OK, so I looked through the list, and for many of the guys I can agree, given the caveat above.

I have one question tho: Where is AZ's Chris Young?! It's not on the Top 50 page, and it's not listed under the Dbacks prospects page, which has Drew, Quentin, Callaspo and Gonzalez. Any way you slice these rankings, you cannot justify leaving Chris Young out... especially since I think he's going to be one hell of a player and he has arrived in the majors already...

And by "it", I meant "Chris Young's PHOTO". I didn't mean to neuter poor Chris. :(

Terry Evans #43? A 24 year old mashes at AA...with a K/BB ratio that would make anyone cringe is most likely to get to the majors?

Homer Bailey #38? Not only is he as talented as any pitcher in the minors, he isn't exactly blocked by the Reds rotation. He'll probably be on the Reds opening day roster come 2007, yet somehow he is the 38th most likely prospect to make it there.

The logic of the MLN rankings is absurd; it makes no sense. OTOH, they say "The MLN FAB50 represents players with exceptional chances to make it to a permanent major league career when we take the snapshot of the world of baseball around the All-Star break each year." And yet, OTOH, "it means nothing if you are stuck behind a healthy veteran player with a fat, long major league contract, or you play in the farm of a large club that prefers veterans but likes to keep healthy high-talent spare parts on the farm in reserve...." Thus, Hughes down at number 45.

But if the point is to list those guys most likely to have a permanent baseball career, any list that has a guy like Hughes nearly off it is a screwy list. While arguably you could justify thinking that NY is just grooming him for a trade as they used to do w/minor leaguers, even if they traded him, Hughes has a vastly superior chance to have a permanent major league career than the vast majority of the players above him. The Yankees, nor any team I'm aware of, have never buried a player with that kind of talent simply for reserve spare parts.

Talent, iow, should be weighed much more heavily than circumstance in ranking these guys. The stated explanation is inadequate.

(A further reason to lean towards talent is that it is stable in a way that circumstances are not. The Yankees, who are the extreme example of reluctance to play minor leaguers, and any other team, can and will change its strategy. Thus whereas at one point a team might simply use its minor leagues for draft and spare parts, at some point it may change (as the Yankees have been doing).

Where is Adam Loewen? He had excellent #s in the minors, some terrific starts in the majors, and is pretty much guaranteed a spot in the Orioles' rotation for the rest of this season and next. It's not like they've excluded other guys who have significant time in the majors -- Garza, Drew, Saunders, Kendrick and others are on the list.

I doubt there’s anyone (including the folks at MLN) who doesn’t believe that Hughes - given the opportunity - will have a longer and better career than Sanchez. But given the relative track histories of the two teams, there’s certainly reason to think that Sanchez will make an impact in the majors more quickly - and that is where these guys are coming from.

Because that aging Yankee roster hasn't been hurt much the past few years...and guys like Cano, Cabrera, Wang, etc are all deadline arrivals over the age of 30. I guess what your team has done in the long ago before time past is more relevant than say the past two years. Hey so long as you bury the game's best pitching prospect at 45, then it's a job well done? I guess I'll find another article to print out for the john this morning.

Nice.

Agree about Loewen...

Can't wait for Part II

I printed out for the john but a full house beat my flush...

No Kevin Kouzmanoff?

hahahahaha

last year mitch jones was the only yankee on the list


mitch jones


THE mitch jones

goodness

levski, did you happen to notice Pedroia is rated noticably higher than Callaspo?

"No Kevin Kouzmanoff?"

Hes kind of in a weird place between a list like this and a list like BAs. All the points he would gain on a list like this for major-league readiness and being a damn solid hitter are taken away by the Indians having a clogges big league 3b situation and they don't nessecairly have room for him at LF or 1b (though im sure they'll try to get him in). This list seems to give preference to guys with clear job opportunities.

On a BA style list he would again gain points for hitting but wouldnt be a super-duper high guy bc of age, injuries and his lack of tools gives the impression hes probably at his peak right now (barring a little big league adjustments). Now his peak right now seems to be fine but he doesnt project as a superstar for the next 5-10 years

Damn fine prospect though, just one whose strengths aren't really reflected in the criteria of most lists (incidentally, i generally agree with BAs criteria for lists..looking for longterm stars, the types who can push a team to championship level)

levski, did you happen to notice Pedroia is rated noticably higher than Callaspo?

and did you notice drew is rated noticably higher than pedroia?

i see absolutely no reason to consider callaspo an inferior player (or prospect) to pedroia. none.

Here is their Top 10 from 2002:

1. Nate Cornejo
2. Ricardo Rodriguez
3. Josh Beckett
4. Marlon Byrd
5. Joe Thurston
6. Lyle Overbay
7. Brent Butler
8. Nick Johnson
9. Brian Dallimore
10. Joe Borchard

Not a good sign when only three and a half (Byrd being the half) of your top ten prospects with the greatest chance to make immediate impact have had appreciable big league careers. The rest of the list is no better.

I think they overvalue organizational opportunity. Top prospects will play their way into playing time, with their original organization or another one. Fringe prospects with an opportunity won't play well enough to keep that opportunity for very long.

The logic of the MLN rankings is absurd; it makes no sense.

At least they're not using "OTOH" to mean two different things!

i see absolutely no reason to consider callaspo an inferior player (or prospect) to pedroia.

Refusing to look at minor league numbers, are we?

Refusing to look at minor league numbers, are we?

Pretty much every scout out there has refused to look at his minor league numbers. What they look at is his ceiling... and they see David Wells's mini-me with a bat. You prefer to look at the past, which sums up Pedroia beating up on A ball pitching. I'd rather think what he'd do in the future... and the future isn't much more than a Leonard Cohen song in this case...

What they look at is his ceiling.

Tell me, what does Callaspo's ceiling look like?

Is it plaster of Paris, like his bat?

At least they're not using "OTOH" to mean two different things!

OTOH = on the ONE hand AND on the OTHER hand

???

I seriously doubt Callaspo's ceiling is lower than Pedroia's. That was my original point.

Anyhow, you keep at it.

Btw, here's kevin's tragedy: not a long time ago, kevin argued that Pedroia was a better prospect than David Wright. Then Stephen Drew. Now all he's got left to prove is that Pedroia has a higher ceiling than Callaspo. It's a sad sad progression...

No worries, kevin, Pedroia is a better prospect than Ronnie Cedeno.

I think they overvalue organizational opportunity. Top prospects will play their way into playing time, with their original organization or another one. Fringe prospects with an opportunity won't play well enough to keep that opportunity for very long.

I think this is exactly correct. MLN likes to trumpet the success that Dioner Navarro and Ian Kinsler have had this season, but if you look a little closer, you see that Navarro's OPS has been around .700 with the Devil Rays (and his defense has been questionable, from the reports), and Kinsler's cooled off considerably after a hot start, with a .710 OPS since the All-Star break; it's not at all clear that either will be able to hold a job for long. And there are some less-than-stellar picks in their top 50 from a year ago: JJ Furmaniak, Jeff Salazar (who's been on their list forever, but who's pushing 26 and who posted a .790 OPS at Colorado Springs, which isn't exactly a tough place to hit), Mitch Jones.

-- MWE

"Hence, Philip Hughes ranks 45th on the list - and is lucky to be there - largely because the Yankees have typically looked at their farm system as something much less than a pipeline for talent for the big club, and therefore Highes may not even get an opportunity for a couple more years."

Please tell Derek Jeter, Bernie Williams, Mariano Rivera, Andy Pettitte, Robinson Cano, Jorge Posada, Melky Cabrera and Chien-Ming Wang about this.

The Yankees are plenty willing to promote their very good prospects. The middling guys get jerked around and traded, but the top level guys get plenty of opportunity.

Please tell Derek Jeter, Bernie Williams, Mariano Rivera, Andy Pettitte, Robinson Cano, Jorge Posada, Melky Cabrera and Chien-Ming Wang about this.

To play devil's advocate for a minute:

The first four, plus Posada, were given chances long before 2000 - and Posada still had to share time with Girardi before capturing the job. Cano got a job only when Tony Womack failed miserably, Wang got one when Pavano and Kevin Brown went down, and Cabrera got one when Sheffield and Matsui were injured; all three would, in all likelihood, still be toiling in the minors without the injuries.

Compare Mitch Jones. Jones spent two years in A ball, two years in AA, and now two years in AAA. He's always hit for power, although he fans a lot and has trouble keeping his BA at a reasonable level. He's not a whole lot different from Craig Wilson, talent-wise. But Wilson is an "established" major league player, so when the Yankees needed a righty 1B/OF off the bench, they traded for Wilson rather than bringing up Jones (except for a couple of cups of java).

Or take a look at Kevin Reese, who's performed pretty well at every level, with a good number of doubles and an occasional HR. He's a better player than Bubba Crosby, and he could probably play center for more than a few major league teams (I'd rather have him than Joey Gathright or Chris Duffy, for example). But when the Yankees wanted a CF this past season, they went out and threw big dollars at Johnny Damon - granting that Damon is a better player, but still...you COULD have seen what Reese could do.

The Yankees will, eventually, give Phil Hughes a chance; I agree he's too good not to be given one. But what will they do with the Steven Whites and Tyler Clippards and Jeff Marquezes? What will they do with someone like Brett Gardner, who gets on base at a decent clip and who runs well, but isn't a power hitter? Will they make room for them, or leave them in Trenton or Scranton for two-three years? Are they going to have to wait for injury to get a chance - and then have to make good "right away" or ride the shuttle back to the minors?

The Yankee farm system is, IMO, deeper than it has been in quite some time. But I want to see how those mid-level prospects are handled before I would suggest that the Yankees believe in their farm system.

-- MWE

Not a good sign when only three and a half (Byrd being the half) of your top ten prospects with the greatest chance to make immediate impact have had appreciable big league careers. The rest of the list is no better.

There list seems a little fishy - Nate Cornholio #1, Brian Dallimore in the top 10 - I don't remember what Dallimore did back then, I don't think I ever heard of him until last year.

But take anyone's prospect list a few years later and you'll always find something to laugh at. I'm convinced the whole reason for making prospect lists in the first place is to invite people to make fun of you.

Mike, your arguments are flawed.

Prior to 2005, the Yankees did not develop a lot of players, period. Their farm system sucked. The Drew Hensons and Parishes of the world were a symbol of one thing: terrible drafting.

Right before the 2003 season, the Yankees made a decision to change things. They hired David Oppenheimer to head up player development. Since then, the following has happened:

1. Traded away Nick Johnson and Juan Rivera for Javy Vazquez. The Yankees lost two quality major leaguers (who had broken in as prospects under the Yankees, not "rotting in AAA") for a young ace starter. At the time, it was a trade that nearly any organization in baseball would have made.

2. Traded away Alfonso Soriano for Alex Rodriguez. Soriano, another farmhand to break in to the Yankee starting lineup and become an all star, was traded for a guy known as the best player in baseball. Last I checked, sans the money issues this is another trade that any team in the majors would have made.

3. Trades away Dioner Navarro and Brad Halsey (among other throw ins) for Randy Johnson. Johnson was coming off a 2.60 ERA season and was probably the best starter in the NL. The Yankees traded two replacement level prospects and a few throw ins for a great starter. Brad Halsey was given a chance by New York, and has proved to be nothing more than average relief pitcher. Dioner Navarro is a powerless catcher who may get on base a little above average.

4. Traded away C.J. Henry, Matt Smith, Jesus Sanchez, and another throw in for Bobby Abreu and Cory Lidle. The Yankees lost a flailing 1st round pick, a decent lefty reliever, and two worthless prospects for an excellent player who filled a big void in their roster. Yet another trade that any contending team would consider, given the costs and benefits.

5. Promoted Chien Ming Wang to the major league rotation. Why had Wang not been called up before? Because he wasn't ready! He entered 2005 following a decent half season of pitching, but had been unable to put together a full healthy season of minor league ball in nearly half a decade. He was promoted because of injury, but the club stuck with him and did NOT trade him following the season, and now he's a top-10 starter in the AL.

6. Promoted Robinson Cano. Tony Womack was sucking. The club very quickly grew tired of a veteran who could not hit, and Cano was standing out in the minors. Robby Cano not only broke in at a young age (22), but it was in fact his first real decent season in the minor leagues. Cano had shown lots of bat speed and poise, but little hitting ability until 2005. The Yankees went with their instincts, and despite Cano quickly entering into an 0-22 slump, they stood with him and allowed him to develop into an all star.

7. Promoted Melky Cabrera after the injury to Hideki Matsui. Melky was the top-hitting AAA player in batting average, on base percentage, and slugging percentage when he was promoted. He would have earned a spot even without an injury to a major league player, although it would have taken another month or two. And guess what? Melky has become an above average major league player at the tender age of 21.

Bottom line, the Yankees have promoted 3 near ROY caliber players in two seasons.

"But what about the Yankees letting players like Kevin Thompson, Kevin Reese, or Colter Bean rot in the minors?"

The Yankee's standards are higher than other teams. They make poor judgements (Womack, Crosby), but they also know what quality really means. Show me one Yankee prospect (who had not broken in the major leagues yet) who has become a star since he was traded away? Kevin Reese is, at best, a .270/.330/.400 major league player. Kevin Thompson has only been at AAA for a season and a half, and has only been effective for one injury filled season.

"But the Yankees have a history of trading past prospects for quality talent?"

The New York Yankees have given no indication, despite increasing tempatation, to trade Phil Hughes. Brian Cashman has repeatedly said "I'll trade him for Albert Pujols, but that's about it".

There is no reason to believe that the Yankees will trade Phil Hughes, who is widely considered the best pitching prospect in baseball. His numbers are rock solid, the scouts love him, and he showed no injury concerns this season

I don't know if Phil Hughes is the best pitching prospect in baseball, but he's right there. It is true that the Yankee system is way ahead of where it was 3 years ago, and that there is no reason to believe that Hughes will do worse in New York than he might in, say, Tampa or in Pittsburgh.

Judging a top prospect by his "opportunity" is a mug's game. The D'Backs made room for Quentin and Young; the Yankees will ensure that Hughes gets his chance when he is ready.

The whole thing is a soft turd. Look at the Kurt Suzuki (#19) writeup.

Kurt Suzuki is flying through the Oakland Athletics minor league system, taking advantage of the global drought in capable catchers.

“I really liked Oakland because they aren’t afraid to move players through the ranks quickly,” Suzuki told MLN.

Since being drafted in the second round of the 2004 Amateur Baseball Draft, the Wailuku, Hawaii native has continued to improve on defense and offense.

Recently, Kurt got a chance to be showcased in the All-Star Futures Game.

“I took this opportunity to be able to learn as much as possible from all the different resources that are at this game,” Suzuki said.

Perhaps one thing that is expediting Suzuki’s development is the fact he played college ball for four seasons at college baseball powerhouse California State University, Fullerton.

Suzuki blossomed at Cal State Fullerton during his senior season, batting .417, with 17 doubles, 16 homeruns, and 87 RBIs.

His first few seasons in the professional ranks were solid. In Suzuki’s first year, he was placed in High-A baseball. His offensive numbers with the California League Stockton Ports were respectable, batting .277, with 12 homeruns, and 65 RBIs.

This season, Suzuki is proving that he has competitive numbers by batting .282, with 23 doubles, 7 homeruns, and 53 RBIs.

“I’m really trying to have serviceable at-bats,” Suzuki said. “I am really trying to put more of an emphasis on my defense and calling a good game. It’s important to be [useful] to the pitcher and be able to help out offensively as well.”

Suzuki has above average offensive skills and can hit enough to be a contributing catcher at the major league level. His defense will continue to dictate how he moves through the minor league system. Like any catcher, they are slower to progress through the levels.

Even though it’s a seller’s market in catchers right now, if Suzuki wants a shot at Jason Kendell’s job, and to hold off Athletics prospect Jason Brown, he’s going to have to turn up his minor league offensive numbers to the .300s and maintain at least his current offensive level. He debuts in the MLN FAB50 Baseball 2006 rankings as our top catching prospect not already in the majors at 19.

A 2004 college draftee playing at AA is not "flying through the Oakland Athletics minor league system."
I doubt playing in the Futures Game is much of a showcase. MLB teams pay millions for scouting and statistical reports. I don't think he would have been missed if he had not played the Sunday before the All-Star Game.
He did not play four years at Cal State-Fullerton and therefore did not blossom in his senior year.
"His first few seasons"- You mean his only seasons considering he was drafted in '04?
And who is Jason Brown, who Suzuki has to hold off to replace Kendall? The writer wouldn't mean Levis model Jeremy Brown, would he? The 26 year old who had a sub .800 OPS in the PCL?

And the cherry on top:
he’s going to have to turn up his minor league offensive numbers to the .300s and maintain at least his current offensive level.

Yes, he is going to have to both turn up his numbers and maitain them. Brilliant.

If the site cannot get an editor, don't read them.

read them it.

1. Los Angeles Dodgers (7; Top: 15) - (MLN Farm System of the Year 2006) (List)

The Los Angeles Dodgers farm system, long one of the top development systems in the baseball biz, shows new strength as picks made over the last two to three years come to term. (See: Farm System of the Year Award). The Dodgers picks launch a bit lower than some of the other top contending farms, but seeding in the McCourt ownership era is taking root. There appears to be a greater commitment to the Dodgers' historic strength through home grown talent in a multi-year investment that is starting to reap better dividends.

I have looked at the major league performance of drafts from 1995 onward, up to the end of 2005.

In terms of MLB ABs, Dodger draftees rank 26 in ABs, 29th in OPS, 29th in innings pitched, and 25th in ERA, over that period.

The Dodgers may have the perception of being one of the best, but the recent history is very dismal, or at least prior to 2006.

Dave

read them it.

Looks like you might want an editor, too :)

The Dodgers may have the perception of being one of the best, but the recent history is very dismal, or at least prior to 2006.

Absolutely true, which is why I took (and still take) the raves about the 2005 Jacksonville team with a grain of salt. I wouldn't be at all surprised if Martin and Billngsley are the only players from that team who fashion decent major league careers.

-- MWE

Their best rookie this year has probably been Ethier, who they got from the A's. Ironic?

I stumbled across this commentary, and had a chance to read through it. Many of you make some good points. Some thoughts:

Several of you seem to miss the point of a movement ranking.

First, Mike, we don't "trumpet" the success of a Kinsler or a Navarro. In fact, on a good day, Navarro is a pretty mediocre talent. He cost the Dodgers a bundle, and Tracy his rep for putting too much stock in such an under-performer. He does have a cash value though, and the Dodgers had to dump him on the D-Rays to get some of it back. Your observation about Humberto Sanchez was more to the point. Even injured, he is considered a major-league ready player, where Hughes was not.

Second, stats are indications of player performance in a vacuum. There is no hard number for maturity and confidence. That's the backroom stuff that comes through player reports from coaches and scouts. Hughes, for example, at the time of our rankings, hit 45 because the only feedback coming from the Yankees farm system in May/June of 2006 was that they weren't going to rush him, and that they expected he wouldn't have an opportunity to advance until mid to late 2007. When that is the word from on-high, in a movement ranking, he ranks lower.


Mitch writes:

A 2004 college draftee playing at AA is not "flying through the Oakland Athletics minor league system."

Catchers typically take longer to develop than other positions. They need to learn more than most other players. Suzuki has been moving faster than a number of his contemporaries.

PooNani writes: <quote>THE mitch jones</quote> - Jones is a good case in point. In 2005, the year he won the Triple-A Home Run Derby, it was mentioned that the Yankees might be looking to move him as part of a bigger deal. The deal in question fell through, but it was enough to put him up as the only player on the Yankees farm that was actually "in play" on a movement ranking.

To the questions:

Where is Adam Loewen?

or Kevin Kouzmanoff or whoever - I would note there are a lot of players, including a number of your faves mentioned here, that are truly great players. If, however, we aren't picking up enough buzz about them advancing, or they have issues that don't show up in a stat report, they may find themselves not making our FAB50 Baseball rankings. Beyond the numbers, we take in a lot of feedback, starting in winter camp, from all different avenues to get a picture of where players are really going to be by mid-season.

I'm surprised that no one dinged us for not ranking up Hunter Pence. Personally I think he will move faster than our FAB50 Committee decided ultimately he would, but maturity and some consistency problems have been minor flags. Once again, we work with the best wisdom from a lot of different sources. He didn't make the majors, which was what we understood would be the case if his spring wasn't top drawer. He's killing the PCL pitchers though, so it is only a matter of time before Houston will take him.

Like all lists we will never get ours 100% right. Yes, some of our earlier lists, as someone called up our 2002 rankings, were works in progress as we tried to build up the information base for a movement ranking system, which is as time sensitive as it is event specific. Systems change, too. Both the Yankees and the Cardinals overhauled their farm systems in 2007 in ways that our crystal ball in mid-2006 was not going to pick up.

Still, I am pretty happy that our 2005 No.1 pick, Felix Hernandez, was a good pick while BA's Delmon Young pick that year was not. They picked Young again last year, bat-temper-tantrum and all. We went with Stephen Drew. We still have to rank Young No. 2 because he is a great talent, but we also know that the red lights were on until some of the flak from his ump outburst settled down.

To Sydney Dave: The Dodgers farm generates a lot of players that end up in minor league trades and who advance in other farm systems faster/better than they would have with the Blue crew. If you include a healthy number of exports, they still remain one of the better systems for scouting and developing talent.

We have an editor, Mitch, which is me. We have a staff too. Lary Bump, our senior Baseball Analyst, is one of a half-dozen veteran writers with local fishwrap credits out your yin-yang who help process and comment on all of the reports that we take in over the course of the pre-season to mid-season while the FAB50 rankings are built.

Thanks for reading, and, like all feedback for the FAB50 rankings, we'll take your comments and add them to our discussions that continue to refine the movement-based ranking.

- Brian Ross
Sr. Editor
MLN Sports Zone

P.S. We've gone to subscription. If you want to get the e-zine for $5.99 instead of the $11.99 annual price, use the discount code "BMR" to get a 50% off on me!