Top 20 Summary

by John Sickels on Mar 16, 2026 10:42 AM EST in News

Summarizing the Top 20 Lists

There are several different ways you can summarize the lists. I didn't originally intend the Top 20 lists to result in "farm system rankings," but several industrious readers went ahead and ran some numbers. Although the exact way they weighted grades varied from system to system, the results were pretty much the same. Thanks to readers Lambtwo and Don2 for sending the numbers in.

Note that the difference in some of these farm systems is very little; a lot of these teams are extremely close to each other. Note that, in my grading system, there is little difference between a Grade C+ and a Grade B- prospect. Attaching a specific number to the grade may exaggerate the difference. As you know, my grading system involves a combination of objective and subjective factors. The latter, of course, is difficult to quantify.

I caution against taking the exact position of any one team too seriously. The difference, for example, between Texas at #16 and Houston at #20 is small and the exact number can be deceptive. It's probably better to think of these in groups of five or six.

The numbers below were generated by Lambtwo, but Don2's numbers are virtually the same. Lambtwo gave a Grade A 10 points, a Grade A- 9 points, a Grade B+ 8 points, etc., down to Grade C at 4 points.

Los Angeles 6.80 1
Minnesota 6.75 2
Oakland 6.75 3
Anaheim 6.55 4
Colorado 6.45 5
Cleveland 6.40 6
Milwaukee 6.25 7
Boston 6.10 8
Toronto 6.00 9
Kansas City 5.95 10
Atlanta 5.90 11
Tampa Bay 5.90 12
Seattle 5.85 13
Chicago Sox 5.70 14
San Fran 5.70 15
Texas 5.70 16
Pittsburgh 5.65 17
Arizona 5.55 18
Chicago Cubs 5.55 19
Houston 5.55 20
St. Louis 5.40 21
NY Yankees 5.35 22
Florida 5.30 23
NY Mets 5.20 24
Baltimore 5.15 25
Cincinnati 5.15 26
Philadelphia 5.15 27
San Diego 5.15 28
Detroit 5.05 29
Washington 4.80 30

Another way to look at it, also generated by Don2, is the number of prospects Grade B or higher:
12 LA
12 Oak
11 Min
9 Ana
8 Cle
8 Mil
7 Col
7 Tor
7 TB
7 Hou
6 Bos
6 KC
6 SF
6 ChW
5 Atl
5 Tex
5 Fla
5 Bal
5 Phi
4 Sea
4 Pit
4 Ari
4 NYM
4 Cin
4 Was
3 ChC
3 StL
3 NYY
3 SD
3 Det
Summarizing, I'd like to put these in groupings. The placement of each team in a group is more important than their ranking WITHIN the group.

TOP FARM SYSTEMS
Los Angeles, Minnesota, Oakland, Anaheim, Colorado, Cleveland
GOOD FARM SYSTEMS
Milwaukee, Boston, Toronto, Atlanta, Kansas City, Tampa Bay, Seattle
AVERAGE FARM SYSTEMS
San Francisco, Chicago Sox, Texas, Pittsburgh, Arizona, Chicago Cubs, Houston
WEAK FARM SYSTEMS
St. Louis, NY Yankees, Florida, NY Mets, Baltimore, Cincinnati, Philadelphia, San Diego
AWFUL FARM SYSTEMS
Detroit, Washington

I don't think most of those would be particularly controversial, but there are some exceptions. The rankings of Oakland, Boston, and Kansas City are heavily dependent on good-looking 2004 drafts turning out well in the long run. Those clubs could drop quickly if the drafts don't pan out. The Braves seem low to me, at least compared to their reputation. The Rockies came out better than I expected.

Also note that these grades don't include guys recently graduated to the Show. The Mets don't get credit for David Wright or Jose Reyes. It's a snapshot of current talent in the minors or on the cusp of the majors.

What do you guys and gals think?

0 recs | Comment 18 comments

Story-email Email | Print |

Comments

Brewers

While I believe that the Dodgers, Angels and Twins are the three top systems in the game - I can't agree that the Rockies, for example, have a better system than Milwaukee.

When talking about top pitchers such as Francis and Jimenez, I feel it's inevitable to discuss the stadium situation. In my opinion, and I believe the numbers support me, Coors destroys pitchers psyches. Let's hope guys like Jennings can prove me wrong.

As for the Brewers, the injuries to their pitchers definitely hamper their grade a bit. Overall, however, their position players are arguably the best in the minors which should push them to the upper echelon of farm systems in my opinion.

The minors: baseball's only true league left...

by mjwelch11 on Mar 16, 2026 10:56 AM EST 0 recs

brewers

The pitching injuries really hurt the Brewers grades. They also don't have a tremendous amount of depth beyond the top guys. But I agree, their top layer of hitting talent is extremely impressive. . .Fielder, Weeks, etc..

by John Sickels on Mar 16, 2026 11:05 AM EST 0 recs

rankings

I'm just wondering if the linear approach that lambtwo used is really the best method. For example, an organization with two C+ prospects would get the same rank as one with one A prospect. I think the organization with the one A is probably better off, but that's just my opinion.

rotowire.com fantasy sports

by herb on Mar 16, 2026 11:10 AM EST 0 recs

Linear rankings

I don't disagree that the rating was fairly simplistic (John doesn't pay me a lot), but paints a picture nonetheless.

To clarify, 2 C+ doesn't equal 1 A, because there were 20 prospects for each team with C being the lowest rating. 2 C+ = 5+5=10, while 1 A and 1 C = 10+4=14.

I agree with your thinking though that some extra weighting could be given to A and A- players.

by lambtwo on Mar 16, 2026 12:12 PM EST up 0 recs

A Grades

I definitely agree that the rankings should be weighted to give much higher scores A and A- prospects and much lower scores to C+ and C prospects.

by phatcat43 on Mar 16, 2026 12:48 PM EST up 0 recs

Revised Rankings weighted to A and A-, and B-

Here is the revised rankings with 50% added weighting to A,A-, and B+ all others were unchanged. A now is 15, A- is 13.5, and B+ is 12. The last figure shows the change from the previous rank.

Oaklnad becomes the clear leader, and a big jump by Cincinnati (several B+ players. LA, Toronto and NYY take the biggest drops.

Oakland    8.43    2
Minnesota    7.80    0
Cleveland    7.65    3
Anaheim    7.63    0
Los Angeles    7.48    -4
Colorado    7.18    -1
Milwaukee    7.10    0
Atlanta    6.95    3
Tampa Bay    6.95    3
Boston    6.73    -2
Kansas City    6.55    -1
Seattle    6.53    1
Toronto    6.40    -4
Texas    6.30    2
Arizona    6.18    3
Chicago Sox    6.13    -2
San Francisco    6.13    -2
Pittsburgh    6.05    -1
Houston    5.95    1
Cincinnati    5.95    6
Chicago Cubs    5.75    -2
Florida    5.70    1
St. Louis    5.60    -2
NY Mets    5.60    0
Philadelphia    5.58    2
NY Yankees    5.55    -4
Baltimore    5.55    -2
Detroit    5.25    1
San Diego    5.15    -1
Washington    5.03    0

by lambtwo on Mar 16, 2026 1:32 PM EST up 0 recs

I mean B+

In title of last message, should have said B+ instead of B-. John, is there some way to edit prior messages?

by lambtwo on Mar 16, 2026 1:33 PM EST up 0 recs

edit

If there is a way to edit comments, I haven't figured it out yet...:)

by John Sickels on Mar 16, 2026 1:57 PM EST up 0 recs

Looking at the very cream of the crop.

There were only 8 systems with 2 or more A- prospects: Brewers, Dodgers, Rockies, D-rays, Twins, Angels, A's, Mariners. Only the Rockies, Angels and A's have three. There were 27 A- or higher grades. So downgrading Adam Miller because of his elbow injury, an A- means you're in the top 26 prospects in the game in this system.

by bhoov on Mar 16, 2026 12:06 PM EST 0 recs

A grades

Only six A grades with the Rockies having two of them. Adam Miller's injury I would presume takes him off the A list leaving 5: Felix Hernandez, Andy Marte, Jeff Francis, Ian Stewart, Joel Guzman.

by bhoov on Mar 16, 2026 12:17 PM EST 0 recs

braves

I think the Braves are slightly underrated...After dealing two of their top 5 or 6 prospects they still have tremendous depth and have about 3 or 4 young pitchers that could make leaps foward like Jake Stevens, Kyle Davies, and Jose Capellan made in 2004...

by MPK on Mar 16, 2026 1:17 PM EST 0 recs

Cubs

I think their system is fine pitching wise, but offensively they have some good prospects, but not a lot of depth. Still, in theory Prior and Zambrano could still be prospects and then it would rank higher. It's all relative though.

by Ienpw on Mar 16, 2026 1:55 PM EST 0 recs

San Diego Padres

I agree the Padres have one of the weaker systems at the moment. I don't think many of their propsects at the upper levels will help the big league club. Josh Barfield (the consensus #1) is a toolsy 2B and I don't see him pushing Loretta out of a job even two years down the road. Tim Stauffer will be lucky to peak at a third starter in the big leagues. I perceive Paul McAnulty as another good 4A corner type in the same boat as Tagg Bozied and Jon Knott, decent hitters who will have a tough time cracking a starting lineup in the big leagues.

However, I do feel Travis Chick and George Kottaras are going to continue their impressive development at class A Lake Elsinore and both will move this organization into the top 20 by next season.

by sdbaseballfan on Mar 16, 2026 4:17 PM EST 0 recs

The Braves and Farm Systems

These rankings are fun to look at, but they need to be contextualized. Two basic observations: there is a prior need to understand exactly what it means for a system to be considered "best"; second, the Braves are clearly underated by this analysis. Before examining the Braves I would venture another point: the analysis is unhistorical and therefore unsound.

It is true that some systems are presently stocked by more high grade players than others. However, to really rate any system it is essential to put its performance into context. That is, how many players have made it to the majors and with what results.

With respect to the Braves, it should be remembered that the they have not had a first round draft pick in the last two years. Would it make them a better system if they had had the opportunity and successfully picked more high grade players (elevating their numbers)? The Brewers, in contrast, have benefitted from having an uncompetitive team because it has given them high picks.

In addition, in recent years they introduced Marcus Giles, Horation Rameriez, Adam LaRoche and Jason Marquis to the MLB. The Braves still have significant talent in the pipeline.

At the same time, they have traded key prospects: Wainwright, Nelson, Meyer, and Capellan. The depth of their system can also be gleaned by players they deem to be marginal (and useful for trades that can be let go. Witness Andy Pratt, Richard Lewis, Matthew Merricks. The last is worthy of comment:the Braves traded Matthew Merricks to the Dodgers, who chose not to protect him in Decmeber. The Rockies take Merricks and he becomes a top 20 prospect. The reality is that he would have been about #50 in the Braves system.

More fundamentally, the question about rating farm systems should turn on at least several of the following variables. First, what is the system's actual track record? Second, how are the prospects used by the big league club. In the Braves case it is fun to speculate that they treat their prospects like stocks: they pick strong arm pitchers allow their value to rise and then trade them when their value (and usually potential) is highest. Before the trades of the last years John Scherholz traded the likes of Rob Bell, Joey Nation, Jimmy Osting, Micah Bowie. John Foster, Brad Voyles, Andrew Brown, Merkin Valdez and others. Most of these were traded very smartly: the value dropped soon after these deals were made. Given the needs of the big league club, this may well be a superb use of a farm system.

Third, which systems scout the best (and most widely). Fourth, which teach the best (and are some systems good at teaching something(the Braves are notorious for not developing plate discipline in hitters). Fifth, it would be nice to know which systems got the most bang for the most buck.

In short, it would be very interesting to find out which system has the best chance to take a good high school or college player and turn him into a quality major leaguer. To go back to the Braves, if they had drafted a few more top prospects, it would probably have resulted in a higher ranking, but I doubt it would have meant that they had a better system.

To be sure, this would be difficult to determine (there are many more variables than this superficial analysis can suggest) these things. Yet, it seems to me that simply ranking farm systems based purely on existent talent is misleading.

by hisslk on Mar 17, 2026 2:40 AM EST 0 recs

It's a snapshot

The Braves may indeed have the most effective farm system when you consider trades as well as players they developed, but these grades are not trying to measure that. They are ONLY reflecting the snapshot of the current batch of top prospects at this point in time. Atlanta's place in the second tier of this ranking system does not imply that they have a second-tier organization.

by Elton on Mar 17, 2026 5:52 AM EST up 0 recs