Three Pirates Make Fangraphs Top 100 List

On Tuesday morning, Fangraphs released their top 200 prospects list. Just three Pirates made the top 100, led by Tyler Glasnow in 12th, with Austin Meadows ranking 30th and Jameson Taillon rated 66th overall. Two other players were just outside the top 100, with Josh Bell finishing 103rd and Nick Kingham ranked 111th. After 142nd place, the last 58 players are just listed in one big group based on their future value, which I’ll get to in a second. Both Alen Hanson and Reese McGuire finished in that group.

The list is broken down into groups/tiers and Kiley McDaniel says in the article that the group the player is in is more important than the rank. For example, the top future value ranking he has is a 70(based on the 20-80 scouting scale) and just two players made that tier. Glasnow is in the third tier, rated as a 60 future value. Austin Meadows falls in the next group(FV 55), which is a large group that also includes Taillon. Both Bell and Kingham fall into the FV 50 group and McGuire and Hanson are in the FV 45 tier.

This list isn’t as kind to the Pirates prospects as other recent lists. has all seven of the Pirates players mentioned above in their top 100, while Baseball Prospectus has five Pirates in their top 100. Baseball America will release their top 100 prospects list on Thursday.

  • I guess we’re gonna see how it all shakes out in a couple of years. Lots of good prospect writers out there.

  • Well the Pirates system doesn’t seem to rate that well, that will ruffle some feathers, and possibly invalidates the entire rankings.

    • Mark Appel at #18, Jake Thomspon at #29, and Jameson Taillon at #67.

      Sure, makes total sense.

      • Disagreements are interesting, if these lists all agreed with one another what would be the point.

        I like the tiers, which is something I believe Tim subscribes too, and like his use of of 40, 45+, I never fully understood the C-, C, C+ stuff.

        • Very, very much agreed. Tiers certainly make sense. Just not quite sure how I feel about, what I would consider, flippant responses from him regarding how much separation exists within one.

          Also, if one is to side with him on his tier method, it pretty much blows up prospect value calcs we’ve seen to date.

        • I think what I like most about Kiley’s work is that he really doesn’t seem to care much at all about rankings. Guy eats, sleeps, and breathes scouting. The rest is a nuisance.

          Making me think that the “typical” prospect season stuff that is seemingly *all* about rankings is kind of silly.

          • I think people get too caught up on the ordinal ranking, I’m guilty of it and will certainty argue about guys being wrongly ranked it in the future. A tier of 50 plus guys is a bit unnerving but is probably a more accurate reflection of how little the prospect evaluators know.

            Good point on the farm system value, somewhat suspect applying numbers derived form BA’s list to another evaluator, but at this point is is all just approximations.

            Its going to be fun rooting against the Cubs.

            • Feel guilty saying it, but can’t say I’ve ever actively rooted against a hyped-up group of prospects as much as these Cubbies.

  • Kiley’s work at FanGraphs has been a must-read, and I’m really looking forward to his Pirates list. But it has become fairly apparent for those following that his organization and time management skills are, well, absent.

    He’s put out extremely detailed write-ups for about half the league, which has taken him all winter, and found himself far behind other outlets in the Top 100 game. I simply don’t see how he can say he did a quality list without doing near as much research on half the league as he did for the others.

    Regardless, his work is well worth following.

  • Although very early, it appears we may regret not taking JP Crawford in the first round a couple of years ago, when he was still on the board….

    • Absolutely agreed.

    • I saw Crawford play a few times last year in Low-A and he was too good for that level. Of all the SAL games I went to, he was by far the best player and I’m hard-pressed right now to think of someone that looked better over the years(hitters, not pitchers), who wasn’t there on rehab. He was doing everything at a different speed than everyone else.

      • My guess, barring unforeseen events, he is a 9/1 call-up this year and the Phils SS in 2016….

    • So, you’re saying we should’ve taken him over either Meadows or McGuire?

      • Absolutely.

      • Hindsight is always 20/20 of course and the jury isn’t out yet on any of these guys. Things can change quickly.

        But, as of today – you could argue that Crawford should have been taken over both Meadows and McGuire – but definitely McGuire. Especially when you factor in the fact that Crawford plays shortstop – the toughest position it seems for guys to stick and excel.