Baseball America’s Top 100 Prospects Just Misses

Open Thread: 2/27 Camp Notes
Scenes from Photo Day

In today’s Ask BA, Jim Callis listed all the players who received votes for their Top 100 Prospects List but failed to crack the final edition. Dante Bichette Jr. and Jose Campos each appeared on seven of eight Top 150 Ballots, peaking at #81 and #73, respectively. Ravel Santana was listed on four ballots and peaked at #104 while Austin Romine and J.R. Murphy were at #104 and #145 on their only ballots. Both Bichette and Campos are prime candidates to jump onto next year’s least with strong debuts in full season ball this summer.

Manny Banuelos (#29), Dellin Betances (#63), Gary Sanchez (#81), and Mason Williams (#83) all made the final cut of the Top 100, as did former Yankee Jesus Montero (#6).

Open Thread: 2/27 Camp Notes
Scenes from Photo Day
  • JoeMan

    Mike, jest forgot about Romine who was on 4 of the ballots and peaked at #104.

  • Gonzo

    The freaking Sox had 7 on that list.

    Insert Red Sox bias rant.

    • Jesse

      I blame Peter Gammons.

    • Knoxvillain

      8 if you count Casey Kelley. He will always be a Red Sox.

  • Plank

    It also mentions Williams and Campos as 2 of 10 candidates to make huge leaps on the next list.

    • Brain Dead Ted

      Plank, Campos is only in A ball. The possible, probable predicted projections make it somewhat unlikely that he’ll have some chance to reach close, near, a somewhat higher or a somewhat lower rank of a true pitching prospect like Hector Noesi is dubious. Please leave your personal views of Campos out of this or they will render your comments highly or lowly fungible. I can’t make this any clearer.

      • Plank

        Well said!

  • Paul VuvuZuvella

    The Separation of Yankee Prospects and Top 100 rankings makes me want to throw up.

  • JMK

    Prospect rankings are fun and all, but I worry about some of you. First, rankings are really insignificant given how volatile development is. Second, even if you think it matters (again, it doesn’t) the difference between a prospect at 99 in the rankings and 104 or even 134 is essentially nil.

    • jjyank

      I agree completely. The only thing I use prospect lists for is when I’m debating a Red Sox fan and I can say “well the Yanks’ farm system is more stacked than yours, we have X amount of prospects in the top 100”. Its just for bragging rights, but ultimately, it doesn’t mean anything. I think of it like the draft: just because someone goes in the first round, does not make him a star. Similarly, someone drafted in the 20th round could end up being an All-Star in a few years. The prospect lists likely mean slightly more than draft order, but what really matters is consistant development and the way teams handle them. Look at Cano as an example. He was never expected to be a star, but his MLB numbers crush his MiLB numbers. Some guys are just weird like that.

  • viridiana

    Prospect lists actually mean quite a bit. While even top prospects sometimes fail, the failure rate is generally lowest for those most highly rated and climbs from there. As to Cano, he was at one point rated the fourth best Yankee prospect so while he was likely under-rated he wasn’t exactly overlooked.
    The key takeaway from this list is that the Yankees had 6 players among the 120-125 berst prospects in the game. With an average farm they’d have had four. Of course, some prospects will dispappoint. That’s one reason there’s strength in numbers. The second key takeaway IMO is that prospects are more impoortant than ever with the new CBA. As it gets tougher for Yanks to sign top talent they will need to hoard the young talent they already have. The current crop of Yankee prospects, if managed well, could sustain the franchise for the next decade.

    • JMK

      I’m not debating the value of prospects, I’m debating the value of lists, arbitrary end points and the fan’s apparent belief that a guy ranked 99 is quantifiably superior to the guy at 126. It’s just not true.

      The very top prospects are top prospects because they have a high quotient of probability and upside. The further down you get, the more it’s likely to be an either/or. This is compounded in the fact that the difference between a guy at 99 and 126 is generally not position-based or a true comparative model. Further, lists are being compiled by human beings who often have seen the player maybe a few times or are entirely rely on other colleagues or various scouts.

      It’s fun to check out, compare and chat about. We can assume having so many prospects considered among the best 125 in baseball by so many different analysts means something, but we’re accepting what could be a lot of wrong assumptions.