Phuture Phillies 2020 Reader Poll for the Phillies #34 Prospect

Andrew Schultz was selected as the organization’s #33 prospect.  He received 38 of the 120 votes cast (32%).   Addison Russ finished second with 17 votes (14%).   David Parkinson received 15 votes each.  Colton Eastman received 14 votes.

Juan Aparicio received 8 votes each.  Gunner Mayer received 7 votes each.   Rixon Wingrove received 6 votes.  Ben Brown received 5 votes.  Bailey Falter received 3 votes.  Victor Santos and Zach Warren 2 votes each.  Brandon Ramey, Brett Schulze, and Alexis Azuaje received one vote each.

I plan on running through a 35th poll.  Maybe to a 40th.  Depending on how the Phillies’ season goes, more than a couple guys might get a call up.  Bohm and Howard are considered locks.  Plus a number of pitchers are poised to receive call ups if needed, whether due to poor performance or another rash of injuries – Romero, Jones, De Los Santos, Llovera, Brogdon, Sanchez, Irvin, Leftwich, Seabold, Medina.  (In which case, I’ll likely add a few more names to the poll.)

Poll results will remain hidden.

Results, so far –

  1. Alec Bohm
  2. Spencer Howard
  3. Bryson Stott
  4. Erik Miller
  5. Mickey Moniak
  6. Francisco Morales
  7. Connor Seabold
  8. Ethan Lindow
  9. Adonis Medina
  10. Luis Garcia
  11. JoJo Romero
  12. Simon Muzziotti
  13. Rafael Marchan
  14. Damon Jones
  15. Johan Rojas
  16. Logan O’Hoppe
  17. Enyel De Los Santos
  18. Nick Maton
  19. Kevin Gowdy
  20. Kendall Simmons
  21. Matt Vierling
  22. Luke Leftwich
  23. Deivy Grullon
  24. Mauricio Llovera
  25. Kyle Young
  26. Starlyn Castillo
  27. Connor Brogdon
  28. Jhailyn Ortiz
  29. Christopher Sanchez
  30. Cole Irvin
  31. Jamari Baylor
  32. Josh Stephen
  33. Andrew Schultz

 

10 thoughts on “Phuture Phillies 2020 Reader Poll for the Phillies #34 Prospect

  1. I’ve voted for only 2 players since the #16 slot: Irvin and Parkinson. So it’s David one more time.

  2. Jim, my 2 cents on future polls….

    Have everyone submit there lists by a deadline (say, sometime in January?) via email and alot points for each slot, perhaps the higher (top 10?) slots weighted heavier (i.e. 10 pts for #1, 8 pts for #s 2-3, 6 pts for #s 4-6, 4 pts for 7-10, then 1 point thereafter). Leading up to the deadline, posters can comment or campaign/debate on worthy candidates. Just a thought….thanks again for your labors in managing the site no matter how you decide to proceed with the prospect polls. I realize there’s no one ironclad way of certifying the most accurate rankings.

    1. 8mark……that can be a .lot of work in the computation of weighted slotting for every poster’s 30 top players.

      1. I think the harder thing would be cleaning the data unless a standardized form was used. Google Forms could probably be used to create the “ballot.” Individuals to submit their ranking, then its just a bit of Excel (or Google Sheets) processing to score the results.

        I’m an infrequent commenter but have been participating in the pools for at least 5 years now. I’d be more than willing to help develop the Form if folks are interested. Maybe we can develop something and give it a pilot run with a Midseason Top 30 this year.

    2. 8mark, when I requested that readers submit their top thirty prospects, I recorded their selections on an Excel spreadsheet, assigning points for the position voted (30 for 1, 29 for 2, etc.). It was a little extra work. I still have a couple.

      This would be my preferred way of doing a Readers Top 30. The problem always was that not many people seem interested in supplying a top 30. I think I got 3 last year. That’s why I didn’t ask for one this year.

      The problems are not the extra work it would cause me, the automated spreadsheet does all my calculations for me. They are –

      1.) most people don’t feel they know the system well enough to submit a top 30
      2.) some people don’t know the system well enough and DO submit a top 30
      3.) I would need a certain number of responses to make the rankings relevant
      4.) because, in the past, some people would try to affect the poll by submitting a one-person list (family member, I guess)

      However, if we were to ever go this route, I would need all top 30s by some date between the end of the baseball meetings in December and Christmas. Then I could begin counting down from 30 on like December 30th and finish on the Friday before pitchers and catchers. (Actually, as I think about it, counting down from 1 to 30 would be more suspenseful.)

      Thanks for your suggestion. I mentioned above it’s my preferred method. At least it’ll get two votes when we discuss it later. 🙂

      1. Jim does an exceptional job with this site and obviously goes extraordinarily above and beyond in effort and time, but IMO the only way that something like a 1->30 one-time submission poll could work is if a little skills bio was accompanying each of the names perhaps rating their levels of for example fielding or hitting or fielding or primary pitch or secondary pitches in terms of (again for example) below MLB, at MLB, good MLB, dominant MLB. Personally – again as an example – if a pitcher is not dominant at little leagues or has a potential of dominant I am highly skeptical of their potential for MLB success. BUT that seems like a lot of extra work for Jim or even if it were divied up among various people with the appropriate knowledge, a group).

      2. Jim, I would be glad to promote that poll by my own posts by reminding readers interested and so inclined during that winter meetings-Christmas period. I think if you received roughly two dozen submissions from regular participants, the poll would present a reasonably informed projection. And perhaps as you notice an obvious outlier submission, you can handle that accordingly. Thanks for your response.

Comments are closed.