History of the Top Prospects

by nborton on Dec 18, 2007 5:43 PM EST

I was wondering if anyone knew where there was a list of each years top 10 prospects going back maybe 20 years.

I thought it would be interesting to look and see just how many top 10 guys actually end up stars in the long run. And based off of the average, who everyone thinks might not make it in this years top 10.

Tweet Comment 18 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

BA

http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/prospects/features/26983.html

by jpahk on Dec 18, 2007 5:26 PM EST reply actions

Thanks

Thanks, that's exactly what I was looking for.

by nborton on Dec 18, 2007 6:28 PM EST up reply actions

1999

You gotta love Bruce Chen at #4 overall.

Carlos Gonzalez--I liked him better when it was Gonzales.

by PujolsJunkie on Dec 18, 2007 6:38 PM EST up reply actions

My favorite

has always been 1994 Alex Gonzalez, SS, #4. Alex Rodriguez #6, Manny Ramirez #7.

by lenred on Dec 18, 2007 6:47 PM EST up reply actions

draft success

It's difficult to define success with a draft choice, unless you just arbitrarily pick a VORP/yr (or something similar) level that defines stardom. But in terms of value for a team, given the success rate of any draft pick, you couldn't be unhappy with getting a reliever, platoon player, or other useful piece. That's not ideal, and you need to develop star players for organizational success, but such a high percentage of prospects never make it at all that that can't really be viewed as a failure given the bigger picture.

Philly sox fan has done some really interesting draft retrospectives along these lines over at SOSH - www.sonsofsamhorn.net . Long reads, but I would definitely recommend them to get a better feel for just how unlikely it is for a prospect to produce major league utility, nevermind stardom. FWIW the drop off from 1st round to 2nd round success rates is very, very large.

http://rswanzey.blogspot.com

by rswanzey on Dec 18, 2007 6:04 PM EST reply actions

True

I agree with what you said. However, shouldn't the top 10 every year be somewhat expected to be more than just a mid range pro?

by nborton on Dec 18, 2007 6:27 PM EST up reply actions

Yes

But I don't think it tells us as much because it doesn't tell us where that prospect came from. Also, the #11 in a strong system like Tampa Bay's is going to be better than half of a poor list like Houston's - just grouping them by organization is going to include some players who are worse and exclude some who are better than the sample you're going for.

http://rswanzey.blogspot.com

by rswanzey on Dec 18, 2007 6:31 PM EST up reply actions

I could be wrong...

but I think he's referring to the top 10 prospects in all of baseball in a given year -- not just for one organization.

by mookstra2 on Dec 18, 2007 6:35 PM EST up reply actions

Yep

I was talking about the top 10 overall.

by nborton on Dec 18, 2007 7:03 PM EST up reply actions

oops

Ah, then ignore most of that =)

http://rswanzey.blogspot.com

by rswanzey on Dec 18, 2007 7:50 PM EST up reply actions

Corey Patterson

2001 list-wow what happened to him....I hope Cameron Maybin doesn't end up like that! Some people bring up Patterson's name when mentioning maybin.

by LipstickOnDipstick on Dec 18, 2007 6:35 PM EST reply actions

he'll be OK

he's not in the Cubs organization or Giants that have shown a history of AAA- MLB- AAA -MLB totally screwing a persons head

Stick with an approach and player and let 'em rip IMO

Jimuhendori sensei at Rigurefirudo

by gmsnctry on Dec 18, 2007 6:48 PM EST reply actions

Reading those kinds of lists

always confirms my sense that a most of it is hit or miss when it comes to predicting the future success of individual prospects.

by Scott Proctor Fan Club on Dec 18, 2007 7:27 PM EST reply actions

Study

I did a very rudimentary study on BA's lists a while ago. While not statistically in-depth in nature, I thought it showed some nice trends. In any case, here is the link:

http://projectprospectbeta.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=25&start=15

by killa on Dec 18, 2007 9:26 PM EST reply actions

Good Stuff

Note how few pitchers end up in tier 1. I'd bet most lists could end up a lot better if they'd just rank hitters and ignore pitchers altogether.

I did a study on the 1998 prospect list which I plan on posting eventually. I think there will be a few suprises, but not many.

by rwperu34 on Dec 19, 2007 8:19 AM EST up reply actions

TIer 1 pitchers

I counted 10 unique pitchers that ended up tier 1. Many of those tier 1s were on multiple lists, but the total shoudl still be less than 20. That's 20 out of 127 pitchers that end up in tier 1, yet I still consitently see lists with half of the top 20 pitchers. In 1998, four pitchers finished in the top 20 of value, and one of those wasn't even ranked in the top 100!

by rwperu34 on Dec 19, 2007 8:43 AM EST up reply actions

Not only that

Not only that, but most of the 20 pitchers ended up becoming RPs. There weren't but 8 or so SPs in the list. That should cast some doubt upon quite a bit of the pitching prospects out there now. Basically, based on the 8 years of this study, there's only 1 guy on average that turns out to be a good SP.

by nborton on Dec 20, 2007 12:24 AM EST up reply actions