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 soxfanatic on Apr 27, 2015 5:33:48 GMT -5
After today's 3-6 double-header, with a walk and sac fly, he's got no Ks yet in 16 games and 70 PAs this year, hitting .362. I admit, I'd like to see more walks (at least a 10% rate), but I can't really argue the results. In about 120 PAs in Salem, he's got 5 strikeouts. That's ridiculous in today's game. I wonder a little if it's affecting his power, but Salem's not exactly a bandbox. He's definitely getting his extra bases. I still think Portland is in his near future, particularly if he's even close to this level of performance after 200 PAs. No-K watch in full effect. BA is going to need to add one like they did for Mookie's on-base streak. Cue the Margot Meter
|
|
|
Post by gregblossersbelly on Apr 27, 2015 7:14:09 GMT -5
There should be no reason to rush Margot. Nothing wrong with giving a prospect 400 plate appearances at each level. Maybe, they'll struggle less with the Sox when called up. Dominate a level for an extended period. Then promote. Same goes for Swihart.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Apr 27, 2015 8:03:57 GMT -5
"He’s a true five-tool prospect with incredible range in center field despite speed that ranks as just a tick above average." First I've seen Margot's speed regarded as anything less than plus. Albeit in an excerpt that praises his intangibles it still feels like a bit of a backhanded complement. I think BA has mentioned this once before, but yeah, when they did so for the first time, it caught me by surprise. Maybe he's slowed down a little as he's aged and filled out his frame somewhat, but the Margot I remember from Lowell was a pretty fast guy (though, since I'm not a scout, I don't have the best basis for comparison).
|
|
|
Post by okin15 on Apr 27, 2015 8:17:20 GMT -5
There should be no reason to rush Margot. Nothing wrong with giving a prospect 400 plate appearances at each level. Maybe, they'll struggle less with the Sox when called up. Dominate a level for an extended period. Then promote. Same goes for Swihart. Lots of reasons not to let good prospects get bored. They may regress, or feel that less work is required to succeed. They miss opportunities to develop at a young age when muscle memory (or whatever it is) is easier to form. They may get hurt in the future, causing them to lose development or performance time. They may be ready for the Rule 5 draft at some point and you'd like to have a good look at upper levels by then/be ready to start burning options. I don't want to rush Margot (and certainly not for a club need), but I do want him to move at his own pace. His performance and scouting look will tell us if he needs more time at any given level, and continued performance (and scouting?) at this pace will tell us he needs to be challenged in order to keep growing. That could change, but if it doesn't in the next 100 at bats, I'll be clamoring for a promotion. If he falls off a bunch, then we can say he's not quite ready.
|
|
|
Post by gregblossersbelly on Apr 27, 2015 8:58:16 GMT -5
There should be no reason to rush Margot. Nothing wrong with giving a prospect 400 plate appearances at each level. Maybe, they'll struggle less with the Sox when called up. Dominate a level for an extended period. Then promote. Same goes for Swihart. Lots of reasons not to let good prospects get bored. They may regress, or feel that less work is required to succeed. They miss opportunities to develop at a young age when muscle memory (or whatever it is) is easier to form. They may get hurt in the future, causing them to lose development or performance time. They may be ready for the Rule 5 draft at some point and you'd like to have a good look at upper levels by then/be ready to start burning options. I don't want to rush Margot (and certainly not for a club need), but I do want him to move at his own pace. His performance and scouting look will tell us if he needs more time at any given level, and continued performance (and scouting?) at this pace will tell us he needs to be challenged in order to keep growing. That could change, but if it doesn't in the next 100 at bats, I'll be clamoring for a promotion. If he falls off a bunch, then we can say he's not quite ready. I don't see any cases of our prospects getting bored by playing a full season at a level. Especially, high school and Latin prospects. I am starting to see evidence we've rushed some guys thru and some of their growing pains in MLB might be attributed to that; Bradley, Bogaerts and Betts.
|
|
|
Post by cologneredsox on Apr 28, 2015 8:24:54 GMT -5
Lots of reasons not to let good prospects get bored. They may regress, or feel that less work is required to succeed. They miss opportunities to develop at a young age when muscle memory (or whatever it is) is easier to form. They may get hurt in the future, causing them to lose development or performance time. They may be ready for the Rule 5 draft at some point and you'd like to have a good look at upper levels by then/be ready to start burning options. I don't want to rush Margot (and certainly not for a club need), but I do want him to move at his own pace. His performance and scouting look will tell us if he needs more time at any given level, and continued performance (and scouting?) at this pace will tell us he needs to be challenged in order to keep growing. That could change, but if it doesn't in the next 100 at bats, I'll be clamoring for a promotion. If he falls off a bunch, then we can say he's not quite ready. I don't see any cases of our prospects getting bored by playing a full season at a level. Especially, high school and Latin prospects. I am starting to see evidence we've rushed some guys thru and some of their growing pains in MLB might be attributed to that; Bradley, Bogaerts and Betts. The Question is: What will those player be like in their third season (or, having played a full season on each level, their first). It seems likely they struggle for a while before they get really comfortable. It's not always obvious more seasoning in the minors would've been the better option. In short: I think Okin made a very good point. I mean, just look at some all-time greats and imagine their BP-Pages (and HOF-chances, for that matter) if those would have had to play a full year on each level. I don't say Margot is on their level. But as long as he is clearly ahead of his opposition, he shouldn't have to wait to long to get tested again, if we want him to develop as good as possible.
|
|
|
Post by borisman on Apr 29, 2015 5:59:24 GMT -5
Another game, another game without a strike out.
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Apr 29, 2015 8:35:59 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by gregblossersbelly on Apr 29, 2015 9:47:28 GMT -5
That's an interesting development. Trey Ball is pitching today too.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,793
Member is Online
|
Post by nomar on Apr 29, 2015 10:29:48 GMT -5
If we ever gave Margot + Owens/Rodriguez for Hamels I'll do my best Brentz impression and shoot myself.
|
|
|
Post by GyIantosca on Apr 29, 2015 10:36:46 GMT -5
Of course he is scouting down there. That's chalked packed with prospects. BA will re rank them top ten after picking thru our guys.
I pictured Margot slotting in Left Field in a couple of years and Hanley going to DH. The Sox can pick and choose there pictures this offseason. They just thro money at it and loose a first rounder. I want a young guy if we're giving up Margot. Who knows what else. I am scared of hamels coming over to the AL East. I hope the Yankees deal with the Phillies and Amaro.
I swear if the Sox try to fix there problems with the pitchers in AAA. I will not complain one minute. If they want to swing a deal for Papelbon at deadline that shouldn't be that bad. I think.
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Apr 29, 2015 10:57:17 GMT -5
Well now we're going to have to throw in Swihart . . . MM just struck out.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Apr 29, 2015 12:54:31 GMT -5
If we ever gave Margot + Owens/Rodriguez for Hamels I'll do my best Brentz impression and shoot myself. The more the pitching stinks the more I'm afraid the Sox are headed in this direction. I hope Ben doesn't cave in to the talkshow callers and reactionaries. This is one of the main reasons I wanted Lester re-signed. Yes, he's struggling as much as the rest of the Sox starters are, but I'd think he'd turn it around, just like I think Porcello and Kelly will emerge alright. Buchholz will always be a tease. I don't have a ton of faith in Miley and Masterson has seen his better days. And because the Sox don't have Lester or somebody filling that "ace" role, the Sox will be forced to deal one of their promising lefties and either Devers or Margot, more likely Margot. I'd much rather see Margot in CF and the lefties in the rotation at minimum wage for the Sox down the road than Hamels in the rotation.
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Apr 29, 2015 13:11:48 GMT -5
I'll be very upset if it's Margot for Hamels, but I won't trust that I'm being rational. I'm too far in the tank for Margot at this point. Generally, after an offseason of saying, "this guy's underrated and going to pop!" I'm too invested in that prospect's success.
|
|
|
Post by azblue on Apr 29, 2015 17:55:46 GMT -5
Pray that Johnson or Rodriguez come through if we need to replace one of the current starters in the rotation. I had flashbacks to the moan that came from deep inside me when Jeff Bagwell was traded for Larry Anderson.
|
|
|
Post by gregblossersbelly on Apr 29, 2015 18:49:51 GMT -5
Comparing Cole Hamels to Larry Anderson is total BS. Gotta give to get. I would just ride this team out and sign Cueto as a free agent. But, I don't have to sell tickets or advertising.
|
|
TX
Veteran
Posts: 265
|
Post by TX on Apr 29, 2015 19:59:07 GMT -5
Comparing Cole Hamels to Larry Anderson is total BS. Gotta give to get. I would just ride this team out and sign Cueto as a free agent. But, I don't have to sell tickets or advertising. Comparing a farmhand to Bags is just as bad. Margot for a quality, seasoned starter? Who comes cheaper than Poorcello? anybody opposing such a thing is nuts.
|
|
|
Post by jhenrywaugh, prop. on Apr 29, 2015 20:52:37 GMT -5
Comparing Cole Hamels to Larry Anderson is total BS. Gotta give to get. I would just ride this team out and sign Cueto as a free agent. But, I don't have to sell tickets or advertising. Comparing a farmhand to Bags is just as bad. Margot for a quality, seasoned starter? Who comes cheaper than Poorcello? anybody opposing such a thing is nuts. Agreed. He's more than quality, he's one of the top 10-15 starters in the game. He can only hope a prospect reaches his level, and no one is projecting Owens, Rodriguez, or Margot to reach that level.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Apr 29, 2015 20:53:22 GMT -5
I think I'd be ok with Margot/Owens, especially if the Phillies are picking up a healthy chunk of salary.
|
|
|
Post by FenwayFanatic on Apr 29, 2015 21:13:43 GMT -5
Comparing Cole Hamels to Larry Anderson is total BS. Gotta give to get. Not sure why people keep saying this. Its simply not true. Teams get rental players for very reasonable packages almost every season. There is no reason to cave into Amaro's demands.
|
|
|
Post by gregblossersbelly on Apr 30, 2015 8:35:44 GMT -5
Comparing Cole Hamels to Larry Anderson is total BS. Gotta give to get. Not sure why people keep saying this. Its simply not true. Teams get rental players for very reasonable packages almost every season. There is no reason to cave into Amaro's demands. In many cases the veteran is approaching free agency. Not the case with Hamels. In other cases, it's a small market that can't afford to keep the vet. Not the case with Hamels. Sometimes, a vet demands a trade or pouts. Again, not the case with Hamels. Amaro has a lot of leverage. And, now other teams to dangle Hamels to. Dodgers, Cards and Yanks come to mind.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Apr 30, 2015 9:12:32 GMT -5
Not sure why people keep saying this. Its simply not true. Teams get rental players for very reasonable packages almost every season. There is no reason to cave into Amaro's demands. In many cases the veteran is approaching free agency. Not the case with Hamels. In other cases, it's a small market that can't afford to keep the vet. Not the case with Hamels. Sometimes, a vet demands a trade or pouts. Again, not the case with Hamels. Amaro has a lot of leverage. And, now other teams to dangle Hamels to. Dodgers, Cards and Yanks come to mind. The only way Amaro has a lot of leverage is if a team is panicking in April.
|
|
|
Post by jrffam05 on Apr 30, 2015 9:46:00 GMT -5
Not sure why people keep saying this. Its simply not true. Teams get rental players for very reasonable packages almost every season. There is no reason to cave into Amaro's demands. In many cases the veteran is approaching free agency. Not the case with Hamels. In other cases, it's a small market that can't afford to keep the vet. Not the case with Hamels. Sometimes, a vet demands a trade or pouts. Again, not the case with Hamels. Amaro has a lot of leverage. And, now other teams to dangle Hamels to. Dodgers, Cards and Yanks come to mind. I hope the Yankees overpay for Hamels.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Apr 30, 2015 10:30:58 GMT -5
In many cases the veteran is approaching free agency. Not the case with Hamels. In other cases, it's a small market that can't afford to keep the vet. Not the case with Hamels. Sometimes, a vet demands a trade or pouts. Again, not the case with Hamels. Amaro has a lot of leverage. And, now other teams to dangle Hamels to. Dodgers, Cards and Yanks come to mind. I hope the Yankees overpay for Hamels. If Amaro's demands haven't lowered, the Yankees cannot trade for Hamels.
|
|
radiohix
Veteran
'At the end of the day, we bang. We bang. We're going to swing.' Alex Verdugo
Posts: 6,298
|
Post by radiohix on Apr 30, 2015 10:34:42 GMT -5
|
|
|