Jim Callis on what makes a player a good prospect

When it comes to ranking prospects, few have done it longer or done it better than Jim Callis. For many years he was the key guy for prospects at Baseball America. Now he works for MLB.com and MLBPipeline.com.

During the Winter Meetings, I asked Callis a simple question, but one that doesn't lend itself to a simple answer: What makes a good prospect and what goes into ranking prospects?

By that, I meant what does he look for and how does he weigh certain attributes of a player? How important is age? How important are tools? Does he need to see a player put up good stats?

"It is a variety of things," Callis said. "You are looking at performance relative to league when you factor in the age. If a guy has a great year in A-ball, but he's 25, that doesn't do it for me. You are looking for performance and tools.

"When they are younger, there is more emphasis on the tools (the raw skills), because they are just getting started. But as they get to high A, Double-A, Triple-A, you need to start seeing the performance. You can have all the tools in the world, but if you are not performing in Double-A, how are you going to perform in the big leagues?

"You look at health, which has been an issue for some Orioles prospects over the years like Dylan Bundy and Hunter Harvey. You have to factor that in. There are makeup issues. How hard does a guy work, how competitive is he? That is hard to quantify. But you hear from some people in an organization and they may really talk up one guy about how hard he works and they may not say that about another guy. So you take that into account."

Callis said you also give some weight to where a player was drafted or how big the signing bonus was. That plays into this somewhat.

"Pedigree comes into account," he added. "You will give more of the benefit of the doubt to a guy that was a first-, second- or third-round pick and got a lot of money then the guy drafted in round 12. That 12th-rounder is going to have to prove it a bit more. If a guy is a lower-round pick, there is often a reason he was a lower round pick, rather then he fell through the cracks.

"Frankly, there is probably some gut feel to it. I've done this a long time and am not claiming I'm infallible. But you see a certain profile of a player that I've seen have success, that I feel good about. A profile of a player that I am never high on is a guy that can really run, but he doesn't do anything else. Those guys almost never make it."

For those of that follow prospects and prospect rankings, what is your take. What things are most important in sizing up prospects?

Note from Steve: Starting tomorrow, I'll be off for a few days, so there will not be a new story here for a couple of days. Nothing is wrong, just taking some time off. Yes, it will be strange to not see a new story every day. I don't have a streak like Roch, but whatever mine is will be ending. But just for a short time. I do reserve the right to change my mind and add something if you-know-who is traded. Until the next entry, leave any comments here on any and all O's topics. Thanks.