We seem to have saved the weirdest list for last. While all other pundits release their “pre-season” prospect lists before the actual season starts, Fangraphs and Eric Longenhagen waited until nearly the All Star break to release their list, the 29th of the 30 lists to get published (only Houston remains).
So, what does this list represent? Does it represent the state of our prospects before the season started and before we saw leaps forward from the likes of Lord, or Henry, or Sykora? Or, does it represent where these players sat in terms of reputation before a pitch was thrown? Honestly, its hard to gauge, based on this list, since on the one hand it still has Crews at #1, but on the other it clearly takes into account 2025 performance in some cases already (for example, having Dickerson at #6 when he ranked him #27 at the same time last year or ranking Henry in the top 10).
So, I’m not sure how to critique this list honestly.
Here’s the top 39:
| Rank | Last Name | First Name | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Dylan | Crews | OF (CF) |
| 2 | Travis | Sykora | RHP (Starter) |
| 3 | Jarlin | Susana | RHP (Starter) |
| 4 | Brady | House | SS/3B |
| 5 | Daylen | Lile | OF (CF) |
| 6 | Luke | Dickerson | SS/CF |
| 7 | Seaver | King | SS |
| 8 | Cade | Cavalli | RHP (Starter) |
| 9 | Jake | Bennett | LHP (Starter) |
| 10 | Cole | Henry | RHP (Starter) |
| 11 | Caleb | Lomavita | C |
| 12 | Alex | Clemmey | LHP (Starter) |
| 13 | Daniel | Hernandez | C |
| 14 | Yoel | Tejada Jr. | RHP (Starter) |
| 15 | Victor | Hurtado | OF |
| 16 | Cristian | Vaquero | OF (CF) |
| 17 | Robert | Hassell III | OF (CF) |
| 18 | Kevin | Bazzell | C/3B |
| 19 | Andry | Lara | RHP (Starter) |
| 20 | Tyler | Stuart | RHP (Starter) |
| 21 | Jackson | Kent | LHP (Starter) |
| 22 | Dashyll | Tejeda | OF (CF) |
| 23 | Marconi | German | SS |
| 24 | Zach | Brzykcy | RHP (Reliever) |
| 25 | Orlando | Ribalta | RHP (reliever) |
| 26 | Jackson | Rutledge | RHP (Starter) |
| 27 | Kevin | Made | SS |
| 28 | Sir Jamison | Jones | CA |
| 29 | Angel | Feliz | 3B/SS |
| 30 | Brayan | Cortesia | SS |
| 31 | Brad | Lord | RHP (Starter) |
| 32 | Darren | Baker | 2B |
| 33 | Marquis | Grissom | RHP (Reliever) |
| 34 | Yohandy | Morales | 3B |
| 35 | Jorgelys | Mota | SS |
| 36 | Cornelio | Riley | RHP (Starter) |
| 37 | Erick | Mejia | RHP |
| 38 | Jose | Feliz | RHP (Starter) |
| 39 | Carlos | Tavares | OF |
Here’s some thoughts.
- Crews still at 1-1, despite exhausting any semblance of rookie eligibility about a week into the 2025 season.
- 2-3-4 as expected. Susana not dinged for the “TJ-sounding” injury he seems to have, which would probably impact his lofty ranking otherwise and, based on the wholesale dumping of other prospects who got hurt, doesn’t seem to make any sense.
- Dickerson at #6, as he should now and going forward. Which .. ok did they take into account his hot start or was this pre-season ranking? Last year, Dickerson was #27 on this list. So there’s your answer.
- Cole Henry all the way up to #10. Clearly this takes into account his sudden ability to get MLB batters out in the bullpen. Last year: not ranked, meaning he was in the upper 30s at best.
- Clemmey is “only” at #12, which I find kind of ridiculous. I mean, what more do you want the kid to do? He literally just turned 20, has put up two straight months of sub 2.00 ERA, and seems likely to get promoted to AA before the season is out. And he’s behind a pitcher in Bennett who’s four years older and who can’t seem to throw more than 3 innings at a time right now?
- Daniel Hernandez at #13 is super bullish. And now is as good of a time as any to point out the “flaws” in the Fangraphs FV system and how it ranks prospects. Longenhagen’s system basically values ceiling with a significant downgrading of the floor. So, you see a guy like Hernandez, who just turned 17 and who is currently slashing .208/.269/.264 as a catcher in the DSL (he’s caught about half the games, DH’d the other half) ranked nearly in the top 10 but players like Andrew Alvarez and Andrew Pinckney, who are in AAA right now producing, are not even in his top 39. Hernandez at #13 is asinine. Putting him inside the top 20 is nearly as dumb. I had him #37 before the season started, and he’s likely falling 20-30 spots the next time I do the ranks.
- Vaquero at #16. What exactly has this guy done to have him ranked that high at this point in his career, besides get a $4.9M bonus?
- Hassell dumped down to #17 in a season where he forced a promotion to the majors and where he’s got a 1.000 OPS in AAA … one spot ahead of Bazzell at #18, who’s hitting like .150 in A-ball. Make it make sense.
- A first time mention for one German Marconi. A 2025 IFA signing for a reasonable $400k in January, he’s got a pretty impressive slash line right now in DSL: .269/.491/.513 for an OPS north of 1.000. He’s got 24 walks and 17 strikeouts; that’s unheard of. This is the first time I’ve seen him on any prospect lists, and clearly he’s one to watch.
- Longenhagen’s system also overrates relievers. Except … when it doesn’t. Ok quick quiz: which reliever who’s made it to the major leagues this year do you think is higher rated? Ribalta, Brzycky, Rutledge, or Lord? If you guessed Lord, who has a 111 ERA+ in 33 appearances … you’d be wrong! Lord is ranked 4th out of these four. I guess in his system actual performance on the field doesn’t actually count.
- Made comes in at #27, which was about right for pre-season, but which may be low now given his offensive explosion so far this year.
- Ok, so Hernandez is ranked #13 right? And he’s hitting at the Mendoza line. Meanwhile, Brayan Cortesia, who got 5x the bonus dollars in January at $1.9M … is currently slashing .477/.558/.523 in the DSL … and he’s ranked 30th while Hernandez is 13th?? Really?
- Morales at #34. Wow. I mean, just wow. Of course, Fangraphs doesn’t rate Morales at all; last year they had him at #19. I mean, what’s the guy gotta do? Get to AAA at age 23 despite injuries and then hold your own there? That’s gotta be worth something right?
- Erick Frigging Mejia at #37. OK this is just trolling us right?
OK, so there’s a lot of problems in this list. But here’s some of the names not even in the top 40:
- Cayden Wallace, mostly a top 10 player on other lists; outside the top 40? Only if you think this season has completely erased all his past seasons and scouting reports.
- Andrew Pinckney, as noted; nowhere to be seen despite being in AAA
- Andrew Alvarez, because being a serviceable AAA starter is meaningless.
- Elijah Green; ok well I can understand this based on his performance … but he’s still all tooled up right?
- No Armando Cruz? Lots of love for big bonus low-performers like Hurtado and Vaquero but not Cruz? Makes no sense.
Phew. It took them until July to release this list. Maybe they should just go with what they had in March; couldn’t be much worse.
What’s the difference between FV and every other prospect rating system? Every prospect rater does so on future potential and not present day talent. I don’t think anyone is claiming that Ethan Holliday TODAY is a better player than Arquette. Drop him in a major college conference and he’d struggle mightily, which is totally fine for a 18 year old! But in the future, most prospecters expect Holliday to be better than Arquette.
If anything FV is nicer, because they make a distinction between where the player is presently vs what their upside is. I don’t recall any other publication grading their current skills.
With that said, and I posted earlier about this, Longenhagen used to be one of the harshest critics of young, raw guys. He was the lone dissenting voice about Elijah Green at draft time. He had Dickerson at #27 last year. And only ranked 2 IFAs in rookie ball.
So, I don’t understand why he kind of tossed that out the window in this year’s list. There’s 8 players in rookie ball listed, and Hurtado and Hernandez are probably closer to a release than to a promotion (Edwin Solano a 7 figure bonus baby got released 2 years after signing…)
Can I make a formal request to pump the brakes on Kevin Made? His “offensive explosion” is a slash of .256/.321/.306 in Harrisburg, including going 0 for his last 18 ABs… The guy got hot for a month, but even so he was displaying absolutely no power (3 XBH in June). That he’s still on prospect lists is generous, in my opinion.
On Wallace, I think his past 12 months of play is worth a relatively precipitous drop, but below 40 is too far. I’d have him dropping from the late top 10 to somewhere in the 20s. He’s been really bad this year, after being exceptionally bad in AA last year. He looks like a fundamentally different player to the one he looked in the Royals org. I’m not sure whether to hope it’s the injuries lingering and sapping his performance, because I hope there’s some sort of explanation for his decline.
First time seeing Yoel Tejeda appear on a list, but this is consistent with Longosz hyping him him a few weeks ago. He’s also had a very solid season, but against inferior opposition…
Also glad to see Dashyll Tejeda also get some recognition after a fantastic year.
Will
11 Jul 25 at 6:22 am
I’m ok if your MO on prospect ranking is consistent. This list just wasn’t consistent. It clearly conflated pre-2025 reputations with 2025 performance … for some players, but not all. It over rates some relievers .. but not all. It crushes some players for 2024 performance … but not all.
Made: he sticks in my mind b/c i do these monthly isolations .. i havn’t seen his may line yet.
Todd Boss
11 Jul 25 at 9:43 am
I think one big encouraging takeaway from the list is that it corroborates what has seemed to me to be an improved development picture for the org. I went back and pulled FG’s previous grade on all these prospects – almost all of them from a ~2 month period last summer that included last years’ prospect list on 5.30.24 and the scouting reports around the draft and trade deadline. For 2025 IFA signings, the reports were from this January and only included Hernandez and Cortesia (so no German). I then dropped everyone who had a half grade or less movement and was left with 10 names, only one of which had a downward arrow (Cavalli). And of the 9 upward arrows, 6 are pitchers. We’ll need to see it continue to next year to make a trend, but that’s a much rosier dev picture than we’ve seen before.
Also, I share everyone’s frustration around the timing of the list. I do think that EL’s delayed publications are caused by a genuine desire for rigor – possibly even more than Law, EL relies on his own independent in-person scouting and analysis of non-public datasets beyond the various team sources that all these guys have – but one negative consequence of that is that within a particular list the various write-ups can have a wide range of information available at time of writing, and that makes it much harder to evaluate EL’s takes.
On the individual merits, I definitely agree with some of the names Todd called out. Even if you mostly project Henry as healthy and effective, what kind of WAR/year can you possibly expect from a bullpen arm? 1? He belongs 10 spots lower. (And Todd probably wants him 15 spots lower that that.) On the flip side, Lord should be no lower than ~20th and possibly higher. He still might make the rotation, and his fallback bullpen value is basically as promising as Henry’s.
And we’ve gone over Morales again and again, but it’s just wild to me that EL reacts to his year between lists – 278 PAs of 153 wRC+ at AA, a promotion to AAA as a 23 year old and an improving but below average line through 150 PAs there so far – by dropping him another half grade from 40 to 35+. I get he took a hit with the switch to 1B, but EL had him as a 45 on draft day, a 40 last year and a 35+ now. I just don’t see it.
But I think that most of the others you call out are perfectly defensible. Green and Cruz are older than Vaquero, let alone Hurtado and all the rookie ball bonus babies, and I think those years make a huge difference for how the projection and bonus hype and the on-field performance is and should be balanced against each other. I wouldn’t object to giving either a 35+, but I’m also fine with them dropping off the list.
And league average play at AAA, even at a reasonable age, is just not enough to turn someone with mediocre tools/projections into a prospect. Again, if you’re in on Alvarez or Pinckney and want to squeeze them in on the tail end of the list (like EL does with Baker), fine, but it’s also perfectly reasonable to drop them into the other mentions.
I really liked seeing Dickerson so high. EL was way out on Dickerson at draft time. Gave him a 35+ and thought he’d be worth a $1M bonus. But at this point, he’s seen the statcast data and he’s done a 180. I actually think this is a good example of him making changes based on new information and not letting inertia take over – which is one of our main typical complaints around these lists.
Similarly, while I have Clemmey higher, EL doesn’t think he solves his command issue and is destined for the bullpen. Agree or not, that’s a reasonable take and his ranking here is, if anything, robust given that heightened reliever risk.
Add in some good scouting details on some relatively obscure names like Yoel Tejeda and Marconi German and I really enjoyed this list. Definitely better than most. (Though I do wish he’d get on the normal schedule of one list in March and a midyear refresh…)
SMS
11 Jul 25 at 11:25 am
Realize that this is off-topic, but the leading mock draft gurus, now have the Nats taking Kade Anderson. No idea if this is based on intel or just speculation. Realize that the Nats selection will be based on many factors, including saving money for splashes with other picks, but Anderson is not the direction I would recommened (which means nothing).
Feel like Anderson has close to maxed his ceiling. He does not have elite stuff and he has already had TJ.
Pilchard
11 Jul 25 at 5:41 pm
Watching Anderson in his last two starts, I actually didn’t feel like he had reached his ceiling. But that’s a big part of the bet in picking him, isn’t it? Part of my thinking is that he’s not done growing. Arnold sure looks like he has, and that he’s at his ceiling. Doyle looks finished growing as well, but not in honing his control.
I don’t feel like there’s truly “elite” talent in this draft, including Holliday. If I thought that Holliday was that much better than everyone else, I’d be willing to pay the premium for him, and make the time investment, but I don’t. And I 100% don’t with Willits. Some think Hernandez is that one elite guy, but then you’ve got Law saying that his vaunted heater is straight and hitable.
KW
11 Jul 25 at 7:04 pm
Speaking of drafting, I’d like to ask Longenhagen a hypothetical: if Clemmey was available for the draft right now, based on his development, where would he be picked? I’d say top 15, maybe top 10. Yet he’s only ranked #12 in the system? That’s laughable.
Yes, it’s easy to get deluded about the quality of your own prospects. We do it all the time. I’m as guilty as anyone. But if Clemmey finds his control, he’s already hard to hit. And he’s only 20.
The best news that I was able to glean from Longenhagen is that Susana is throwing bullpens, which we hope and pray means he can avoid surgery. We’ll worry about his ceiling once he gets healthy.
As for “future value,” I’ve always thought it should add ceiling plus floor. So Green has a ceiling of 60 but a floor of 10, so he’s a 70 (or 80 if you want to make 20 the washout number). Maybe you can add 5 points for someone who is elite at a young age, so Clemmey becomes 60 ceiling, 40 floor, plus 5 bonus = 105. And maybe there’s -5 for guys like Cavalli who are getting long in the tooth, so 55 + 45 -5 = 95. It’s not perfect by any means, but it’s more honest than judging solely on potential ceiling.
KW
11 Jul 25 at 7:25 pm
How would you set up your Nats’ draft boards and the haircuts that would work for you? Here’s my spitballing:
— Anderson, $9.5M
— Holliday, $9.0M
— Doyle, $8.5M
— Arquette, Arnold, $8M
— Willits, hell no
The Nats’ 1/1 slot value is $11,075,900. There seems to be unanimous agreement that no one in this draft is “worth” anywhere close to this number. I’ll repeat what Law has said that he doesn’t think any of the 1/1 candidates are worth 20% more than any of the others.
Is Hernandez in the conversation? As a high schooler, I don’t think his discount would be big enough to make him worth the risk. Beyond not liking Willits’s profile, as a high schooler, I also think he would want too much.
Law is reporting that Holliday has an overslot offer from the Rockies at 1/4. Their slot value is $8,770,900, so presumably he has $9M to $9.5M on the table. To me, if it’s over $9M, that moves beyond what he’s “worth” to the Nats. (It should be noted that as desperate as the Rockies are for immediate help, and for pitching help, them drafting a high school hitter borders on malpractice.)
The Rockies are surrendering the most runs in the majors. Team #29 on that list? Your Washington Nationals.
What I’m wondering is whether the buzz about Anderson combined with Boras surely seeking as much as he can get are pricing him out of 1/1. Perhaps Boras has a $10M promise from the Angels that he’s trying to get the Nats to match/top. All things being equal, I think Anderson would be my guy, but I don’t expect all things to be equal.
KW
12 Jul 25 at 9:05 pm
Here are slot values and pool values:
https://www.mlb.com/news/mlb-draft-2025-bonus-pick-values
KW
12 Jul 25 at 9:24 pm
Law’s final take on the Nats’ choices:
“I’m leaving Anderson here, because ultimately I think the Nats will pick the player with the best balance of probability and upside, but I have heard that Eli Willits is much more in the mix at pick 1 than I’d thought before — and that several other teams have Willits at No. 1 in their draft models, probably because he’s the youngest player in the class. If it’s not either of those two, I think it’ll be Aiva Arquette. Ethan Holliday doesn’t seem as likely today.”
https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6483516/2025/07/12/mlb-mock-draft-2025-final-kade-anderson/
Interesting. I absolutely, positively don’t understand Willits’s rise. Nearly every profile says his projected power ceiling is 10 to 15 homers. To me, that gives him an “FV” of no higher than 45. Honestly, there are several high schoolers who will still be available in the second round who are potentially just as good, Jason Parker (twin of JoJo) among them.
Also interesting to see the Nats tied (potentially) to Arquette. I like the guy. He plays the game hard and with a lot of passion. He controls the strike zone, to the point that I think they could push him to AA this summer. I have a hard time judging what his ceiling is, and I think the scouts do as well. It’s also unclear what his defensive position will be. But heck, I’d be happy with a DH who can actually make contact.
If it’s Arquette, I think he would also come with significant slot savings.
As much as I’m intrigued by Anderson — I agree with Law that he is “the best balance of probability and upside” — the arm abuse on a TJ arm is worrisome. And with Boras as his agent, there wouldn’t be a lot of slot savings.
Also interesting to see that the Nats apparently have told Holliday to pound sand, no doubt after hearing that the Rockies are prepared to pay him more than they would.
KW
13 Jul 25 at 9:06 am
MLB reporting Nats are down to 3 players, which is kind of insane that they might still not have locked down a deal this close to the deadline. They’re reporting it’s between Anderson, Holliday and…. Willits.
As I pointed out before, the only thing separating Willits from being a 3rd round pick is that his dad was a big leaguer. It seems insane to me that a guy with such mediocre tools can build such hype. Someone give his agent a raise!!
Interestingly, they’re parroting my draft strategy of taking whoever they can extract the biggest discount from, and highlight Willits as a candidate because he didn’t show up for the combine, and could take a discount less than 75%
Interesting read in any case: https://www.mlb.com/news/2025-mlb-draft-latest-news?t=mlb-draft-coverage
Will
13 Jul 25 at 3:57 pm
Willits is the nightmare scenario. I completely agree: he has a 3d-round profile. I truly don’t get it. Sao wrote in a Nats Talk comment that Willits was #17 in OK high school players this year in OPS. (Holliday was #1.) There’s nothing to see here.
There are a number of reports from other outlets that Holliday is out of consideration by the Nats. For the record, I would take Holliday 12 times out of 10 over Willits, even though I don’t see Holliday as a good fit for where the Nats are right now.
Anderson still seems like the odds-on favorite. There’s an interesting trickle of buzz about Arquette. I wouldn’t be shocked if Ike Irish had his name pulled out of the hat.
Rizzo is gone, but the the Nats’ stealth remains . . . which may mean that they’re still negotiating.
KW
13 Jul 25 at 4:50 pm
A nightmare indeed. Willits goes #1.
His highest grade of any kind is 60. Ugh.
The only way this makes sense is if he’s WAAAAYYY underslot.
Will
13 Jul 25 at 6:14 pm
Willits. Damn. No help for four years, and maybe not even then. There’s NO WAY anyone can claim that this was the “best player available.”
FWIW, Holliday, Anderson, and Arquette are represented by Boras. Willits isn’t.
Now the Nats will take another high schooler overslot in 2d round. Well, then they damn well better be willing to spend in free agency, because there’s no help for the foreseeable future.
KW
13 Jul 25 at 6:16 pm
BREMNER at #2. WOW. Obviously teams are going for money saving over top-tier talent. And they’re avoiding Boras.
KW
13 Jul 25 at 6:18 pm
Thumbs down. This feels really stupid
Derek
13 Jul 25 at 6:18 pm
Looks like the Nats aren’t the only going for the underslot savings strategy…
Gonna be a really interesting draft, the best picks from the Nats could happen tomorrow.
Will
13 Jul 25 at 6:20 pm
McDaniel says to watch Landon Harmon for a later-round Nat overslot, a 6-5 high school pitcher who has touched 100. He’s #95 on Law’s board.
Mariners peeing their pants to have Anderson fall to them at #3. Assuming that Holliday goes to the Rockies, the Cards will add a top-tier pitcher as well.
KW
13 Jul 25 at 6:27 pm
Tying in with the original post here, the Nats just drafted a guy with the 1/1 pick who at best would rank around #8 in their system, and that might be generous. That’s just mind-blowing, in a not-good way.
KW
13 Jul 25 at 6:57 pm
Months ago my only draft prediction was that, no matter who they took, fans would hate the selection. Done!
John C.
13 Jul 25 at 7:50 pm
@KW – I get why you and many others are down on Willets, but that’s just not a consensus view.
FG, for example, explicitly tries to keep the FV scale consistent between amateurs and pros. EL puts at 50 on Willets, which would slot him in 3rd on our list.
It’s less clear with Pipeline, but I expect he’ll be 3rd or 4th there too.
Doesn’t make it a good pick, but I think you’re overreacting a little. Let’s at least wait until we see what the pool savings is used for.
SMS
13 Jul 25 at 7:53 pm
The takes in this thread are hilarious. Nats take a kid McDaniel, Callis, Mayo and BA have in their top five in a draft where there is no consensus top pick – and we have grown men throwing hissy fits.
BTW, BA says Willits will likely slot into their top 40. But yeah, he will be the Nats 8th best prospect. Ok, boomer.
Chris
13 Jul 25 at 8:12 pm
Yep, I hate it. I wasn’t PLANNING on hating it. I would have been OK with Anderson, Holliday, Doyle, Arnold, Arquette, Irish (what a steal for the O’s at 19), even with a gamble on Hernandez’s upside. They took the ONE guy who I thought was utterly wrong.
I know several other teams had Willits rising on their boards, but I never heard/read anything tangible other than that he’s young. With no power, that leaves a player with a very, very narrow tools window through which to make it. It’s sort of the same thing that the Nats attempted when they gave Armando Cruz a fat bonus. Willits would need to hit .300, average 30 steals, and play Gold Glove defense at SS. Some say that he might be able to develop into 10-15 HR power, but that’s more a wish than anything supported by fact. Do you know how many homers his dad hit in the majors, in 1014 PAs? Take a guess. Lower. No, lower than that. Reggie Willits never homered in the majors. His career OPS+ was 78.
As always, I hope Willits proves me wrong, but I fear that we’ve drafted the second coming of Kevin Made.
The other part of the equation is that he does nothing to help the Nats in the visible future of the next two or three seasons, so matter how optimistic you are about him. This franchise and its fans needed a ray of hope. A light-hitting shortstop who may debut in the majors in 2029 is not that.
KW
13 Jul 25 at 8:42 pm