draft. That draft by Tampa was a thing of beauty.

I think Chuckles LaMar was still the GM in 2004.  It's hard to believe that such a good draft could take place during his reign of terror.

This is smart?  It's reminiscent of the prisoner's dilemma.  Of course, if a couple teams screw their partners enough times, they'll end up getting screwed themselves.  eg.  luxury tax   How much is that draft strategy really costing the Yankees.

IF nobody ever paid over slot, no draftee would make rumblings about not signing.

The drafting strategy isn't costing the Yankees very much at all. Over the next couple years they are going to shave salary dramatically as about 80M comes off the books and is replaced by the much cheaper, and also much better system talent. In about a year Hughes should be better than any non-Clemens pitcher the Yankees have had in over a generation. He was signed as a highschool arm with a high-signing bonus, someone who is normally completely undraftable by most teams who can't afford that kind of risk at that cost. Joba has injury and physique injuries, but the Yankees could draft him because it didn't matter if he busted because they drafted three or four players like that. Andrew Brackman is similar to Joba, he signed for over 3M, and if he can't recover from injury, the Yankees don't care. This ability to throw money around in the draft is pretty intuitive, and not so much the sign of a genius as much as a GM with a pulse, but it's still a massive impact on baseball. Three of the top teams in the AL right now, New York, Boston, and Detroit, are teams that throw money at draft picks that most teams just can't afford. Rick Porcello, who Bones mentioned, signed a major-league deal with a signing bonus of 7.8 million dollars. Everybody knew he's amazing, he didn't fall through 25 picks because nobody else considered him first round pick material.

tl;dr version: there is absolutely no downside to spending 10M+ per year on the draft for the Yankees/Red Sox and MLB needs to fix this. Yankee and Red Sox dominance in drafting is a function of  funds and not GM genius.

Also looks like it was LaMar who oversaw the 2004 draft. Consider my vote changed to MacFail comedy option.
http://www.thebaseballcube.com/teams/draft/tampa-bay-devil-rays-2004.shtml
Niemann, Brignac, Davis, McGee, Sonnanstjin. Wow.