Who will be #21-#25 prospects?

[Tony-OH]

Who will be #21-#25 prospects?

They will be released on Tuesday with #26-#30 on Thursday.

[Can_of_corn]

First time I voted this year.  It was strictly to pick the one that didn't have Tate listed.

[ChosenOne21]

I don't really have a clue at this point. I think it's one of the first two, and ended up picking the second one. Fifth has Tate too high, and I don't see Cumberland, Greiner or McCoy being this high, so that eliminates the third and fourth

[HowAboutThat]

I am down on Tate So I chose the only option that did not include him, , Which of course means that that is the only guaranteed wrong answer.

[HowAboutThat]

Sedlock has fallen a long way.

[Luke-OH]

1 hour ago, Philip said:

Sedlock has fallen a long way.

He’s actually rose from not being in the top 30 last year.

He was pitching with basically a dead arm for almost 2 years.

[Aristotelian]

I would think Sedlock and Fenter have to be in the top 25 but there is no option with both of them.

[Greg Pappas]

7 hours ago, Aristotelian said:

I would think Sedlock and Fenter have to be in the top 25 but there is no option with both of them.

Yeah, I chose two but somehow missed that Sedlock was not among the five. I'd think he'd be #21 or 22.

[Frobby]

I like option 2 best.   I eliminated 3 and 4 because I don’t see any of Cumberland, Grenier and McCoy being ranked this high.   I eliminated 1 because I can’t see including Rodriguez but excluding Stauffer.    That leaves 2 and 5, and I chose 2 because I prefer Bannon to Tate (the other four players are the same in both choices).   

[glenn__davis]

1 hour ago, Frobby said:

I like option 2 best.   I eliminated 3 and 4 because I don’t see any of Cumberland, Grenier and McCoy being ranked this high.   I eliminated 1 because I can’t see including Rodriguez but excluding Stauffer.    That leaves 2 and 5, and I chose 2 because I prefer Bannon to Tate (the other four players are the same in both choices).   

I think Luke's pretty high on Cumberland.  But other than that I generally agree with your take.

[Tony-OH]

1 hour ago, glenn__davis said:

I think Luke's pretty high on Cumberland.  But other than that I generally agree with your take.

Yes, yes he is and I can't seem to shake him of it, but appreciate his persistence!

I believe he had three guys I did not have on my list at all and we ended up including two if I recall. Honestly when we get into the late 20s area, arguments can be made for the guys that just missed.

 

[Number5]

3 hours ago, Frobby said:

I like option 2 best.   I eliminated 3 and 4 because I don’t see any of Cumberland, Grenier and McCoy being ranked this high.   I eliminated 1 because I can’t see including Rodriguez but excluding Stauffer.    That leaves 2 and 5, and I chose 2 because I prefer Bannon to Tate (the other four players are the same in both choices).   

Yeah, this was pretty much the reasoning I went with.  I also felt Stauffer and Fenter should be a tad higher than Sedlock and Tate, hence option 2 over option 1.  I've got Sedlock and Tate at 26 and 27.

[Frobby]

29 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

Yes, yes he is and I can't seem to shake him of it, but appreciate his persistence!

I believe he had three guys I did not have on my list at all and we ended up including two if I recall. Honestly when we get into the late 20s area, arguments can be made for the guys that just missed.

 

When he tries that stuff, just say to him, "Matthias Dietz."   

[Luke-OH]

4 hours ago, glenn__davis said:

I think Luke's pretty high on Cumberland.  But other than that I generally agree with your take.

If in the 20s in a system is high, then guilty as charged. 

[Luke-OH]

2 hours ago, Frobby said:

When he tries that stuff, just say to him, "Matthias Dietz."   

Ha, got me there. Overestimated the ability of a guy to make poor mechanics work. I thought the move to the pen would help. It’s a shame, the raw stuff was as good as Baumann or Harvey.