Ba Top 100

[Crazysilver03]

No Spoone, Rowell or Erbe. Wow. I expect Rowell, Erbe and Arrieta to be on the list next year along with Tillman and Wieters.

You dont think Spoone will make the list next year?

[brvn52]

Some other rankings that are interesting/relevant players that have been discussed in trades (realistic or not, they've been discussed) and players in our division:

#1 Jay Bruce, Reds

#2 Evan Longoria, Rays

#3 Joba Chamberlain, MFY’s

#4 Clay Buchholz, Red Sox

#5 Colby Rasmus, Cardinals

#7 Clayton Kershaw, Dodgers

#9 Homer Bailey, Reds

#10 David Price, Rays

#11 Travis Snider, Jays

#13 Jacob Ellsbury, Red Sox

#15 Jake McGee, Rays

#16 Brandon Wood, Angels

#17 Wade Davis, Rays

#24 Nick Adenhart, Angels

#29 Adam Miller, Indians

#31 Andy Laroche, Dodgers

#34 Johnny Cueto, Reds

#38 Jose Tabata, MFY’s

#39 Reid Brignac, Rays

#40 Lars Anderson, Red Sox

#41 Austin Jackson, MFY’s

#42 Jeff Clement, Mariners

#44 Joey Votto, Reds

#45 Ian Kennedy, MFY's

#55 Chin-Lung Hu, Dodgers

#59 Desmond Jennings, Red Sox

#62 Carlos Truinfel, Mariners

#64 Justin Masterson, Red Sox

#73 Jed Lowrie, Red Sox

#82 Sean Gallagher, Cubs

#96 Ryan Kalish, Red Sox

#99 Jeff Niemann, Rays

#100 Drew Stubbs, Reds

Rays have a top 5, a top 10, a top 15, a top 20, a top 40, and a top 100 prospect (6 total) Wow! 3 pitchers in the top 17 along with Longoria at 2! If they can manage to hold onto these guys they are going to be good for a long time! But that it a big IF. Really look for them to have a nice run from about 2009-2014. They could be our biggest problem with competing and maybe delay when we begin to compete.

Red Sox have a top 5, top 15, top 40, 3 from 59-73, and a top 100 prospect. (7 total) To me, they are going to continue to be a big problem with our competing in 2010-2015. We are going to need to buff up our system much more to compete with this.

MFY’s have a top 5 prospect and 3 prospects from 38-45 (4 total) Really after their big 3, they are not that deep. If 1 or 2 of Kennedy/Hughes/Chamberlain don't work out the MFY's are gonna still have some trouble with pitching in the coming years.

Jays have a top 15 player in Snider, but that's all they have. Pretty weak and should help the O's in 2-3 years.

Not including our players, we have 3 of the top 5 prospects in our division, 4 of the top 10, 7 of the top 15, and 8 of the top 20 prospects in our division. When I see this list, I worry that its gonna take a little bit longer on here than most people think to get back to competing. This isn't gonna be popular, but I'm saying we might not be back until 2012 or 2013. In other words we still need to step it up a notch. We're definitely moving in the right direction, but there is still a lot to be done. We still have a LOT of work to do.

[Crazysilver03]

Good post.

There sure will be a lot of good baseball in the AL East for years to come! Will be fun to watch.

[brvn52]

Good post.

There sure will be a lot of good baseball in the AL East for years to come! Will be fun to watch.

Yes it will. And it will be so much sweeter when we finally get back!

[theonestevewh]

You dont think Spoone will make the list next year?

And Spoone. I actually think Bascom has a 50/50 chance as well but I don't want to sound optimistic just to be let down (that's what she said).

[hoosiers]

The list doesn't matter. It's not like these lists are some kind of Official Certification that guys will or won't be good. In any team's system, most guys won't make it. Would it be nice to see lists that say the O's farm is better off than everybody else's? Sure, it would be nice to read that. But all that really matters is that we have good guys who actually make it. It's completely routine and normal for highly ranked guys to not make it, and for not-highly-ranked guys to become stars. Both things happen all the time. That's what's normal.

I try not to sound too much like a BA homer, but the above is really over-the-top.

I'd much rather have a prospect on this list than not and I'd wager some quality coin that the list is far more inclusive of all-stars and everyday players than otherwise.

[Frobby]

This isn't gonna be popular, but I'm saying we might not be back until 2012 or 2013. In other words we still need to step it up a notch. We're definitely moving in the right direction, but there is still a lot to be done. We still have a LOT of work to do.

I concur that it may take a while. However, I'd like to think we can at least be a team that is winning a little more each year in the meantime.

BA projects Liz and Patton to arrive some time in 2008, with Wieters and Reimold arriving in 2009. Hopefully some of the solid pitching prospects who didn't make the list also arrive in that time frame: Olson, Penn, Hoey, McCrory, Sarfate, Moore, Costanzo, Mickolio and Spoone. And hopefully somewhere along the way we can trade a few vets and get some more useful young players.

[Lucky Jim]

I try not to sound too much like a BA homer, but the above is really over-the-top.

I'd much rather have a prospect on this list than not and I'd wager some quality coin that the list is far more inclusive of all-stars and everyday players than otherwise.

No doubt, it's a good "state of the union" assessment. That said, we've got our two highest-ceiling players (Rowell and Erbe) who suffered down years lingering below the top-100. And we've got Spoone who - if last year wasn't a fluke - should be climbing quickly. I think Beato and Hernandez have the opportunity to move quickly, too. Not to mention Arrieta.

We're likely to lose Reimold and Liz off the list for next year - and perhaps Patton - but I wouldn't be shocked if we added three or four names to the list. And some of them may be high-upside. Weiters should stay high. Tillman is likely to climb, as well. Moving multiple prospects into the top-quarter of the list is what I want to see. And I don't think it's impossible.

Remember, we suffered set-backs from our major propsects this year. It was a VERY down year on our farm. They all won't be like that.

[Bloopandablast]

The best player we got in each trade (Jones, Scott) were not eligible for these lists.

And, as I'm sure you are aware, we haven't traded Roberts yet, so we've only traded two guys for 10.

Neither are Pie nor Murton. So.

And as Frobby suggested I am including the Trax trade.

The headliner in the Tejada trade is damaged goods and is rated ahead of Gallagher. More to come on that front I think.

Somebody mentioning that the others not rated are better than Patton in the Astros trade and yet in the same general points somebody else questioned where Ceda and Veal are?

Hmmmmm.

[Lucky Jim]

Neither are Pie nor Murton. So.

And as Frobby suggested I am including the Trax trade.

The headliner in the Tejada trade is damaged goods and is rated ahead of Gallagher. More to come on that front I think.

Somebody mentioning that the others not rated are better than Patton in the Astros trade and yet in the same general points somebody else questioned where Ceda and Veal are?

Hmmmmm.

I'm not sure what your point is. Do you think Murton is still a prospect at 26? Are Ceda and Veal not on the list because they have ML experience (like Albers?). I mean, Markakis is younger - and much better - than Murton. Should we be counting him?

Pie would be on the list, yes.

But Mackus's point was only as a rebuttal to the idea that YOU floated that we'd traded for nothing but prospects and had only landed three on the list. This isn't true. We traded for a boatload of arms. Some of which are on the list. And we traded for two everyday players who aren't eligible. I.e., our return is much better than you implied.

Quick question: why are you including the Trax trade? Is your point that we have to trade for our good prospects and can't grow our own? Or that we didn't get enough for Trachsel, somehow?

The former is irrelevant (we didn't get any top-100s back for Trachsel, but we got a lot value more than we should have - thanks, by the way) and the latter ridiculous (see prior point.) This just seems like a way of cooking the numbers so that you can take a shot at us. A little tacky.

Finally, as for Gallagher v. Patton - you're right, Gallagher may be underrated according to this list. I think he's more projectable than a lot of other folks on this board. And Patton is what he is - a moderate ceiling, but quite advanced, young arm. Yep. Injured. There's more to come. Etc. But certainly, for a team not competing this year, a little patience with Patton (and a willingness to take a risk on him, especially when it allowed us to add arms to the deal) makes some sense. I've got no problem trading for him, all things considered.

If you'd rather have your farm system than ours, that's fine. I don't think, however, we have many folks from this board heading over to (whatever insufferable) Cubs boards you all frequent and spreading the gospel of the O's. And - it's apparent - a lot of you guys are true believers. We may over-value our prospects, but when we speak in tongues and go into convulsions over our prospects we have the good sense to do it among familiar faces.

[psk3170]

What people without a BA subscription can not see is that the Red Sox and Rays tied for the most top 100 at 7, but the Orioles were in a group of 7 team that were tied for second best at 5 top 100 each although the O's were mostly bottom 50 heavy and on the weaker side of that group.

Interesting notes is that the A's tied the O's with 5 top 100 and all 5 were received in trades 4 this year and Barton in the past from St.Louis so Beane is great at getting talent back for his players and most of them were top 50 talent. But Beane got little back in major league talent where AM mixed it up between major leaguers, ready for prime time prospects, and some lower minors studs. I will take AM's mix because while a bit lower in overall talent ceiling it is also at bit lower risk because it has some proven major leaguers in case the prospects fizzle.

Why people question Joe Jordon is unbelievable when you look at this list. They do not realize is that he has built the O's minor league depthwise not all star talent wise into a top 5 system in all the minors which is awesome after only three drafts because while I would love to swap with the Rays list for all star talent I will take our depth over every other system except maybe the Red Sox/Rays/Rangers. BA goes on to name 92 other players that received at least a vote in their top 150 that feeds into the top 100. The O's were third with 6 players that got at least 1 vote for top 150 but did not make the top 100. The Rangers lead that second list with 8 top 150's votes, and the Twins had 7 on that top 150 mention list mostly the guys from the Mets trade. The Orioles were only behind the Rangers at 13 total players in terms of top 150 mentions, and they tied the Rays at 11 for second top 150 mentions. So that tells me that while Jordan has not set the world on fire in terms of top 50talent what he has done is an awesome job of stockpiling depth as 7 of the 11 are his draft picks. He is probably top 3 or 4 in all time O's scouting directors in talent brought into the system and he has another year to draft high again this year. Also, teams like the Braves have alot of players from recent trades and drafts that go back to 2001-2003 and are older and took forever to blossom. BA also gives more weight to guys in upper minors and most of the guys after top 50 are more seasoned 22 or older types where as the O's have alot of 18-21 year old Studs with limited time as professionals (Rowell,Arrieta, Snyder, Beato) that just missed this year that may make it next year. Erbe, Olson, Bascom, Britton, Butler, Angle and Henson are young enough to develop into top 100 and did not even get a top 150 vote. Read that again we are top 3 in terms of top 150 players mentioned and the list does not include Adam Jones,Erbe,Butler,Bascom,Penn, or Olson who have limted time in the majors.

Flanagan deserves alot of credit here because he started with nothing after Sid Thrift and his patience to build it right probably cost him his job.

[Bloopandablast]

I'm not sure what your point is. Do you think Murton is still a prospect at 26? Are Ceda and Veal not on the list because they have ML experience (like Albers?). I mean, Markakis is younger - and much better - than Murton. Should we be counting him?

Pie would be on the list, yes.

But Mackus's point was only as a rebuttal to the idea that YOU floated that we'd traded for nothing but prospects and had only landed three on the list. This isn't true. We traded for a boatload of arms. Some of which are on the list. And we traded for two everyday players who aren't eligible. I.e., our return is much better than you implied.

Quick question: why are you including the Trax trade? Is your point that we have to trade for our good prospects and can't grow our own? Or that we didn't get enough for Trachsel, somehow?

The former is irrelevant (we didn't get any top-100s back for Trachsel, but we got a lot value more than we should have - thanks, by the way) and the latter ridiculous (see prior point.) This just seems like a way of cooking the numbers so that you can take a shot at us. A little tacky.

Finally, as for Gallagher v. Patton - you're right, Gallagher may be underrated according to this list. I think he's more projectable than a lot of other folks on this board. And Patton is what he is - a moderate ceiling, but quite advanced, young arm. Yep. Injured. There's more to come. Etc. But certainly, for a team not competing this year, a little patience with Patton (and a willingness to take a risk on him, especially when it allowed us to add arms to the deal) makes some sense. I've got no problem trading for him, all things considered.

If you'd rather have your farm system than ours, that's fine. I don't think, however, we have many folks from this board heading over to (whatever insufferable) Cubs boards you all frequent and spreading the gospel of the O's. And - it's apparent - a lot of you guys are true believers. We may over-value our prospects, but when we speak in tongues and go into convulsions over our prospects we have the good sense to do it among familiar faces.

There is no shot taken. We have heard over and over how "junky" the Cubs system is from the O's fans yet there is not a lot to separate them at this point after the O's have made two very good trades. It just shows that the Cubs system is not so bad.

Part of it is a rebuttal to all the other posts. who say that Jones has to be included and then consider Scott. No. neither Jones. Pie, Scott (came from an O's poster not me therefore I included Murton) do not have to be included the same as Markakis. Compare BA to BA. and yes I self reported and took out Fukudome.

I am making one point and you O's fans have helped me make it quite well. Thank You. The drawback in making in a trade is 1)not matching up, 2) or two teams trying to stare down one another and get the best value for them. It has nothing to do with the state of the Cubs minor league system.

And BTW I do think you make out like bandits in the Trax deal..

[Frobby]

BA goes on to name 92 other players that received at least a vote in their top 150 that feeds into the top 100. The O's were third with 6 players that got at least 1 vote for top 150 but did not make the top 100. The Rangers lead that second list with 8 top 150's votes, and the Twins had 7 on that top 150 mention list mostly the guys from the Mets trade. The Orioles were only behind the Rangers at 13 total players in terms of top 150 mentions, and they tied the Rays at 11 for second top 150 mentions. So that tells me that while Jordan has not set the world on fire in terms of top 50talent what he has done is an awesome job of stockpiling depth as 8 of the 11 are his draft picks. He is probably top 3 or 4 in all time O's scouting directors in talent brought into the system and he has another year to draft high again this year. Also, teams like the Braves have alot of players from recent trades and drafts that go back to 2001-2003 and are older and took forever to blossom. BA also gives more weight to guys in upper minors and most of the guys after top 50 are more seasoned 22 or older types where as the O's have alot of 18-21 year old Studs with limited time as professionals (Rowell,Arrieta, Snyder, Beato) that just missed this year that may make it next year. Erbe, Olson, Bascom, Britton, Butler, Angle and Henson are young enough to develop into top 100 and did not even get a top 150 vote. Read that again we are top 3 in terms of top 150 players mentioned and the list does not include Adam Jones,Erbe,Butler,Bascom,Penn, or Olson who have limted time in the majors.

Flanagan deserves alot of credit here because he started wiht nothing after Sid Thrift and his patience to build it right probably cost him his job.

Addressing the last point first, yes I do think Flanagan deserves some credit for inheriting a farm system that was an absolute joke and getting it to the point of being at least respectable. Where I think he failed was in not doing the things that MacPhail has quickly done to shore up the Dominican program and other international scouting.

The other information you posted here is quite encouraging. Could you clarify who are the 6 players who received top 150 votes but who didn't make the top 100? I assume it's Rowell, Arrieta, Snyder, Beato, Spoone and someone else.

[Lucky Jim]

There is no shot taken. We have heard over and over how "junky" the Cubs system is from the O's fans yet there is not a lot to separate them at this point after the O's have made two very good trades. It just shows that the Cubs system is not so bad.

Part of it is a rebuttal to all the other posts. who say that Jones has to be included and then consider Scott. No. neither Jones. Pie, Scott (came from an O's poster not me therefore I included Murton) do not have to be included the same as Markakis. Compare BA to BA. and yes I self reported and took out Fukudome.

I am making one point and you O's fans have helped me make it quite well. Thank You. The drawback in making in a trade is 1)not matching up, 2) or two teams trying to stare down one another and get the best value for them. It has nothing to do with the state of the Cubs minor league system.

And BTW I do think you make out like bandits in the Trax deal..

I see. I don't know what generalized posters you're referring to. I'd argue that it's less a problem that the Cubs have a crap farm system than it is they certainly don't match up great with us right now. I think you guys suffer from some of the same problems as us: a plethora of high-ceiling/high-risk guys. And a plethora of moderate-ceiling/low-risk guys.

Neither are the keystone of an exceptional system. But they can produce a functional one. To be sure.

[LookinUp]

What people without a BA subscription can not see is that the Red Sox and Rays tied for the most top 100 at 7, but the Orioles were in a group of 7 team that were tied for second best at 5 top 100 each although the O's were mostly bottom 50 heavy and on the weaker side of that group.

Interesting notes is that the A's tied the O's with 5 top 100 and all 5 were received in trades 4 this year and Barton in the past from St.Louis so Beane is great at getting talent back for his players and most of them were top 50 talent. But Beane got little back in major league talent where AM mixed it up between major leaguers, ready for prime time prospects, and some lower minors studs. I will take AM's mix because while a bit lower in overall talent ceiling it is also at bit lower risk because it has some proven major leaguers in case the prospects fizzle.

Why people question Joe Jordon is unbelievable when you look at this list. They do not realize is that he has built the O's minor league depthwise not all star talent wise into a top 5 system in all the minors which is awesome after only three drafts because while I would love to swap with the Rays list for all star talent I will take our depth over every other system except maybe the Red Sox/Rays/Rangers. BA goes on to name 92 other players that received at least a vote in their top 150 that feeds into the top 100. The O's were third with 6 players that got at least 1 vote for top 150 but did not make the top 100. The Rangers lead that second list with 8 top 150's votes, and the Twins had 7 on that top 150 mention list mostly the guys from the Mets trade. The Orioles were only behind the Rangers at 13 total players in terms of top 150 mentions, and they tied the Rays at 11 for second top 150 mentions. So that tells me that while Jordan has not set the world on fire in terms of top 50talent what he has done is an awesome job of stockpiling depth as 7 of the 11 are his draft picks. He is probably top 3 or 4 in all time O's scouting directors in talent brought into the system and he has another year to draft high again this year. Also, teams like the Braves have alot of players from recent trades and drafts that go back to 2001-2003 and are older and took forever to blossom. BA also gives more weight to guys in upper minors and most of the guys after top 50 are more seasoned 22 or older types where as the O's have alot of 18-21 year old Studs with limited time as professionals (Rowell,Arrieta, Snyder, Beato) that just missed this year that may make it next year. Erbe, Olson, Bascom, Britton, Butler, Angle and Henson are young enough to develop into top 100 and did not even get a top 150 vote. Read that again we are top 3 in terms of top 150 players mentioned and the list does not include Adam Jones,Erbe,Butler,Bascom,Penn, or Olson who have limted time in the majors.

Flanagan deserves alot of credit here because he started with nothing after Sid Thrift and his patience to build it right probably cost him his job.

Thanks. This is good information.