|
Post by jdb on Jun 4, 2015 18:21:25 GMT -5
Speaking of Benintendi's signability this was in Laws mock that was linked under the Astros 5th pick write up.
edit: Can't get quote function to work
Analysis: I've heard they want two bats at 2 and 5, and prefer Tucker to Cameron or Trenton Clark here. That said, I wouldn't be shocked if the Astros took Andrew Benintendi here and tried to save a bit of money to overpay guys in the sandwich round.
PLAYER CARD
|
|
|
Post by templeusox on Jun 4, 2015 19:42:00 GMT -5
He has the Cubs taking Tyler Jay. But that's who I want the Sox to take, so - sorry Theo. I certainly wouldn't hesitate to take Jay in the 2nd round, which is a round perfectly suited for Big Ten relievers. If Fulmer is on the board when the Sox pick, you take him, and then giggle to yourself giddily that you stole a pitcher like that in this Draft.
|
|
|
Post by vermontsox1 on Jun 4, 2015 21:31:55 GMT -5
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,924
|
Post by ericmvan on Jun 4, 2015 23:15:24 GMT -5
Keith Law new mock Boston takes Benintendi. Top four: Swanson Bregman Rodgers Tate No Aiken (health), Cameron ($ demands) in 1st round Actually, he said that he expects to put Cameron in there somewhere in his final mock, Monday morning, but left him out of this one because he had no sense who might be willing to risk meeting his asking price.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Jun 4, 2015 23:53:37 GMT -5
But that's who I want the Sox to take, so - sorry Theo. I certainly wouldn't hesitate to take Jay in the 2nd round, which is a round perfectly suited for Big Ten relievers. If Fulmer is on the board when the Sox pick, you take him, and then giggle to yourself giddily that you stole a pitcher like that in this Draft. Jay isn't likely to make it past 10th overall. The Sox don't have a second-rounder. I like Fullmer, but Jay has a smoother delivery and three plus pitches that he has command of, from the left. That's a **lot** tougher choice than you're making it out to be. CW says that MLB dictate a role reversal.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Jun 5, 2015 0:01:41 GMT -5
This will be familiar to many of you, and no doubt had been mentioned earlier, but because Fullmer could be our pick just for fun I went back and read a story on the small, violent Tim Lincecum before the 2006 draft. Concern for his size and his motion, but also the compensating factor that he is a "freak" of an athlete. sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=2453860"scouts reportedly continue to show concern regarding the size of Lincecum. It's a situation that is hardly new for Lincecum. "[Scouts] talk about my size, or the lack thereof," Lincecum said. "So I have to deal with that. It's something I've had to deal with pretty much my whole life. But it hasn't been too bad." Knutson feels like Lincecum's performance should outweigh any concerns about his small frame. "I think he's answered all of those questions this season," Knutson said. "He's really strong. I think he has less chance of getting hurt, because of his [delivery] style." Lincecum's mechanics are another part of his game that scouts are not used to seeing. As he and his coach describe it, he recoils at the start of his delivery, turning his back to the plate. Putting his entire body in motion, and with a long stride to the plate, Lincecum then unwinds his body as he throws." Kiley McDaniel did a story re: Fulmer, mentioning he and Lincecum as "Black Swans": the exceptional exceptions to the rule.
|
|
|
Post by philarhody on Jun 5, 2015 1:25:12 GMT -5
This will be familiar to many of you, and no doubt had been mentioned earlier, but because Fullmer could be our pick just for fun I went back and read a story on the small, violent Tim Lincecum before the 2006 draft. Concern for his size and his motion, but also the compensating factor that he is a "freak" of an athlete. sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=2453860"scouts reportedly continue to show concern regarding the size of Lincecum. It's a situation that is hardly new for Lincecum. "[Scouts] talk about my size, or the lack thereof," Lincecum said. "So I have to deal with that. It's something I've had to deal with pretty much my whole life. But it hasn't been too bad." Knutson feels like Lincecum's performance should outweigh any concerns about his small frame. "I think he's answered all of those questions this season," Knutson said. "He's really strong. I think he has less chance of getting hurt, because of his [delivery] style." Lincecum's mechanics are another part of his game that scouts are not used to seeing. As he and his coach describe it, he recoils at the start of his delivery, turning his back to the plate. Putting his entire body in motion, and with a long stride to the plate, Lincecum then unwinds his body as he throws." Kiley McDaniel did a story re: Fulmer, mentioning he and Lincecum as "Black Swans": the exceptional exceptions to the rule. The delivery itself doesnt bother me. I hate the arm action on Fulmer. Simply an amazing amount of stress he puts on his elbow.
|
|
|
Post by templeusox on Jun 5, 2015 6:04:14 GMT -5
I certainly wouldn't hesitate to take Jay in the 2nd round, which is a round perfectly suited for Big Ten relievers. If Fulmer is on the board when the Sox pick, you take him, and then giggle to yourself giddily that you stole a pitcher like that in this Draft. Jay isn't likely to make it past 10th overall. The Sox don't have a second-rounder. I like Fullmer, but Jay has a smoother delivery and three plus pitches that he has command of, from the left. That's a **lot** tougher choice than you're making it out to be. CW says that MLB dictate a role reversal. If I know both of them can relieve, why would I ever choose the player who dominated the SEC as a starter, against the guy who dominated the Big 10 as a reliever? It's only a "choice" because the draft is prime time for scouts to bloviate about things like mechanics. It's really not a choice at all. I'll take a risk on a player with unconventional mechanics rather than hoping a college reliever can transition to a starter based on nothing.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jun 5, 2015 6:37:24 GMT -5
Have there been any college relievers who were converted to starters and had significant success? The best example I can think of is Joe Kelly, which, meh. It seems a little nuts to me that there are two guys who will probably go in the top ten who were primarily relievers in college.
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 15,651
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Jun 5, 2015 6:56:22 GMT -5
Have there been any college relievers who were converted to starters and had significant success? The best example I can think of is Joe Kelly, which, meh. It seems a little nuts to me that there are two guys who will probably go in the top ten who were primarily relievers in college. I could be wrong but I thought Roger Clemens was a reliever in college and Calvin Schiraldi had been a starter. Maybe I have that wrong and Clemens only relieved in the 1983 College World Series.
|
|
|
Post by GyIantosca on Jun 5, 2015 7:08:43 GMT -5
Has is been confirmed if the Sox saw Aiken's medical report? I was convinced the Sox would take a pitcher but now I leaning towards the two they have the most knowledge of Fullmer and Bregman. This is wide open. I hope someone falls to them maybe a team goes with a pick that's signs for less . Someone who normally would not get drafted top six.
That's a good sign the international kid had a nice write up on BA on the helium report. I noticed that we are going more with Other countries than D.R. I start to get the feeling that the D.R. Is tapped out on prospects. I have no proof but just what I am seeing.
How cool would it be if the Sox can open an academy in Cuba. They have talented kids but they seem more raw like they need more refinement. Be the first to do that would be awesome.
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 3,972
|
Post by jimoh on Jun 5, 2015 7:09:41 GMT -5
Yes McDaniel's black swan piece and earlier piece on Fullmer are encouraging From the latter, on Fullmer "He’s a physical and possibly genetic freak, as this delivery, stuff, usage and velocity would’ve broken most other pitchers already, but he’s never been hurt."
Won't get hurt because he would have gotten hurt already if he were going to?
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 3,972
|
Post by jimoh on Jun 5, 2015 7:15:24 GMT -5
Have there been any college relievers who were converted to starters and had significant success? The best example I can think of is Joe Kelly, which, meh. It seems a little nuts to me that there are two guys who will probably go in the top ten who were primarily relievers in college. I could be wrong but I thought Roger Clemens was a reliever in college and Calvin Schiraldi had been a starter. Maybe I have that wrong and Clemens only relieved in the 1983 College World Series. No, Clemens was mainly a starter with a few relief appearances in each of his two Texas years. Lots of complete games
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jun 5, 2015 7:34:45 GMT -5
There have been plenty of guys like Tate who started their college careers as relievers before transitioning to the rotation in their junior years (for instance, Marcus Stroman). But there aren't very many guys who never started a game in college and became great starters in the majors. It says something about Jay that his coaching staff never thought he was good enough to start for them. I am wary.
|
|
|
Post by bsout2 on Jun 5, 2015 8:02:26 GMT -5
There have been plenty of guys like Tate who started their college careers as relievers before transitioning to the rotation in their junior years (for instance, Marcus Stroman). But there aren't very many guys who never started a game in college and became great starters in the majors. It says something about Jay that his coaching staff never thought he was good enough to start for them. I am wary. In Keith Law's opinion the Illinois coaching staff has screwed the kid over. He seems to think he should be starting and it is crazy that he has not been. Law has attacked this situation in many of his chats the past few months.
|
|
|
Post by templeusox on Jun 5, 2015 8:21:35 GMT -5
There have been plenty of guys like Tate who started their college careers as relievers before transitioning to the rotation in their junior years (for instance, Marcus Stroman). But there aren't very many guys who never started a game in college and became great starters in the majors. It says something about Jay that his coaching staff never thought he was good enough to start for them. I am wary. In Keith Law's opinion the Illinois coaching staff has screwed the kid over. He seems to think he should be starting and it is crazy that he has not been. Law has attacked this situation in many of his chats the past few months. There is no world in which Illinois screwed over Tyler Jay. He was the #1 overall pick in Baseball America's mock draft two weeks ago. Jay should be thanking his lucky stars that he's been used in a role where he can' doesn't get abused and his stuff plays up. It's done nothing but good things for his draft stock and career. Oh, and I think Illinois, the team who won like 30 games in a row at one point and is in the Super Regionals, knows what they're best pitcher usage is. Keith Law wants what is best for Keith Law and that is being able to see Jay start in order to evaluate him as a starter. We should be so thankful that Illinois has joined the rest of modern society and tuned Keith Law out.
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 3,972
|
Post by jimoh on Jun 5, 2015 8:23:51 GMT -5
Have there been any college relievers who were converted to starters and had significant success? The best example I can think of is Joe Kelly, which, meh. It seems a little nuts to me that there are two guys who will probably go in the top ten who were primarily relievers in college. Andrew Cashner? www.thebaseballcube.com/players/profile.asp?P=Andrew-Cashner
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 3,972
|
Post by jimoh on Jun 5, 2015 8:31:49 GMT -5
... It seems a little nuts to me that there are two guys who will probably go in the top ten who were primarily relievers in college. perfectgame.org/articles/View.aspx?article=1153CLOSERS AND THE DRAFT ANUP SINHA Published: Friday, December 26, 2008 five college closers picked in the first (+suppl) round in 2007 and 2008 (not including catcher/closer Wieters)
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jun 5, 2015 9:34:58 GMT -5
... It seems a little nuts to me that there are two guys who will probably go in the top ten who were primarily relievers in college. perfectgame.org/articles/View.aspx?article=1153CLOSERS AND THE DRAFT ANUP SINHA Published: Friday, December 26, 2008 five college closers picked in the first (+suppl) round in 2007 and 2008 (not including catcher/closer Wieters) There are definitely college relievers drafted in the first round, but most of them are in the back end of the first round and intended to be fast-track-the-the-majors full-time relievers. Cashner is a good find and probably the best example of a guy who was drafted high to be converted to a starter, but even he was drafted 19th overall.
|
|
|
Post by jdb on Jun 5, 2015 9:44:43 GMT -5
Nick Howard went top 20 last year but he may have started some.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Jun 5, 2015 10:21:33 GMT -5
FWIW - Keith law had a periscope chat last night and I was able to ask why the Sox seem to be predicated on Benientendi. He was pretty emphatic that they "want a bat this year" from everything he's hearing they want the "predictability" of a bat. Also had the caveat that if Tate slipped to them it would change that perspective but he was 99% sure that wouldn't happen.
Not sure if this is a departure from their "best player available" position - and Law only has sources, he's not in their war room - but would be interesting if they were for some reason leaning bat even if they have Fulmer/Jay/whomever with an identical (or even slightly better) projection.
Like I said, FWIW.
|
|
|
Post by vermontsox1 on Jun 5, 2015 10:31:07 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by oleary25 on Jun 5, 2015 10:42:11 GMT -5
I was thinking is there any thought of the RedSox punting this years pick and taking a 8 next year with whatever pick they end up with after this season ? I was thinking maybe next years class will be more top heavy. So with that in mind Akin might not be a bad pick. Upside he signs at a reasonable cost bc/ of TJ surgery, and we get last years number one. The down side he balks and we take 8 next year. I do love Fulmer if he's available. He I feel we can all agree will be a major leaguer wether it's in the pen or as a starter. Thoughts ?
|
|
|
Post by jdb on Jun 5, 2015 10:59:48 GMT -5
I don't think they punt the pick but I've seen a chat where Kiley said teams know there's a much better draft next year and will draw a line in the sand with these high end picks if they change a number.
|
|
|
Post by greatscottcooper on Jun 5, 2015 11:30:34 GMT -5
I don't think I'm smart enough to definitely say punting the pick would be a good strategy. But with the way this season is going we could be in the top 10 again and with a bonus pool between 11-12 million next year. Or we could end up with a Matuella/Aiken (if we are comfortable with them) and 1.5-2.0 million extra to spend in rounds 3-10.
I'd like to believe it could help you build a strong farm in a much better draft but how do we really know how good next years draft will be? It seems to me that the perception of a draft classes strength (before and after) is constantly amorphous.
|
|