Success Rates of MLB Propects

[MaudDib]

Here is an interesting article about the success/failure rate of top prospects.

http://www.royalsreview.com/2011/2/14/1 ... -prospects

Sadly as a Royals fan, this doesn't bode well for our great minor league system. Also shows why it is not a good idea to draft prospects or rookies early in a dynasty league or deeper keeper. And shows why trading Harper and Trout for an established MLB player is usually a good move.

[Tavish]

I think it bodes very well for the Royals system. Obviously anyone who thinks that the entire group of pitching prospects are going to all become aces or that Moose, Hosmer, Myers, Colon, Eibner, and Giavotella are guaranteed future All-Stars are sadly mistaken. The strength of the Royals system ( and what has most people very enthused about what is to come) isn't so much that they have top rated prospects, its that they have so many top rated prospects. It is virtually impossible that all of them bust. Playing the odds the Royals should get at minimum 5 excellent players out of the current class.

[MaudDib]

I said the Royals thing as more of a joke. I understand that they have top system not only for their top guys but also how deep their system is at the moment. Guys who weren't even ranked in their top 10 would be other people's top 5 players.

But looking at the breakdowns from the article is very interesting. Top ten SP have a 60% bust rate meaning not even becoming an average ML player. Fall out of the top 20 and you have a one in five chance of being a regular ML pitcher. I hadn't realized that the success rate was so low. I remember some of the big name prospects that never made it but I have forgotten a lot of the guys who at one point teams were relying on becoming part of their rotation.

With this info the Royals look to get one maybe two all-star type players a handful of regular ML players and a number of busts. This is all worrisome because outside of Butler, the Royals are relying on these guys to be ML caliber players and the reality is that they all won't and probably only half of them will be in the majors for long.

[kab21]

If a team has one or two all-stars and a handful of average or better regulars all in pre-arb and arb together they have an excellent foundation for a team. What's worrisome is that Dayton Moore still has to use that money (not spent on the cheap young players) and select veterans that are actually good at baseball. No more guillens, betancourts and whatever other disasters he has spent money on in recent years.

[chargerss24]

Dayton Moore still has to use that money (not spent on the cheap young players) and select veterans that are actually good at baseball. No more guillens, betancourts and whatever other disasters he has spent money on in recent years.

Yeah...but Jeff Francoeur?

Kansas City's new motto is "Save Money, Live Better", courtesy of David Glass. This is what management is doing.

[Grounded Polo]

70% sounded about right, any old top 100 from a couple of years ago will look ridiculous now. It just emphasizes how they really don't mean anything, the guy ranked 70th can easily be better than the guy ranked 5th. Organizations like KC and ATL have great systems but can only hope to get lucky on 1 or 2 of their big prospects and get another regular or two at best.

The Teixeira to Atlanta trade was advertised as Salty being the main piece. He developed in a bust but the lower level prospects, Andrus and Feliz, are impact players. Ideally, you can try to use a top # of players list that's twice as big as your MiLB fantasy draft, there are alot of top 100 guys who definitely won't become anything if you look close enough.

[RunReyesRun]

Excellent article. I am not surprised at all by the 70% failure rate for BA Top 100 prospects.

I AM surprised by the 60% success rate by top 20 hitters, that is interesting.

If you trade 3 SP ranked in the BA 21-100 (20% success rate) for 1 hitter in the top 20 (60%), you'll come out even.

A good takeaway would be to package 2-3 SP prospects for a hitter in the top 20. According to this research, the odds are on your side...

[MasterX1918]

It's an interesting read but the relevance of the article fades a bit knowing that the data only goes up to 2003.

[kab21]

It's an interesting read but the relevance of the article fades a bit knowing that the data only goes up to 2003.

Not really. There needs to be enough MLB data to determine if a prospect is a bust or not. And since that is the focus of the article I would consider it pretty important.

One thing that needs to be mentioned regarding SP bust rate is that almost all starters that move to the bullpen will be considered a bust (<1.5 WAR). Obviously a RP'er is less important than a starter but WAR (based on FIP) undervalues some RP'ers. For whatever reason there are numerous RP'ers whose ERA is consistently better than their FIP. So if career WAR (a large enough sample to use ERA) was based on ERA I think there would be more RP'ers in the success (but not star) category. But pitchers are still much more risky than hitters.

[markj11]

I would have liked it better based on 1st rounders instead of BA Top prospects