You could probably find 2-4 guys in every team's system to say that about. That's the exact kind of thing I'm referring to. It's funny because insert team name and the testimonies are always the same. 'So and so is a top 100 guy and any ranking without them is bogus.'
Rankings are kind of silly to begin with. They're terribly subjective and completely depend on what someone is looking for. Nevermind how unspecific they are as to whether they're being ranked based on current production, based on talent, ability, potential, likelihood of succeeding in the majors. It's all so incredibly inconsistent. From ranking to ranking the creators rank based on their own criteria. Yet fans subjectively, despite having probably seen less than .001% of the players, gripe about the ranking sets that include or don't include their favorites without knowledge of how the rankings were even compiled and what criteria they were based.