Jump to content

Who will be the #17 and #18 prospects?

Tony-OH

By Tony-OH
in Orioles Talk

 Share

Who will be the #17 and #18 prospects?  

45 members have voted

  1. 1. Who will be the #17 and #18 prospects?

    • Bannon and McKenna
      9
    • Hall and Stowers
      33
    • Pop and Sedlock
      2
    • Leonardo Rodriguez and Tate
      0
    • Stauffer and Fenter
      1

This poll is closed to new votes


Recommended Posts

HowAboutThat Hangout Grand Counsel

HowAboutThat

Posted
Posted

I based my note entirely unfamiliarity, and awareness, neither of which I have in great measure regarding these guys, but Sedlock has been disappointing and Pop is out for TJ surgery so I didn’t vote for them. But I’ve heard of Rylan and Bannon. Their guitar work is amazing and the lyrics are fresh and interesting.

so I went with them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChosenOne21 Major Leaguer Rising Star

ChosenOne21

Posted
Posted (edited)

I went with Hall and Stowers, but I could have just as easily picked Pop and Sedlock. Pretty sure it isn't the other three choices. Tate's stock is way down, Stauffer doesn't seem like anything special and Bannon and McKenna don't have much upside.

Didn't pick Pop and Sedlock because I think Pop was about here in the rankings last year and he had TJS. Also while Sedlock is showing signs of life, he probably has 7/8th inning guy ceiling

Edited by ChosenOne21
Link to comment
Share on other sites
weams Hangout Grand Counsel

weams

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, LookinUp said:

The top player left on that list, for me, is Hall. Stowers has tools to work with. So they're my pick. 

We're pretty far down this list and still not picking from scrubs. 

You and I can put out our own lists then. Because I'm right here. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LookinUp Hangout Grand Counsel

LookinUp

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, weams said:

You and I can put out our own lists then. Because I'm right here. 

I'm kind of surprised Stauffer and Fenter are getting no love, tbh. Fenter's old for his level, but both had really nice years. I guess it's just too early since they're probably not going to end up ML starters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
weams Hangout Grand Counsel

weams

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, LookinUp said:

I'm kind of surprised Stauffer and Fenter are getting no love, tbh. Fenter's old for his level, but both had really nice years. I guess it's just too early since they're probably not going to end up ML starters.

I'd assume as much. I don't think it will be too long though. For the first time through this I saw one thing in the future that makes it tough to say to much for a couple picks. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Frobby Hangout Grand Counsel

Frobby

Posted
Posted

I went Hall and Stowers, though Tony’s comments on Hall in the Hernaiz thread show me that he’s not that high on Hall.   
 

All in all, I’m pleased to see ten plausible names here.   The bottom part of our top 30 is quite strong compared to just about any year I can remember.   

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
weams Hangout Grand Counsel

weams

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, Frobby said:

I went Hall and Stowers, though Tony’s comments on Hall in the Hernaiz thread show me that he’s not that high on Hall.   
 

All in all, I’m pleased to see ten plausible names here.   The bottom part of our top 30 is quite strong compared to just about any year I can remember.   

Yes. Agreed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
weams Hangout Grand Counsel

weams

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Greg Pappas said:

I went Hall and Stowers, but was on the verge of selecting Stauffer/Fenter. I'm high on Stauffer and thought he'd be a strong candidate for this range. 

I don't know a thing about these next two. I just know someone listed as a choice does not make this cut. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


  • Posts

    • Just Regular
      Jackson Holliday 2024

      By Just Regular · Posted

      ZiPS being an inhuman thing incapable of recency bias is not much out on Holliday.    It only dings his 2025-2029 forecast WAR by about 3% today relative to what it was forecasting this spring. https://blogs.fangraphs.com/reassessing-the-future-for-this-seasons-disappointing-rookies/ Jackson Holliday’s numbers didn’t take a big hit for a few reasons. First, and most importantly, despite a really lousy debut in the majors, he played well enough in the minors — plus he’s so young and his résumé is so strong — that his small-sample struggles barely register. By reverse-o-fying Holliday’s major league woes into an untranslated minor league line and including it in his overall Triple-A production, ZiPS estimates that he would’ve had a 118 wRC+ in Triple-A this season, down from his actual mark of 142. A 20-year-old shortstop with a 118 wRC+ in Triple-A would still top everybody’s prospect list.
    • MurphDogg
      Santander taking grounders at first

      By MurphDogg · Posted

      Kjerstad should also get some reps in at first so he can be an option there as well, although now is probably not the time, best for him to DH for the rest of the season. He had 8 starts at first at AAA this season and 37 starts there between AA and AAA in 2023.
    • SteveA
      Santander taking grounders at first

      By SteveA · Posted

      Kjerstad
    • Frobby
      Tracking Ex Oriole Thread

      By Frobby · Posted

      In Grich’s case, I think his OBP skills weren’t appreciated at the time.  He was a .266 lifetime hitter in an era when that was maybe 10 points above average, but his .371 OBP was more like 45-50 points above average.  But OBP just wasn’t very valued at the time.  
    • Sports Guy
      Santander taking grounders at first

      By Sports Guy · Posted

      We don’t have a current combo that is ideal. You have to go with the best possible grouping you have.
    • Moose Milligan
      Tracking Ex Oriole Thread

      By Moose Milligan · Posted

      Yep, we're in agreement on the 70 rWAR threshold.  A championship would help Manny's cause, though I'm not sure if that's in the cards for him in the near future.  He needs a big moment on a big stage, too....as silly as that sounds, I do believe it matters in the eyes of some voters. Not to derail, but Whitaker is a guy that belongs in the HoF, too.  I'm not sure why Grich never got serious consideration.
    • Frobby
      Tracking Ex Oriole Thread

      By Frobby · Posted

      I’ve always felt that 70 rWAR was the line between having to justify why someone shouldn’t be in the HOF versus justifying why they should.  In other words, if you’re over 70, there needs to be a reason for you NOT to be in.  There are 70 position players over 70 WAR, and the only ones not in are Bonds, Pujols (not yet eligible), Trout (not yet eligible), Rose, Bill Dahlen, Lou Whitaker, Raffy Palmeiro, Bobby Grich, and Carlos Beltran.  Really, only Dahlen, Whitaker and Grich have no obvious reason why they’re not in.  And I wouldn’t bet against Beltran getting in eventually.  He’s gotten  46% and 57% of the ballots his first two tries.  

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...