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.
Recent Posts
|
Post by telson13 on Oct 13, 2021 19:55:11 GMT -5
Not to beat a dead horse, but I would caution against giving credit or blame for a single draft pick or even draft class to any GM/CBO/PBOps. That person is not really the one in the room with his finger on the button - it is a FAR more collaborative process than that. That applies even more so to a new CBO in 2020, a season in which he almost certainly never saw any of these players in person. Credit/blame to the guy in charge should be for the org's performance over an extended period, to the extent he's the person in charge of keeping an amateur scouting department together or not. Honestly, I think we put way too much at the feet of the person in charge. He's not scouting, developing, or coaching the players. Buck stops with him for sure, but I mean, he hasn't brought anyone in from the outside yet in a position above, say, an assistant director has he? Now, there's wisdom in that, so I'm not saying he should have. But it's not like Bloom brought about this revolution in the front office. There are certainly moves with his fingerprints on them, mostly in the area of trades and signings. But like, I wouldn't credit Bloom for Nick Yorke. Again, don't interpret this as a comment on what Bloom has done, positively or negatively. I'm just saying that pinning each individual success or failure on him, especially in the areas of scouting and player development, isn't really correct. Wait, are you arguing that for the very first pick that the Bloom administration ever made -- and a well-outside-the-box one at that -- Chaim was just a rubber stamp? I'm sorry, that doesn't make a lot of sense. You can love scouts and admire their work while at the same time acknowledging that they have a boss who was hired instead of them for the top job and their boss supervises their work and tells them how he wants it done.
Does the GM get input on draft picks in real time? Of course. Once they get past the third or fourth round, does the GM hand over the reins for the most part? Sure but that draft board still has his fingerprints on it -- I mean, don't you think having Yorke internally ranked in the top 15 or 20 guys on the board had to pass Chaim's scrutiny at the very least. Do you think he was unaware that most of the publicly available rankings (and probably many not-as-publicly available ones) had him down in the 3rd or 4th round?
"Hey, why is this Yorke kid ranked so high on our board? I don't think I've seen his name anywhere else."
"Oh, a lot of us really like him."
"Oh, okay. I was just wondering. Okay, I'm going to go have lunch with John and Sam and Tom... When's the draft again?"
"Wednesday."
"Oh, right, I knew that. I'll definitely be there. Wouldn't miss it. If I don't see you guys before then, let's all be ready, okay? We're gonna knock this thing out of the park! See what I did there?"
I definitely do not subscribe to the theory that just because he's in charge and has lots of scouts and coaches working for him that a GM basically knows nothing about scouting or development and just collates and parses information given to him by others (even though I'm sure he does a lot of collating and parsing). Didn't Chaim write some kind of "The Rays Way" manifesto in his last job? Was that just about marketing and playing lots of loud, annoying noises between ABs in the stadium?
I heard Chaim talk for about five minutes about the Fabian decision in this past draft and he sure sounded like he knew what was going on.
I think the fact that Chaim hasn't brought many new people in from the outside and that there is an obvious difference in the types of players that have been acquired and released compared to two or three or more years ago is proof that the boss really does have his fingerprints all over everything and can effect a top-down revolution in the way things are done, at least in the Red Sox FO. Seems pretty unlikely that this would apply to everything but the draft.
This. I'm sure there's variation between GMs in terms of how involved they get but I certainly get the sense that Bloom has a clear vision and plan, and implementing it requires a substantial amount of work and input. I see him just wanting a lot of info, and the opportunity to discuss risk/benefit, roster structure, all sorts of things. At a certain level, he's an analyst at heart.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Sept 25, 2021 19:38:36 GMT -5
If I were the Sox, having the extra bucks with 41 and roughly 65 next year, I’d put a bug in his ear. They could overslot him at 25 easily. Even post surgery? With his inconsistent velocity, reliance on the slider, and the Mets wariness over his physicals, I think the chances that he's gonna need surgery is pretty high. Different point in development, but I think of Lucas Giolito. Good chance the inconsistency of the FB and SL movement is injury-related. So another year? Maybe after surgery? Sure. Groome is pitching to his talent now. If anything Rocker’s age might suggest an even better prognosis since his physical development is done. With two second-rounders and a shot at a guy whose best has been a top-3 talent? Yeah, that’s a gamble I take every time, provided I’m happy with the medical risk assessment. High-end college pitchers are historically relatively low risk to have at least marginally valuable careers. I think the upside outweighs the marginal increase in bust rate, depending on the injury itself. Roger Clemens had a R labrum repair, the sort of thing (I think both Pedro and Ramon Martinez did as well) that’s very low-likelihood recovery, and still did pretty well for himself. Actually, I think it was two surgeries. Point is just to be open-minded and develop options. Rocker is a potentially terrific one. Sometimes you swing for the fences.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Sept 16, 2021 15:17:55 GMT -5
Do you not remember Duran raking even more than Yorke at the same level? Granted he was a bit older, but he was raking like no one since Mookie. Duran did that at age 22!!! Not 19 like Yorke. Huge difference! True, but he was also a 7th-rounder who'd been taught for three years to hit like it was 1986 and he was Willie Mays Hayes, and he underwent an extremely successful swing change. Then did it again. I don't really get why people are so down on Duran again. It's just like his AA struggles. Maybe he's not a savant...but he has outstanding tools, works hard, and is adaptable. He's already shown at least four times (swing change after draft, position change after draft, AA struggles, AAA swing change to unlock plus game power) that he can make major adjustments and go on to substantial success. At different points in his pro career he's been a near-.400 hitter, walked 10% of the time, been a prolific base stealer, and legitimate power hitter. Jeez, the kid got no real games all of last year and now everyone's decided he's over the hill and has no future because he's 25? Lol, people need to give the kid at least a year to make the adjustments before they write him off. I still think there's a pretty reasonable chance he puts most of that together for a few years in MLB.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Sept 16, 2021 14:39:30 GMT -5
The level of disrespect that Nick Yorke is getting is laughable. He'll play with chips on his shoulder I'm sure. Nick Yorke is the archetype of why I love hit tool players. Within reason you can rehab shoulders, quicken footwork, drill, drill, drill, and improve "raw" things like power and speed. Hitting requires adaptation (and the twitch/bat control/vision/recognition) and there's just a cutoff for a LOT of players where no matter how hard they work at it, they can't make sufficient hard frequent contact to be viable MLBers. Great hitters might have to be polished, but I think they're really born with it or not. Yorke's been incredible this year as just a 19-y/o. He probably gets a small taste of AA (although a lot of competition at that point will be promoted high A guys) before he hits 20. He also looks like maybe...maybe...he's one of those guys who hits it on the screws so often that he hits for more power than his raw might predict. It's exciting watching him develop.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Sept 16, 2021 14:24:31 GMT -5
Law has never really quit on Groome since he was drafted. Lol...given the start at Portland, hopefully it's prescient? I will say this, I follow Groome on IG and his maturation and focus are evident over time. The talent is undeniable.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Aug 1, 2021 12:48:30 GMT -5
I feel bad for Rocker. I hope he absolutely shoves at Vandy next year and looks like that possible ace that he's shown glimpses of. Yet inexplicably slides to pick 41 in next year's draft. If I were the Sox, having the extra bucks with 41 and roughly 65 next year, I’d put a bug in his ear. They could overslot him at 25 easily.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Aug 1, 2021 12:42:07 GMT -5
Ask and we shall receive I see.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Aug 1, 2021 12:41:21 GMT -5
You make a valid point (he’s losing basically 36% off the top, so he’s only seeing 1.5+). But hey, just put a minimum down payment on a nice house in MA (say 20% for a million-dollar home, on a 2.6% mortgage) and Medicaid covers your health insurance. Hell, I earned 65% in the market in the past year. One good year and he’s set. Lifetime S&P return as noted is about 8%…and smart investing should double that. It’s not like they HAVE to go Yoan Moncada and start blowing money on a Lambo collection 😂. I will say this…it’s a lot easier if the player is Mike Mussina or Craig Breslow or Ron Darling. But in that sense, it’s why I don’t understand these kids who turn down huge bucks. Financially speaking, especially if they’re not otherwise uber-talented (or at least very bright) in some way, in doesn’t make sense at all to “go for it.” It’s a huge, unnecessary gamble. And the litany of losers is long. The only winner I can think of off the top of my head is Gerrit Cole. Delayed time to reach MLB, injury, performance regression, scouting finding more holes…there’s just not much upside from $2.5 to 8.5M in a year when that’s what a guy will make in a month if he’s actually as good as he thinks being willing to push it off. If Orioles did promise $3mm and if Sox did offer $2.6mm, geez I really don't understand Fabian rejecting the 2.6mm. OTOH, I really don't understand the Sox not taking some senior signs in the later rounds to get that extra 250-400k to give to Fabian.
My guess is they picked him on the talent/slide alone, and had a value they were willing to spend, hard stop. I’m glad they stuck to their guns and spread the bonuses around. I mean, I get your point, it’s not a ton to sacrifice, but I think the depth of next year’s draft and the financial flexibility of the added pick basically meant they were comfortable taking a hard line. Sure, 4th-8th round picks don’t pan out that often, but theres a serious talent drop-off going HS or Jr to Sr sign. To save that kind of money they’d be giving up real talent. And getting pick 41 next year means they basically lose nothing but a year of development on a second round pick, which isn’t much…and they get to gamble even bigger since they’ll have another 2nd-rounder they can go underslot on. I’m actually happy it went this way, mostly because I’m a hit tool guy and Fabian made me nervous.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Aug 1, 2021 12:32:43 GMT -5
I’m looking at this like a good thing. I’m telling you next year I’m hoping they load up with a couple of top pitchers. Next year is the year to go back-to-back on HS arms in the second round. It’s a deep year supposedly, and the prep arm risk issue means great talent often slides. Plus the extra college hitters (highest likelihood of success historically) should eat up Rd 1.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Aug 1, 2021 12:10:05 GMT -5
Cubs draft signing below. Never seen this before and honestly didn't even know this was a possible arrangement: I don’t get at all why more teams don’t do this. Young guys aren’t going to start their seasons until June anyway. It’s probably not an issue for at least 2 years. By then maybe the kid drops out to play baseball, or he loses just a bit of development time each spring. Like, a month. Hell, he can make it up if the team runs a January clinic just for the draft-and-fulltime school guys. Seems like a market inefficiency to me. Paid school and summers playing baseball? Yes please.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Aug 1, 2021 11:49:01 GMT -5
Detroit take Jobe you cowards Amazing.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Aug 1, 2021 11:46:21 GMT -5
Worst case scenario I'd be thrilled with Lawlar. Hoping for Leiter. Can't imagine Mayer falls to 4. On advice, I’m re-reading pp 9-12 and this is the best way it could’ve started.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Aug 1, 2021 11:44:01 GMT -5
Well, a conservative way to live off of your savings is to invest it (and with $2.5m, you can find plenty of people willing to help you) and withdraw 4% each year. You should be able to do way better than 4% per year in returns, e.g. by simply investing in a fund pegged to the S&P -- some years way more than 4%, some years will be losses (at least there used to be) but I believe the average 10-year window, pick any window, since the inception of the S&P is >7%/year. So a 4% draw on $2.5m is $100,000 per year. Starting at age 21? That's pretty good. And you still have the $2.5m in the bank for later. I could live pretty comfortably on that but I doubt a 21 year old kid would do that. It's a stupid argument to have in the first place. But you have to pay taxes on 2.5 million. They get mad if you don't. And kids will want to buy a house and cars. And in the hypothetical of a failed career, so you know what lifetime health insurance for the unemployed is? It's plenty to get him to a second career. If you don't make it to arb years in MLB though, you better have a second career. You make a valid point (he’s losing basically 36% off the top, so he’s only seeing 1.5+). But hey, just put a minimum down payment on a nice house in MA (say 20% for a million-dollar home, on a 2.6% mortgage) and Medicaid covers your health insurance. Hell, I earned 65% in the market in the past year. One good year and he’s set. Lifetime S&P return as noted is about 8%…and smart investing should double that. It’s not like they HAVE to go Yoan Moncada and start blowing money on a Lambo collection 😂. I will say this…it’s a lot easier if the player is Mike Mussina or Craig Breslow or Ron Darling. But in that sense, it’s why I don’t understand these kids who turn down huge bucks. Financially speaking, especially if they’re not otherwise uber-talented (or at least very bright) in some way, in doesn’t make sense at all to “go for it.” It’s a huge, unnecessary gamble. And the litany of losers is long. The only winner I can think of off the top of my head is Gerrit Cole. Delayed time to reach MLB, injury, performance regression, scouting finding more holes…there’s just not much upside from $2.5 to 8.5M in a year when that’s what a guy will make in a month if he’s actually as good as he thinks being willing to push it off.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Aug 1, 2021 11:24:00 GMT -5
This is why you tank during a short 60 game no fan season Precisely. Last year's "season" was so oddball, who cares what happened? What a time to flush a year down the toilet to get a high pick. The combination of COVID (right up my alley education/training-wise), the Mookie trade (I will always be pissed they didn’t get Patiño, and that Mookie signed right away, meaning he probably orchestrated it), and the weirdness of the season—especially no minors—and I spent all of 1 hour on baseball last year. I’ve never been remotely that disinterested about baseball. It was way worse even than my every-Sunday-watchin’ to “meh, better things to do” response to the ‘07 Pats (luck or no, they just got out-hustled…still kills me). I was *psyched* they stunk once the year ended, though, for exactly the reason you say. Sorry, 2020 Dodgers, but it doesn’t really count.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Jul 21, 2021 1:15:37 GMT -5
The return of Chris Sale could be the kind of storyline that drives a season and tightens a team up. Looking forward to him getting back on a mound. Yup. Gotta imagine (especially with him looking AND *sounding* good out there--the pop!) that it's both going to drive some excitement but also calm...it's a lot easier to relax and have fun when you can figure you're probably getting the best deadline addition in baseball while in first place. Adds depth too. The addition of Duran (I think he'll settle into .260/.340/.420 territory this season and steal plenty of bags, not to mention have at least one prolonged torrid streak) and particularly Sale is a huge boost for an already pretty talented team. Tough to argue that they're not the opening salvo in the conversation for the best second-half team on paper in baseball. They've also got a ton of depth with Wilson and Franchy, along with Houck (he's a legit MIRP beast candidate) and probably Seabold (who seems like a classic "stuff ticks up nicely in short stints a la Wade Davis"). I'm pretty excited for this team's chances...I imagine they are, too.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Jul 12, 2021 1:15:38 GMT -5
Getting Mayer somehow alleviates the pain of the Trey Ball debacle. However, if this fails I will leverage this forum for the number of a good psychiatrist. I gotchoo, as long as you're near the Bean. I was thinking of Tim Duncan, but that pain won't be alleviated until Mayer throws up his fourth consecutive 5-win season with the Sox. Huge get though. Timing is right if Bogey chooses to leave (which I *really* hope does not happen, and he accepts a move), and this instantly puts a big boost in the system's strength if they can produce coup #2 with their second pick. I was a huge Duran pick fan back in '18, and I though he might grow into some power given his size and fast-twitch. But I certainly didn't expect this. All the flies hurt the BAPIP lol, but I'll take the .600 SLG. He's a legit 40-40 candidate at this point, even if the likelihood is low by nature. Makes me a lot less annoyed that they didn't take my advice and get Patino from the Padres for Mookie instead of going to LA for Downs (what, no Keibert Ruiz?!)
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Jul 12, 2021 1:01:17 GMT -5
I still can't believe they got Mayer. It's a little unsettlingly like the Groome pick, in that he was arguably the top talent available, but he also had a lot going on and as a HSer (edit: meant to qualify that with pitcher...at least he wasn't a righty tho) was risky anyway. And he's actually looking better and better this year, which makes me real glad they never gave up on him. But Mayer...he's just kind of a weird coincidence slid pick it seems, a confluence of cost saving attempts and maybe different priorities. I couldn't be any more pumped. There's a tiny part of me that feels a little sad we didn't get to take Leiter, but with a choice between the two I'd take Mayer 9 out of 10 times. Poor Leiter is stuck in the heat in TX and the Sox just got Correa v2.0.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Jul 12, 2021 0:56:44 GMT -5
Love this question in the FG chat from "Pinstripe Perry" about two hours before the MFYs drafted Sweeney: Pinstripe Perry 7:15 Can either of you explain to me why Trey Sweeney seems like a R1 lock? Sitting in the 60s on THE BOARD. Is it just the dearth of College Hitters or something more (like being willing to cut a below slot deal)? Get the models love him but man the late teens or 20s seems rich for me. (Poor Pinstripe Perry...) I just read the FG chat and this is GOLD, Jerry, GOLD!!
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Jul 10, 2021 1:57:13 GMT -5
How many AB’s does Santana get before the Sox move on from him? Or, “why is Franchy hitting .360 with huge power in AAA?”
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Jul 10, 2021 1:46:07 GMT -5
All of this debate and worry, but I am just glad that there is a nice tier 1 pool of draft picks. So barring some crazy way off the board decision, we should be adding a legitimate high end prospect to the rankings. I still go back to my question of, do you draft a position you have more history of success developing, or do you trust high end skill to develop despite the track record? My guess is most people would vote along the lines of 'best prospect regardless of position' or even a need based 'we need pitching talent in the org'. But given the Trey Ball experience, I am wondering if people have changed tune and want the highest floor potential of high skill and development history. End of the day, I'll be shocked if Bloom picks someone that I won't be thrilled with. I think (hope/assume) teams consider their org skills as far as BPA. But they also certainly have their biases. Hit tool is a big one for the Sox; I could see them heavily weighting hit (Yorke, Cannon) to the detriment of other tools, while assuming they can develop power (Duran, hopefully Jimenez) with tweaks and find the guy a position. They also seem to like raw arm strength and sharp sliders so maybe they figure they can tweak for command and develop a third pitch or tweak the FB/use a cutter (Houck, Light, Buttrey, Zeferjahn, Ward come to mind).
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Jul 10, 2021 1:34:38 GMT -5
Rocker having a bit of a horror start against Arizona, 3 runs allowed in the first with multiple hard hit balls (fb sitting around 93). Throwing more changeups than you might otherwise see from him and fewer sliders for some reason. Branden Boissiere (1b) of Arizona crushed a double and is maybe a round 3-7 guy, who was also super hot against Ole Miss in the Super Regional. Jacob Berry also doubled and is a name to keep track of for the future. Daniel Susac is a catcher and showed great patience in his at bat against Rocker. He's another one to watch for the future, though his single was less of a barrel and more of a hard ground ball that found a hole. I'm not watching the game just box score checking but in fair after 2 innings he's at 4 Ks. Hopefully he settles in because overall I like him and want to root for him not necessarily as the guy I want at 4 but just he seems likeable. Same. Rocker just seems like a good guy. Almost *too* good, which brings up the “fire” question for some. I will say that if the Sox took him, I’d be ecstatic at this point because as Eric noted, I’d figure they like his makeup and talent, and they think there’s something minor amiss that they can tweak and get him back to form, which is a plus FB and a 70 slider. Asa Lacy with better pedigree/track record. I’m good with that.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Jul 10, 2021 1:26:04 GMT -5
I get a strong "pitchability" vibe from Leiter. He just seems like he'll become ever more polished. The size/physicality stuff is overrated. For every CC Sabathia there are 20 Ben McDonalds. Leiter has insane spin/rise, and we all know after Koji and Okajima and guys like Daniel Cabrera or 90% of his career Nate Eovaldi that velocity alone doesn't miss bats, especially in the zone. Leiter's also got good command and a deep repertoire, as well as the MLB background, which really does seem to impart a degree of familiarity and comfort for a lot of guys. I definitely prefer him over Rocker, although I sure do like Davis and there's a cadre of SS prospects who should be pushing on the door right around when Bogey might have to move off. It's a good spot to be in. I think what they end up doing really depends on where the talent line separates...if it's 1-2-3 and then the rest, I imagine they go underslot with a guy they really like makeup-wise in the next tier (tangent: makeup is why I *love* Gilberto Jimenez as a prospect...he gets glowing reports, now if he'd only walk more). If a 1-2-3 falls to them, they take him, which represents a "bargain" in and of itself. Screwing up the 4th pick is a really, really big faux pas. If it's kind of a muddle/gradual drop in talent in the top 10, with no clear separation of a small group from the rest...yeah, it seems certain they go underslot for a guy they're really high on, because the allotment difference between 4 and 8-10 is huge. Picking a 60 FV over a 50 is easy. Choosing between 50s is an art. I've been so grumpy with the Sox for 15 months that I really hope they do something impressive, because Bogey and Babyface are the only reason I watch nowadays. I saw all of 5 minutes last year, and when ERod developed myocarditis from COVID I threw my hands up. Guy can't catch a break health-wise. And seeing Mookie sign immediately with LA didn't help either. Not a fan anymore, although he did clarify for me in crystal fashion how much I appreciate Bogey, who clearly sees himself as a Red Sox. Good to hear that stuff about Leiter (and to hear from you). I have so much on my plate right now beyond the Sox [*] that for the most part I'm waiting to see who they'll pick rather than fully educating myself on all the candidates. Saves time!
* Working on three books simultaneously (it should be one, but I get ideas), hoping to empty a storage unit by the end of June (having already missed a May goal), heading the programming for the local cinephile screening group, being sole rather than occasional host of the screenings (twice per three weeks) now that COVID is ending, planning to reorganize the living room in conjunction (which includes getting a custom blackout curtain, installing a smart motorized rod assembly for it, redoing the carpeting, fixing some house wiring, comissioning a custom TV stand, and moving bookcases around and repopulating them) ... and dealing with an overwhelming host of unresolved Real Life issues like a lost (but apparently not found) credit card, the one that I use for a dozen automatic payments and do not want to cancel. I should call them today! (he said for the fourth day in a row).
Eric you have way too much frickin’ energy, man. I think you’ve got at least a decade or two on me and I take a nap after my afternoon Finnish and Russian lessons. And I can only muster work on one book. I’m still high on Leiter, I think he’s a future 2a or better. Legit 1 potential. Lol, and thanks it’s good to be back. Mookie leaving still stings tho.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Jul 10, 2021 1:19:27 GMT -5
I don't remember where I saw the analysis, but being old for the class in HS is a significant, and bad, predictor. And youth has some benefits (which is why I was ecstatic with Casas, who I still think is going to be an absolute monster). Combined with Lawlar's Ks... too many red flags for me. I'd be really happy if Lawlar was a Groome-type situation where he fell to the Sox with a pick in the early teens, but at #4 those warts are too unsightly. Edit: not the one I was thinking of but it makes some good points, particularly focusing on slope of the curve www.baseballprospectus.com/news/article/15295/doctoring-the-numbers-starting-them-young-part-one/The general consensus is that teams recognize this now and do a pretty good job adjusting for it. One specific example that sticks out to me was that Bobby Witt Jr. was old for his class and several twitter know-it-all were critical of the idea that he was a top prospect because of it and the analysts who had seen him were clear they recognized he was old for his class but also are basing evaluations on where he is in terms of age advancement and that he still graded out very well. I don't think Lawlar being a little old for his class is sneaking up on anyone. Not saying it’s sneaking up on anyone, just that if I had my druthers I’d err on the side of a significantly *relatively* younger player, a la Leiter as an eligible sophomore. I remember Witt too, and the other half of that was a lot of swing-and-miss. I’m still not convinced on him for the same reasons. Lawlar has five 5+ future tools, I just am wary of older HS hitters with hit tool issues the way I am 19 y/o prep RHPs with delivery/command issues. There are certain tools I think are more age-sensitive when it comes to how concerning they are for red flags.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Jun 19, 2021 1:41:30 GMT -5
Old players getting overrated, and young players getting underrated seems like a sticky bias that the Draft Industrial Complex hasn't taken care of yet, so that makes me scared of Lawler. I have no opinion on any of the high school hitters beyond that. I don't remember where I saw the analysis, but being old for the class in HS is a significant, and bad, predictor. And youth has some benefits (which is why I was ecstatic with Casas, who I still think is going to be an absolute monster). Combined with Lawlar's Ks... too many red flags for me. I'd be really happy if Lawlar was a Groome-type situation where he fell to the Sox with a pick in the early teens, but at #4 those warts are too unsightly. Edit: not the one I was thinking of but it makes some good points, particularly focusing on slope of the curve www.baseballprospectus.com/news/article/15295/doctoring-the-numbers-starting-them-young-part-one/
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Jun 19, 2021 1:30:53 GMT -5
I don't really have that many opinions on him, but I do find it pretty interesting how we've all collectively spent a lot of time dissecting basically every other top prospect (Leiter, Rocker, Davis, Mayer, even Watson and Jobe to an extent) but we pretty much never talk about Lawlar at all. Lawlar is the Jeter Downs of possible draft picks: weirdly overlooked for being right at the top of the list. (Though in Lawlar's case it might be in part that he has mostly been assumed not to be available at #4, at least until recently?) That's exactly the guy I thought of. Tho I think there's a reason...I don't see Downs as being much more than a 2-WAR guy. I'm concerned Lawlar is the same. I think if you've got the 4 overall pick, you shoot your shot. It's not hard at all to find a 2 WAR guy. It is hard to find a perennial 4 WAR guy (or better). I was disappointed that they got Downs (I'd have preferred Ruiz), and I'd be sorta disappointed with Lawlar. A bunch of 50-55 tools is great in the 10-15 range, but I want a carrying tool in the top 10. At least Beni had the 65-70 hit, even if it didn't pan out that way. Kind of the same reason I'm concerned with Leiter now. His secondaries aren't that great (50-55) and his FB velocity is pretty pedestrian. He's got the plus-plus FB because of the spin and axis/fact that it's very vertical. He probably has a little projection left too. But I wonder if that FB holds up with the foreign substance rules being enforced. If he loses the elite hop on his FB he's a 4/5 ceiling guy. I'd still take him over Lawler though, because commanding a swing-and-miss FB is one of those things that just *makes* a guy a guy (I think of Okajima and Koji, whiffing guys with mid-high 80s). There's always learning a new pitch or modifying a grip or anything else, but it all works off the FB. Tbh I'm kind of hoping for Davis, although I like Watson too. And I'd be happy with Leiter. Mayer's my first choice in that group; I'd probably prefer Rocker and maybe Jobe (although that's a horror show demographic) over Lawlar, and I even lean House a bit. I'll admit I might be underestimating Lawlar because of watching Downs.
|
|
|