How do you tell if that player you drafted, whether with a top-10 pick or in the 31st round, is developing? Best way I can think of after several years of doing the top 25 ballots is to look at the stats and see how they've produced, and to look at the trends. To me, Ernesto Martinez and Korry Howell have shown breakthroughs this year - huge ones that I am projecting to very productive players - and I ranked them on my ballot accordingly. I also think that both Fry and Wilson have both produced consistently in terms of offense. They've also proven themselves to be versatile defensive players - across five or more positions (Wilson all four IF positions and the corner OF spots; Fry as a C/1B/2B/3B/LF/RF/CF). Hummel offered slightly less versatility (C/LF/RF/1B) but a bat that would have played well. The way I see it, the Crew, as a small-market team needs a regular flow of the bench guys, mid-rotation guys, and bullpen role players as well. As Cooper Hummel showed, their value may not be just on the Brewers 26-man roster, it could be a rental, or maybe we get those lottery tickets from another small-market club. The Yankees and Dodgers can afford to give out a nine-figure contract every year or so, as can the Red Sox, Padres, Angels, the Cubs, and White Sox. The Brewers can only do that once or (if they maximize their revenue) twice a decade. So, they need to develop a lot of their bench help, bullpen assets, etc. in-house whenever possible. That's why Fry and Wilson went 3-4 and Mitchell and Small were 5-6. That doesn't explain whatsoever why you rank Fry and Wilson 3-4 and Mitchell and Small 5-6. I understand the value of developing MLB depth in the system, but that really has nothing to do with ranking future prospect value. Do you honestly believe that Weston Wilson is going to have more future value to the Brewers than Garrett Mitchell? Because that is what you are saying with your rankings.