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 patford on May 31, 2018 8:52:14 GMT -5
It's all very discouraging but as long as Ball has the desire to keep trying to find it they should keep rolling him out there in hopes that at some point he will improve his command.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Jun 9, 2018 21:53:10 GMT -5
This draft seems like more of a unknown this year than in most years. Some of the best talent the Sox got came out of high school and you have no idea where that could ever go. I trust the Sox scouting department though. When they aren't reaching (like when they did with Ball), they seem to go with as safe as picks as they can get. Relievers and power seems like a safe bet. Sure most of these guys never make it, but there is a (sometimes) quicker and easier path as pure relievers and you can't teach power with hitters. Lol, Ball wasn’t a reach, though. He was a slightly underslot sign and most outlets had him falling no lower than 12. He was pretty much consensus next-tier after the top few guys.
|
|
|
Trey Ball
Jun 9, 2018 23:20:42 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Jun 9, 2018 23:20:42 GMT -5
This draft seems like more of a unknown this year than in most years. Some of the best talent the Sox got came out of high school and you have no idea where that could ever go. I trust the Sox scouting department though. When they aren't reaching (like when they did with Ball), they seem to go with as safe as picks as they can get. Relievers and power seems like a safe bet. Sure most of these guys never make it, but there is a (sometimes) quicker and easier path as pure relievers and you can't teach power with hitters. Lol, Ball wasn’t a reach, though. He was a slightly underslot sign and most outlets had him falling no lower than 12. He was pretty much consensus next-tier after the top few guys. He was a reach at 7 though. It's normally a bad idea to take a under slot guy at a top pick like that. Correa might be the one exception to the rule. Take the best talent in the top 10 especially. That could be your next franchise piece.
|
|
|
Post by swingingbunt on Jun 9, 2018 23:45:51 GMT -5
Lol, Ball wasn’t a reach, though. He was a slightly underslot sign and most outlets had him falling no lower than 12. He was pretty much consensus next-tier after the top few guys. He was a reach at 7 though. It's normally a bad idea to take a under slot guy at a top pick like that. Correa might be the one exception to the rule. Take the best talent in the top 10 especially. That could be your next franchise piece. The only reach is saying that the Ball pick was a reach. As stated above, that draft had a tier of 6 players, which went 1-6, before dropping off to the next tier. Ball was easily in that next tier, although probably in the back half of it. Taking Ball also allowed the Sox to spend later on another player that was thought to be a pretty good prospect. Something to keep in mind is that the first pick in that draft is already retired, and the player who got picked at pick 8, (who was actually a huge reach) has made the big leagues, and also allowed the team that took him to take another player later in the draft that just threw a no-hitter against the Red Sox. Drafting is hard, and requires a lot of luck. It's a shame Ball didn't work out like we wanted, but there certainly wasn't anything inherently wrong with their strategy.
|
|
|
Trey Ball
Jun 10, 2018 0:00:49 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Jun 10, 2018 0:00:49 GMT -5
He was a reach at 7 though. It's normally a bad idea to take a under slot guy at a top pick like that. Correa might be the one exception to the rule. Take the best talent in the top 10 especially. That could be your next franchise piece. The only reach is saying that the Ball pick was a reach. As stated above, that draft had a tier of 6 players, which went 1-6, before dropping off to the next tier. Ball was easily in that next tier, although probably in the back half of it. Taking Ball also allowed the Sox to spend later on another player that was thought to be a pretty good prospect. Something to keep in mind is that the first pick in that draft is already retired, and the player who got picked at pick 8, (who was actually a huge reach) has made the big leagues, and also allowed the team that took him to take another player later in the draft that just threw a no-hitter against the Red Sox. Drafting is hard, and requires a lot of luck. It's a shame Ball didn't work out like we wanted, but there certainly wasn't anything inherently wrong with their strategy. I kind of agree and disagree. I agree that I could see the upside in a big lefty starter like ball out of highschool, but I just don't like how they were essentially throwing a dart at number 7 and going on all upside in a high school arm. Outside of Judge and a few others, the whole 2013 draft was one of the worst the past 10 years really so it's kind of a moot point.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Jun 10, 2018 0:02:44 GMT -5
He was a reach at 7 though. It's normally a bad idea to take a under slot guy at a top pick like that. Correa might be the one exception to the rule. Take the best talent in the top 10 especially. That could be your next franchise piece. The only reach is saying that the Ball pick was a reach. As stated above, that draft had a tier of 6 players, which went 1-6, before dropping off to the next tier. Ball was easily in that next tier, although probably in the back half of it. Taking Ball also allowed the Sox to spend later on another player that was thought to be a pretty good prospect. Something to keep in mind is that the first pick in that draft is already retired, and the player who got picked at pick 8, (who was actually a huge reach) has made the big leagues, and also allowed the team that took him to take another player later in the draft that just threw a no-hitter against the Red Sox. Drafting is hard, and requires a lot of luck. It's a shame Ball didn't work out like we wanted, but there certainly wasn't anything inherently wrong with their strategy. Couldn’t have said it better. Dozier was an actual “reach,” Ball was an extremely talented player who was drafted within five spots of where pretty much everyone thought he’d be drafted. Appel was a near-consensus 1, two years in a row. He’s done. And we’d have almost been uniformly ecstatic to land Kohl Stewart, who’s struggling in AAA after being 4 for the Twins. Phil Bickford was in that tier with Ball, and he ended up going to SF in ‘15 as the *18th* pick, after turning down Toronto. He’s still in A ball. Braden Shipley (who I liked at the time, but I thought was probably a bit of a reach at 7) is in AAA at 26 for AZ. Ball wasn’t a reach...he is emblematic if the risk of drafting pitchers. It’s the nature of the beast. The Sox took a calculated risk on a projectable arm who probably wouldn’t have lasted past Toronto at 10 (since he was considered more likely to sign than Bickford, with similar talent). I think the best takeaway is, if you’re picking that high, take a hitter. Lol, like Meadows.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Jun 10, 2018 0:06:16 GMT -5
The only reach is saying that the Ball pick was a reach. As stated above, that draft had a tier of 6 players, which went 1-6, before dropping off to the next tier. Ball was easily in that next tier, although probably in the back half of it. Taking Ball also allowed the Sox to spend later on another player that was thought to be a pretty good prospect. Something to keep in mind is that the first pick in that draft is already retired, and the player who got picked at pick 8, (who was actually a huge reach) has made the big leagues, and also allowed the team that took him to take another player later in the draft that just threw a no-hitter against the Red Sox. Drafting is hard, and requires a lot of luck. It's a shame Ball didn't work out like we wanted, but there certainly wasn't anything inherently wrong with their strategy. Couldn’t have said it better. Dozier was an actual “reach,” Ball was an extremely talented player who was drafted within five spots of where pretty much everyone thought he’d be drafted. Appel was a near-consensus 1, two years in a row. He’s done. And we’d have almost been uniformly ecstatic to land Kohl Stewart, who’s struggling in AAA after being 4 for the Twins. Phil Bickford was in that tier with Ball, and he ended up going to SF in ‘15 as the *18th* pick, after turning down Toronto. He’s still in A ball. Braden Shipley (who I liked at the time, but I thought was probably a bit of a reach at 7) is in AAA at 26 for AZ. Ball wasn’t a reach...he is emblematic if the risk of drafting pitchers. It’s the nature of the beast. The Sox took a calculated risk on a projectable arm who probably wouldn’t have lasted past Toronto at 10 (since he was considered more likely to sign than Bickford, with similar talent). I think the best takeaway is, if you’re picking that high, take a hitter. Lol, like Meadows. Yeap, as stated above in the post above this, that 2013 draft was a disaster for a lot of teams. Red Sox included. Edit- It ticks me off that the only team to have nailed that draft is the Yankees. You could turn to that draft and point to that year and say that's when they started revamping their farm system and turning in into the superpower of major and minor league talent today.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Jun 10, 2018 0:08:20 GMT -5
The only reach is saying that the Ball pick was a reach. As stated above, that draft had a tier of 6 players, which went 1-6, before dropping off to the next tier. Ball was easily in that next tier, although probably in the back half of it. Taking Ball also allowed the Sox to spend later on another player that was thought to be a pretty good prospect. Something to keep in mind is that the first pick in that draft is already retired, and the player who got picked at pick 8, (who was actually a huge reach) has made the big leagues, and also allowed the team that took him to take another player later in the draft that just threw a no-hitter against the Red Sox. Drafting is hard, and requires a lot of luck. It's a shame Ball didn't work out like we wanted, but there certainly wasn't anything inherently wrong with their strategy. I kind of agree and disagree. I agree that I could see the upside in a big lefty starter like ball out of highschool, but I just don't like how they were essentially throwing a dart at number 7 and going on all upside in a high school arm. Outside of Judge and a few others, the whole 2013 draft was one of the worst the past 10 years really so it's kind of a moot point. And yes, that draft was really pretty bad. Bryant is terrific, and Judge is too. But even Gray among all the pitchers has struggled (thanks Coors), and the next pitcher to make it, i think, was Stanek for the Rays. I think the Sox did what you have to do there in a weak draft where you’ve got a high pick: gamble but save enough $ to take another risk further down. I mean, if they’d taken Judge we’d have lost our collective minds back then!
|
|
|
Trey Ball
Jun 10, 2018 0:36:47 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Jun 10, 2018 0:36:47 GMT -5
Trey Ball is and will be the Sox biggest draft bust for a long long time. The Sox have drafted in the top 10 in the pick category 6 times since the rule 4 draft came into existence. Three players in the 1960's went on to have careers with the Sox in Billy Conigliaro, Ken Brett, and Mike Garman.
Since then, the Sox have only selected 3 times in the top ten. They took Trot Nixon in 1993. Trey Ball in 2013. Benintendi in 2015.
Trey Ball most likely will never throw a single pitch in a Sox uniform. The only guy that comes close to being this bad of a bust is a guy named Tom Fischer who was a left handed pitcher out of college in 1988 draft picked at number 12. He never threw a pitch for the Sox either.
I think that's why the Ball pick stings a little. It was arguably the *worst pick in Sox history* considering where he was taken in the first round.
|
|
|
Post by FenwayFanatic on Jun 10, 2018 7:07:19 GMT -5
He was a reach at 7 though. It's normally a bad idea to take a under slot guy at a top pick like that. Correa might be the one exception to the rule. Take the best talent in the top 10 especially. That could be your next franchise piece. The only reach is saying that the Ball pick was a reach. As stated above, that draft had a tier of 6 players, which went 1-6, before dropping off to the next tier. Ball was easily in that next tier, although probably in the back half of it. Taking Ball also allowed the Sox to spend later on another player that was thought to be a pretty good prospect. Something to keep in mind is that the first pick in that draft is already retired, and the player who got picked at pick 8, (who was actually a huge reach) has made the big leagues, and also allowed the team that took him to take another player later in the draft that just threw a no-hitter against the Red Sox. Drafting is hard, and requires a lot of luck. It's a shame Ball didn't work out like we wanted, but there certainly wasn't anything inherently wrong with their strategy. Top tier had 7 players, Meadows was still available at 7 when we picked. Which makes the pick even more awful.
|
|
|
Trey Ball
Jun 10, 2018 7:42:05 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by swingingbunt on Jun 10, 2018 7:42:05 GMT -5
The only reach is saying that the Ball pick was a reach. As stated above, that draft had a tier of 6 players, which went 1-6, before dropping off to the next tier. Ball was easily in that next tier, although probably in the back half of it. Taking Ball also allowed the Sox to spend later on another player that was thought to be a pretty good prospect. Something to keep in mind is that the first pick in that draft is already retired, and the player who got picked at pick 8, (who was actually a huge reach) has made the big leagues, and also allowed the team that took him to take another player later in the draft that just threw a no-hitter against the Red Sox. Drafting is hard, and requires a lot of luck. It's a shame Ball didn't work out like we wanted, but there certainly wasn't anything inherently wrong with their strategy. Top tier had 7 players, Meadows was still available at 7 when we picked. Which makes the pick even more awful. Meadows was thought to be tweener with no carrying tool and I remember him being firmly outside the top teir. My recollection had him as the next best pick, and the person I wanted, but still a huge letdown considering most people wanted Frazier to fall.
|
|
|
Trey Ball
Jun 11, 2018 10:38:25 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by telson13 on Jun 11, 2018 10:38:25 GMT -5
Couldn’t have said it better. Dozier was an actual “reach,” Ball was an extremely talented player who was drafted within five spots of where pretty much everyone thought he’d be drafted. Appel was a near-consensus 1, two years in a row. He’s done. And we’d have almost been uniformly ecstatic to land Kohl Stewart, who’s struggling in AAA after being 4 for the Twins. Phil Bickford was in that tier with Ball, and he ended up going to SF in ‘15 as the *18th* pick, after turning down Toronto. He’s still in A ball. Braden Shipley (who I liked at the time, but I thought was probably a bit of a reach at 7) is in AAA at 26 for AZ. Ball wasn’t a reach...he is emblematic if the risk of drafting pitchers. It’s the nature of the beast. The Sox took a calculated risk on a projectable arm who probably wouldn’t have lasted past Toronto at 10 (since he was considered more likely to sign than Bickford, with similar talent). I think the best takeaway is, if you’re picking that high, take a hitter. Lol, like Meadows. Yeap, as stated above in the post above this, that 2013 draft was a disaster for a lot of teams. Red Sox included. Edit- It ticks me off that the only team to have nailed that draft is the Yankees. You could turn to that draft and point to that year and say that's when they started revamping their farm system and turning in into the superpower of major and minor league talent today. I wish I could like this again for the edit. NY made some mistakes in that draft, too, but Judge was a huge get. And, as you say, this was exactly when they started hoarding prospects and Cashman started finagling deals for more with deals like the multi-Chapman flips. And, he used Jagielo (from ‘13) as the main piece in the first-time acquisition.
|
|
|
Post by theaveragefan88 on Jun 11, 2018 10:47:20 GMT -5
I don't understand the "reach" argument. Ball was an uber-talented lefty HS pitcher who was a projected top 12 pick. If the Sox took the #11 ranked player at #7 would it still be a reach? #8 ranked player a reach? Where do you draw that line? If you think that was a reach, you must hate all Bill Belichick drafts lol. I mean for sure a giant bust, didn't pan out, but not a reach at all.
|
|
|
Trey Ball
Jun 11, 2018 10:47:22 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by telson13 on Jun 11, 2018 10:47:22 GMT -5
Top tier had 7 players, Meadows was still available at 7 when we picked. Which makes the pick even more awful. Meadows was thought to be tweener with no carrying tool and I remember him being firmly outside the top teir. My recollection had him as the next best pick, and the person I wanted, but still a huge letdown considering most people wanted Frazier to fall. In fairness, he and Frazier were considered similar in terms of overall talent. Frazier had more power, Meadows was smaller but more athletic. Meadows was kind of a HS Benintendi-type only without the 70 hit tool (more like a 55-60 if i recall?). I actually wanted Frazier to fall, but I liked Meadows too. That said, I also liked Ball and I was happy they took him, because I knew they could get him underslot since he was projected more in the 9-12 range. I’d actually say that that draft had a 1-3 tier, with Appel, Bryant, Gray, and maybe a 1-4 if you include Stewart, who was the clear prep monster. But Frazier, Meadows, Ball, Bickford, Moran (who had serious power questions and was considered a disappointing “best next available college hitter”)...they were kind of mix-n-match next tier. It got murky after 10-12, and a player like Shipley going 8 or 9 wouldn’t have been strange. Just not a good draft at all.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Jun 11, 2018 10:57:48 GMT -5
Once Frazier and Moran were off the board, I wanted Braden Shipley.
He's not really good either.
You know how you can tell it was a crummy draft? Because the Red Sox missed with the #7 pick, and there is exactly only one player that people harp on as the would've/could've/should've guy, and that guy just reached the majors five years later. Usually when you miss at #7, there are easily four or five in the 8 to 15 range who, five years later, you're wistful for. Not here. All I hear about is Austin Meadows.
EDIT: And the idea that the Yankees had this amazing draft is also some serious inferiority complex BS. They hit on Aaron Judge, but he was one of three picks. They grabbed Eric Jagielo ahead of him, and Ian Clarkin with the very next pick. Three picks between 26 and 33 and they got one dude. Sean Manaea went #34, and everyone knew about him, and the Yankees had the money to move around to sign him, and they didn't do it.
|
|
|
Trey Ball
Jun 11, 2018 11:53:55 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Jun 11, 2018 11:53:55 GMT -5
I don't know, you could miss a entire draft, but if you get on of the two best players in the draft that year and he turns to be a franchise player, then that seems like a win to me.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Jun 11, 2018 12:27:01 GMT -5
If we're going to use an oversimplified win/loss dichotomy, sure. If we're going to analyze whether the Yankees "nailed" the draft, nah. They got the best player available with one of their picks, and got players no better than Trey Ball with their other two first rounders.
And to say they were the ONLY team that nailed the draft? When the Cubs got the best player, and their second pick (Zastryzny) was miles better than any of the Yankees picks? That's the Yankee inferiority complex right there. Every team lucks into a good player sometimes. The Angels, who have easily the worst amateur scouting record of any franchise this century, also made the single best draft choice of the last 30 years.
That's part of my frustration. A team that had a ton of success in 2011, got seven major leaguers in their first eight picks in 2012 (provided Buttrey makes to the majors, and him not getting there probably involves something like a career-ending injury at this point), hit on both of its first rounders in 2014, and got a franchise cornerstone in 2015 but missed on its top pick in a historically bad draft in 2013 and that's all that gets talked about. And what's worse, like that one draft somehow puts the Yankees amateur scouting in anywhere the same league.
|
|
|
Trey Ball
Jun 11, 2018 13:22:22 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by telson13 on Jun 11, 2018 13:22:22 GMT -5
Once Frazier and Moran were off the board, I wanted Braden Shipley. He's not really good either. You know how you can tell it was a crummy draft? Because the Red Sox missed with the #7 pick, and there is exactly only one player that people harp on as the would've/could've/should've guy, and that guy just reached the majors five years later. Usually when you miss at #7, there are easily four or five in the 8 to 15 range who, five years later, you're wistful for. Not here. All I hear about is Austin Meadows. EDIT: And the idea that the Yankees had this amazing draft is also some serious inferiority complex BS. They hit on Aaron Judge, but he was one of three picks. They grabbed Eric Jagielo ahead of him, and Ian Clarkin with the very next pick. Three picks between 26 and 33 and they got one dude. Sean Manaea went #34, and everyone knew about him, and the Yankees had the money to move around to sign him, and they didn't do it. I mentioned this elsewhere, but I was pretty high on Shipley too. I thought he was a bit of an overdraft at 7, but in that draft, pretty much everyone after Stewart was an overdraft at 7. Frazier I guess would’ve been about right, but he was no Benintendi (or Trot Nixon, for that matter). I don’t think anyone is saying NY had a great draft, although they made one franchise pick (which basically makes it a great draft). Just bemoaning that that draft was the point where they started turning their system around...Jagielo netted Chapman and Judge is Judge. To me, it’s not the draft itself but the evolution of their organizational approach to talent acquisition: Cashman made a point to reload the minors (horribly, quite astutely) as they were mired in good-not-great country, trading Jagielo for Chapman, and signing Miller, then flipping them both for a bunch of talent. Although, Dillon Tate hasn’t done much of anything and Sheffield has a BB rate over 10% in AAA. So, no, they didn’t draft great, they got incredibly lucky on one pick. It just happened to coincide with them realizing that they needed to stockpile some minor league talent.
|
|
|
Trey Ball
Jun 11, 2018 13:27:45 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Jun 11, 2018 13:27:45 GMT -5
The Yankees scouting department has made a ton of improvements and is quite good now. I'm sure they stack up with the Sox scouting department these days.
|
|
|
Trey Ball
Jun 11, 2018 13:35:13 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by telson13 on Jun 11, 2018 13:35:13 GMT -5
Also, FWIW, I agree with you James that the Sox have a superior scouting department. They’ve been the best-drafting team for quite a few years. They hit big with remarkable frequency, and one need look no further than our own division (Baltimore) to see what bad drafting looks like. I think where the Sox lag behind some teams is in pitching development, and especially in properly evaluating their own roster/the market, and moving MLB players for other teams’ minor leaguers. Part of that is the persistent “win now” philosophy of a perennial contender. And it’s not as if they don’t identify potentially valuable players on other teams (Miller from Miami and then Rodriguez from Baltimore, for example). But they do seem to often miss obtaining peak value from players on their roster, which is in part I think a problem of consistency in the development stream (tough when you’re usually picking late 20s, or having trouble developing pitching), and of expecting/wanting superior performance over money-saving simple “capability” (Shaw). But, yeah, the Sox are great at identifying (and apparently, relationship-building) with amateur talent.
|
|
|
Post by iakovos11 on Jun 11, 2018 13:36:41 GMT -5
The Yankees scouting department has made a ton of improvements and is quite good now. I'm sure they stack up with the Sox scouting department these days. Just curious what those specific upgrades are? I don't follow other teams scouting department changes unless it's been a big deal in the media. Hell, I'd have hard time keeping track of Red Sox scouting department changes. I mean they a few recently. Not sure if they were good or bad as a whole, though. So I am curious what the Yankees have done recently to boost their scouting department chops.
|
|
|
Trey Ball
Jun 11, 2018 13:44:06 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Jun 11, 2018 13:44:06 GMT -5
The Yankees scouting department has made a ton of improvements and is quite good now. I'm sure they stack up with the Sox scouting department these days. Just curious what those specific upgrades are? I don't follow other teams scouting department changes unless it's been a big deal in the media. Hell, I'd have hard time keeping track of Red Sox scouting department changes. I mean they a few recently. Not sure if they were good or bad as a whole, though. So I am curious what the Yankees have done recently to boost their scouting department chops. www.mlb.com/news/yankees-announce-five-additions-to-major-league-scouting-department/c-67275286Yankees vice president of baseball operations Mark Newman retired in 2013. The past five years they've hired quite a few people in the scouting department. Edit- nypost.com/2017/11/01/yankees-fill-key-exec-role-now-can-find-their-manager/Kevin Reese has also become the Yankees’ director of professional scouting. He was recently hired.
|
|
|
Post by iakovos11 on Jun 11, 2018 14:08:28 GMT -5
Cool, looks they've had some changes. We'll see if it's a positive long term or not. I think the bigger change might be at the GM level and how they've dealt with prospects in terms of trading them or trading for them. But they have certainly assembled a solid farm system right now. Seems that more from Cashman selling off assets a few years back when they were out of contention.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jun 11, 2018 14:29:09 GMT -5
For a while we sucked at pitching prospects, but that seems to have changed. Ball was risky, his stuff regressed, not we didn't develop him right. Espinoza, Kopech and Allen were all traded, but show were gotten better at bringing in the right guys. Add Groome, Mata, Houck, Shawaryn, Beeks and Scherff that is a ton of good pitchers recently. Heck without trades and injuries it would be one of better groups in all of baseball.
|
|
|
Post by greatscottcooper on Jun 11, 2018 14:32:46 GMT -5
Ball was a consensus top 12 pick in the draft.
Anyone who says he was a reach is doing so because they're either going off of some other guys draft board, or because they heard nice things about Austin Meadows in 2013 and we needed outfielders back then.
The best argument against the Trey Ball pick is hindsight, and that is literally zero argument at all. Seriously, I would eat a pair of dirty socks and post it on you-tube if I could never hear the "we never should of drafted Trey Ball" argument again.
|
|
|