Reader Top 30; run-off vote

2010 Reader Top 30

The voting for #16 is tied and has been within one vote or so for most of the day that I’ve seen, so we’re going to do a run-off vote between Freddy Galvis and Brian Rosenberg. The winner will be #16, the runner up will be #17, and then we’ll move on to #18.

So, vote below. I’ll leave this open for 24 hours.

52 thoughts on “Reader Top 30; run-off vote”

  1. I voted Galvis, because I have him higher on my ranking than Rosenberg, but I don’t think either of these guys is legit top 20. I have Stutes, Worley, Carpenter, Savery, Schwimer ahead of both of them.

    Like

  2. An interesting run-off, a 24 year-old who played last season in Lakewood (A) versus a 20-year-old who played last season in Clearwater (A+). Both ended their seasons in Reading (AA) and both are invited to Spring Training. There is no question in my mind that Galvis, who is younger by 4 years 2 months, is the much more valuable prospect.

    Like

  3. I voted for Galvis, but I do not think either player should be in the 16-19 range. I have Castro, Stutes, Pettibone and Worley ahead of them.
    Galvis will probably win this in a landslide as it seems the same 80-89 guys have been voting for Rosenberg the last 3-4 rounds. There has not been many converts.

    Like

  4. I voted for Galvis, but sort of agree that I liked some others better. I like Savery better for sure, and if he pulled an Ankiel and became a position player again, I still might like him more than these two.

    Like

  5. Voted for Galvis, but he can’t hit and thats kinda a big part of baseball. I had to give it to him, because at the SS level, an average hitter can still be a great player.

    Rosenberg could appear in the Phillies bullpen before you know it.

    Like

  6. It’s going to be tough to me to vote for Galvis for a while. I just don’t see that bat playing in the bigs..

    Like

  7. It’s all about the last name people. Jews generally don’t play sports, but when they do…brother, ill tell ya! How happy will everyone be when they get to call this guy’s fastball The Hebrew Hammer?

    Like

  8. I’ll vote Galvis but I don’t think either guy is top 20. I do agree that BJ could sneek up the majors this year though as a last man in the pen due to an injury situation. I have the same questions about Galvis as everyone else. He’ll play this whole season at Reading. If he hits at least .260, he might have a chance to keep improving his bat. By the way, some in the Phils organization still think Savery can be a major league starter similar to a Terry Mulholland. I don’t know whether I share that optimisim but I was surprised to hear that.

    Like

  9. It’s an interesting question, because I’m kind of down on Galvis’ bat right now, while I expect Rosenberg to wind up as at least a middle reliever, and possibly a set up man if everything goes perfectly. In that sense, then, I think Rosenberg has a higher floor.

    But the flip side is that Galvis has more upside. If you really buy into the ARL argument, and the numbers being dragged down by the switch-hitting, and that he’ll be in better shape once his frame fills out a little bit — then something like Adam Everett isn’t out of the question. I have Galvis ahead of Rosenberg on my personal Top 30, so I’ll go with him here.

    Like

  10. Galvis.
    But you could throw a net and catch about 6 of these guys – they all have weaknesses that make them questionable.

    Like

  11. Fun stat: I’m guessing the starters at Lakewood will be some combination of Hernandez, Cosart, Shreve, Zeid, Colvin, and Pettibone. The shortest of the six of them is 6’3″ with several 6’5″. They’ll look like a basketball team.

    Like

  13. Ed…im sure you didnt mean anything by that…but i take that as a anti-semetic comment…so in the future please be careful of what you say

    Like

  16. I went with Galvis. I like Freddy but, like a lot of the commenters, I would have waited a few more spots before putting him on the list.

    I think PhillyFriar hit it on the head: Rosenberg has a higher floor, Galvis a higher ceiling. He’s still got some time to fill out and learn how to hit better, Rosenberg doesn’t have as much leeway. He should be in a major league ‘pen or knocking on the door this year or next if he’s going to make it.

    Like

  17. I don’t think either deserve to be this high.

    Though I went with Galvis over Rosenberg when given no choice.

    Like

  19. This was my opportunity to vote Galvis since I have gone Worley several times now. I am confident both Galvis and Worley will have substantially better seasons this year.

    Like

  20. I think we are putting both these guys to high, especially galvis. A shortstop that can’t can’t hit isn’t worth much. At this point there is no way he is the SS after J-Roll leaves. That being said, no way he should be in Top 20.

    Like

  21. Galvis. And about the right spot, too. Don’t underestimate the value of an excellent defensive SS who can make contact and get on base. Especially since his OPS split dramatically reversed last year following a wrist injury. If he’s healthy, he may really start to hit.

    Like

  24. I don’t know if Glavis is even jewish but Ed lay off the booze and medication together.

    I need to think about this vote more. Strangely these two are the ones most likely to see much MLB time this year.

    Like

  25. With all the issues that the big club has in the bullpen, i could see Rosenberg making an appearance in the bullpen. Galvis I can’t see.

    Like

  26. I went with Galvis because he has more perceived value. Realistically though, I think Rosenberg will end up having a better career.

    – Jeff

    Like

  27. Keep on with Galvis. Glad he’ll finally be placed on the list and be finally able to vote for somebody else next time. All of the non-hitting thing-not proven. Has hit well in spurts and now that reflection is given , I believe alot of the down cycles correlate to minor injuries, They say , on here, a wrist injury last season, and I know his first was a wrist injury sliding into 2nd base. No major injuries.

    Like

  28. If you can’t prove that a guy can’t hit by pointing out his OPS is south of .600, how could you ever prove it? That he “hits well in spurts” is specious reasoning. By that measure, we should have signed Eric Duncan because his hot April proved he could hit.

    That said, I voted Galvis on the promise that he might hit down the road. If he does, that makes him a valuable prospect.

    Like

  29. Galvis: I’ve seen him play when healthy, and I think he can develop into a decent hitter at the Major League level. The Phil’s brass seems to think highly of him also.

    Like

  30. I have Castro, Worley, Stutes, Pettibone, Rodriguez, Sanchez, Villar, and Collier ahead of both of these guys….really back end of the 20’s guys for me.

    Like

  31. I can understand most of those guys. But Collier and Pettibone are two who have yet to turn their tools into results. Why rate them over Galvis?

    Like

  32. Based on the number of commenters that reluctantly voted for Galvis and didn’t have him in their top 20, it seems possible that the majority actually was in agreement that neither guy should be this high and yet was so heavily split on who should be that its ending up Galvis, Rosenberg. I wonder if fewer names might actually lead to a greater consensus.

    Like

  33. My last name is Rosenberg, I was really just kidding. I don’t think I said anything negative. Im not really sorry, but i did not mean to offend anyone. Wont happen again.

    Like

  34. Phuture…agree with PRD. Maybe after pulling these two off of the list you could just leave it at 6 names? Maybe even drop it to 5 after the next round?

    Like

  35. I went Rosenberg simply because I can see him contributing to the big club before Galvis. If I had to guess our bullpen will be a weakness again this season.

    I’m not down on Galvis but I think this is a big season for him. He has to show he can raise his OBP. I’ll say this living closer to Trenton than I do Reading I’m looking forward to seeing the R-Phils at Waterfront park this year.

    Like

  36. I do not see why Rosenberg has a LOW ceiling. He has basically been dominant at every level and though his is older, it is not his fault he stayed at the lower levels longer. I think of Tyler Walker as a comparison.

    Since neither Galvis nor Rosenberg were hyped signings, they will always have their talent questioned.

    I voted Galvis just because of the age factor. He might get better. Without speed it will be tougher for him to hold a bench spot on just his glove but with McDonald on the Blue Jays (and Bruntlett and Castro) still hanging around I see Galvis holding a bench/AAA spot for a few years. The growing trend toward better defensive players will certainly help his cause.

    Like

  37. I agree that the majority probably doesn’t think either candidate should be #16 or #17. That being said, at this stage of the process, I understand why James took this approach and therefore am not asking for another vote. However, a 3rd option (none of the above) probably should be included in future run-offs to avoid this in the future.

    I really like Mike Stutes as a back of the rotation starter. With his good stuff and aggressive approach, I think its only a matter of time before he gets a big league start, and when he does, he’ll make the most of it.

    Savery is a sleeper…he used to be something special, and if his arm ever heals, he could be again. However, if he gets hit hard this year, its time to pick up the bat. The track record for pitchers coming off labrum injuries is really bad, and the Phillies should’ve recognized this in their draft evaluation.

    Like

  38. I appreciate the arguments on both sides. I’ll go with Rosenberg because I think it’s a lot less likely that he’ll fall off the face of the earth. I agree that Galvis has more upside, but I think the chances of him reaching that potential are just too remote to justify moving him past Rosenberg. But, like the vote suggests, it’s a close call.

    Like

  39. I was one who commented that I didn’t think either guy belonged in the top 20, but I am more strongly of the opinion that to include a ‘neither’ option in the runoff voting would be an exercise in futility. The two tied for top spot by our normal voting process, with a lot of folks voting. What if ‘neither’ won the runoff? We’d go back to voting for #16 and these two would lead the pack again and finish roughly tied. The rest of the vote was split a lot of different ways, but I don’t really see that changing.

    Like

  43. This isn’t the ideal way to determine a prospect list overall, but this list is more fun than anything incredibly serious, IMO.

    Like

  44. I was looking at the 2007 draft again when they selected savery, and I saw Rich Porcello was drafted 6 spots later. I know the draft is hit or miss, but porcello dropped because of his agent, imagine if Porcello was a phillie :/

    Like

  45. This is both impressive and surprising. And it doesn’t include several of the prospects that many of us think have the biggest upsides (Santana, May, Cosart, etc. . . . )

    “MLB scout Frank Piliere came out with his top 100 prospects list. Four (yes 4) Phillies prospects appear in the top 50:
    19. Domonic Brown
    29. Phillippe Aumont – “the player with the most upside in the Halladay-Lee blockbuster”…”has two pitches that could make him a downright dominant force”
    46. Anthony Gose
    50. Tyson Gillies”

    Like

  46. Good post Baxter. If you believe these rankings, then it justifies the big trade. for the benefit of a long term deal with halliday over Lee, we gave up #15 and #38 overall and got back the #29 and #50 overall. this guy seems really high on Aumont, which is good to hear.

    Like

  47. In the comments section he said he initially expected Santana to make the top 100, but ended up not having room for unproven young players.

    Like

  48. The problem with a run off in this instance, is that these two candidates secured only a minority of the original #16 vote. I doubt the loser of this round would win #17 in a vote, if no new names were added, because 60% of the readers already think others on the list are better. The second place finisher for#14 did not win #15 or #16.
    The runoff only works properly if the top 2 finishers originally finished with a majority of the vote.

    Like

  49. I know he was playing in a hitters league, but Tyson Gillies’s 2009 numbers were really impressive- .916 OPS in A+ as a 21 year old, while playing great centerfield defense and stealing 44 bases…

    Brown-Gose-Gillies could be the best defensive outfield ever.

    Like

  51. Odds are very high that Gose and Gillies are not going to be in the same outfield together, unless one of them unexpected develops into a power hitter. They are there as redundancy. One will replace Victorino in a few years; the other will probably become the 4th outfielder or will be traded; probably the latter.

    Like

  52. Personally, I like Gillies quite a bit. Gose is still too raw to get a fix on, except we know for sure that he’s fast as all hell and has a rocket for an arm.

    Like

Comments are closed.