I thought the rankings were pretty much right on the money with the exception of the DFEs, I would have thought they'd be higher, but I can live with their placement until they prove something. However, 5-10 spots at the tail end of the 50 doesn't mean all that much, it's not where they start it's where they finish. I've been reading the P50 for almost 4 years now, and watching the minors since I found the site, and there are some universal truths I've learned... Production at A and A+ while nice doesn't mean anymore than production in the rookie leagues. AA is where the cream starts to rise to the top, I refuse to get overly excited about anyone in A+ or lower. The guys that wash out before AA never really had a chance, Brad Nelson was pretty spectacular at AA before his injury, look where he is now... I've only been paying attention for a few years and can name a ton of guys with super potential that washed out before AA or AAA, being at the higher levels means more about a player's MLB potential. Very rarely will 2 people have the same opinion on a player. This why I like this current method with 3 people callaborating the best. They may be Mass' comments this time around, but the rankings are the average of all 3 people. Being injured 1 time drops a top prospect down a bit, but not more than 15 spots usually. There's a reason why someone is/was a top prospect, it's prudent to give them the benefit of the doubt until they return, then the production speaks for itself. While a certain people may not have their favorites ranked where they want, it's certainly nothing to get that worked up about. I would have probably slept on it before dropping a rant like the above, why are one person's opinion any more valuable than another's? It's important to remember that there's not a whole lot of fact when evaluating and ranking players, it's all pretty subjective. Just because you think it so, doesn't make it so.