Our democratic process to determine the Phillies top 30 prospects, according to you the readers, is complete, with Tyler Mach rounding out the top 30. I think a number of the selections are a tad strange, but it wasn’t my list, it was yours. A number of people had asked about submitting their own top 30 lists and comparing them, and I think that’s a fine idea. The reason I chose to do the day by day top 30 was simply the lack of anything to talk about regarding the minors on most days in the offseason. So, if you want to submit your own top 30 list, I encourage you to do so. We’ll compare lists and see where different guys rank on everyone’s list. To submit your list, simply send an email to phuturephillies at hotmail dot com, with “TOP 30” somewhere in the subject line of the e-mail. I’ll compile all of them together, lets say at the end of next week. Anyone is eligible, including guys who didn’t make the day by day Top 30.
So, here was the final list based on your voting
01. Carrasco
02. Cardenas
03. Savery
04. Costanzo
05. Outman
06. Carpenter
07. Marson
08. Donald
09. Drabek
10. Happ
11. Harman
12. Golson
13. Jaramillo
14. E Garcia
15. Brown
16. Bastardo
17. Bisenius
18. Berry
19. Myers
20. d’Arnaud
21. Naylor
22. Galvis
23. Correa
24. Mattair
25. Bolt
26. Diekman
27. Sampson
28. Mitchinson
29. Spencer
30. Mach
Phuture Phillies 
Do you want to hold the same requirements for our own Top 30 lists, i.e. that Mathieson and Zagurski are ineligible?
Interesting list; looking forward to seeing some individual lists, including yours.
LikeLike
Carrasco
Cardenas
Savery
Drabek
Outman
Garcia
Marson
Brown
Costanzo
Galvis
Happ
Golson
Donald
Carpenter
Harman
D’Arnauld
Myers
Jaramillo
Correa
Bastardo
Naylor
Berry
Dieckman
Sampson
Mattair
Spencer
Mitchinson
Mach
Bisenius — haven’t been sure where to put him due to health
Matos
LikeLike
yeah keep the same eligiblity rules. No Mathieson, no Zagurski.
LikeLike
phuturephillies:
Who on the list do you find to be a mistake other than bolt?
LikeLike
Brad Harman needs to be ranked little higher by all of us if the Aussie baseball writer can be believed. Get a kick out of the writer describing his play in the World cup game against the Cubans:
http://www.baseball.org.au/?Page=39952&MenuID=National%5FTeams%2F86%2F0%2F%2CNational%5FSenior%2F365%2F22702%2F%2CNEWS%2F14942%2F0%2F0
LikeLike
I’ll post my Top 30 sometime in the next week or 2. Off the top, I’ll say that I think these guys are too high; Costanzo, Carpenter, Bisenius, Berry, Bolt
these guys are too low; Sampson, d’Arnaud, Bastardo, Correa, Naylor, Diekman, Spencer
LikeLike
Agreed on Harman. I have a sneaking suspicion that he is going to make a run through the system this year – as Kyle Kendrick showed, for the right player, it’s not that far from Clearwater to the bigs. What a great report!
LikeLike
thanks for the organizing the activity…certainly it was a fun exercise. and its great to see such support for your site.
that said, while i certainly appreciate your time, imo, i wish you weren’t always so condescending and judgmental. replace “tad strange” with “interesting choices,” and you’ll sound more agreeable. i understand this is your blog, and you’re not running this site necessarily to be popular or well-liked, but hammering people for their opinions only detracts for your overall goal. again, just my opinion; and i really do appreciate your site. thanks!!
LikeLike
oh, about the list, i agree that costanzo is the most overrated. if he truly is our fourth best prospect, we really do have a weak system–he’s little more than fringe at best, imo.
LikeLike
See, I don’t get this. Should I just post open ended topics and never give my opinion? Should I just give wishy-washy opinions on guys and never disagree? I’m not convinced I’m right about anything, let alone everything, so I can’t be sure how I come across as condescending. I have methods to analyze, I attempt to get the opinions of people I trust, I try and get interviews with people who have more info than me, and I just synthesize that. I’ve only ever gotten into one major disagreement in the 11 months I’ve been writing this blog, and that was because the person simply couldn’t comprehend my argument. Would this blog be more enjoyable to read if I simply offered up open ended questions every day and I didn’t share my opinion?
It’s just that, an opinion. I feel I’m far from condescending. I may disagree, I may find an argument strange, or just flat out crazy, but that’s just my opinion. Everyone is free to disagree, and they normally do. And how does this detract from my goal? Do you even know what my goal is? Do I have a goal? When people stop coming, I’ll stop writing. Or, maybe I’ll stop writing before that, and then people will stop coming. One way or the other.
LikeLike
Please keep giving your opinions. You are remarkably low key with them. ‘Tad strange’, especially when not even addressed at a particular poster seems awfully mild to raise someone’s ire. Certainly not condescending. I found some of the choices more than a tad strange, as I’m sure many others will find some of the rankings on m list to be.
LikeLike
I really didn’t think you would understand 😉
i love your opinions. not that i necessarily always agree with them; but you support your points well, and I appreciate the convinction you display. i am by no means an expert on the pharm system, and, more than anything, your site is truly a great source of information for me.
in my example above, as opposed to offending your loyal readers by castigating their opinions as “strange,” you could still further debate by classifying their collective opinions as “intersting” or “surprising.” the debate is not squashed, but rather brought to a more respectful playground.
it certainly was presumptious of me to assume you had a goal of this site–though i do feel comfortable assuming you do, in fact, want people to read your blog. and, after your readers invested much of their time in the voting process, to insult them following the results…well, i’m just not sure that’s retentionship 101.
that said, regardless of the personality you display on your blog, the content you provide will continue to drive traffic…so keep up the good work.
Yours,
PA State Debate Champion, ’90 (seriously)
LikeLike
i once won a spelling bee.
Seriously, thanks for the site and keep up the good work. Considering the tone of most public forums, this place is a paradise. Cheers all around.
LikeLike
If I’d have said that voting Andrew Carpenter #6 was “really freakin’ stupid”, you may have a point. But “a tad strange” was just a polite way of saying that I personally didn’t agree with all of the rankings. But this wasn’t MY list, it was YOUR (the collective you) list. And come on “I really didn’t think you’d understand” is more condescending than anything I’ve written here in the last year.
LikeLike
i’m glad the irony wasn’t lost on you…
i don’t know why i was being hypersensitive today…x-factor is totally right–most boards are filled with such utterly deplorable trash-talk, i should be man enough to take a label like “strange” in stride.
really sorry for the random discourse today–feel free to delete my posts! no hard feelings.
LikeLike
Costanzo #4 is gone. Lets hope Lidge doesnt turn into Todd Worrell. Sad to see Bourn go with him.
LikeLike
Fritz are you kidding no way is James offensive. Have you gone to some of the other blogs? Some are extremely offensive. This is by far the best blog about the Phillies, period.
I think that it is way too soon to put Galvis on the list. His line for 2007 was .203/.255/.252.
LikeLike
Dave Kingman —
Except those numbers are pretty good when you consider Galvis played the whole NYP season at age 17. He would have been young for the GCL, but skipped that to go play against the college draftees and guys promoted from GCL last year. And, he supposedly already has major league D.
With Costanzo gone, I’ll add Byrd to the bottom of my top 30 list.
LikeLike
allentown, I understand the age but does he project to anything beyond a Steve Jeltz in the majors?
LikeLike
I think it is really tough to project Galvis on offense these days. I think he will have above average speed, but things like plate discipline and power are tough to project based on our limited info. I would assume he would be a little more of an Omar Vizquel TYPE offensive player. Type is in bold because there is so much variation in the projections. The main thing we are really going on is that the Phillies thought enough of his potential to challenge him in the NY-Penn league. It is not as if they had anyone at GCL that they needed to get playing time either (Andino/Morales). They thought a 17-year-old was ready to play against 21-year-olds and that tell us something. He will need to start succeeding, however, to really be a top 10 prospect (though I would not be shocked if tools-happy BA puts him on the bottom of their list).
LikeLike
phuturephillies- this blog is terrific and you do a lot of great work. I don’t post much, but I read daily. Your arguments are well supported and your tone is measured. Thanks again for the great blog!
LikeLike