TOWER GROVE — About a week ago, Baseball America slipped me the information that for the first time since they began publishing their rankings of overall minor-league systems the St. Louis Cardinals would reach the top 10, finishing eighth in a poll and discussion of editors there at BA. Since then, there has been a, ahem, tsunami of questions and criticisms.

The general theme of those comments has been: What does it mean, and what does it mean for 2009?

For many answers to those questions, I invite you to revisit the original entry, specifically the part section about the players the Cardinals produced when they were ranked No. 27 or lower. For example, from the 2005 top 30, the one that came with a 30th ranking for the overall system, the Cardinals were able to produce Anthony Reyes, Tyler Johnson, Chris Duncan, Skip Schumaker, Joe Mather and, not ranked as a Cardinal but groomed as a Cardinal, Daric Barton. Several of the players in the system at the time of the 30th ranking — like, say, Josh Kinney or some bloke with a curveball named Adam Wainwright — were key parts of a 2006 World Series championship. That’s covered in the entry linked above.

What’s not is what being ranked No. 8 has meant in the past.

Since that 2005 Handbook ranked the Cardinals 30th three different teams have held the No. 8 ranking:

• 2005 — Oakland
• 2006 — Atlanta
• 2007 — Minnesota
• 2008 — Atlanta

Righthander Matt Garza, pitching here for the Rays, was Minnesota's No. 1 prospect when the Twins ranked 8th as a system in 2007, according to Baseball America.

What strikes me first about that list is that only Oakland has made the playoffs since the ranking, and only Oakland’s Huston Street has won the Rookie of the Year after being featured on the eighth-best organization. But those are just whiffs of anecdotal evidence. No larger truth to be found in those morsels of trivia. What can be learned from previous No. 8s, however, is further proof of a developing theme here this offseason in the blog. Tomorrow the Bird Land Community Top 30 will end with voting for No. 30 in the readers’ rankings of Cardinals’ prospects.  What is clear in that list and so many other lists being produced is how the Cardinals have a few high-ceiling prospects and a depth of potential contributors.

It’s as manager Tony La Russa said recently to a gathering of reporters: Recognizing that a system is producing better players is one thing, but tell me about what kind of players being produced. This is something we’ve written about here before. The Cardinals may be able to claim that their system delivered a couple dozen players to the majors (10 last year alone, for example). But if only two or three of those players are bona fide everyday players or surefire pitchers how does that system that produces only, say, 15 major leaguers, yet five or six o them are impact players.

Which is the better system?

It’s the simple quantity vs. quality question. And it’s not as easy an answer as you’d think. Quality obviously grabs the eyes, but a quantity of role players has a competitive value too — as long as its supplemented by free agents, trades, etc. The Cardinals, while deserving of No. 8, have replenished their minor-league system — made the farm more fertile, so to speak — and by doing so are set to produce more quantity that elite quality.

For context, I looked back at those other organizations that ranked No. 8 recently and what they had in their Top 30s that made them the eighth-best system. While the quality sings out on its own, I found particularly interesting that the Braves ranked eighth twice just a few years removed from their historic run of playoff appearances. The comparison with the Cardinals is obvious.

The prospects the other No. 8s claimed (Note: links take you to pages at Baseball America that are for subscribers; I apologize and always try to use a free page when available):

***

Now with the New York Yankees, Nick Swisher was Oakland's No. 1 prospect when the A's ranked No. 8 as a system.

2005: OAKLAND ATHLETICS — No. 1 prospect Nick Swisher. Others of note: No. 3 Joe Blanton; No. 4 Dan Johnson; No. 5 the aforementioned rookie of the year closer Huston Street; No. 16 Andre Ethier and No. 19 Tyler Johnson, who was taken in the Rule 5 draft and later returned to the Cardinals. As with other Oakland prospect classes, the A’s have wheeled and dealed many of these players into more prospects or, in the case of Street, outfielder Matt Holliday. It was a system that had both depth and high-end talent, though it hasn’t directly produced that All-Star-level player.

2006: ATLANTA BRAVES — No. 1 prospect Jarrod Saltalamacchia. (There was a companion listing that ha No. 1 prospect Andy Marte, who was traded to Boston for Edgar Renteria and later traded to Cleveland.) Others of note: No. Yunel Escobar, who was taken in the second round of the 2005 draft, five picks after the Cardinals selected Josh Wilson and two picks before the Cardinals took Nicholas Webber. No. 6 Joey Devine; No. 7 Chuck James; No. 8 Brandon Jones, who made his debut this past season. Count me in the camp that believes Escobar will be a legit All-Star and among the best at shortstop in the NL within in the next few years. Otherwise, who have here what you had with Oakland. Depth. Some starters, like James and Saltalamacchia, and some trade chips, like Saltalamacchia.

An All-Star in the making, Atlanta shortstop Yunel Escobar was a top prospect when the Braves ranked No. 8 back in 2006.

2007 MINNESOTA TWINS — No. 1 prospect Matt Garza. Others of note: No. 2 Glen Perkins, who at 25 went 12-4 for the Twins this past season and was part of Minnesota’s unexpected push for the postseason; No. 3 Kevin Slowey, who did Perkins one better with a 13-11 record and a 3.99 ERA for the Twins in 2008; No. 7 Alexi Casilla; and No. 10 J.D. Durbin and later in the rankings outfielder Denard Span. Including Casilla, the Twins had four of their top 10 prospects from 2007 impact the team in 2008, and that doesn’t include the top prospect Garza who had a remarkable impact all his own on another team. Garza, acquired in the offseason for outfielder Delmon Young, was dynamic against the Boston Red Sox in the American League Championship Series as his new team, Tampa Bay, won the pennant. Garza was the ALCS MVP. This is an example of quantity and quantity of quality. A tour through Minnesota’s top 30 is a how-to on developing not just contributors but players who will have an impact when they do arrive. Two members of their rotation. Two everyday starters. I could go on, but it’s enough to put it this way: It’s the Twins. Of course.

2008 ATLANTA BRAVES — No. 1 prospect Jordan Schafer. Others of note: No. 2 Jason Heyward; No. 3 Jair Jurrjens; No. 4 the aforementioned Jones; No. 6 Brent Lillibridge;  and No. 9 Tommy Hanson. It’s pretty early on to judge where this group of prospects will take the Braves. Jurrjens is the real dealer. Acquired from Detroit for, well, Renteria (again), the righthander was up for the NL Rookie of the Year after going 13-10 with a 3.68 ERA for the Braves. A reshuffling of the rankings for the 2009 edition of the Handbook has Hanson rising to No. 1 — a spot merited by the interest he drew in trades this winter (read: Jake Peavy) — and Heyward, a gifted athlete, remaining No. 2 Schafer shifted to No. 3. There’s ability here, but it needs another year to steep.

***

Looking at those other No. 8s, it’s not unreasonable to argue that the Cardinals in Colby Rasmus have the best No. 1 prospect of the group. Like the A’s, they also have a handful of players (Bryan Anderson, Jess Todd) who could factor in trades, and like the Braves they have that athletic outfielder in the mix (Daryl Jones). The Cardinals’ Top 10 will be released official next week, and we can debate more then. But as we scan the previous eighth-ranked systems it stands out the Cardinals would be pleased to echo the production of the others.

They could use a Perkins or two in the rotation, an Escobar or so in the field.

-30-