NationalsProspects.com

MLB Pipeline Releases its Top 30 for Washington

As per usual, MLB decided to wait until Spring Training was in full swing before, say, releasing this in January or February when more people might care or pay attention. Sorry, I don’t buy the chimera that this is in preparation for next week’s “Breakout Series,” which, if it were that important, wouldn’t be held over three days in conjunction with the regular ST.

I mean, how hard is to understand that if you’re going to do a prospects showcase, then maybe you should put the focus on the minor-leaguers so that they’re only ones that get written/talked/tweeted about for one news cycle? You could do what BA’s been doing for years and remind the gambl…er, fantasy-baseball folks that this is how you can get help picking your “deep league” teams.

But if there’s anyone or anything more tone-deaf than the Nats’ P.R., it’s MLB’s marketing/handling of MiLB so I probably am Abe Simpson here…

Back to the the MLB Pipeline Top 30, it’s once again in lockstep with the BA Top 30 with some, um, minor differences:

  • OF Elijah Green at #6 instead of BA’s #9
  • OF Daylen Lile at #7 vs. instead of BA’s #11
  • RHP Travis Sykora at #11 vs. BA’s #14
  • LHP DJ Herz at #13 vs. BA’s #15
  • RHP Jackson Rutledge at #15 vs. BA’s #6
  • Inclusions of Dustin Saenz and Israel Pineda
  • Exclusions of Armando Cruz and Andrew Alvarez




The accompanying writeup confusingly dates the rebuild to the Juan Soto trade in 2022 vs. the flurry of trades made in July 2021 but otherwise checks the boxes as reliably as a ChatGPT bot.

With perhaps the exception of the overvaluation of Green, most of these differences come down to the listmaker’s subjectivity. As Mr. Boss argued in his post yesterday, there might be a better case to be made for Andry Lara and/or Roismar Quintana being overlooked.

As we’ve long noted here, there’s no need to remove your shoes when counting the true-blue chippers in the Washington system, which is probably just as well, given the number of slings the organization goes through each season.

16 Commments

  1. I do wish there were organizations agile enough to update rankings after spring training. They’re like stocks that go up and down, so annual rankings don’t exactly reflect the current state of things.

    The the Nats right now, Wood is ahead of Crews. They might not end up that way, but as of now that’s how it is. Hassell is showing well and would be back up in the middle of the top-10. Lipscomb looks closer to being able to contribute in the majors than these lists act like he is. As discussed on Todd’s site, Millas and Young likely are going to end up with more value than a bunch of guys ranked ahead of them.

    In general, I’m still concerned about organizational pitching depth, no matter how they’re ranked. Beyond Cavalli, who still seems to be a few months away, the next two on this list are 19-year-old lottery tickets who are years from the majors. Rutledge and Henry have struggled thus far in the spring, and Herz has walked five in three IP.

    1. @KW – I think you’re wildly overestimating the predictive value of spring training results. These are not competitive games. Beyond the laughably small sample size and the uneven competition, a decent percentage of the players have priorities over “winning the game” or even “winning the AB”. There isn’t any advance scouting and there’s minimal in-game adjustments. I mean, seriously, look at past years. Correlation with in-season success is basically nil.

      I know it’s hard because it’s the only new information available, but you really really should be completely ignoring ST results 99% of the time. The only exception I’d make this year is Hassell. Regardless of the competitive environment, his consistent solid contact gives credence to the theory that he’ll regain his quality with a healed wrist. I was skeptical about that a month ago; I’m around 50/50 on it now. And if/when he keeps the improvement up over 200 PAs in Harrisburg, I’ll be sold and think of him again as an FV50.

      Other than that, we just haven’t learned anything. And we won’t until mid-May or so.

      1. Regardless of Spring Training Results, James Wood should be ranked as a higher as a prospect than Crews. Crews is a solid prospect, but Wood’s tools are on another level. The ceiling for Wood is much higher than Crews. Understand that there is no guarantee that a player reaches his ceiling, but by definition, rating prospects is greatly dependent on potential, and Wood has the most potential of any Nats prospect since Bryce Harper.

        1. I will — ALWAYS do — freely admit that spring training is a small sample size, and that you have to dig deep sometimes to figure out if the guys are getting hits off major-leaguers or AA filler. But playing in the same games, Wood is ahead of Crews right now, is eight months younger, and has basically unlimited ceiling. I’m exactly where SMS is on Hassell right now: less skeptical. But “less skeptical” puts him ahead of Green in my book, even though Hassell’s overall tools aren’t nearly what Green’s are purported to be.

          And yes, Kieboom once homered twice off Verlander in a spring game. So your mileage always may vary.

          1. I’m right with KW on Hassell. I had him behind Green and Lile a month ago, and now i’ve moved him ahead. And with 2 more solid months, I think I’d move him ahead of Vaquero and possibly Morales (pending their development too, of course).

            I’ll also say that I agree with you both on Wood over Crews, though the last couple weeks have nothing to do with that. Wood is younger and performed better in the minors last year. The stat line isn’t the end-all of an evaluation, but the projection.upside arguments just favor Wood even more.

            My comment was more a reaction to KW’s suggestion that there be spring updates to evaluations, and about the other players mentioned. I mean, yes, Herz needs to work on his control (though I think the issue is a little overstated – deception is an underrated tool and Snell just won a Cy with 5 BB/9), but I don’t care at all that he threw 3 walks in an inning of a practice game. Spring results aren’t changing my prospect evaluations at all (except in cases like we’ve discussed for Hassell).

    2. We can hear the ugh from Travis Blakenhorn hearing about the depth piece added in Eddie Rosario .
      Rochester should have Lewis , Alu and Blakenhorn as lefty bats in red wings middle lineup

  2. A commment including a Luke – like snarkle
    Kyle Luckham has not had an injury on his rise to AA?
    Luke Young is interesting right behind him .

    2. Oh really ?? Fred MD
      The depth chart on Harrisburg outfield truly means JDL repeats in the “ Grand Canyon.

      1. if they asked me (and I’m sure they will any day now) I’d have Wood and Pinkney in AAA. leaving AA for Crews, Hassell and De La Rosa and Lile.

        I don’t expect Crews to be there for long, maybe same for Hassell

        1. I’m definitely on the Pinckney bandwagon, but I seriously doubt that they’re going to bump him ahead of Hassell and Crews. I do hope that they don’t rush Crews to AAA, but I wouldn’t be surprised if they do.

          It will be interesting where they start Lile, who didn’t exactly master A+ and is still quite inexperienced. De la Rosa is fading fast on the radar. It will be a big year for Green and Vaquero, presumably starting in Fredericksburg.

          1. I don’t equate moving up one prospect as moving them ahead of another. Jacob Young is a perfect example. he’s hardly ahead of James Wood in the scheme of things.

            Pinckney got three full years in the SEC and two summer leagues as well as steady game action after the draft. I think he’s ready for Rochester

  4. The great thing about athletic bats who can sit in the top tier of lineup helps the infield not have to produce offensively so much
    Ty Fred MD
    Comparing Langford and Crews Is like discussing Maureen O’Hara vs Rita Hayworth in Hollywood Golden Era .

  5. Provocative comment coming up… if peeps think Wood is (currently?) a better prospect than Crews….

    … was Crews an overdraft last year at #2?

Comments are closed.