Just to play a little devil's advocate (because I do like Walt Jocketty as a GM), don't the Cubs just have better talent because they suck and get high draft picks every year? So arguably there's less development necessary? I wouldn't say so for a couple reasons. One, relating specifically to the Cubs, a large majority of their prospect successes have been international players(of note: the Cards don't really spend on Internationals, at least not like the Cubs), who require more development than any acquisition. Also, I don't think the teams' level of Major League success determines the level of talent in the system that much. For starters the Cubs and Cards haven't been that far apart record wise(in other words, the Cubs aren't the Pirates), and also when you look at the top systems(Arizona, both LA teams, Atlanta, Minnesota, etc.) you see several franchises that have had a lot of success, some of which has been sustained for several years. In conclusion, I like parentheses.