Tony-OH

While I fully support the draft rounds being lowered, 20 seems a like a deep cut. I guess it does give more players a chance to sign with teams with a better opportunities, but 30 rounds seem more realistic. Not a fan of the signed players not playing in a league though as it would make it a lot harder for us to see them initially. I'd like to see maybe one Rookie League where new players get to play for half a season.

Who will be #21-#25 prospects? They will be released on Tuesday with #26-#30 on Thursday.

They seem to be getting off to slow starts and then they turn it on. Those slow starts could come back to hurt them when they play a good team.

That's a good question. Defensively I'd go with McKenna because Mullins' arm is so poor that runners clearly takes extra bases on him that they wouldn't if even an average arm was out there. They both can go get the ball side to side well, Mullins goes back a little better for me but not significantly. Offensively, I like to try and look at how they performed at the same levels at the same age if I can. Both were at AA at Bowie at 22 years of age: Name slash WOBA wRC+ BB% K% ISO Mullins .265/.319/.460/.778 .342 109 7.7% 16.6% .194 McKenna .232/.321/.365/.686 .315 104 10.4% 21.3% .133 Both had decent platoon differences, but Mullins gets the edge there because he hits right-handers better. and there are more right-handers (Mckenna slashed .215/.313/.345/.658 against righties this year.) At 23-years old, Mullins had a decent year at AAA and ended up in the big leagues where he hit well for a few weeks before major league pitchers found his holes and he's struggled since. They have similar tools outside of the arm where McKenna gets a big nod, but Mullins brings a little better hit tool and a little more game power. In my mind they are both close as players so it's hard to say. The arm is so weak for Mullins that it makes him a problem in CF, so his versatility in the outfield is a question where as I could put McKenna anywhere out there and feel ok. I think they both could end up 4th/5th outfielders but neither will be starters on a good team. Basically it's what's your preference. Does the team need a platoon guy? Which side of the platoon? Are you looking for an outfielder that can fill in on all three? Depending on your answers would be the guy Id' want.

Yikes, no. Zimmerman was always better than Rogers. Rogers was always a throw in kind of guy who might be able to eat you innings in a long relief role.

And when you add in his unique delivery style, his risk factors go up in my opinion.

Early contention for goofiest post of the offseason! Congrats!

Just did it.

Hahah. I decided at this point to not repeat names which probably makes it easier but also gives you guys more players to discuss.

Tate is basically a sinker changeup pitcher who throws a terribly inconsistent slider. He was scored upon in 6 of the 9 outings in which he threw 18 pitches or more. He's a guy who was never consistently good in the minors and he was a guy who was never consistently good in the majors. While he did flash good stuff at times, and did have some good outings, he's similar to Tanner Scott in that he's a bit of a box of chocolates. I'd like to hope that he can put it all together and be more consistent now that he's moved to the pen, and that's why he's going to still be on the list, but he's a 6th inning/middle relief guy for me until he can prove he can be consistent with his stuff. He also needs to ditch that slider or get better at not leaving it in the middle of the plate. Same goes for the fastball/sinker when it straightens out. He very well may end up better than some of the A-ball guys we'll have above him, but they all have the potential to be starters so if I gotta have one guy I'll take the younger one and hope he develops into something more than a 40 relief pitcher that believe Tate is at this time.

That's a good way to look it at. If you think the guy is a 60 FV and we have him at 45 then you might want to consider yourself wrong (if we happen to be right) to we could make arguments to rearrange a lot of this order.

You have have realistic outcome for guys where they are drafted. we've had second round picks buried already after there first full minor league season so the fact he's on the list is a good thing. The fact that if he develops he could end up a started is a good thing. Heck, if he ends up a super utility guy who can play on the grass, and then perhaps fill in at CF who brings some speed and a hit tool to the plate is a good thing. One thing to remember here is the conventional wisdom at the time was the Orioles reached a bit with Hall in the 2nd round. The guy is major league prospect at 20-years old, that's a good thing.

You and many others have done an excellent job so far. Goes to show you how closely you guys follow the minors and hopefully our info throughout the year helps. As for Hanifee, There were starts I'd watch and wanted to write him off then he'd flash me stuff that made me not want to bury him after a bad year. In the end, there is still a chance he could end up a starter, but he's need to improve that changeup and find something that he can miss bats with more often.

That is not how Peter Angelos operated from everything I've heard. He was not one that took much input from anyone. It would not be surprising if he was slipping a bit and Boros was able to get that deal done when no one one else thought it was a good deal.

Who will be the #19 and #20 Prospects

https://www.orioleshangout.com/2019/11/14/orioles-18-prospect-kyle-stowers-of/

https://www.orioleshangout.com/2019/11/14/orioles-17-prospect-adam-hall-ss/

Carmona was a figment of the scouting reports prior to arriving at Aberdeen last year. While still very young, he did not get very good reviews from Orioles personnel and scouts last year and it's was pretty apparent by how the new regime treated him with playing time that they are less enamored with him as well.

I certainly profile Hall as a 2B or utility guy. I don't see him sticking as an everyday SS defensively as the arm is a bit short and he doesn't have that fluid, quick twitch athleticism that you prefer to have out at SS.

This one was all about ceiling. Of the guys left, we felt he had the best ceiling but of course the risk is very here. He could be in the top ten or out of the rankings after next year. This is where i use my, ""If I can only have one guy system" and I'd rather have a guy with everyday regular upside over utility/backup/reliever profiles.

Who will be the #17 and #18 prospects?

BS, a typical game is not having that many mid-inning pitching changes and most team are employing the super set up guys in the 7th and 8th. This is not saving 10-12 minutes a game. If it does, point me back to this and I'll apologize for being wrong. Most playoff games don't start that late and the Super Bowl is at 6PM and only one game, so sorry, I don't buy the NFL thing.

So let me see here, a pitcher comes into the game and after throwing his 10th pitch has a blister. According to some here, if the team removes him for injury he can't play for 5 or 10 games or the team has to put a position player into the game. How freakin' ridiculous is this? Honestly, how many LOOGYs do team's employ? One, maybe none. As was stated before, how is forcing a guy into a bad matchup who might be off his game a good thing? What if the guy is 25-pitch guy (most one inning relievers are) and has two long at bats to the first two batters and has already 25 pitches? Then the next guy starts fouling off pitches and now you risk an injury, for what, to save two minutes? This is one of the most ridiculous rules changes and arguments I've ever seen.

That's a really poor analogy because baseball was never and will never be an action flow game like basketball was designed. Forcing a manager to not change his pitcher is ridiculous because there are a ton of reasons it might not be best for the player, team or game. When you add in that manager can still pinch hit, that is completely ridiculous. If you are going to tie a managers hand a his bullpen management, then he should have his pinch hitting tied down as well during those two batters he must face. Anything is else is unfair.

This is a good point. So a guy comes out and clearly doesn't have his stuff, but you are forced to watch him pitch to two more batters when the offensive team just pinch hit for better match ups? So they score a bunch more runs and the game just goes longer. This rule is so asinine it's not even funny.