SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
|
Post by ramireja on Feb 2, 2018 12:58:45 GMT -5
I’ve never seen him pitch, and his numbers are obviously disappointing, but.... he came to the Sox young and raw. He is still only 23, a 6’6” lefty. He still has multiple pitches with high upside. I think the only option is patience. Kid hasn’t hit in years, and last did it in high school. It seems far more likely he ends up servicable relief pitcher than outfield prospect. Anyway, he is 23, in AA, has a solid arm and body. There is a ton of work to do, but he has the parts to work on. This. I'd opt for a bullpen move at this point. Trying to recreate him as an OF prospect seems like a waste of an OF position in our system. Like Manfred said, he hasn't hit in years and hitting .320 in HS is actually quite pedestrian.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Apr 14, 2018 8:45:24 GMT -5
Trey Ball has officially been moved to the bullpen.
|
|
|
Trey Ball
Apr 14, 2018 10:26:46 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by bigpapiortiz on Apr 14, 2018 10:26:46 GMT -5
How has his velocity been with the move to the bullpen? Really encouraging move. Let’s hope he can keep it up and follow the path of a certain lanky LH high draft pick that failed as a starter.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Apr 14, 2018 10:44:58 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Apr 15, 2018 21:36:59 GMT -5
I'm excited if his strike-throwing keeps up. That was a major issue for him as a starter. The stuff honestly wasn't bad so much as the inconsistency and lack of command. That said, I'm going to wait for the .143 BABIP to normalize a bit before I get too excited. He's not going to maintain a 21% Pop-up percentage either. Still, positive developments so far, at least.
|
|
|
Post by juanpena on May 6, 2018 16:31:10 GMT -5
Ball gave up five hits, including two homers, in 2.1 innings today. That's four straight appearances he's been torched.
It's hard to find any reason for optimism.
|
|
|
Post by RedSoxStats on May 30, 2018 9:21:25 GMT -5
Ball's allowed an earned run in 9 of his past 10 games.
10 G, 19 IP, 28 H, 19 ER, 11 BB, 17 K, 6 HR, 341/432/659
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on May 30, 2018 9:24:08 GMT -5
Anticipating someone asking, I give him the year to see if he figures out the relief role, then talk with him at his exit meeting about what he wants to do moving forward.
I know everyone is just like "he was a first-round talent as an outfielder too!" but the guy hasn't swung a bat regularly for five years now. There needs to be complete buy-in on his part if moving him back to the outfield is going to work, and even then it's a longshot.
|
|
|
Post by klostrophobic on May 30, 2018 11:32:46 GMT -5
Even if he were to go that route, he'd be 24 or 25 starting over and likely start at, what, Greenville? Best case, reach the majors when he's 28-29. Not a lot of guys want to spend a decade in the minors.
|
|
|
Post by jbuttah on May 30, 2018 11:41:43 GMT -5
I think it more likely they would keep trying different things pitching wise, like maybe trying a sidearm or submarine arm slot.
|
|
|
Post by iakovos11 on May 30, 2018 11:55:41 GMT -5
I think it more likely they would keep trying different things pitching wise, like maybe trying a sidearm or submarine arm slot. Or the knuckelball. Sox will need to someone to carry on the Wake/Wright tradition. Not sure it will work without the W last name, though.
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 15,653
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on May 30, 2018 12:41:18 GMT -5
Well, I do think that either Cherington or somebody else in the organization said they were "swinging for the fences" when they drafted Ball with the 7th pick.
Suffice to say, they swung and missed. Terribly.
|
|
|
Post by bcsox on May 30, 2018 12:54:06 GMT -5
the post about knuckleballers just caused me a thought. I dont recall there being any lefty knuckleballers. Is there any reason behind that scientifically?
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on May 30, 2018 13:26:10 GMT -5
Well, I do think that either Cherington or somebody else in the organization said they were "swinging for the fences" when they drafted Ball with the 7th pick. Suffice to say, they swung and missed. Terribly. They weren't swinging for the fences. They took a consensus top 10 draft pick at #7 in a crappy draft.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on May 30, 2018 13:33:14 GMT -5
Well, I do think that either Cherington or somebody else in the organization said they were "swinging for the fences" when they drafted Ball with the 7th pick. Suffice to say, they swung and missed. Terribly. They weren't swinging for the fences. They took a consensus top 10 draft pick at #7 in a crappy draft. Yeah it's not like picks 1 and 4 went much better. And we all wanted the guy at 4 to fall to them at 7 and would've been doing the happy dance. Sometimes you miss on picks. It happens. You just can't do it too often.
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 15,653
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on May 30, 2018 14:58:40 GMT -5
Well, I do think that either Cherington or somebody else in the organization said they were "swinging for the fences" when they drafted Ball with the 7th pick. Suffice to say, they swung and missed. Terribly. They weren't swinging for the fences. They took a consensus top 10 draft pick at #7 in a crappy draft. They felt they were as I reference an article from the Providence Journal from Brian MacPherson. "But the Red Sox saw enough from Ball in his high-school season and in various prospect showcases to make the 6-foot-6 lefty the No. 7 overall pick in Thursday’s draft, their highest selection since Trot Nixon in 1993 -- the silver lining to last year’s 93-loss season. He’s the “swing for the fences” pick to which scouting director Amiel Sawdaye alluded before the draft."
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on May 30, 2018 15:01:27 GMT -5
They weren't swinging for the fences. They took a consensus top 10 draft pick at #7 in a crappy draft. They felt they were as I reference an article from the Providence Journal from Brian MacPherson. "But the Red Sox saw enough from Ball in his high-school season and in various prospect showcases to make the 6-foot-6 lefty the No. 7 overall pick in Thursday’s draft, their highest selection since Trot Nixon in 1993 -- the silver lining to last year’s 93-loss season. He’s the “swing for the fences” pick to which scouting director Amiel Sawdaye alluded before the draft." They can write that all they want, but it doesn't mean they reached for the pick whatsoever which is what that comment is implying. They took a guy that was projected to go around where he went.
|
|
|
Post by jbuttah on May 30, 2018 15:07:04 GMT -5
They felt they were as I reference an article from the Providence Journal from Brian MacPherson. "But the Red Sox saw enough from Ball in his high-school season and in various prospect showcases to make the 6-foot-6 lefty the No. 7 overall pick in Thursday’s draft, their highest selection since Trot Nixon in 1993 -- the silver lining to last year’s 93-loss season. He’s the “swing for the fences” pick to which scouting director Amiel Sawdaye alluded before the draft." They can write that all they want, but it doesn't mean they reached for the pick whatsoever which is what that comment is implying. They took a guy that was projected to go around where he went. The Ball pick is made all the more painful because I think the consensus (on this board and some mock drafts) was that they were going to pick Frazier or Meadows. They could have taken Meadows who is now a MLB regular. It might not have been a huge reach, but I do remember Ball was expected to go in more in the 12-18 range than top ten.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on May 30, 2018 15:13:53 GMT -5
I'm honestly so sick of talking about this that I can't do it anymore. Sorry I posted anything.
|
|
|
Post by cotuitfan on May 30, 2018 15:26:38 GMT -5
Just looked again - 2013 was one stinker of a first round. 5 years on and Bryant and Judge only stars ... Jon Gray's shown glimpses ... but wow, I had no idea it was this bad.
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 15,653
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on May 30, 2018 15:40:33 GMT -5
They felt they were as I reference an article from the Providence Journal from Brian MacPherson. "But the Red Sox saw enough from Ball in his high-school season and in various prospect showcases to make the 6-foot-6 lefty the No. 7 overall pick in Thursday’s draft, their highest selection since Trot Nixon in 1993 -- the silver lining to last year’s 93-loss season. He’s the “swing for the fences” pick to which scouting director Amiel Sawdaye alluded before the draft." They can write that all they want, but it doesn't mean they reached for the pick whatsoever which is what that comment is implying. They took a guy that was projected to go around where he went. Relax Jim. It was MacPherson either quoting or paraphrasing Amiel Sawdaye. It's not MacPherson projecting his own opinion on Ball. I made a simple comment that the Sox swung for the fences (that quote always stuck with me for some reason that I remember it 5 years later) and that they missed (pretty obvious). Wasn't meant to be a hurtful mark that gets people upset for no real reason. And no, they're not the first team to miss on a high pick. At least they hit one off the Monster when they next picked 7th - when they snagged Benintendi.
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 15,653
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on May 30, 2018 15:46:24 GMT -5
They can write that all they want, but it doesn't mean they reached for the pick whatsoever which is what that comment is implying. They took a guy that was projected to go around where he went. The Ball pick is made all the more painful because I think the consensus (on this board and some mock drafts) was that they were going to pick Frazier or Meadows. They could have taken Meadows who is now a MLB regular. It might not have been a huge reach, but I do remember Ball was expected to go in more in the 12-18 range than top ten. That's what I remember. That Frazier was the hope but Cleveland pounced. Then the next hope was it was Meadows kind of the way I hoped the Sox would get Benintendi when it became obvious there was a chance and the way I hoped the Sox would somehow miraculously come away with Groome as it so happened. I think Ball was seen as a project, one with higher risk/higher reward, but a real project.
|
|
|
Trey Ball
May 30, 2018 15:53:21 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by sarasoxer on May 30, 2018 15:53:21 GMT -5
the post about knuckleballers just caused me a thought. I dont recall there being any lefty knuckleballers. Is there any reason behind that scientifically? First there are few knuckleballers period. But Wilbur Wood was an outstanding left-handed knuckleballer who came up thru the Red Sox organization with marginal overall stuff until he converted full time to the knuckleball. Unfortunately for us he blossomed after he left. www.baseball-reference.com/players/w/woodwi01-pitch.shtmlen.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilbur_Wood
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on May 30, 2018 16:00:03 GMT -5
They can write that all they want, but it doesn't mean they reached for the pick whatsoever which is what that comment is implying. They took a guy that was projected to go around where he went. Relax Jim. It was MacPherson either quoting or paraphrasing Amiel Sawdaye. It's not MacPherson projecting his own opinion on Ball. I made a simple comment that the Sox swung for the fences (that quote always stuck with me for some reason that I remember it 5 years later) and that they missed (pretty obvious). Wasn't meant to be a hurtful mark that gets people upset for no real reason. And no, they're not the first team to miss on a high pick. At least they hit one off the Monster when they next picked 7th - when they snagged Benintendi. But the quote from Sawdaye is something he said before the draft that MacPherson, post hoc, was applying to the Ball pick for reasons that aren't clear. If you read the entire paragraph, he actually could be using that phrase to refer to the fact that they were picking 7th for the first time since 1993 - and in fact, now that I see it in context, I do think that's what MacPherson means, rather than in reference to Ball himself as a pick. EDIT: And if you read the whole article it actually does seem he was referring to Ball. Not entirely clear though. Anyway, I love MacPherson, but he's no draftnik - he refers to "college outfielders" Frazier and Meadows later in the same article. www.providencejournal.com/sports/red-sox/content/20130606-red-sox-select-two-way-star-trey-ball-at-no.-7-overall.eceThat said, BMac does sum up the situation well in the article: There wasn't much outward connection between the Sox and Ball, but that doesn't mean it should have come out of nowhere, as they scouted him the same as the others. I think our consensus in hindsight was that they thought Frazier was going to fall, and that got somewhat confirmed a year later when Frazier said he had a deal worked out ahead of time with the Sox. See www.overthemonster.com/2014/1/3/5269880/clint-frazier-was-going-to-the-red-soxWhatever, if they took Meadows he'd have been a throw-in in the Carson Smith trade or something anyway.
|
|
|
Post by bluechip on May 31, 2018 2:37:54 GMT -5
Relax Jim. It was MacPherson either quoting or paraphrasing Amiel Sawdaye. It's not MacPherson projecting his own opinion on Ball. I made a simple comment that the Sox swung for the fences (that quote always stuck with me for some reason that I remember it 5 years later) and that they missed (pretty obvious). Wasn't meant to be a hurtful mark that gets people upset for no real reason. And no, they're not the first team to miss on a high pick. At least they hit one off the Monster when they next picked 7th - when they snagged Benintendi. But the quote from Sawdaye is something he said before the draft that MacPherson, post hoc, was applying to the Ball pick for reasons that aren't clear. If you read the entire paragraph, he actually could be using that phrase to refer to the fact that they were picking 7th for the first time since 1993 - and in fact, now that I see it in context, I do think that's what MacPherson means, rather than in reference to Ball himself as a pick. EDIT: And if you read the whole article it actually does seem he was referring to Ball. Not entirely clear though. Anyway, I love MacPherson, but he's no draftnik - he refers to "college outfielders" Frazier and Meadows later in the same article. www.providencejournal.com/sports/red-sox/content/20130606-red-sox-select-two-way-star-trey-ball-at-no.-7-overall.eceThat said, BMac does sum up the situation well in the article: There wasn't much outward connection between the Sox and Ball, but that doesn't mean it should have come out of nowhere, as they scouted him the same as the others. I think our consensus in hindsight was that they thought Frazier was going to fall, and that got somewhat confirmed a year later when Frazier said he had a deal worked out ahead of time with the Sox. See www.overthemonster.com/2014/1/3/5269880/clint-frazier-was-going-to-the-red-soxWhatever, if they took Meadows he'd have been a throw-in in the Carson Smith trade or something anyway.I remember that draft well. The Red Sox appeared to want Frazier or Moran. Both of which were picked before them. Ball didn’t come out of no where, but when the top six fell they way it did, I remember us all kinda throwing up our hands. Here was our post draft discussion of the “inside the draft room” video posted on mlb.com a couple of days after the draft. I think it was "Ball's a super athlete." Also, based on past draft videos (e.g. here), looks like the colors are for differentiating between HS, JuCo, College, etc. players, as speculated above. Or, at the very least, it doesn't seem like any sort of tiering or anything like that. Your right some one says "Ball is a super athlete" Then Ben Cherington says "Ball is higher on the board" What I take away from the draft room is that the pick wasn't a slam dunk. Ball obviously wasn't they guy they were hoping would fall otherwise there would be no discussion at all. There was some indecision and the pick of Ball was being debated until the last minute.. a lot at stake on this pick. As noted, by Cherington, Ball was the top remaining player on their draft board.
|
|
|