BA provides a prospect ranking on the scouting scale of 20-80, similar to FG. From there, they diverge a bit. BA overtly assigns a risk factor to each players\u2019 \u201cupside\u201d and then downgrades the original scouting grade with an associated \u201crisk premium\u201d. As an example, they give young Rainel Rodriguez a scouting grade of 60, with an \u201cAverage\u201d risk rating and adjust the prospect rating to 50 (major league average). FG merely gives the same \u201c50\u201d scouting grade and assigned a \u201cHigh\u201d risk to his development potential. What does one make of that? Blend them, and you get a player who falls between 50 and 60 on the scouting grade scale and between \u201caverage\u201d and \u201chigh\u201d on the risk scale. Reasonable? I am curious if risk is context sensitive. Like, is the risk seen as average given he is just 19 years old and in Single-A ball, or average relative to an across-the-board, peanut butter type evaluation? I guess if it were league- and age- adjusted, that would make it a Risk+ score. Board contributor cdb has a neat little tool that finds minor league comps based on the mathmatically closest stat lines. The most similar players to RR so far have mostly washed out of baseball. A few have been quite successful. I suspect his tool quantifies the \u201chigh\u201d risk premium FG places on him. To not get into the weeds too far, let\u2019s zoom out and take the summary view.<\/p>\n
In total, you might recall from the earlier work that Fangraphs has the Cardinals with two 55 FV players (Wetherholt, Doyle) plus five 50 FV players (Bernal, Rodriguez, Crooks, Mathews, Hence). Seven players projected to average or better MLB players seems a fairly strong upper-end of the system, if a little lopsided in catching.<\/p>\n
From the BA perspective, they provide a bit more at the top end. In the BA list, I count one 65 FV (Wetherholt), four 60 FV (Rodriguez, Doyle, Clarke, Roby), five 55 FV (Mathews, Franklin, Padilla, Mitchell, Hence) and five 50 FV (Baez, Baez, Bernal, Fajardo, Hjerpe). If you are keeping score at home, that is fifteen (15!) players who could project to average or better MLB players. Wow! That is before the risk premium is applied, of course.<\/p>\n
What I like about the FG system is their system approach, where they take an entire system and establish a future value in dollars based on the normal experience of value provided by a cohort of players at each FV grade. Example: a single 40 FV position player might be worth $2m ($1m for pitchers). That isn\u2019t a projection of the value THAT player will deliver, but an average for all 40 FV players who break out (not many, but some do). If a team has ten 40 FV players, the projection of value for the group is $20m. FG doesn\u2019t really try to project which one or two of those guys will deliver that value, they basically just do the math and propose that out of 10 guys, a team should expect to see $20m in value. Which ones? Pick \u2018em.<\/p>\n
BA tries to handicap each individual players\u2019 future contribution. I can see it, but I\u2019m sure I totally buy it. Wetherholt has a 65 FV, with a \u201cmild\u201d risk, which adjusts his scouting grade to 60. I think it is reasonable to view him as 65 FV prospect, but he may not produce in the MLB to the level expected of a 65 FV player. It could just as well be 40 or 50 or 70 level performance, and most likely will NOT be the risk-adjusted value of 60 (just going with the odds). But I appreciate the range, which I find more satisfying than a single number. I don\u2019t think prospects are easily quantified into a single number. I can take the FG score for Wetherholt (55, low risk) and blend it with the BA score (65, mild risk) and find a range (55-65) and recognize that his MiLB performance has narrowed the expected range but hasn\u2019t eliminated the risk factor entirely. Here is a table showing the top prospects in the Cardinal system by range of FV (risk is not shown, but generally the wider the range, the greater the risk projection):<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.rawchili.com\/mlb\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/QKxUk-fv-range-for-cardinal-prospects-in-2026-.png\"\/)
<\/a><\/p>\n