Originally Posted by thatcoolguy_22
That comment from Goldstein seems suspect. No way should 1 prospect move you from (at best) 16 to the top ten imo. The Reds were a in the 9-12 range easily without Chapman, he's icing.
This is the same guy who did the Top 101 prospects. His organizational rankings over the years, at least to my eyes, give credit for depth but have more of an eye out for star potential. (A case can be made for that; if the purpose of a farm system is to set up a team for excellence, one A/A+ player can have more impact than fistfuls of B/C types.) Before Chapman, his highest-rated Reds prospect was Leake at #59 (and we debated the absence of Alonso on the other thread). So it's safe to say his view of the Reds went from "good depth, low on star potential" to a much higher opinion of the system's star potential after adding Chapman into the mix.