https://www.fangraphs.com/scoutboard.aspx?draft=&type=&pos=&team=chw

While they haven’t officially released the list, they do have rankings for the Sox on their THE BOARD feature.  For now I’ll assume these are legit, but we’ll now for sure shortly as Longenhagen is currently on the AL Central for his write-ups.

Below is the list with FV grades:

1. Jimenez, RF (65)

2. Kopech, RHP (60)

3. Robert, CF (60)

4. Hansen, RHP (50)

5. Burdi, RHP (50)

6. Collins, 1B (50)

7. Dunning, RHP (50)

8. Cease, RHP (45)

9. Adolfo, RF (45)

10. Burger, 3B (45)

11. Rutherford, LF (45)

12. Cordell, OF (40)

13. Fulmer, RHP (40)

14. Sheets, 1B (40)

15. Puckett, RHP (40)

16. Gonzalez, OF (40)

17. Zavala, C (40)

18. Basabe, CF (40)

19. Clarkin, LHP (40)

20. Adams, RHP (40)

21. Bummer, LHP (40)

22. Stephens, RHP (40)

23. Mendick, SS (40)

Couples interesting takes:

• Collins being listed as a 1B and being valued so highly is very surprising
• They’re obviously much higher on Burdi than other publications
• Cease, Rutherford, Basabe, & Sheets all seem a grade low for me (and I mean coming into the season, not with the benefit of hindsight)
• Surprised that Puckett is the highest rated guy of the second tier pitching prospects, well ahead of Stephens who I would have picked as the favorite
• None of our high end relief (Hamilton, Burr, Vieira, etc) prospects making it seems pretty ridiculous IMO
• Slightly surprised Curbelo fell off the list, but can understand why

Wow, Cease a 45? I wonder if those were given pre-season, and maybe they will be updated when the team list is published. 

If you compare these ratings to what Longenhagen typically gives it will make a little more sense. MLB Pipeline gives out 45 FVs like candy so it kind of makes everyone else look harsh.

Both Adolfo and Cease would be high upside 45s but I think for now its right. They both have a lot to prove in health and approach before you can elevate them.

And as interesting as I find our approach to relief pitching, I'm not sure how any of our arms look compared to others aside from Burdi. Vieira's velo has been down and control is an issue. Hamilton, Burr, Morrison, etc are all promising but still at low levels. Overall I think some performances already this year have been promising to get some more 40s than this list and a few 40s to 45s.

For example check out the KCR writeup

https://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/top-24-prospects-kansas-city-royals/

I don't understand how Gonzales is rated above Basabe. He's a year older and putting up lesser production, at a lower level. I like him, but Basabe is really off to a great start. I'd rate Basabe over sheets, as well.

Edited April 30, 20187 yr by Lillian

13 hours ago, Lillian said:

I don't understand how Gonzales is rated above Basabe. He's a year older and putting up lesser production, at a lower level. I like him, but Basabe is really off to a great start. I'd rate Basabe over sheets, as well.

Rankings prob made before season started.

Fangraphs finally released our top prospect list:

https://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/top-25-prospects-chicago-white-sox/

I like the Ti'Quan Forbes love from Carson, but a bit surprised that Basabe was so low on their list.
 

9 minutes ago, beautox said:

I like the Ti'Quan Forbes love from Carson, but a bit surprised that Basabe was so low on their list.
 

I think, unfortunately, they got way behind with some of the draft stuff and it got into a position of either constantly updating and never publishing this list or just getting it out there. I say that because all of the "early reports saying this changed". This is a late view into the scout view of the system prior to it beginning.

I usually like FG content, but this list is bizarre and seems to be working from some vague and in some cases stale info.

 

1 hour ago, NorthSideSox72 said:

I usually like FG content, but this list is bizarre and seems to be working from some vague and in some cases stale info.

 

This is the worst Fangraphs prospect list I can remember to be honest.

1 hour ago, bmags said:

I think, unfortunately, they got way behind with some of the draft stuff and it got into a position of either constantly updating and never publishing this list or just getting it out there. I say that because all of the "early reports saying this changed". This is a late view into the scout view of the system prior to it beginning.

I think you’re spot on here.

Yeah, it seems a little stale, but I think once the draft is over they will have more dynamically updated rankings and reports with THE BOARD so I'm not too worried about it. 

11 minutes ago, GenericUserName said:

Yeah, it seems a little stale, but I think once the draft is over they will have more dynamically updated rankings and reports with THE BOARD so I'm not too worried about it. 

Rankings and tool updates are nice, but the write-ups won't get updated until next year. To get write-ups this bland, and often inaccurate, was pretty disappointing.

I think prospect scouting tends to be conservative. However these FV numbers seem to be low for several guys.

41 minutes ago, y2chae said:

I think prospect scouting tends to be conservative. However these FV numbers seem to be low for several guys.

There's a built in variance component to it. The further away from the Majors a player is, the harder it is for them to get a good FV grade because of how much can happen between lower level minors and MLB. That said, these FVs are old and I would expect some of them to have changed based on the first few months of the season. For example, I'd think both Kopech and Cease will move up at least half a grade. Maybe Dunning will as well.