Ranking Changes - 7/18/14 - Rafael Devers at # 4

This might be more appropriate for the meta forum here, but it's important - the rankings at this site are not "power rankings." They are not an indication of who is playing well right now, but who is the best prospect long term. Devers isn't ranked at #4 right now because nobody expects him to struggle at any level, but because the scouting reports we've gotten on him, as well as his production, have been phenomenal. If a flaw is exposed in a higher level that may well change his outlook, but his ranking is meant to reflect the kind of major leaguer he projects to be, not his current slash line. To use a recent example, Xander Bogaerts remained at #1 even when he met some resistance in his first couple months at Portland last year.

If Devers is truly the number 4 prospect, the system is in trouble. This is tantamount to projecting the college prospects of an 8th or 9th grade basketball player. Devers numbers are extremely encouraging but the only issue at this point for him is whether he's ready for full season baseball.

My point is that the Devers hype is silly. He's ahead of Deven Marrero, who quite likely will be the sox starting ss by mid next year? Ahead of Vasquez, the current starting sox catcher and a player scouts claim is already an elite defensive catcher? And, yes, i know what valuing prospects is all about. Do you really think a major league scout would value Devers more than Marrero and Vasquez?

You do realize that you can have an opinion of one prospect independent of another, right? So Devers ranking on this site says nothing about the quality of prospects Deven Marrero or Allen Webster or Travis Shaw are. It is therefor a completely ridiculous to make the statement you did.

Prospect status is a combination of floor and ceiling. Yes, Devers has a lower flower and a lower chance of reaching his ceiling based purely on his age and level, but no one else in the system has a ceiling near his. I've had him at #4 on my personal list for a couple weeks and think it is the exact right place to put him. It speaks volumes about his tremendous upside and says nothing (negative) about the system.

Yup. I know at least one who does in fact.

I think you misunderstood. When oilcansman says "major league scout" he means "people who scout box scores, mostly major league ones".

It's not a knock on Owens. Swihart at this point has made himself either the best or one of the best catching prospects in the game. Says a lot that both BP and BA ranked Swihart ahead of Owens on their midseason Top 50s as well. That's the scouting consensus that we'd been hearing as well, and matched what we saw in games.

Easy to say when you're not specifying which league exactly.

My assumption is that prospect rank is based on best estimate where we think he will become, irrespective of floor or ceiling, while value factors in probability that he will reach the estimate along with floor and ceiling. Trade value could also factor how close the prospect is to being MLB ready to meet a specific need.

I hate rankings. I think it's silly how people focus on the number next to a name, "this guy is 4 instead of 11 that other guy is 5", what ever it doesn't matter to me.

I'd rather focus on the substance. And the substance is that Devers was one of the top bats in the market. In his first 40 pro games he has done nothing but back that up. He has been heavily scouted even as an amateur, traveling to the US and playing at PG events. Now in the US he has more exposure, while I don't think the GCL is heavily scouted it certainly more than the DSL where it's none. To me more exposure means more people have seen him which means there is a chance for more info. Now put him at 40 if you want but it doesn't matter one bit.

Also it certainly doesn't hurt that he is OPSing 1.000 + in his 1st 40 games. I'd rather that than something else.

I would start equating Devers to a top 10 pick at this point. I really believe that if he went through the system in the US, let's say he was elegible for the 2014 draft which he would have been one of the youngest guys but there were guys younger than him in the draft so he certainly could fit, I think he could have been a top 10 pick. I'm basing this off the way reports say he looked at instructs, which date wise matches up somewhat with some of the bigger HS events. Also on what we know scouting wise. We know scouting wise we know he has a big bat with questions about staying at 3B. The 1st HS bat taken was Alex Jackson who has a big bat but may end up in LF.

I just went off on a hypothetical tangent but whatever we'll never know if indeed Devers would have gone in the top 10 with so many variables. I'll post it anyways. I think if Devers was a top 10 pick people wouldn't be so resistant.

IIRC there is a high correlation between younger players and future success, even when controlling for draft position. Younger players may be raw, but they a) have fewer bad habits (probably least important), b) have more physical and mental growth, and c) will get their age-whatever development in a professional environment with high level competition and coaching. This advantage can be compounding as they can move up the ladder more quickly and get even better coaching and competition, while being even more focused. That's the theory anyway.

This week's rankings updates will be late. Maybe today, maybe tomorrow.