Originally Posted by DumpJerry
My point is that there is a very low correlation. That is why I think it is silly to get worked up over these highly subjective ratings, they are less indicative of future performance than an investment prospectus.
If you read the article posted you'd notice the author essentially agrees with you, saying that small differences are highly subjective (are the Cubs really #10 and Astros #11?) but that doesn't mean there aren't some CLEAR divisions in terms of talent pool and the Sox are still, sadly, lagging well behind the league. Nobody in their right mind would look at the talent the Rays have acquired and developed, for instance, and compare them to the White Sox's farm system and think it's still a coin flip between which system will pump out better players over the next 5-10 years.
But obviously the celebration in this thread is a bit in jest. The Sox farm system is still horrendously barren, and it is no comfort that the teams immediately surrounding us have recently had their systems depleted by graduations or big splash "win-now" trades that have worked and produced results at the MLB level. We're, unfortunately, devoid of talent all over the place.