He’s probably a boderline A-/B+. Change the name to Maybin or Rasmus and things change.

I’d say Anderson < Holland + Alderson

but Maybin > Holland + Alderson

Adding on, I think the weighted numbers for Hitters is rather unfair, yes, pitchers are more risky, but they’re also more scarce. There’s more reward in my mind to developing a good pitcher then it is developing a good hitter. I mean, this is a league where people like Jeff Suppan get paid 10 million a year.

The biggest value differential is going to be at the top. I’ve always said that at the top of the list, the ranking is more important, in the middle and at the bottom the rating carries the most weight.

If you were to trade Wieters for Maybin, you might not need a B prospect in return. If you were to trade him for Lars Anderson, you’d probably need at least a B+ in return. Maybin and Anderson have the same rating, but there is a huge difference in value. That’s not the case as you move furthur down the ladder.

1 Texas 81
2 Oakland 72
3 Florida 71
4 Atlanta 71
5 Tampa Bay 69
6 San Fransisco 66
7 Boston 65
8 Baltimore 65
9 Kansas City 63
10 St. Louis 62
11 Cleveland 59
12 Minnesota 55
13 San Diego 54
14 Milwaukee 53
15 Cincinnati 52
16 New York Mets 51
17 Seattle 51
18 New York Yankees 51
19 Washington 51
20 Los Angeles Angels 50
21 Pittsburgh 49
22 Toronto 49
23 Philladelphia 48
24 Colorado 47
25 Los Angeles Dodgers 46
26 Chicago Cubs 45
27 Detroit 45
28 Chicago White Sox 44
29 Arizona 41
30 Houston 36

I don’t think points should be given to C propects because every system is full of them. Every system that has been listed has a bunch of C propects who were not on the list, it seems arbitrary to give credit to a small handful of the C prospects just because they are in a weaker system.

With the information we have from what John has posted, I think the best way to compare systems is to look at C+ and higher prospects.