Jonathan Mayo's Top 100

does any other team have close to 8 ? That list doesn't even seem to be much of a stretch. Not to mention Swihart had to fall just outside it.

Yeah, but only 1 in the top 30. Pathetic*.

I also note that he has Brentz above Swihart, and 2 other catchers not in the 100 above him as well.

*Sarcasm, but with a trace of truth about how few blue chippers

I've never liked Mayo's lists, never.

I usually do not like his lists either. I did like his on air work during the draft.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA I hadn't even seen the 4/5 power grade for Bogaerts. Good grief.

Also, completely missed that he still had Hamilton at 19. I think greatscottcooper is spot on with how he's slow to move guys down.

Lol. Grades:

Bogaerts: Hit: 4/6 | Power: 4/5 | Run: 5/5 | Arm: 6/6 | Field: 4/6 | Overall: 5/6
Bradley: Hit: 5/6 | Power: 4/5 | Run: 5/5 | Arm: 5/5 | Field: 6/7 | Overall: 5/6

So basically, the only thing keeping Bradley from being a top 5 prospect is his arm, huh Mayo?

Yikes.

I've always disliked his lists and especially hated his grades. they seem basically random. For example

#100 Michael Choice #3 Miguel Sano
Hit 3/5 3/5
Power 5/6 5/7
Run 5/5 3/3
Arm 4/4 6/7
Fielding 5/5 2/4
Overall 4/6 4/6

Looks completely even. And his rankings arent even good either. As already pointed out he apparently thinks that cecchini must still be just on a hot streak and waiting to cool off.

Also decided to throw in denney here

Hit 4/6
Power 5/6
Run 4/4
Arm 6/6
Fielding 4/5
Overall 4/6

and thats our #15 prospect about as good and at a more valuable position compared to sano

Add Garin to the list of prospects with 4/5 power according to Mayo. Considering Garin has almost 40 less HRs over his minor league career than Xander, while only being behind by about a seasons worth of ABs... Well, his logic somehow works for him and his editor...

These lists should have huge variances. It's opinion. Rating prospects is incredibly difficult which is why so many high value guys never get anywhere. Not ally 5/6 grades are ade equal either so guys with those grades can have a good variance in overall ranking. If people are really forming their own opinion then there are great differences. I bet some White Sox people think Jacobs is a top 100 type guy and they aren't necessarily wrong.

If lists are very similar, then they are just regurgitated garbage.

8 of 10 top 100 is impressive no matter the list especially when Ruby doesn't quality and guys like Swithart and Workman aren't on it.

I agree that it's good to have some variation in prospect lists, but anyone who thinks Jacobs is a Top 100 prospect is wrong. There's a line between opinion and wish-casting.

It's often said that top prospects lists are worthless without grades/writeups. Here, the write-ups are fluff and the grades are admittedly incorrect (not that the preseason grades made any sense either). Therefore, his Top 100 list is basically a cheap gimmick to get hits. It's not serious in-depth scouting or performance analysis in any way.

I think you might be right. I remember he had a really low grade for Xander's power and high grade for his defense.