The Top 10 Prospect Lists… So Far

In case you’ve missed the Top 10 lists so far, here they are. Click the team names for scouting reports/profiles.

30. The Chicago White Sox

1. Chris Sale, LHP
2. Jared Mitchell, OF
3. Brent Morel, 3B
4. Dayan Viciedo, 1B/3B
5. Tyler Flowers, C

29. The Houston Astros

1. Jordan Lyles, RHP
2. Delino DeShields, OF/2B
3. Tanner Bushue, RHP
4. Jio Mier, SS
5. Mike Kvasnicka, C/OF

28. The Detroit Tigers

1. Jacob Turner, RHP
2. Nick Castellanos, 3B
3. Andy Oliver, LHP
4. Daniel Fields, OF
5. Daniel Schlereth, LHP

27. The New York Mets

1. Wilmer Flores, SS/3B
2. Kirk Nieuwenhuis, OF
3. Matt Harvey, RHP
4. Juan Urbina, LHP
5. Fernando Martinez, OF

26. The San Diego Padres

1. Casey Kelly, RHP
2. Simon Castro, RHP
3. Anthony Rizzo, 1B
4. Reymond Fuentes, OF
5. Donavan Tate, OF

25. The Florida Marlins

1. Matt Dominguez, 3B
2. Chad James, RHP
3. Kyle Skipworth, C
4. Christian Yelich, OF/1B
5. Brad Hand, LHP

24. The Milwaukee Brewers

1. Jake Odorizzi (traded), RHP
2. Mark Rogers, RHP
3. Jeremy Jeffress (traded), RHP
4. Kyle Heckathorn, RHP
5. Wily Peralta, RHP

23. The Baltimore Orioles

1. Zach Britton, LHP
2. Manny Machado, SS
3. LJ Hoes, 2B
4. Xavier Avery, OF
5. Dan Klein, RHP

22. The St. Louis Cardinals

1. Shelby Miller, RHP
2. Zack Cox, 3B
3. Joe Kelly, RHP
4. Carlos Matias, RHP
5. Tyrell Jenkins, RHP

21. The Oakland Athletics

1. Grant Green, SS
2. Chris Carter, 1B/OF
3. Michael Choice, OF
4. Jemile Weeks, 2B
5. Max Stassi, C




Print This Post



Marc Hulet has been writing at FanGraphs since 2008. His work focuses on prospect analysis. Follow him on Twitter @marchulet.


55 Responses to “The Top 10 Prospect Lists… So Far”

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
  1. Dwight Schrute says:

    Nice work thus far, I look forward to seeing the rest of them. But where would you rank the Brewers after the Greinke trade? Would they be at #30 now?

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  2. JK says:

    Are you holding back #26, or is San Diego really #26 and the #16 is a typo?

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  3. guincho says:

    yikes….no wonder Reinsdorf is ‘all in’ this year.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  4. tbr says:

    Are the Padres 26th? You have them marked as 16th, but that would be out of order.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  5. sabernar says:

    Not to be nitpicky, but you really don’t need ‘The’ in front of all the team names. It’s repetitive and redundant.

    -19 Vote -1 Vote +1

  6. William says:

    Are you going to add two prospects two the brewers list to replace the ones that got traded?

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  7. Ben says:

    Delino Shields’ profile hyperlink is for an older player.

    Good job though. Glad this isn’t like every other place where y

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  8. Ben says:

    *You have to pay

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  9. OremLK says:

    I don’t agree with these farm system rankings. Of particular note: The Cardinals and Marlins are much too highly ranked, and the Astros and Padres are ranked too low.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • tony says:

      I think the Padres are a bit low, but I think the other three are in decently appropriate spots. Maybe you could make a case for the Astros to be a slot or two higher, but there shouldn’t be a significant change. Maybe you could argue the Marlins a slot or two lower, but they should be around there.

      I think the Cardinals spot is okay considering Miller’s potential and decent depth in the system.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

  10. Scott C says:

    Top 3…Royals, Braves, Rays?

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  11. joe bananas says:

    LJ Hoes wins the best name award. The orioles should promote him solely for the jersey revenue he’d bring in.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  12. Anthony says:

    So what do you think the Jays will be ranked? Top 15?

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  13. Melvin says:

    Does the order of the teams represent their farm systems ranking compared to MLB?

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  14. Marc Hulet says:

    The rankings are based on the quality of the minor league systems overall, not just the Top 10 lists.

    KC, TB, TOR, and ATL are all within the top eight teams, at least right now.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  15. Andrew says:

    How do the Padres rank #26? Name an organization with a better mix of depth and low-level, high ceiling guys? Their top 30 probably consists of no players any worse than C+ and I think the gap between 15-30 would be closer than just about any minor league organization. Not great top-end talent but definitely excellent depth.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • cavebird says:

      I am not sure if they should be 26th or not, but while they have a bunch of C+ guys, they don’t have any A guys or even really A- guys, just a few B’s and a bunch of C+’s. That’s not particularly strong.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Andrew says:

        Did you even read my post all the way through? The last sentence was “Not great top-end talent but definitely excellent depth,” making your comment nonsense.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Adam says:

        I get what you are saying, I just disagree that this makes their system any good. I don’t think having a whole bunch of “interesting” guys with upside but serious questions about realizing potential makes a system very good. Given that guys who are between 15-30 on any teams prospect list rarely become impact players, I don’t think having a good 15-30 really helps a system very much.

        You obviously didn’t read my last sentence–“That’s not particularly strong.” I think we agree on what the Padres have. We just disagree on whether that is good or not.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

  16. Bob says:

    “Are you going to add two prospects two the brewers list to replace the ones that got traded?”

    Are you really that awful at english that you cannot use the words “to”, “two” and “too” properly? Especially after just using “two” just one word before? Wow.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • phoenix says:

      that annoyed me too. normally, spelling/grammar errors are just whatever and i ignore them… but two and to? i mean to and too i can get, but two and to? thats just an embarrassing oops haha. luckily it isn’t as incoherent as some people. on the platoon one i think about yuni betancourt there was a poster named “CARLOS” that just… could not… speak. i literally understood nothing he said at all. something about a sheriff and being “…WANTED” that i think was supposed to be a punchline… i have no idea.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Daniel O'Brien says:

        Lads, in fairness, it seems like it was just a little brain fart from William. He wants to write “to”, he’s still thinking about “two”… Look, he even used “to” properly later on in the sentence. Happens to everyone.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

  17. Bob says:

    Sorry William, I’m sure I sound like an a-hole. But it just kills me how many people do not understand such an obvious principle of our language. And no, I am not a teacher.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Jim says:

      Hey, it happens to the best of us.

      Up above, in Marc’s reply to ‘sabernar'(who made the nitpick about using ‘The’ in front of all the teams), he uses ‘seconds’ where I think he meant to use ‘sentences’ instead, but he was probably typing it quickly.

      No big whoop, as they say.

      And Merry Christmas to everyone at FanGraphs! :)

      Vote -1 Vote +1

  18. Resolution says:

    I didn’t get the impression originally that these farm system rankings/blurbs were being released in order of worst to best.

    Just to clarify, they are?

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  19. Conrad says:

    Bob, are you really that awful at English that you don’t know the word “English” should be capitalized?

    Dude, it’s the comment section of a blog. A grammar mistake here and there isn’t important. And no, I never would have thought you were a teacher, because teachers don’t talk down to people who make typos. Grow up and get a life.

    +8 Vote -1 Vote +1

  20. Tom Waits says:

    I second Resolution’s question and some other comments. There’s no way the Padres ranked 26th even before the Red Sox trade, when they grabbed 3 top prospects from a better system.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  21. Tom Waits says:

    So the rankings are based on “the quality of the minor leagues overall?” Does that mean W-L records? Because in terms of the true purpose of a farm system, which is to deliver talent to the majors, that’s basically worthless.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Patrick says:

      Uh… No. Not at all.

      I’m sure it’s just a misunderstanding, but doesn’t it seem obvious that’s not the case? They’re based on an overall judgement of the strength of the system.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Patrick says:

        And just to be clear, “strength” is defined by “How much major league talent is expected to come from the players currently in the system”, much here encompassing both quantity and quality.

        Vote -1 Vote +1

      • Tom Waits says:

        To answer both you and James:

        1. It’s obviously not clear, since many people have asked the question.

        2. It patently is absurd, because no other evaluator will have the Padres 26th even before the Red Sox trade. The Padres have lacked impact talent in previous years, but they’ve become much deeper over the past two seasons. Now they have nice combination of both putting them solidly in the middle tier of farm systems. To rank them below the Brewers (even before the Greinke trade) who had Mark Rogers at 3 or the Cardinals shows a lack of rigorous analysis.

        Anyone want to wager on where the consensus between Baseball America, Baseball Prospectus, Keith Law, and John Sickels put the Padres?

        Vote -1 Vote +1

    • James says:

      Of course that’s not what it means; that would be absurd. It means he is looking beyond just the top-10 prospects he is listing.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

  22. GiantHusker says:

    I’m surprised the Giants aren’t lower in the rankings. With Posey and Bumgarner in the bigs, Belt seems to be the only player who’s anywhere close to being ready. Admittedly, they’ve got some potentials in the lower ranks.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • merizobeach says:

      Seems pretty bleak after Belt. I won’t get my hopes up about the lower level kids until they can hit in Fresno, and after Richmond’s hitting implosion of sorts this past season, I’m concerned. Here’s hoping for strides of progress for Neal, Crawford, et al.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

  23. West says:

    Kenny Williams has never had a problem winning without a farm system, it would be nice, but when you have Ozzie Guillen and Don Cooper managing your pitching staff you have a chance to win.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  24. angel p says:

    on the marlins chad james is a LHP and why isnt alex sanabia or elih vilanueva on this list?

    Vote -1 Vote +1

  25. Tony Alaska says:

    If Donovan Tate is #5 on the Padres list, they should be ranked 30… He’s a stinker who can’t hit..

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    • Andrew says:

      John Sickels has Tate #5 and says:

      “Grade B-: Very tough to rank. Grade A tools, Grade C skills, with injury and health issues. Could be an A- next year, or he could fizzle in A-ball.”

      He also describes the farm system this way:

      “Overall, this is a strong farm system that deserves more attention than it receives.”

      Doesn’t sound like #30, #26, or anywhere close to bottom 10.

      Sickel’s top 20 (it’s actually 23) IS chalk full of C- prospects, but the caveat is the majority of them are huge-upside young guys in lower levels. Castro, Kelly, Lollis, Sampson, Portillo, Oramas, Cates, De Paula and Barbato is a sick group of pitchers, not to mention some of the guys who could help in the bullpen right now.

      Vote -1 Vote +1

  26. Socrates says:

    I agree that SD should be higher. I would have placed them more in the late teens. The Mets should be last in my opinion, and the Marlins and Cardinals should be lower.

    Vote -1 Vote +1

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>