http://m.mlb.com/news/article/113105746/cubs-top-list-of-mlbs-10-best-farm-systems

 

Jim Callis has Minnesota at #3

 

Twins in Top 100: 6 -- Byron Buxton (No. 1), Miguel Sano (No. 12), Alex Meyer (No. 30), Jose Berrios (No. 33), Nick Gordon (No. 34), Kohl Stewart (No. 37)

 

'What makes an organization rank as one of the top farm systems in baseball? Simply put, it's a combination of quality and quantity. The MLBPipeline.com staff ranked the top 10 systems in the game by considering which organizations have an abundance of elite-level prospect talent as well as depth, in terms of future big leaguers up and down the system.

 

Prospect Points are determined by awarding a team 100 points for the No. 1 prospect on the Top 100 list, 99 points for No. 2 and so on, down to one point for No. 100. Points are then tallied by team.'

Edited March 21, 201511 yr by jimmer

I've notice in the last year or so, that we've gone from 1st overall, to tied for first, and now to third. Without having promoted any of our MLB-ready prospects to the majors (except Vargas I guess).

 

I've notice in the last year or so, that we've gone from 1st overall, to tied for first, and now to third. Without having promoted any of our MLB-ready prospects to the majors (except Vargas I guess).

And Danny Santana. And on some lists, Arcia since he wasn't guaranteed a starting job going into 2014, we still saw him on some prospects listings.

 

International signings, performance of prospects (or injury affecting the ability to play),  drafting new prospects, etc.  Lot of ways to effect it in a year.

Edited March 21, 201511 yr by jimmer

MItch Garver, Michael Cederoth, Lewin Diaz not in the Callis Twins Top 30 list?

Arcia had almost 400 MLB PA in 2013. Who had him on a prospect list entering 2014?

Prospect Points are determined by awarding a team 100 points for the No. 1 prospect on the Top 100 list, 99 points for No. 2 and so on, down to one point for No. 100. Points are then tallied by team.'

This seems like a bad system. Most people probably agree that most of the prospects after the top 20 or so are pretty closely bunched in talent/expectations, yet the want to weight the #50 prospect ten times more than the #95 prospect?

 

By that measure, having the ten prospects ranked 91-100 would not be as valuable as only having the #45 prospect.

 

This seems like a bad system. Most people probably agree that most of the prospects after the top 20 or so are pretty closely bunched in talent/expectations, yet the want to weight the #50 prospect ten times more than the #95 prospect?

By that measure, having the ten prospects ranked 91-100 would not be as valuable as only having the #45 prospect.

Well, in fairness to them, the Twins had the most points but they still ranked two other systems ahead of them.

 

Well, in fairness to them, the Twins had the most points but they still ranked two other systems ahead of them.

Yeah, the way I read the opening explanation, is that the overall rankings wasn't just about the points.

 

 

I've notice in the last year or so, that we've gone from 1st overall, to tied for first, and now to third. Without having promoted any of our MLB-ready prospects to the majors (except Vargas I guess).

I don't think that's quite right.  IIRC, the 2013 farm system was top 5, 2014 was usually considered #1 (despite Hicks, Gibson, Arcia all graduating) and this year it's somewhere in the 1-3 range, depending on who you check with.  (This year, Pinto, Santana and Vargas all lost rookie eligibility.  May still has his). 

 

 

I don't think that's quite right.  IIRC, the 2013 farm system was top 5, 2014 was usually considered #1 (despite Hicks, Gibson, Arcia all graduating) and this year it's somewhere in the 1-3 range, depending on who you check with.  (This year, Pinto, Santana and Vargas all lost rookie eligibility.  May still has his).

 

Understood, thanks.

 

Arcia had almost 400 MLB PA in 2013. Who had him on a prospect list entering 2014?

Good call.  I might have goofed it there, though not intentionally  Thanks for the catch.

 

In regards to that poor example, I think my overall point was that even if players play some in the previous season, they'll still be considered prospects by some prospect ranking organizations for the next.

 

There's still the international signings, the draft, the performance issues, whether it be poor performance or inability to perform due to injury, which is likely why Sano dropped in a few prospect  publications.

Sano and Buxton being hurt is likely a big reason why they are 3 as opposed to 1. That being said, I don't get too worked about up the number. I think it's really good they are in the top 5. You can go down 30 spots and still find guys who could be good major leaguers. Many won't develop, but when you have that kind of depth, you'll be able to fill a team.