Who is Redszone's #5 prospect?

[RedsManRick]

Both are the type of guys who always get underrated in these polls too. Last year's community ranking had Dickerson #10, Maloney #18, Hanigan I believe somewhere in the late teens / early twenties, and Danny Ray Herrera at #33. Each of those guys contributed something of value to the MLB team the very next season, something a bunch of guys ahead of them on the list will never do.

Well, that gets to the heart of the matter, doesn't it? There's no such thing as a single dimension on which we can rank players -- it has to be a ranking of something. That something could be the guy's ceiling, it could be his "mean project", it could be his trade value.

But so long as we don't ever say what that something is, ceiling will play a very significant role in these sorts of polls thanks to our optimism as fans.

[Mario-Rijo]

Well, that gets to the heart of the matter, doesn't it? There's no such thing as a single dimension on which we can rank players -- it has to be a ranking of something. That something could be the guy's ceiling, it could be his "mean project", it could be his trade value.

But so long as we don't ever say what that something is, ceiling will play a very significant role in these sorts of polls thanks to our optimism as fans.

I agree and it's unfortunate because we really don't get a real genuine ranking that way. At least as genuine as we can get with what info we have. Every area should be represented. Ceiling, Floor, Production, Proximity to Majors, Positional value, etc. We touch on all these things to some extent but ceiling is given way too much weight in these polls.

However I do have an idea, it's not the most optimal idea but based on the way we have this structured already it's a nice addition I think. I'll map it out if anyone is interested. But the short version is after every 10 rankings we take those 10 names and rank them in order of 1 pt to 10 pts in all 5 of the categories above. For example Alonso, Leake and Frazier are our 3 top picks so who has the highest ceiling at this point? I'd say Alonso so he gets 1 pt, I'll go with Leake 2nd so he gets 2 pts, Frazier gets 3. Now who has the highest floor? I'll go Frazier (1), Alonso (2), Leake (3). Now Lowest points is the highest ranking. Alonso has 3 pts, Frazier 4 and Leake 5 so that's your new overall order.

Obviously just an example as we'd have to toss in the other categories but this way everyone gets credit for their strengths and gets dinged for their weaknesses more fairly. We'd just treat it as an additional poll in between prospect 10 and 11. What does everyone think?

[dougdirt]

I agree and it's unfortunate because we really don't get a real genuine ranking that way. At least as genuine as we can get with what info we have. Every area should be represented. Ceiling, Floor, Production, Proximity to Majors, Positional value, etc. We touch on all these things to some extent but ceiling is given way too much weight in these polls.

That is your opinion. It all depends on how people view things. Some people care a lot more that a guy could be a super star than a guy who might be a 4th outfielder/fringe starter/bullpen guy, even if that superstar potential guy is far from reaching that potential. Some guys think the guy at AAA who doesn't have the ceiling but is close, say a Matt Maloney type of guy is worth a lot more because he can help out soon even if its only in an average type of way. Its all in the eye or the beholder. With so many people having different views on what makes a good prospect, the list isn't going to be as fluid as if one person did the list because of all the different views.

[Mario-Rijo]

That is your opinion. It all depends on how people view things. Some people care a lot more that a guy could be a super star than a guy who might be a 4th outfielder/fringe starter/bullpen guy, even if that superstar potential guy is far from reaching that potential. Some guys think the guy at AAA who doesn't have the ceiling but is close, say a Matt Maloney type of guy is worth a lot more because he can help out soon even if its only in an average type of way. Its all in the eye or the beholder. With so many people having different views on what makes a good prospect, the list isn't going to be as fluid as if one person did the list because of all the different views.

Well let me just ask you this Doug, how much weight do you give ceiling? How little weight do you give proximity to the majors? Do you try to give them equal billing? Do you try not to give ceiling way too much weight? Where do you draw the line and why?

[dougdirt]

Well let me just ask you this Doug, how much weight do you give ceiling? How little weight do you give proximity to the majors? Do you try to give them equal billing? Do you try not to give ceiling way too much weight? Where do you draw the line and why?

It depends on the player, but ceiling certainly plays a factor for me. Its why I hardly rate relievers high because I just don't see them providing a ton of value. Proximity to the majors matters of course, but its only a small part of the overall picture. I am more concerned about what a guy does when he gets to the majors rather than when he does. Where proximity comes in is how far they are along (and closer to reaching their potential in most cases) with their skills.

An example of how I weigh ceiling is that with guys like Billy Hamilton or Yorman Rodriguez. They are premium athletes with incredibly high ceilings. I give their ceiling a bit more weight than a guy like Chris Heisey, who doesn't have nearly the same ceiling as those guys. On the flip side of things, Heisey also has a much higher floor than either of those guys and that also gets weighted in my thinking. There is a whole lot that goes into how I rank prospects, but the thing that I give the most weight to is how I project them as major leaguers.

[Mario-Rijo]

It depends on the player, but ceiling certainly plays a factor for me. Its why I hardly rate relievers high because I just don't see them providing a ton of value. Proximity to the majors matters of course, but its only a small part of the overall picture. I am more concerned about what a guy does when he gets to the majors rather than when he does. Where proximity comes in is how far they are along (and closer to reaching their potential in most cases) with their skills.

An example of how I weigh ceiling is that with guys like Billy Hamilton or Yorman Rodriguez. They are premium athletes with incredibly high ceilings. I give their ceiling a bit more weight than a guy like Chris Heisey, who doesn't have nearly the same ceiling as those guys. On the flip side of things, Heisey also has a much higher floor than either of those guys and that also gets weighted in my thinking. There is a whole lot that goes into how I rank prospects, but the thing that I give the most weight to is how I project them as major leaguers.

So let me ask this then. Where do you rank those 3 players in your personal rankings?

[dougdirt]

So let me ask this then. Where do you rank those 3 players in your personal rankings?

Yorman, Heisey and Hamilton.

[Mario-Rijo]

Yorman, Heisey and Hamilton.

What is their official rankings (the #) in your view?

[dougdirt]

What is their official rankings (the #) in your view?

4/6/10

[Kc61]

This one is Yorman but then it gets interesting.

Number 6 could be one of a number of guys. On this poll, it seems like Travis Wood may have an edge, but he's a bit of a wild card. His K rate at AAA wasn't high. Does he have the stuff? He certainly has youth on his side.

Heisey seems to have emerged as a good all around bat who can play center field acceptably.

Cozart - position of need, handled AA pretty well.

Those three seem to be the group.

And how about Maloney who threw beautifully in several major league outings?

[Mario-Rijo]

4/6/10

And where do you have Juan Silva ranked?

[dougdirt]

And where do you have Juan Silva ranked?

In the 20s for now.

[Mario-Rijo]

In the 20s for now.

Wow really. It must be a scouting report thing because I see no good reason for that kind of disparity between the 2.

[RedsManRick]

Doug, I know this may be a bit much to ask, but I think it would be very interesting to see your thought process, particularly as it relates to balancing floor/ceiling. Given the high washout rate of all prospects, particualrly pitchers, my gut says that we tend to underweight the floor of very young players.

I think a matrix of high(ceiling)/medium(most likely major league contribution)/low(never establishes in majors) career trajectories with a likelihood of reaching each (summing to 100%) would be quite interesting. At the very simply level, what are the odds that Yorman never plays with the Reds?

[dougdirt]

Wow really. It must be a scouting report thing because I see no good reason for that kind of disparity between the 2.

Which 2?