NEW Community List: Royals Top 20
by casejud on Oct 17, 2008 11:35 AM EDT
Email
PrintI'm sticking to my guns here. Here's how I'm going to start this and i am open to any suggestions other than "don't do this".
I'm going to have the community evaluate ALL of John's top 20 lists as they come out. Just give a simple ranking for all the players on the top 20 list or make a more in-depth comment if you have seen or know more about a player. But what I am looking for is to classify them, generally, and begin the true polling after the last list is out.
You don't have to think about the entirety of the list. Just give me your opinions of the players. Every opinion counts!
This will be the only initial classification for Royals prospects so let your voice be heard!
I'm looking for either a number, as in ...Mike Moustakas: "55" or a range "10-30", or for a player you can just say "not in top 100". Any player in the Royals orginization who gets any vote in the top 100 will be considered, or moved up to be looked at later.
Have fun voting on the Royals top 20!
I won't be posting that often so it won't interfere with the other list and again voting won't start until all the top 20's are out and evaluated. i will post the reults for the voting on each list as the next one comes out or it looks like the voting has stopped on a list.
I'm only going to list the top 10 of the Royals but feel free to vote a ranking or range for ANY player in the orginization.
59 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
top 10
he hit roughly .320/.390/.550 in the second half…in a big pitchers league.
dude is a beast.
Rowdy Hardy Fan Club member.
top 20
i’m not sure that he’s top 10. i don’t know, maybe.
I heard Tim Lincecum will win 1 Cy Young & 11 Tim Lincecums. Question is, how many Cole Hamels will he win?
by the pinstripes on Oct 17, 2008 1:05 PM EDT up reply actions
+1
I like him plenty, but there are probably at least ten guys I’d rather have. And I still don’t know where he’ll play.
25
great second half, but first half can’t be ignored
40
not usually keen on ranking HS’ers high there first year, but was keen on heyward right off the bat and think hosmer will have a similar season out of the gate
+1
I heard Tim Lincecum will win 1 Cy Young & 11 Tim Lincecums. Question is, how many Cole Hamels will he win?
by the pinstripes on Oct 18, 2008 7:03 PM EDT up reply actions
100th
I’m tempted to leave him out. Maybe I am crazy but I can’t imagine an average farm system not having at least 3 guys who are as good of long-term prospects as this guy. even though he had a HELL of a season.
I’m sure there are going to be people who think he is a LOT higher than this.
100
I heard Tim Lincecum will win 1 Cy Young & 11 Tim Lincecums. Question is, how many Cole Hamels will he win?
by the pinstripes on Oct 17, 2008 1:03 PM EDT up reply actions
.314 / .458 / .629
37 HR with 106/67 bb/k ratio from a L bat.
Why wouldn’t this guy be ranked higher? Just trying to find out more about him and why there’s no love here. (I don’t know anything about him other than the stats).
KILA
A bit old.
Not always real good before this season.
Intereresting guy though. Isn’t this the same sort of resume for guys like David Ortiz and Travis Hafner, even Carlos Pena…late blooming sluggers.
I just don’t think he’ll be that good but if he is he’s the kind of guy we will look back on as a group and say we ranked too low.
80
i think his progress this year was for real……love the patience…….average 1B is the floor with considerable upside
50-75 range as well
i think he’s a top 25 pitching prospect as i said in the sickels’ post. the texas league is tough on pitchers and i think he acquitted himself quite well. he was also among the league leaders in k’s.
I heard Tim Lincecum will win 1 Cy Young & 11 Tim Lincecums. Question is, how many Cole Hamels will he win?
by the pinstripes on Oct 17, 2008 1:02 PM EDT up reply actions
not in my top 100
i think he took a step back – GB rate was poor this year and getting rocked in the AFL
(Right shoulder surgery - out for season)
Injury Note 60-day DL as of Sep 2, 2008 (Right shoulder surgery – out for season)
Anyone know anything about that? Was it serious? Will he miss any time next year?
100th
I think he’ll have a tough time cracking a top 100 but he has some things going for him so i’ll give him a vote for consideration.
BTW, the competition for the 100th prospect is going to be fierce! there are going to be a million guys fighting for one spot. It’ll be interesting sorting them out.
90-100 range
this is another guy i really like. i think he belongs in the top 100.
I heard Tim Lincecum will win 1 Cy Young & 11 Tim Lincecums. Question is, how many Cole Hamels will he win?
by the pinstripes on Oct 17, 2008 1:00 PM EDT up reply actions
not in my top 100
although he could have a big ’09
100th
Not as high on him as some but I’m willing to give him the benit of the doubt and give him a vote to talk about him more.
Can I make a suggestion
Instead of doing this team by team, that you just go ten by ten.
Meaning you ask for everyones top ten, and then you average them all out to get your top ten, then ask for everyones 10-20 (asking them to leave off who ever was already voted on in the top ten), and go from there.
Don’t crucify me, this is just a suggestion.
That is actually
A good idea. NEVER will crucify anybody who has ANY constructive idea…don’t woory bout that :-) we are INCLUSIVE round here. Onthis post i mean.
You know what though I WANT to do a 100 list from the bottom up almost BECAUSE it is kinda difficult. I want to see how we can make it work.
I’d be all for doing one like yours later though.
Why?
What is the advantage of going from 100 to 1? Like, I get that it’s different, and maybe it’s more dramatic, but why would it produce a better list? Simply because it’s difficult? Well, if you want difficult, then why don’t we do it alphabetically? Or by states where the players were born in order of their entrance to the Union (and fuck Virginia and the South – they seceded, they count as 1865)?
www.loftylantern.com
by OldProspects on Oct 17, 2008 5:48 PM EDT up reply actions
Okay!
As long as a post is baseball related i don’t see that you have to ANYBODY’S permision except maybe John’s to try something interesting that is both provokes discusion about prospects.
I feel like starting with the top prospects invites in too many people who are only VAGUELY interested in Baseball or prospects in general and that is why they degenerate into wierd pissing contests often, or whatever you call them.
The advantage is you have to discuss a whole lot of Carlos Rosa’s and Kila Ka’aihue’s and a lot of people aren’t INTERESTED in that. Those are exactly the kind of people who I don’t care if they participate. I WANT it to be kind of esoteric to some and interesting to just the people it interests. I think some people will like it, and maybe even more than the old list.
Of course you don't need permission
I was just wondering as to your logic. You make an interesting point about only getting the people willing to wade through this and maybe you’re right. I guess we’ll see
www.loftylantern.com
by OldProspects on Oct 18, 2008 7:33 PM EDT up reply actions
This doesn't make sense
People can only GUESS where they want a guy to be in the top 100 if you’re going team by team, unless it’s a surefire top ten guy. You need to compare top prospects to top prospects to do this.
Sure
But everybody has an IDEA of where someone ranks. It’ll be interesting to see how many players people think are top one hundred when we get to the end. Probably at least6 a couple hundred. We’ll sort them out more later and vote on them in tiers. Foe now, it works to just sort them out.
Whether you think Moustakas is the #1 prospect or the #77 or whatever, the point is that he is moving UP and won’t be anywhere near a poll for the #100 prospect, when that starts.
It doesn’t have to be EXACT to be usefull.
Ill-conceived
Listen to what everyone is saying, Casejud instead of being hard-headed and going through with this anyways. It’s pretty obvious you haven’t thought this thing out fully. There are major flaws in this process. You are changing things as you go, so no one knows what the Hell you are doing.
Say we start with #91-100… you put all the players on the polls that were getting verbal nods for that region of the poll. #91-100 goes well… then we start on #81-90. Are we only using 10 players for those polls? If not, then it won’t work. Because say 15 players get the verbal nod for the “80s” range. We vote 10 in… what happens to the other 5? Do they just not make the list even though everyone thought they were better than the 91-100 guys? What happens when we get into the 20s or 30s?
There is a reason people start at the beginning. Starting at 100 is just an ill-conceived idea. Are you going to pick a Top 100 then let us decide the order? What happens if there is a player that most people like for the 50-65 range, but becase everyone has differing opinions on where he should be placed, he never wins any of those slots? Does he just not make the list? In the real list, his votes will slowly go up as people realize he is the best player left. In this one, his votes will go down as people think he is reaching a ranking that is too high for him, meaning he never makes it.
Also, since you plan on this taking “a lot longer” than the regular list… what happens when you are doing the Top 20 in June and 8 of them have already graduated to the majors? John’s Top 20 Lists won’t be done until the New Year at earliest most likely, which means, even running these polls 1 day each, they won’t be done until mid-April…. and say some have to go two days… this thing won’t be done until July.
It’s great that you are trying to find ways to make the Community List different, but you haven’t fully realized that they are done this way for a reason… it’s the best way to do it. Your system is greatly flawed and everyone is telling you that. Instead of just saying “No its knot! It will werk out find!” Tell us how these obvious flaws in your system are not going to come into play. Maybe if you do that, you will quell the rising storm that is whole heartedly against this poll being done.
"My mom always taught me it's better to laugh at yourself than to laugh at others. She was so wrong. ;)" -Pedrophile
This idea is pretty stupid
This second version sort of makes sense, at least, in a limited way, though there is no chance this will ever become a real top 100 list. I think it’s just going to be a thing where a few people try to guess where the prospects of each time might fit in without context or anything – sort of interesting so far as it goes. I don’t understand what’s the point of fighting it, though.
www.loftylantern.com
by OldProspects on Oct 17, 2008 5:45 PM EDT up reply actions
No, it isn't
Somone saying that say, Daniel Cortes is the 95 th best prospect is just a way of saying…"There’s a guy who should be in the top 100. Of course that isn’t EXACT necessarily but it’s a usefull way of classifying players. There may be 178 guys that people nominate for the 100 list but there can only be 100 in the end.
I’m kinda too tired to explain this tonight but the voting on the Royals prospects isn’t meant to say " Which Royals should be in the top 100 and where, generally" Thats all. I will COUNT all the players when I am done, maybe the top 75 or so will be locked in… there can be lots of polling and discussion of the players from 76-150 or whatever to see who makes the top 100.
My title was a little glib
and I apologize, but my point was simply that I think doing it this way might produce interesting debate but won’t make a top 100 list. Then again, it’s a reasonable question of why we do need a top 100 list anyway, and that interesting debate is really the whole reason we’re here.
www.loftylantern.com
by OldProspects on Oct 18, 2008 7:35 PM EDT up reply actions
Its cool
I aint that sensitive but it feels good to have a more normal conversation i admit.
Anyways, I’m kind of in the middle…I like the concept of a list but I’d just like it to mean more and be haggled over better, or differently maybe. I like the list to be part of the debate.
For instance, i kinda dont like it when BA puts out thier lists of top 20 prospect in each league and someone says that the numbering isnt significant. If one guy is the #2 and one guy is the #10 it means that they saying that guy is BETTER. That what I think anyways. Why else number tham then??
Okay
Granted, I haven’t explained it real well. I think I can think these things through pretty well and as I see it after the nominating of players from all the teams…from all the top 20 lists…. there will be anywhere from 120-180 maybe more, propects that someone or the other should be considered for the top 100 okay.
I will be able to COUNT them when we are through. Then begin to sort out the bottom to get to 100 prospects. Which with your obvious intelligence you should be able to help with but I can see all sorts of ways that will work well.
After that process the polling would just be in reverse of the regular one. Take the LOWEST nine or ten ranked players and ask " which of these players should be the #77 prospect… ie: Who is the worst prospect in the poll, instead of the best
I can’t see ANY reason why it wouldn’t work. You have to admit that the idea I have, if it could be exectuted, would BUILD the suspense of the list as it goes instead of everyone complaining about it being boring after 30 players or 50 or whatever.
Let me be clear on this one point… the exact people who are bored after 50 postions on a prospect list are not the people I am talking to. I am hoping there are some who like to discuss farm systems a little more in-depth and not just every team’s top 1 or 2 prospects. That is what a top 50 list is.
I'm tryin
I did my best below. I don’t know why the replay-to is so tricky on my computer. Anyways, I appreciate the input.
I’m sure I can finish this by opening day but I hadn’t evn thought of that to be honest.
There may be many people who don’t like my list idea but there seems to be some peope who like to talk about the Royals top prospects, so to me it is working fine already. No nonsense, no bickering (unless you count this, and i dont) and we don’t have to act like after discussing whover the consensus #1 propect is that it isn’t intersting. A loses that loses interest in itself after 40-50 propects has something wrong with it, I think.
I don't think
this will produce a good top 100 list but I do think it will produce good conversation about these prospects. In the other form, you can vote and discuss players but if you like lets say Cortes alot more than everyone else, for 20 spots on the list your gonna be voting for other or Cortes unless you just bite the bullet and vote for someone else. Here everyone will have a fair chance at it. Think of it as doing a snake order fantasy draft or auction draft.
by groundingout on Oct 18, 2008 1:12 PM EDT up reply actions
Hmm
Hadnt thought of that groundingout. The polling will be LESS BORING! Because you wont be voting for the same guy, day after day, trying to get him on. You will be voting for a different guy, voting them OFF the list. Of course sopme people may be voting for the same guy to be off day after day too, but it seems like less anyways,
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
