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 telson13 on Jun 9, 2016 23:42:29 GMT -5
Groome could be the second-best pitcher of the century and still not live up to Clayton Kershaw. That's a ridiculous and unfair comparison to anyone. Not an unfair comparison, but an unfair expectation to attach to that comparison. Hey, Brien Taylor was probably the best HS lefty in draft history, and we know how that went.
|
|
|
Post by templeusox on Jun 10, 2016 0:31:56 GMT -5
Clayton Kershaw is going to be the best pitcher of our lifetimes and possibly the best of all-time.
On Groome...
I hope the he treats this as an opportunity to completely dedicate his life to baseball. We will see.
|
|
|
Post by deepjohn on Jun 10, 2016 2:07:34 GMT -5
Im really curious what all these makeup concerns are. Vandy pulled his acceptance reportedly. Missed his friends back home and left the private academy at IMG. No big deal. Signability was the bigger concern, since he is said to want a top 3 bonus of $7 mil.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jun 10, 2016 2:09:58 GMT -5
Love the Groome pick, but hate the Chatham pick. He seems like another Marrero pick, safe low ceiling player. Nolan Jones was there at 51 for the taking. A guy Law had ranked #11. Instead we get a guy that wasn't rated in his top 100 and he calls utility man or below average regular due to such a poor bat. Man I hope he is wrong. Compared to Jones were almost everyone had him rated top 30, a ton had him top 20. Man we could have had a dream start to draft.
|
|
|
Post by deepjohn on Jun 10, 2016 2:10:28 GMT -5
Groome could be the second-best pitcher of the century and still not live up to Clayton Kershaw. That's a ridiculous and unfair comparison to anyone. Not an unfair comparison, but an unfair expectation to attach to that comparison. Hey, Brien Taylor was probably the best HS lefty in draft history, and we know how that went.
|
|
|
Post by sammo420 on Jun 10, 2016 2:34:13 GMT -5
Im really curious what all these makeup concerns are. Vandy pulled his acceptance reportedly. Missed his friends back home and left the private academy at IMG. No big deal. Signability was the bigger concern, since he is said to want a top 3 bonus of $7 mil. I don't believe either of these. If all he wanted was top 3 money, then somebody around that point would've picked him. There has to be some character concers there other than just that. I won't repeat the stupidity that was thrown around earlier, but saying that's the only thing "wrong" with him is almost as bad. I love the pick. I think it's tremendous upside with some risk associated with it. What you mentioned isn't enough to have him fall to number 12.
|
|
|
Post by sammo420 on Jun 10, 2016 2:37:17 GMT -5
Love the Groome pick, but hate the Chatham pick. He seems like another Marrero pick, safe low ceiling player. Nolan Jones was there at 51 for the taking. A guy Law had ranked #11. Instead we get a guy that wasn't rated in his top 100 and he calls utility man or below average regular due to such a poor bat. Man I hope he is wrong. Compared to Jones were almost everyone had him rated top 30, a ton had him top 20. Man we could have had a dream start to draft. It's not how many you draft, it's how many you sign. I would've loved to have Jones in there, too, but where is the money gonna come from to sign him? Klaw's rankings don't mean too much to me either. I wonder what he thought about Mookie Betts around the time of the draft. EDIT: my insomnia typing sucks.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jun 10, 2016 3:02:56 GMT -5
Love the Groome pick, but hate the Chatham pick. He seems like another Marrero pick, safe low ceiling player. Nolan Jones was there at 51 for the taking. A guy Law had ranked #11. Instead we get a guy that wasn't rated in his top 100 and he calls utility man or below average regular due to such a poor bat. Man I hope he is wrong. Compared to Jones were almost everyone had him rated top 30, a ton had him top 20. Man we could have had a dream start to draft. It's not how many you draft, it's how many you sign. I would've loved to have Jones in there, too, but where is the money gonna come from to sign him? Klaw's rankings don't mean too much to me either. I wonder what he thought about Mookie Betts around the time of the draft. EDIT: my insomnia typing sucks. I guess it all depends on what Jones wants to sign. Would he sign for slot at 51? I will look at Chatham differently if he signs for like 600k and the savings sign Groome. I think he signs below slot, but not for that much which is why I really don't like the pick. I would rather they punt one pick and get the money for Groome and not have to punt any more picks. Or take a player like Jones and think about going 10% over slot to sign Jones and Groome, even if it cost next year's first. Someone is going to do it, why not us.
|
|
|
Post by FenwayFanatic on Jun 10, 2016 5:13:46 GMT -5
I'm no expert but having watched several of these I have to believe money was a big factor in why they picked Chatham just based on logic and the limited info we have. He wasn't a massive reach as he is ranked 101 by Baseball America and maybe the Sox like him a good deal more anyway.
I don't love the pick but I can certainly understand it and could end up loving it depending on the money. If you watch the draft closely you will see other teams make picks like this even sooner than round 2.
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Jun 10, 2016 5:15:48 GMT -5
There's a difference in saying Groome will become Kershaw and Groomes scouting reports sounds a lot like Kershaws. The latter I agree with, although it's probably meaningless in and of itself.
But, Groomes scouting report is pretty glowing. There's nothing negative said about his baseball skills. Great body, mechanics, fastball, curveball, velocity, command, developing change up, and young for the draft. He is also as left handed as tommy Layne.
The vague maturity tag is what made him drop. I'll wait and see.
|
|
|
Post by soxfanatic on Jun 10, 2016 5:26:10 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by FenwayFanatic on Jun 10, 2016 5:36:10 GMT -5
It sounds like he really wanted to go to an East coast team. If you watch the video of his family celebrating, its one of the first thing they say after he gets drafted. That and the fact he left IMG Academy may have spooked some teams like the Padres.
We've heard a lot about maturity and vague makeup references but often times the most simple explanation is the correct one. After watching that video of him doing scratch tickets right before they drafted him, wonder if teams just think he is an odd and just very immature guy and didnt feel comfortable taking him given the other options. Usually it leaks if there is some serious issue like potential criminal behavior. Although that still doesnt explain why Vandy "was no longer interested in having him attend."
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jun 10, 2016 6:52:10 GMT -5
There's a difference in saying Groome will become Kershaw and Groomes scouting reports sounds a lot like Kershaws. The latter I agree with, although it's probably meaningless in and of itself. But, Groomes scouting report is pretty glowing. There's nothing negative said about his baseball skills. Great body, mechanics, fastball, curveball, velocity, command, developing change up, and young for the draft. He is also as left handed as tommy Layne. The vague maturity tag is what made him drop. I'll wait and see. Thanks, and that was what I intended. I didn't think I needed to go over the likelihood that Groome becomes like Kershaw because that's obvious.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jun 10, 2016 7:02:16 GMT -5
Love the Groome pick, but hate the Chatham pick. He seems like another Marrero pick, safe low ceiling player. Nolan Jones was there at 51 for the taking. A guy Law had ranked #11. Instead we get a guy that wasn't rated in his top 100 and he calls utility man or below average regular due to such a poor bat. Man I hope he is wrong. Compared to Jones were almost everyone had him rated top 30, a ton had him top 20. Man we could have had a dream start to draft. It's not how many you draft, it's how many you sign. I would've loved to have Jones in there, too, but where is the money gonna come from to sign him? Klaw's rankings don't mean too much to me either. I wonder what he thought about Mookie Betts around the time of the draft. EDIT: my insomnia typing sucks. So any analysts that missed Mookie is irrelevant? Might want to add the Red Sox to that list since they reportedly only signed him after someone else didn't sign.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jun 10, 2016 7:08:40 GMT -5
Love the Groome pick, but hate the Chatham pick. He seems like another Marrero pick, safe low ceiling player. Nolan Jones was there at 51 for the taking. A guy Law had ranked #11. Instead we get a guy that wasn't rated in his top 100 and he calls utility man or below average regular due to such a poor bat. Man I hope he is wrong. Compared to Jones were almost everyone had him rated top 30, a ton had him top 20. Man we could have had a dream start to draft. If you pick a guy like Groome at 11 then you need to realize the rest of the draft isn't going to just not have over slot guys but it's going to have underslot. The reasons you do that is because Groome is that special that you cannot pass up the chance to get that type of talent and because it's the perfect time for it with so much talent in the lower minors. Next year our first rd pick will be an underslot guy and they will fill in with more over slot volume later. That being said, we should be ecstatic to get a guy like Chatham in the second round. Very signable and a prospect with a good floor at s premium position. Marrero isn't so bad to have in the organization so having the next one coming up behind him wouldn't be so bad either. Also, if you keep getting those guys eventually one of them is going to surprise you with the bad. Th defense is easier to predict. The bat less so.
|
|
|
Post by FenwayFanatic on Jun 10, 2016 7:20:46 GMT -5
They also said on the MLB Network the due diligence docket on Groome was among the thickest they'd seen.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jun 10, 2016 7:24:41 GMT -5
Gotta love the idea of the trio of Neo, Groome, and Kopech heading the rotation in 3-5 years. If they all pan out, it would be nasty! Not to mention ERod! /drool Yea I'm not sure I want Groome and Kopech mentioned together right now. And let's have Kopech pitch a minor league season without really screwing up bad first before we put him in the rotation.
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jun 10, 2016 7:25:16 GMT -5
They also said on the MLB Network the due diligence docket on Groome was among the thickest they'd seen. What's that even mean?
|
|
|
Post by greatscottcooper on Jun 10, 2016 7:38:05 GMT -5
I've heard some people compare Chatham to Marrero. I understand that's an easy, quick and poor comparison that is really an indictment of him being a defensively minded high floor low ceiling SS. My problem with that, is it's easy to get unexcited because of how Marrero has failed. You draft an exact replica of Devin Marrero and he could end up being an everyday MLB SS, they could of drafted the exact replica of Trey Ball and that guy could pan out.
All things considered, with the big one being Groome at #12, I think this is a really really good pick.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jun 10, 2016 7:39:25 GMT -5
Chatham is more Lowrie than Marrero.
ADD: not in terms of quality, but profile. Maybe average-at-best defensively, well-rounded offensive profile.
|
|
|
Post by amfox1 on Jun 10, 2016 7:41:47 GMT -5
They also said on the MLB Network the due diligence docket on Groome was among the thickest they'd seen. What's that even mean? It means that people did a lot of work to dig into Groome's background. Wouldn't be surprising if MLB took the lead and provided the info to all the teams.
|
|
|
Post by deepjohn on Jun 10, 2016 7:47:46 GMT -5
Missed his friends back home and left the private academy at IMG. No big deal. Signability was the bigger concern, since he is said to want a top 3 bonus of $7 mil. I don't believe either of these. If all he wanted was top 3 money, then somebody around that point would've picked him. There has to be some character concers there other than just that. I won't repeat the stupidity that was thrown around earlier, but saying that's the only thing "wrong" with him is almost as bad. I love the pick. I think it's tremendous upside with some risk associated with it. What you mentioned isn't enough to have him fall to number 12. I think I've scoured every blog, forum and article published and that's all there is. He is only 17 (18 in August) and so there is always a "makeup concern" with someone that young who gets so much money so soon. He likes to have fun with his hometown friends, that's it. So what that he may even have used (unfounded rumor alert!!!) some recreational substances with his friends not strictly legal for his age. Not a big deal, to me. That said, it could be regarded as a big deal to teams about to spend millions on a signing bonus, especially when he is leaving the private academy at IMG to go back home and take a suspension, so he can play with his friends. It's just not a big deal-breaker to me. Once he fell past three, then the real risk was he would want a signing bonus that the team wouldn't or couldn't pay, or else he would go back to juco and be eligible again next year, when his age 17 makeup concerns were less important, and he could get the top three money he wanted. The deal the Red Sox made was basically a two-fer. They took Groome with the money for their first and second picks, and just took a cheaper pick for their second. If it works, and the age 17 "makeup concerns" are not a big deal, it could be brilliant.
|
|
|
Post by thursty on Jun 10, 2016 7:48:51 GMT -5
The hype train is an express and has left the station. I suppose it's natural, but first he has to sign, and I don't know, actually pitch a few professional innings before slating him for the Red Sox rotation.
|
|
|
Post by FenwayFanatic on Jun 10, 2016 7:50:17 GMT -5
I really like the Groome pick of course, just curious about what these issues are.
|
|
|
Post by amfox1 on Jun 10, 2016 8:00:58 GMT -5
Love the Groome pick, but hate the Chatham pick. He seems like another Marrero pick, safe low ceiling player. Nolan Jones was there at 51 for the taking. A guy Law had ranked #11. Instead we get a guy that wasn't rated in his top 100 and he calls utility man or below average regular due to such a poor bat. Man I hope he is wrong. Compared to Jones were almost everyone had him rated top 30, a ton had him top 20. Man we could have had a dream start to draft. We get it, you like shiny toys. The Marrero analogy is lazy and weak at best. Chatham is a solid pick at 51. He improved every year, offensively, and won conference POY and dPOY this year. He can stay at the position and is the best college SS in a weak draft for SS. He's not going to be Tulo but likely isn't Marrero either. If you are going to rely on Keith Law for your information, good luck to you. Just don't spout his gospel as your own. BTW Chatham was ranked 63 by MLB Pipeline and 62 by Perfect Game and was widely projected to be drafted in the 30-50 range. BTW, I liked Nolan Jones at 51 (and advocated for the Red Sox to take one of the Jones boys) but let's not go overboard on Nolan Jones. He likely will end up at a corner infield spot and did not deserve a ranking in the early teens. I had Jones ranked in the 20-35 area.
|
|
|