Fat Strat wrote:
Question about their rankings system. I know the standard 20-80 scale, but I don't fully understand how they're applying that to an overall grade for these prospects.
They have several guys that rate out as 80's. I know that for an individual tool, an 80 would be nearly perfect -- Pujols' bat, Rolen's D, Coleman's speed, etc. I look at an 80 rating for Bryce Harper and it looks like they're saying his upside would make Willie Mays look like Otis Nixon (ugly!).
Or are they saying that Harper and Trout are the best of this bunch of prospects and comparing everyone to them?
Anyway, I think they're comparing everyone to the best prospect in the minors now, but I don't really like that. I would be much more interested in how Harper and Trout (and Miller) rated out with an average of their potential tools. If that came out to be a 70 or something, then wow! Pujols wouldn't have received an 80 rating based on his actual tools at any point in his career and he might become the best player in history.
I think the grade they have listed there is the grade for that player's best tool (Harper has an 80 bat, Trout an 80 speed, etc.) They aren't giving that grade overall.