Where did BA rank organization for ML talent?

[caulfield12]

Sorry if I missed this...have they released these rankings?

 

I heard the local Royals' announcer talking about how they'd moved way up (I think to #11) from being in the 20's the last couple of years, so I was curious where we stood.

 

Around #10-14?

 

http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/prosp...ures/26854.html

 

That's all I could find, but this information is only good through 2006.

Edited April 12, 2007 by caulfield12

[MnSoxFan]

Sorry if I missed this...have they released these rankings?

 

I heard the local Royals' announcer talking about how they'd moved way up (I think to #11) from being in the 20's the last couple of years, so I was curious where we stood.

 

Around #10-14?

 

http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/prosp...ures/26854.html

 

That's all I could find, but this information is only good through 2006.

 

We were ranked 25th

[caulfield12]

We were ranked 25th

 

 

How did we fall so far when we added so many pieces to our system?

 

Doesn't make much sense to me...weren't we ranked in the teens last year AFTER we'd already given up Chris Young to AZ?

 

In the offseason, we added Gio, Floyd (who technically doesn't qualify I guess), Danks, Masset, Rasner, Vazquez, Lujan, etc. Shouldn't we have at least stayed in the same position?

 

Was this simply because McCullough and Broadway aren't considered to be high impact draft picks?

Edited April 13, 2007 by caulfield12

[danman31]

How did we fall so far when we added so many pieces to our system?

 

Doesn't make much sense to me...weren't we ranked in the teens last year AFTER we'd already given up Chris Young to AZ?

 

In the offseason, we added Gio, Floyd (who technically doesn't qualify I guess), Danks, Masset, Rasner, Vazquez, Lujan, etc. Shouldn't we have at least stayed in the same position?

 

Was this simply because McCullough and Broadway aren't considered to be high impact draft picks?

Last year Jenks and Anderson counted which helped. Also Lumsden was traded for Macdougal. Rasner, Vasquez, and Lujan mean 0 as far as BA is considered. Floyd probably doesn't count because of his innings. Let's call Danks and BMac a wash for this. Nothing special from our 06 draft and losing Jenks, Anderson, and Lumsden for Gio and Masset isn't going to move you up.

[caulfield12]

Last year Jenks and Anderson counted which helped. Also Lumsden was traded for Macdougal. Rasner, Vasquez, and Lujan mean 0 as far as BA is considered. Floyd probably doesn't count because of his innings. Let's call Danks and BMac a wash for this. Nothing special from our 06 draft and losing Jenks, Anderson, and Lumsden for Gio and Masset isn't going to move you up.

 

Brandon had 67 IP in 2005. Shouldn't he have been disqualified from the list as he wasn't a rookie?

 

And I thought Lujan was once around #9 or #10 in the Rangers' system...

 

I guess it really doesn't matter if our top-loaded system contributes to the big league club. And they're not giving credit to the recent development of Russell (AFL and then ST) as a legitimate frontline starting candidate. Most would consider him now the #3-5 prospect in our organization.

 

A team with Floyd/Gio/Danks/Russell and then Broadway/Haeger/McCullough/Phillips all within 2 years of the big leagues shouldn't be graded so harshly. Oh, well. And since the ratings came out in late March, they should have credited Chris Young to the D-Backs.

Edited April 14, 2007 by caulfield12