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.
danr
Veteran
Posts: 1,871
|
Post by danr on Aug 17, 2015 12:00:51 GMT -5
The only other defensible pick was probably Meadows, who they should have taken. But we also might note how there are very few good pitchers in our system, and lots of position players. I had Shipley as the guy I wanted after Fraizer and Stewart, but Smith, Peterson, McGuire, and Crawford all had some top 10 helium and would have been justifiable picks, even if they weren't rumored as matches. Remember when Gonzalez was rumored as being a possibility at #7? IIRC, some members were threatening bodily harm if they took him at #7, or maybe that was just me. There are five pitchers on that list who already have made the majors: Marco replacement level pitcher for 34 innings in 2014, followed by 5.5 ERA in AAA in 2015 and supporting FIP data. 50 grade overall from Kileyand ChiChi Gonzales Replacement level pitching this year, striking out less per 9 than he is walking. Average-ish minor league stats, but still a solid prospect from the scouting side. Best of this bunch, Rob Kaminsky Don't see this guy in the majors, unless I'm looking up the wrong one Michael Lorenzen 5.46 ERA in 90 MLb innings supported by FIP data. Solid in AA last year, but nothing that would suggest other than his 50 gradeand Corey Knebel Reliever. Given the obvious Sox need for pitching, it would have made more sense to draft a pitcher with more advanced development, with a record of achievement at a higher level. The more I think about it, the less sense this pick made. Added some context in the blue. While the Ball pick is not looking good, these guys were not obvious answers. Off subject from Ball... The 2013 draft clearly looks weak at the top with Ball's performance, and Denny's off field issues, but I think we did good after round ten with Asuaje, Dubon, and Longhi. All ~ top 20 in the system while only spending 350K over slot. There's only so much detail one can put into a post. I considered putting the records of the players in the post, but it would have made it far too long. My point is that there were players closer to the majors and several have made it. It's probably too early for some of them to say that their immediate performance is indicative of what they might be. It also is possible, but I don't know for a fact, that some of them were rushed. I did read a comment about Knebel being rushed because of Detroit's RP problems. And you are right. These three might be real bargains. However, since their promotions Asuaje and Dubon have cooled off, Dubon more so, but it may be just a period of adjustment. Longhi has gotten very good notices at Greenville and is holding his own in competition with the big name players there.
|
|
|
Post by brendan98 on Aug 17, 2015 13:07:07 GMT -5
If someone buys 50 lottery tickets at their local convenience store, calls that their retirement plan, and then are disappointed that they have to work until they are 80, than they might be the type of person who is complaining about the Red Sox drafting Trey Ball. The Red Sox rolled the dice on a high risk, high reward High School pitcher, HS pitchers are likely already the riskiest of draft choices, than multiply that by the fact that Ball was raw due to a limited amount of pitching, because he is from a northern State, and he was a two way player who never focused solely on pitching. The pick was a gamble from the get go, and obviously the Sox were willing to forego a level of certainty for the potential to hit it big with what was (at the time) a rare opportunity of picking in the top 10 of the draft. Ball still has a tremendous amount of developing to do, and in that sense it is silly to call him a bust at this point, however the raw stuff that Ball takes to the mound each outing is not very impressive, and that is a cause for concern. If Ball was throwing an explosive fastball or a heavy 2 seamer, with occasional glimpses of plus secondary pitches, and his issue was command or repeating mechanics, than it would be more encouraging, but the stuff has been rather pedestrian. Regardless, the pick was a gamble, at the time it was made most of us dreamt on a #1/#2 starter, but knew there was a significant chance that Ball might flame out by AA, the fact that the flame out option looks more likely than even a #4/#5 starter, was part of the gamble.
|
|
|
Post by arzjake on Aug 17, 2015 15:58:03 GMT -5
The only other defensible pick was probably Meadows, who they should have taken. But we also might note how there are very few good pitchers in our system, and lots of position players. I said the same thing and got crucified on this board for it... At the time of the Ball pick, Sox had plenty of young arms. As we know its not a science. I would have taken the hitter that year over the pitcher at #7... In hindsight, they signed Longhi who just might be better than Meadows or Frazier. Imagine if they signed Sheffield and Boldt?
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 17, 2015 16:04:59 GMT -5
The only other defensible pick was probably Meadows, who they should have taken. But we also might note how there are very few good pitchers in our system, and lots of position players. I said the same thing and got crucified on this board for it... At the time of the Ball pick, Sox had plenty of young arms. As we know its not a science. I would have taken the hitter that year over the pitcher at #7... In hindsight, they signed Longhi who just might be better than Meadows or Frazier. Imagine if they signed Sheffield and Boldt? And they saved $500k on Ball, which is part of why they were able to sign Longhi. Meadows signed for slot at #9, so we don't really know what he was demanding at #7. I think that's what you were getting at.
|
|
|
Post by sibbysisti on Aug 17, 2015 16:38:15 GMT -5
If someone buys 50 lottery tickets at his/her local convenience store, calls that a retirement plan, and then is disappointed that he/she has to work until 80, then he/she might be the type of person who is complaining about the Red Sox drafting Trey Ball. The Red Sox rolled the dice on a high risk, high reward High School pitcher. HS pitchers are likely already the riskiest of draft choices. Then multiply that by the fact that Ball was raw, due to a limited amount of pitching, because he is from a northern State. And he was a two way player who never focused solely on pitching. The pick was a gamble from the get go, and obviously the Sox were willing to forego a level of certainty for the potential to hit it big with what was (at the time) a rare opportunity of picking in the top 10 of the draft. Ball still has a tremendous amount of developing to do, and in that sense, it is silly to call him a bust at this point. However, the raw stuff that Ball takes to the mound each outing is not very impressive, and that is a cause for concern. If Ball were throwing an explosive fastball or a heavy 2 seamer, with occasional glimpses of plus secondary pitches, and his issue was command or repeating mechanics, then it would be more encouraging, but the stuff has been rather pedestrian. Regardless, the pick was a gamble. At the time it was made, most of us dreamt about a #1/#2 starter, but knew there was a significant chance that Ball might flame out by AA. The fact that the flame out option looks more likely than even, a #4/#5 starter was part of the gamble. Good post. Just tweaked it a bit.
|
|
|
Trey Ball
Aug 20, 2015 20:53:48 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by arzjake on Aug 20, 2015 20:53:48 GMT -5
Ball getting hammered last few starts
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 20, 2015 20:55:55 GMT -5
Ball getting hammered last few starts It's that time of year for young starters.
|
|
|
Trey Ball
Aug 20, 2015 22:49:03 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by telson13 on Aug 20, 2015 22:49:03 GMT -5
Ball getting hammered last few starts It's that time of year for young starters. I've been defending him, thinking he might progress this year, but this total regression is an unfortunate development. Obviously the innings have an effect, but he was improving at this time last year. He's going to need to repeat Salem, and he's looking more and more like a 6th/7th inning arm, maybe a setup man at best. Just no swing-and-miss in his repertoire. I have a sliver of hope, but it's paper-thin at this point.
|
|
|
Trey Ball
Aug 21, 2015 13:10:23 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by humanbeingbean on Aug 21, 2015 13:10:23 GMT -5
If anyone needs to be sad for any reason, J.P. Crawford was selected after Ball. We're obviously stacked in infield prospects, but hey...
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 3,968
|
Post by jimoh on Aug 21, 2015 13:58:47 GMT -5
If someone buys 50 lottery tickets at their local convenience store, calls that their retirement plan, and then are disappointed that they have to work until they are 80, than they might be the type of person who is complaining about the Red Sox drafting Trey Ball. ... It's not that, given the assumption that we should buy lottery tickets for our retirement, we're disappointed that they did not work out. It's both the decision to buy lottery tickets, and the apparent failure to calculate properly the odds of these particular lottery tickets. I haven't seen a day that Ball has been in uniform that he looked worthy of a #7 overall pick--when he pitches well he looks like "not a bad gamble for a late-first-round pick." That we with our limited knowledge could not identify at the time anyone other than Meadows or Shipley that we might have taken sooner is not a compelling argument. This was a major failure. It seems like they said, well, he throws pretty well, plus he's tall (we like tall!), and from a cold state, and can dunk impressively, and has not concentrated on pitching, and if we put all this together he could be great. That seems, to use a different gambling metaphor, like drawing to an inside straight.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 21, 2015 14:06:49 GMT -5
I'm pretty tired of this. There were 6 players in that draft that we wanted and we got into the next tier. We got a lot more screwed because we won an extra game in 2012 than we did by drafting Trey Ball. (or however many games would have gotten us to 6th) We lost before the pick was made IMO.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Aug 21, 2015 15:39:48 GMT -5
Where I'm at on Ball: it was undoubtedly a bad pick, but one bad pick is not something to bury a front office for.
|
|
|
Post by ramireja on Aug 21, 2015 17:47:44 GMT -5
Where I'm at on Ball: it was undoubtedly a bad pick, but one bad pick is not something to bury a front office for. My wishful thinking in a few years: We'll view Ball as a #7 pick miss, and we'll view Benintendi as a #7 pick steal (one of the best 3-4 guys from his draft). Perhaps then, people will stop bringing him up in every thread.
|
|
|
Post by ramireja on Aug 21, 2015 17:52:01 GMT -5
I'm pretty tired of this. There were 6 players in that draft that we wanted and we got into the next tier. We got a lot more screwed because we won an extra game in 2012 than we did by drafting Trey Ball. (or however many games would have gotten us to 6th) We lost before the pick was made IMO. The sad thing is, if we had picked at #6, we'd find a way to complain about Colin Moran too. Lets face it, it wasn't a great draft in terms of identifying an upper tier. Although there were some interesting guys taken later (J.P. Crawford, Hunter Harvey, and Aaron Judge come to mind), you find me a single board that had one of those guys in the Top 7.
|
|
|
Post by larrycook on Aug 21, 2015 18:49:53 GMT -5
Where I'm at on Ball: it was undoubtedly a bad pick, but one bad pick is not something to bury a front office for. My wishful thinking in a few years: We'll view Ball as a #7 pick miss, and we'll view Benintendi as a #7 pick steal (one of the best 3-4 guys from his draft). Perhaps then, people will stop bringing him up in every thread. I am not giving up on ball, his last five starts, are clearly dead arm zone.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2015 11:57:05 GMT -5
This guy needs a fresh start another organizations I'm starting to feel bad for him. Last start three earned runs on six hits and three walks in just 3 2/3 innings. Now 4.85 ERA, His last win was on July 24
|
|
|
Post by congusgambler33 on Aug 26, 2015 13:21:57 GMT -5
This guy needs a fresh start in other organizations I'm starting to feel bad for him. Last start three earned runs on six hits and three walks in just 3 2/3 innings. Now 4.85 ERA, His last win was on July 24 "This guy needs a fresh start with another organization". If that is the case, it doesn't say very much about this organization. I guess Dombrowski is going to have to clean house to find guys that can evaluate pitching better and develop better. I don't think that is the case. i just think the draft was a weak one and he was the best available pitcher. Or so they thought.
|
|
|
Post by cba82 on Aug 26, 2015 15:43:38 GMT -5
"one bad pick is not something to bury a front office for." -- Perhaps not, but Ben also will need to live with the legacy of the Hanley and Pablo signings, which will hurt this organization more directly and for more years than will the Trey Ball pick.
|
|
|
Post by arzjake on Aug 26, 2015 16:05:08 GMT -5
Where I'm at on Ball: it was undoubtedly a bad pick, but one bad pick is not something to bury a front office for. Remember Jason Place and Vitek. Its not a science. I believe NLonghi will make us forget about TBall
|
|
|
Post by mandelbro on Aug 26, 2015 16:08:34 GMT -5
The only other defensible pick was probably Meadows, who they should have taken. But we also might note how there are very few good pitchers in our system, and lots of position players. I said the same thing and got crucified on this board for it... At the time of the Ball pick, Sox had plenty of young arms. As we know its not a science. I would have taken the hitter that year over the pitcher at #7... In hindsight, they signed Longhi who just might be better than Meadows or Frazier. Imagine if they signed Sheffield and Boldt? Longhi might be better, but right now there's not much reason to think so. Meadows is 3 months older, already in high-A, plays higher up the defensive spectrum, and is hitting 25% better relative to his level by wRC+. If Ball continues to struggle, might he get a look as a hitter, ala Casey Kelly?
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Aug 26, 2015 16:40:25 GMT -5
Yeah, I hate to say it, but the "time to try Trey Ball as a hitter" line is about a season away from needing the italics removed.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Aug 26, 2015 16:41:05 GMT -5
I'd be willing to discuss if he is still terrible at this time next year, yeah.
|
|
|
Post by MLBDreams on Aug 26, 2015 17:01:30 GMT -5
Like Tim Wakefield as a drafted 1B hitter from Pittsburgh organization and turned out as terrible hitter then, he tried as pitcher and he ended up as 192 MLB win. It can happen to Trey Ball as he switches from pitcher to hitter and see what happens.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Aug 26, 2015 17:09:29 GMT -5
Like Tim Wakefield as a drafted 1B hitter from Pittsburgh organization and turned out as terrible hitter then, he tried as pitcher and he ended up as 192 MLB win. It can happen to Trey Ball as he switches from pitcher to hitter and see what happens. Maybe we can also sign a 40 year old physics teacher who learns he can throw 100 mph. I don't think it's very likely.
|
|
|
Post by burythehammer on Aug 26, 2015 17:13:07 GMT -5
Wouldn't they try him as a reliever first?
|
|
|