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.
2015 Draft Discussion
|
Post by mookiemagicfan on May 7, 2015 20:37:57 GMT -5
I'm really tired of these great hit tool players whose power will "eventually"show up. I get it...we are all chasing power...arms...bats. But we have seen so many times now with our prospects that haven't developed the power that the scouts said would come (in game power). I'm looking at you Cecchini. And we may have another 1st round (in-game) potential power bat with Chavis...so please someone tell me why are we even considering not drafting any arm with the number 7 pic? And please don't give me the "you don't draft for need" argument. Our lower level arms are questionable at best (outside of the 2 arms we took early last year). Even Ball is looking like he will either take years to develop, or eff it, give him his bat back!
|
|
|
Post by pedroelgrande on May 7, 2015 21:21:40 GMT -5
Cause nobody in this thread has ANY say on who the Red Sox will draft or whatever they want to do.
Edit: And yes teams don't draft for need if they don't think a pitcher available at 7th is worthy of being picked they won't just draft them because they need to take a pitcher that's how you make mistakes. Maybe they take a pitcher maybe they don't nobody knows.
|
|
mjammz
Veteran
Posts: 1,026
Member is Online
|
Post by mjammz on May 7, 2015 21:39:59 GMT -5
Carson Fulmer dominating tonight. Complete game shutout, with flithy stuff.
Kendall Rogers @kendallrogersd1 Few things better than watching a Carson Fulmer start. Put in yet another clinic tonight, touching 93 after 120 pitches. Just filthy.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on May 7, 2015 21:42:19 GMT -5
touching 93 after 120 pitches. Swell. The only thing a college pitcher should be touching after 120 pitches is this sentence is going in a bad direction so I'll stop it.
|
|
|
Post by soxfan2015 on May 7, 2015 21:58:52 GMT -5
The more I see on Fulmer the more I want the sox to pick him. Worse case is he can be a quick to the big leagues dominant closer with his great stuff.
|
|
|
Post by gregblossersbelly on May 8, 2015 8:15:35 GMT -5
Saw a little bit of him last night. Sure, reminds me of Joe Kelly. With a little bit of a curveball.
|
|
|
Post by RedSoxStats on May 8, 2015 9:17:47 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on May 8, 2015 9:43:26 GMT -5
I'm really tired of these great hit tool players whose power will "eventually"show up. I get it...we are all chasing power...arms...bats. But we have seen so many times now with our prospects that haven't developed the power that the scouts said would come (in game power). I'm looking at you Cecchini. And we may have another 1st round (in-game) potential power bat with Chavis...so please someone tell me why are we even considering not drafting any arm with the number 7 pic? And please don't give me the "you don't draft for need" argument. Our lower level arms are questionable at best (outside of the 2 arms we took early last year). Even Ball is looking like he will either take years to develop, or eff it, give him his bat back! 1) What's wrong with "you don't draft for need"? I'm confused by why you are rejecting the argument - you're asking a question and then saying it can't be answered with what the actual answer is. Teams are allowed to trade players. When you're selecting between guys who won't help your club until 3 or so years down the line, why wouldn't you just take the best one? You don't get extra credit in the MLB standings for having the most balanced Low A club. If you wind up with a glut at a position, you trade from it. Easy. 2) If you're sick of players who take a long time to develop, and who may not reach the absolute tippy top of their potential projection at the time they're drafted, then following the minor leagues probably isn't for you. I'm not being mean, but just trying to save you what appears to be lots of consternation. The player drafted at number 7 this year probably isn't going to make the majors until 2017 the earliest, and he may not be everything we all hope he'll be. Those are just facts of the game. (And by the way, not everyone said that Cecchini's power was going to develop, for whatever that's worth. That was a knock on him at least as early as Salem, if not sooner.)
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on May 8, 2015 10:46:17 GMT -5
I'm really tired of these great hit tool players whose power will "eventually"show up. I get it...we are all chasing power...arms...bats. But we have seen so many times now with our prospects that haven't developed the power that the scouts said would come (in game power). I'm looking at you Cecchini. And we may have another 1st round (in-game) potential power bat with Chavis...so please someone tell me why are we even considering not drafting any arm with the number 7 pic? And please don't give me the "you don't draft for need" argument. Our lower level arms are questionable at best (outside of the 2 arms we took early last year). Even Ball is looking like he will either take years to develop, or eff it, give him his bat back! 1) Cecchini was not drafted with the expectation that he would hit for power. He was a LD hitter with a highly advanced hit tool in H.S., with the thought that he *might* develop power later on based on his frame. 2) Agree with the previous post, that there's no sense in asking a question if you refuse to hear the actual answer to the question. Draft the best player available and flip him for a need three years down the line if you want. Position players are a much better bet to make the majors (I think BA did a study on top-10 first rounders, and historically it's something like 60% vs 40%) anyway, so there's added value there in terms of reduced risk. 3) Kopech, Ball, Cosart, Espinoza, Acosta. All young power arms. If aces were easy to develop, offense would be down even more. Legit #1s are rare (probably only 2/3 of MLB teams have a guy who deserves his #1 slot), and aces like Pedro, RJ, Kershaw, Halladay, etc are much rarer. Even if the Sox DID take a #1 ceiling player with the 7th pick, the odds that he'd reach that potential are probably less than 10%. Look at the Orioles with their recent top-10 picks. Gausman has been good, but he's not a #1...more like a 3. Bundy was considered one of the best HS pitching prospects ever...hurt. Matusz never did much of anything. Three top-7 pitchers, zero number one starters. Gausman still has a shot, but if you don't want to wait, you're going to get very frustrated following these kids.
|
|
|
Post by mookiemagicfan on May 8, 2015 10:52:50 GMT -5
I'm not worried about the time it takes them to develop. That's not my concern at all. My issue is that the players that we draft all seem to have power potential. Some will come through, most will not. When we drafted Travis most people thought he would be a fast mover(so far so good) and have legit in-game power (still waiting). Cecchini was said to have one of the best hit tools in the draft when he was drafted...everyone was concerned about his power development...and rightly so. I love to follow the prospects...it's pretty much my main hobby lol. (I don't take offense to what was said) I was in a waiting room watching the clock on signing day...just wishing, hoping and praying that Swihart would sign. And low and behold he signed with little time to spare(obviously) And that made my month that summer. Haha. But anyways. I Just hope we come away with some good players (hopefully pitchers, for me), but if we come away with a fast moving player with a high ceiling and high floor I'll be ecstatic. Side note...if the glut of position players can be used as trade bait...why hasn't that happened yet considering how stacked our position players are up the middle? Well I'm sure there are many reasons...Amaro being a Jack butt could be a major one haha. Obviously waiting for the max value for our players (that we want to get out of them) So again. Cheers and have a happy day.
|
|
|
Post by mookiemagicfan on May 8, 2015 10:56:17 GMT -5
I'm really tired of these great hit tool players whose power will "eventually"show up. I get it...we are all chasing power...arms...bats. But we have seen so many times now with our prospects that haven't developed the power that the scouts said would come (in game power). I'm looking at you Cecchini. And we may have another 1st round (in-game) potential power bat with Chavis...so please someone tell me why are we even considering not drafting any arm with the number 7 pic? And please don't give me the "you don't draft for need" argument. Our lower level arms are questionable at best (outside of the 2 arms we took early last year). Even Ball is looking like he will either take years to develop, or eff it, give him his bat back! 1) Cecchini was not drafted with the expectation that he would hit for power. He was a LD hitter with a highly advanced hit tool in H.S., with the thought that he *might* develop power later on based on his frame. 2) Agree with the previous post, that there's no sense in asking a question if you refuse to hear the actual answer to the question. Draft the best player available and flip him for a need three years down the line if you want. Position players are a much better bet to make the majors (I think BA did a study on top-10 first rounders, and historically it's something like 60% vs 40%) anyway, so there's added value there in terms of reduced risk. 3) Kopech, Ball, Cosart, Espinoza, Acosta. All young power arms. If aces were easy to develop, offense would be down even more. Legit #1s are rare (probably only 2/3 of MLB teams have a guy who deserves his #1 slot), and aces like Pedro, RJ, Kershaw, Halladay, etc are much rarer. Even if the Sox DID take a #1 ceiling player with the 7th pick, the odds that he'd reach that potential are probably less than 10%. Look at the Orioles with their recent top-10 picks. Gausman has been good, but he's not a #1...more like a 3. Bundy was considered one of the best HS pitching prospects ever...hurt. Matusz never did much of anything. Three top-7 pitchers, zero number one starters. Gausman still has a shot, but if you don't want to wait, you're going to get very frustrated following these kids. [b Hey I mentioned low level arms haha. But I hope Ball can become what we hope. I just don't see it YET. Maybe another 2/3 years of full sseason ball. But maybe if he doesn't reach his potential maybe give him his bat back. Haha.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on May 8, 2015 11:01:10 GMT -5
I'm not worried about the time it takes them to develop. That's not my concern at all. My issue is that the players that we draft all seem to have power potential. Some will come through, most will not. When we drafted Travis most people thought he would be a fast mover(so far so good) and have legit in-game power (still waiting). Cecchini was said to have one of the best hit tools in the draft when he was drafted...everyone was concerned about his power development...and rightly so. I love to follow the prospects...it's pretty much my main hobby lol. (I don't take offense to what was said) I was in a waiting room watching the clock on signing day...just wishing, hoping and praying that Swihart would sign. And low and behold he signed with little time to spare(obviously) And that made my month that summer. Haha. But anyways. I Just hope we come away with some good players (hopefully pitchers, for me), but if we come away with a fast moving player with a high ceiling and high floor I'll be ecstatic. Side note...if the glut of position players can be used as trade bait...why hasn't that happened yet considering how stacked our position players are up the middle? Well I'm sure there are many reasons...Amaro being a Jack butt could be a major one haha. Obviously waiting for the max value for our players (that we want to get out of them) So again. Cheers and have a happy day. Fast moving high ceiling high floor players are pretty rare (and that's an understatement), and they are drafted #1. This draft doesn't have one.
|
|
|
Post by mookiemagicfan on May 8, 2015 11:06:26 GMT -5
Well dang. Haha. I'm shooting too high for the quality of the prospects in the draft...positive thinking come on! Ha. Jokes.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on May 8, 2015 11:21:50 GMT -5
My issue is that the players that we draft all seem to have power potential. Some will come through, most will not. When we drafted Travis most people thought he would be a fast mover(so far so good) and have legit in-game power (still waiting). Sam Travis had a .206 ISO last year in Greenville (albeit in a small sample-- 115 PAs), which ranked in the top 20 in the South Atlantic League amongst players with as many PAs. He has a .155 ISO this year so far, which similarly ranks in the top 15 of all qualified players in the Carolina League (recall that the Carolina League is usually regarded as a pitcher's league and has some cavernous parks). I don't ever think he'll ever be a huge power hitter, but he isn't a singles hitter, either.
|
|
|
Post by pedroelgrande on May 8, 2015 11:30:56 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on May 8, 2015 12:12:51 GMT -5
My issue is that the players that we draft all seem to have power potential. Really? If anything, the consensus for a long time has been the opposite - they favor toolsy guys who may or may not hit for power but are athletic. That's why the Travis and Ockimey picks were surprising last year - they bucked their trend significantly. I also think you could say that "some will come through, most will not" on the guys they draft with potential in any tool.
|
|
|
Post by mookiemagicfan on May 8, 2015 21:46:51 GMT -5
My issue is that the players that we draft all seem to have power potential. Really? If anything, the consensus for a long time has been the opposite - they favor toolsy guys who may or may not hit for power but are athletic. That's why the Travis and Ockimey picks were surprising last year - they bucked their trend significantly. I also think you could say that "some will come through, most will not" on the guys they draft with potential in any tool. Way to cherry pick for your argument. I said that they drafted gpod hit tool players with power potential.
|
|
|
Post by jdb on May 8, 2015 22:01:21 GMT -5
Funkhouser with his best Masterson impression. 6 innings 6 Hs 5 BBs 5 ERs. With his control issues no way I'd touch him.
Also are more of the talking heads thinking Bregman can stay at SS?
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on May 8, 2015 22:13:42 GMT -5
Really? If anything, the consensus for a long time has been the opposite - they favor toolsy guys who may or may not hit for power but are athletic. That's why the Travis and Ockimey picks were surprising last year - they bucked their trend significantly. I also think you could say that "some will come through, most will not" on the guys they draft with potential in any tool. Way to cherry pick for your argument. I said that they drafted gpod hit tool players with power potential. Not intentionally trying to cherry pick. I'm having a really hard time trying to figure out what your point is.
|
|
|
Post by freddysthefuture2003 on May 9, 2015 2:07:04 GMT -5
Way to cherry pick for your argument. I said that they drafted gpod hit tool players with power potential. Not intentionally trying to cherry pick. I'm having a really hard time trying to figure out what your point is. I think his point is that the red sox haven't taken a mike trout talent in each of there last 75 straight picks, you know because the mlb draft is so easy to determine long term talent in
|
|
|
Post by mookiemagicfan on May 9, 2015 14:43:31 GMT -5
Yeah that's my point. Right. Cause Mike trouts grow on trees and we should have many. My point is that we seem to,draft many players with a good to plus hit tool with high power potential. My issue has been that it seems to that little to none of them Will have that power. I know that the power tool is the hardest and last to develop. I get it. Again, I'm saying please draft a pitcher .. Not another up the middle good hittool talent with potential for some power. That's all.
|
|
|
Post by jdb on May 9, 2015 15:35:26 GMT -5
Yeah that's my point. Right. Cause Mike trouts grow on trees and we should have many. My point is that we seem to,draft many players with a good to plus hit tool with high power potential. My issue has been that it seems to that little to none of them Will have that power. I know that the power tool is the hardest and last to develop. I get it. Again, I'm saying please draft a pitcher .. Not another up the middle good hittool talent with potential for some power. That's all. I see what your saying to a degree but like its been said you draft the player who you think is going to be the best MLB player. If a Bregman is similar to someone like Chavis who we already have in the system you still take him if you like his chances over the others. I see your point that it seems we go middle of the diamond early so if they can't hack it they still have room on the defensive spectrum. That being said I wouldn't mind seeing a Happ or Tucker even though they project to a corner OF.
|
|
|
Post by Smittyw on May 9, 2015 15:43:28 GMT -5
If there's a pitcher they like better than Bregman, I'm sure they will take him. But if a guy with "good to plus hit tool with power potential" is available at #7 and they feel he's the best still on the board, it would be silly not to take him because they picked some guy with a similar profile in the past and he never developed in-game power. Like, really silly. Or am I misunderstanding your point?
|
|
|
Post by jmei on May 9, 2015 17:55:19 GMT -5
If the point is "I'd rather have Nelson Cruz than Dustin Pedroia" (or, in less oversimplified terms, "I prefer power over hit/defense"), which is what it looks like to me, then I disagree.
|
|
|
Post by mookiemagicfan on May 9, 2015 22:06:18 GMT -5
It's pretty much just draft a pitcher is my point. Basically saying we have a lot of the same mold of players (which is great)
|
|
|