Introducing the Beyond the Box Score Prospect Ranking System
There are few things in life that I enjoy more than reading material on prospects. Scouting reports, notes, primers, etc. I love 'em all. Whenever writers can enlighten their readers on players whom they have no chance of seeing during the regular season, it's widely considered to be indispensable to their knowledge. And to be completely honest, that's one of the main reasons for my enjoyment of writing such material. However, if there is one type of material that I've always gauged at, it's simple, flavorless top prospect rankings.
Over the years, prospect junkies have found prospect rankings to be the best possible way to enhance the knowledge of their readers. Some sites and magazines feature scouting reports on certain players, or maybe just an entry discussing a certain team's system, and by no means are those painful to read. The painful ones are those that simply discuss a player's attributes based on statistics alone or the ones that don't diverge in to a player at all. But even the best prospect rankings are somewhat bland.
I never found a top prospect ranking system useful at all really, because all that really does is say that in a system in which you're not aware of the prospect depth or lack thereof, Prospect A has a brighter future than Prospect B because he's listed higher on the list. There's basically no information to conclude why or why not Prospect A should be separated from Prospect B and, if so, why?
Of all the ranking systems on the interwebs, Kevin Goldstein does it best in my opinion. Goldstein goes team-by-team, placing the top 11 organizational prospects into categories: five-star, four-star and so on. They represent tiers, if you will, and a perfect way to separate talent in an organization based on the potential impact level that the players betoken. Each of Goldstein's team rankings also give the reader a brief scouting report on each of the top 11 prospects plus nine additional top prospects and a sleeper.
Although this system does contain a few minor flaws, it's easily the most conclusive ranking system on the internet, I would say. Baseball America provides an outlook on the entire organization rather than the top prospects, and to be completely honest, fans who care about their team's future should be interested in the impact prospects more so than the 25-year old non-prospect who has the system's best strike-zone discipline.
I discussed this last when I wrote my primer on how to compile professional scouting reports but I'll explain again. Teams grade talent differently, but most do so in two separate ways: the OFP system and the role system. The OFP system is focused primarily on number grades and tiers based on ability at present and future. Contrary to OFP, the role system pegs a player's future using position, organizational depth, and in-depth visualizations of the player's present team as factors in his projection. Now, that's exactly how I'll be formulating my rankings over here at Beyond the Box Score. They'll be similar to Goldstein's, but slightly different as well.
Here's how it'll work:
1) Every team's top 12 prospects will be ranked. While there's really no way to project how many prospects in an organization will have an impact on the major league team going forward, it's safe to sit in the 10-15 area. Remember, these rankings aren't created with the intention of recognizing hidden talent in an organization. To be completely straight-forward, this is done to rank team's prospects based on the impact they will have on their club once they have reached their potential and are in the majors.
2) Players will be divided into four tiers, labels if you will, with the 1st tier being the best. Here's what each tier represents:
- Tier 1: Major League Star -- Number One Starter
- Tier 2: Stand Out/Above Average Regular -- Number Two/Exceptional Three Starter
- Tier 3: Solid, Average, Every Day Regular -- Number Three/Solid Four Starter
- Tier 4: Bench/Below Average Regular -- Borderline Four/Number Five Starter/Relief Pitcher
3) Players will be given points due to their respective tier. 1st tier players count as four points, while 2nd count as three, 3rd count as two, and 4th as one. At the end of the team's ranking, all of the points will be added up together. Once all 30 teams are done being ranked this will be the determining factor for the top 30 organization list. Teams tied in points will be ranked accordingly based on gut instinct or the additional amount of, if any, 1st tier prospects.
4) I'll provide a quick, detailed scouting report of the players I've either seen in person or received info on from someone who has, such as a scout or other talent evaluator in whom I trust. Also, by no means do I assume that this is a perfect system to use. Everyone uses different tools and resources to evaluate talent, and I'm no different.
I'll answer any and all questions in the comment section.
So without further ado, here is our first organizational ranking, the Toronto Blue Jays.
Blue Jays -- 31 points
1st Tier
1. Travis d'Arnaud - Scouting Report
2. Jake Marisnick - Scouting Report
3. Noah Syndergaard
2nd Tier
4. Anthony Gose - Scouting Report
5. Daniel Norris
6. Justin Nicolino - Scouting Report
3rd Tier
7. Aaron Sanchez - Scouting Report
8. Drew Hutchison - Scouting Report
9. Adonys Cardona - Scouting Report
10. Dickie Joe Thon
4th Tier
11. Deck McGuire - Scouting Report
12. A.J. Jimenez
13 comments
|
2 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Proximity to Majors
I really like that this format gives a look at individual prospects in relation to the value they add to their system, even if it is mostly for the purpose of entertainment.
Do you take age/level into account? If so, how much does it affect your decision? One of the drawbacks of Sickel’s system is that an older high floor/low ceiling prospect may have the same grade as a low level risky high ceiling prospect, so I would understand some reluctance to lump these together. I guess the inclusion of Syndergaard and Marisnick in Tier 1 answers my question, but do you mind giving a little more insight?
I wouldn't say this is for entertainment, but thanks.
Age, level, professional experience, etc are all important factors when grading out prospects, and I’m definitely taking them into account when compiling these rankings. Although I wouldn’t say there’s a certain trend that I’m following that would give, say, younger prospects the edge over older ones. Younger prospects have more upside than older ones, but again, this is all about impact on their respective major league teams.
Dave Gershman - Beyond the Box Score
Penn League Report / Twitter: @Dave_Gershman / Getting Blanked
by Dave Gershman on Jan 2, 2012 3:50 PM EST up reply actions
Great stuff, Dave
How are you handling players with some time in the bigs? I ask because Kyle Drabek is not in your rankings.
Contributing Editor at Beyond the Box Score and writer at Amazin' Avenue.
Thanks, Bill.
Even players with big league experience will be graded based on the potential impact they represent. The Jays didn’t have anybody with big league experience who I thought should be on the list. Kyle Drabek probably would, but he isn’t a rookie (78.2 IP in 2011).
Dave Gershman - Beyond the Box Score
Penn League Report / Twitter: @Dave_Gershman / Getting Blanked
by Dave Gershman on Jan 2, 2012 3:48 PM EST up reply actions
True, but...
…he spent July and August in the minors and didn’t start a major league game after June 12th. This is more a general question of when scouts, etc, consider players prospects and when they turn into something else.
Contributing Editor at Beyond the Box Score and writer at Amazin' Avenue.
Ah, gotcha. That's a completely different topic, but a very relevant one.
Scouts definitely have further expectations in non-rookies, especially if a player hasn’t reached his peak or expect potential yet. For example, let’s say Johnny Scout sees a 19-year old Kyle Drabek pitching in Williamsport in 2007 (he did pitch in Williamsport in 2007), that scout would label projections on Drabek for once he reaches his upside. 90% of scouts wouldn’t ever change their projections on a player from when they first saw him. So let’s say that scout saw a number one starter in the 19-year old Drabek. If Kyle Drabek is 26-years old and still struggling, that scout will still project him to be a number one starter. And the same goes for Kyle Drabek’s current status.
Dave Gershman - Beyond the Box Score
Penn League Report / Twitter: @Dave_Gershman / Getting Blanked
by Dave Gershman on Jan 2, 2012 4:27 PM EST up reply actions
Henderson Alvarez
21 years old with 63.2 IP..where would you put him if still eligible?
2nd Tier
Love his stuff but has struck me as a number one.
Dave Gershman - Beyond the Box Score
Penn League Report / Twitter: @Dave_Gershman / Getting Blanked
by Dave Gershman on Jan 3, 2012 9:57 PM EST up reply actions
sounds good
he was flashing elite ground ball rates, and BB/9 ..you maybe see him as a 1 if the slider develops and the K’s go up?
Maybe
But I don’t think his K rates will go up unless he drops his sinker, his best pitch.
Dave Gershman - Beyond the Box Score
Penn League Report / Twitter: @Dave_Gershman / Getting Blanked
by Dave Gershman on Jan 4, 2012 8:28 PM EST up reply actions
I'm a bit surprised you have a scouting report on Cardona
But not on Syndergaard. If there’s any Jays prospect that I’ve found little information about, it’s Cardona. Thanks for the report, nonetheless.
And great work!
"We are all agreed that your theory is crazy. The question that divides us is whether it is crazy enough to have a chance of being correct."
- Niels Bohr
Sorry, unauthorized hotlinking of copyrighted material not permitted.
Good
stuff. Look forward to reading more.
by McCutchenIsTheTruth on Jan 2, 2012 7:23 PM EST reply actions
Great Rankings
I agree with the tier 1 prospects, I think Noah will start topping out more blue jays lists once he has 1 more year under his belt.

by 




























