What question are we answering when we say someone is a better prospect than someone else?

What question are we answering when we say someone is a better prospect than someone else?

Sky Kalkman | Twitter

Let's take this one to the audience. What do you think? Is the answer "which prospect will eventually bring more value to the club?" a good enough question? Is that what we're really answering?

4 days ago Justin Bopp 17 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I think it could be two things

One, the relative value of one player versus another over the course of their careers. But the other could be the certainty of their future performance. It comes back to an expected value issue. If prospect A has the potential for 80 WAR over their career given “tools”, but the chance of them achieving that is 65% (so, 52 WAR), and prospect B has the potential for 65 WAR, but the chance of them achieving that is 85% (55 WAR) one could argue that prospect B is the better prospect—the surer thing.

It’s an interesting question.

Beyond the Box Score

by BillPetti on Jan 27, 2026 11:25 AM EST reply actions

Pretty much

I wouldn’t say necessarily multiplying ultimate upside by percent likelihood is the way I approach it, but there’s definitely a balance that has to be reached, and I think it’s that balance that sets every prospector apart. I’d say upside is usually weighted more than safety, but you can find people who go the other way as well.

And then you have the people who throw names on a wall and throw darts with no explanation at all.

If everybody likes you, then either no one knows anything about you, or you're dead.

Fantasy Prospect Central: http://fantasyprospectcentral.blogspot.com/

by Archie A on Jan 27, 2026 11:57 AM EST up reply actions

There are probably many many ways to answer the question.

It would be nice to know what each prospect guru’s point of view is when they write these articles, though.

Some ideas, good and bad:

probability of making the majors
probability of posting X career WAR
probability of achieving an X WAR season
expected career WAR

Beyond the Box Score | Facebook | @Sky_Kalkman

by Sky Kalkman on Jan 27, 2026 11:32 AM EST reply actions

I'm afraid your first point is probably the most common.

Combine that with the most upside and BLAMMO, farm rankings!

See Data Differently: Beyond the Box Score | @justinbopp

by Justin Bopp on Jan 27, 2026 11:36 AM EST up reply actions

Here's another, that I think I really like:

Who’s expected to provide most production (WAR?) in first six years of team control?

Beyond the Box Score | Facebook | @Sky_Kalkman

by Sky Kalkman on Jan 27, 2026 11:56 AM EST up reply actions

Another way to ask my original question is...

How do we judge prospect lists when we can look back at them many years in the future?

Beyond the Box Score | Facebook | @Sky_Kalkman

by Sky Kalkman on Jan 27, 2026 12:20 PM EST reply actions

WAR seems to be the simplest, as

the minimum requirement for earning any WAR is to make it to the majors in the first place.

See Data Differently: Beyond the Box Score | @justinbopp

by Justin Bopp on Jan 27, 2026 12:22 PM EST up reply actions

If you're going to grade prospect lists based upon WAR...

…I’ve done some of that recently with BA’s top 100 for the last 15 years, based on fWAR. Some early results are in a fanpost over at Royals Review. (Is it poor form to link myself like that?)

I’m not sure that’s what most people want from prospect lists, but it certainly is what interest me as a fan… particularly in connection with the prospects in my favorite team’s system. But I suspect that lots of prospect mavens are just more interested in identifying who the most exciting guys out there are… and that question has much more to do with upside than with probability of reaching that upside.

In this regard, it might be worth asking: Who is the “we” in this question? Fans? Sabermetricians? Prospectors generally? etc…

by kcemigre on Jan 27, 2026 6:38 PM EST up reply actions

Or are you asking how we can take WAR and fairly

judge a prospect list?

If so, I think we should probably establish a slotting system, where the #1 prospect at any time is expected to produce some minimum number of WAR, the #2 is at some slightly less number, and so on.

See Data Differently: Beyond the Box Score | @justinbopp

by Justin Bopp on Jan 27, 2026 12:27 PM EST up reply actions

I like to keep it simple. Mean projected WAR

As far as a farm system goes, the highest total mean projected WAR should be the best farm system.

I think this takes everything into account. Mike Trout’s mean projected WAR is much higher than Aaron Hicks’, because although their upsides are similar, Trout has a way higher chance of reaching it, and is almost a sure thing to be a solid regular.

"Pinch-bunters don't have a ton of value, even with the Twins"

by Steven Ellingson on Jan 27, 2026 1:44 PM EST reply actions

The problem with this, is that although the concept is simple, its harder to figure out than just upside or chance of making majors

You really need to think of all possible outcomes, and have a percentage chance of that happening.

To simplify, You could just put the outcomes in 5 categories or something, assign a WAR value to each, and give an expected probability for each.

Well, that’s how I would do it, if I knew way more about prospects, and had a lot more time and data on my hands.

"Pinch-bunters don't have a ton of value, even with the Twins"

by Steven Ellingson on Jan 27, 2026 1:49 PM EST up reply actions

Expectation of the WAR probability distribution.

I think that’s what you’re talking about, as well as BillPetti and Archie A above. If there was some way to create such a distribution (probability that the player reaches a certain total WAR), then the expectation would take into account both the player’s abilities and risks. It’s essentially just the weighted average. Of course, the hard part is coming up with that distribution.

by RoxnSox09 on Jan 27, 2026 5:42 PM EST up reply actions

Question of Questions, isn't it?

We were debating this on Mets Minor League Blog a week or two ago:
We had one player who pitched, could hit 97 as a starter, and was only 20 going on 21, and had just finished at Low-A or A+ ball. On the other hand, he had control issues that were massive…though they got better as the year went on.

Then we had a hitter who played 1B and started suddenly slugging well in the minors, but he was 23-24, wasn’t thought of high by scouts, and of course played 1B. On the other hand, he was close to the show and would be on the team next year.

Who do you rank higher?

by garik16 on Jan 27, 2026 4:22 PM EST reply actions

The pitcher, I suppose

I’m guessing you’re talking about Familia and Duda, and frankly I think you lean towards the guy you can dream on a lot more. The 1B has limited upside given his defensive value, he’s not that young, and Ike Davis is entrenched there. Guys like that have value, but the odds of striking gold aren’t great, while a 20-year-old that can sit in the mid-90’s as a starter has a ton of upside. Although I’ll admit I tend to lean towards the higher upside guys personally.

Baseball is my preferred sport. It should be yours, too.
I'm a columnist for Beyond the Box Score, an SB Nation blog.
Oh, I'm on Twitter, too.

by Satchel Price on Jan 27, 2026 10:16 PM EST via mobile up reply actions

Correct, Familia andDuda.

And I’m with you on this, but it was an interesting debate.

by garik16 on Jan 28, 2026 1:11 AM EST up reply actions

One of two things:

1. Which guy will have the better career? (weighted mean expectation)
2. In a vacuum, If you could only have one of them, which would you choose?

by RedsManRick on Jan 28, 2026 1:37 PM EST reply actions

I would love to see where each of the picks succeed and fail. Such as with the #50 position:
10% created >10 WAR,
20% 2 to 8 WAR,
50% less than 2 WAR in major leagues
20% maxed at AAA ,
10% maxed out at AA

- .-. ..- … – / – …. . / .—. .-. - .. . … …

by Jeff Zimmerman on Jan 29, 2026 2:41 PM EST reply actions