FDH rankings of minor league baseball systems

By Rick Morris

We at FDH recently formulated a beta version list of The Top 100 Minor League Baseball Keeper League Prospects. It's up on our fantasy sports blog, FantasyDrafthelp.blogspot.com.

We will be featuring the final version of this list in our 2008 Fantasy Baseball Draft Guide, which will be available shortly. While this list was compiled to illustrate the most valuable baseball prospects for people in fantasy keeper leagues (with emphasis given to upside and the chance of each player reaching their upside), we did see a non-fantasy use for the remainder of our research -- and this blog is our home for anything we do outside of our initial core of fantasy sports content. In rating each organization by how many top prospects they have (and just how good these prospects are), we can at least determine which organizations are rich in terms of projected future superstars.

We need to emphasize that these rankings are a bit different than those you will see from Baseball America or other sources not completely devoted to fantasy or rotisserie pursuits. Those publications and websites give more credence than we do (as well they should, by the way) to players with amazing defensive upside but less potential at the plate. So the hitters on our list are awarded their placement purely on the basis of all-around offensive upside. As you might imagine, pitchers are ranked by pretty much the same criteria as Baseball America or other sources.

Our methodology for our organizational rankings was pretty simple: 100 points for the top player in the Top 100, 99 points for #2, 98 points for #3 and all the way down to one point for #100. We have listed below each organization with the total number of points they accrued as well and in parentheses the point totals of the various players that added up to the final score). Again, this is not a means of determining total organizational depth like you might find from a Baseball America or USA Today Sports Weekly, because they attempt to grade each system's top prospects, next-level prospects and dark horse candidates for success. Our list grades on purely the studs: the quantity and quality of potential future All-Stars that each organization presently possesses.

1. Tampa Bay: 396 (83, 81, 80, 78, 74).
2. Los Angeles Dodgers: 377 (98, 85, 55, 52, 46, 30, 11).
3. Cincinnati: 374 (100, 94, 93, 87).
4. Seattle: 270 (77, 69, 64, 40, 20).
5. Colorado: 265 (71, 68, 66, 51, 9).
6T. Oakland: 228 (75, 70, 34, 27, 22).
6T. San Diego: 228 (89, 82, 50, 7).
8. Atlanta: 225 (86, 72, 48, 16, 3).
9. Texas: 222 (65, 57, 44, 41, 13, 2).
10. Los Angeles Angels: 199 (63, 61, 58, 17).
11. New York Yankees: 194 (88, 53, 45, 8).
12. Pittsburgh: 192 (92, 90).
13. San Francisco: 147 (54, 49, 39, 5).
14. Washington: 144 (76, 43, 25).
15T. Chicago Cubs: 133 (60, 38, 35).
15T. Florida: 133 (97, 24, 12).
17. Philadelphia: 132 (62, 37, 33).
18. Arizona: 130 (99, 21, 10).
19. St. Louis: 127 (96, 31).
20. New York Mets: 122 (67, 29, 26).
21. Boston: 114 (95, 15, 4).
22T. Cleveland: 112 (84, 28).
22T. Milwaukee: 112 (79, 32, 1).
24. Toronto: 105 (91, 14).
25. Detroit: 92 (56, 36).
26. Minnesota: 83 (42, 23, 18).
27. Houston: 73 (73).
28. Baltimore: 66 (47, 19).
29. Kansas City: 59 (59).
30. Chicago White Sox: 6 (6).

A cursory glance of the individual player rankings themselves seemed to indicate that the National League might be poised to regain some badly-needed ground on the Senior Circuit in terms of franchise players, since 14 of the top 20 on our list are NL prospects. But only five of the top ten teams on our organizational rankings are NL squads, proving that the road back to parity cannot be traced purely through strength of top prospects.