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.
2021 MLB Draft
|
Post by tyler3 on May 8, 2021 10:49:58 GMT -5
Leiter taking a break....wow. Rocker having just a weird high strikeout, high walk, high era game, Gunnar suffering from elbow soreness, and Jaden Hill already down with TJS. This is a tough year for the college ranks.
|
|
|
Post by dyoungteach on May 8, 2021 10:54:23 GMT -5
So, Flaherty throws mainly two pitches and has 2-3 others. That's Rocker, no? I'll second what jimoh says here. Sounds like mainly a 2 pitch guy. Also that's from 2020 after Flaherty developed. Rocker could easily learn an extra pitch or two on his development track. I'm not saying I want Rocker but he's got good raw stuff, looks like the body type to handle a full workload and still has room to grow. Let's not act like Rocker or anyone they take qt 4 is a finished product because they're not. ALL I’m saying is rockers downside is kinda scary given history of pitchers that are like him in the past. We could easily be talking about another trey ball scenario. And I’m not looking for stretches to justify things. At end of day rocker is rated high right now. I believe those are rose colored glasses being worn especially given his season this season AND at that draft slot. Flaherty has averaged 94 and my statement was rocker has been BELOW 94. So no I don’t agree they are the same pitcher. Yes he can develop but shoot plenty of other pitchers can develop that you get in second round! Or next years first. To have a process where impact pitchers are acquired every year so keep that position stocked is important. However it doesn’t need to happen at 4 with his downside Interestingly, I read a similar article talking about how rangers fans are beating the drums of either of the two Vanderbilt pitchers. And the feeling among many right now is that lawyer won’t get past them even if those two pitchers are still there. ( just interesting they are having the same sort of tense back and forth).
|
|
|
Post by tyler3 on May 8, 2021 11:10:55 GMT -5
I’m hoping the best for Hoglund but it doesn’t sound great. If the worst case scenario unfolds it would be interesting to see if both Hoglund and or Hill is there at 40. I was also putting Fabian in the 40 range but lately....I don’t know. As for Leiter...3 questionable games and now a week off. I hope he’s ok. Not that he wasn’t before but he’s really going to be under the microscope when he returns. This tsp really looking to be the year of the HS SS.
|
|
|
Post by ematz1423 on May 8, 2021 11:11:03 GMT -5
I'll second what jimoh says here. Sounds like mainly a 2 pitch guy. Also that's from 2020 after Flaherty developed. Rocker could easily learn an extra pitch or two on his development track. I'm not saying I want Rocker but he's got good raw stuff, looks like the body type to handle a full workload and still has room to grow. Let's not act like Rocker or anyone they take qt 4 is a finished product because they're not. ALL I’m saying is rockers downside is kinda scary given history of pitchers that are like him in the past. We could easily be talking about another trey ball scenario. And I’m not looking for stretches to justify things. At end of day rocker is rated high right now. I believe those are rose colored glasses being worn especially given his season this season AND at that draft slot. Flaherty has averaged 94 and my statement was rocker has been BELOW 94. So no I don’t agree they are the same pitcher. Yes he can develop but shoot plenty of other pitchers can develop that you get in second round! Or next years first. To have a process where impact pitchers are acquired every year so keep that position stocked is important. However it doesn’t need to happen at 4 with his downside Interestingly, I read a similar article talking about how rangers fans are beating the drums of either of the two Vanderbilt pitchers. And the feeling among many right now is that lawyer won’t get past them even if those two pitchers are still there. ( just interesting they are having the same sort of tense back and forth). Everyone has downside though. I'm with you in the fact I'm not rooting for them to take Rocker or Leiter but I wouldn't be upset if they did really. Also I don't see Rocker and ball as comparable in the slightest. Ball was complete projection and raw as they come. Rocker has a major league quality slider already.
|
|
|
Post by dyoungteach on May 8, 2021 11:20:41 GMT -5
I’m hoping the best for Hoglund but it doesn’t sound great. If the worst case scenario unfolds it would be interesting to see if both Hoglund and or Hill is there at 40. I was also putting Fabian in the 40 range but lately....I don’t know. As for Leiter...3 questionable games and now a week off. I hope he’s ok. Not that he wasn’t before but he’s really going to be under the microscope when he returns. This tsp really looking to be the year of the HS SS. Gonna be an interesting couple months.
|
|
|
Post by wOBA Fett on May 8, 2021 11:53:56 GMT -5
Only 1 of these would I take. The other 2.... I’ll grab in free agency or wait till next one comes along or piece together something for a bit. Jack flaherty...... the what he throws as quoted by mlb: “ In 2020, he relied primarily on his Fourseam Fastball (94mph) and Slider (85mph), also mixing in a Curve (77mph) and Sinker (92mph). He also rarely threw a Change (86mph).”. Whoops that’s 5 pitches not 2. He throws them 86% of the time. Here is the list. fantasy.fangraphs.com/two-pitch-starters/. Assuming Kumar is going to throw Fastball Slider 85% of the time, I bet he throws he changeup the other 15%.
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 4,121
|
Post by jimoh on May 8, 2021 12:38:44 GMT -5
I'll second what jimoh says here. Sounds like mainly a 2 pitch guy. Also that's from 2020 after Flaherty developed. Rocker could easily learn an extra pitch or two on his development track. I'm not saying I want Rocker but he's got good raw stuff, looks like the body type to handle a full workload and still has room to grow. Let's not act like Rocker or anyone they take qt 4 is a finished product because they're not. ALL I’m saying is rockers downside is kinda scary given history of pitchers that are like him in the past. We could easily be talking about another trey ball scenario. And I’m not looking for stretches to justify things. At end of day rocker is rated high right now. I believe those are rose colored glasses being worn especially given his season this season AND at that draft slot. Flaherty has averaged 94 and my statement was rocker has been BELOW 94. So no I don’t agree they are the same pitcher. Yes he can develop but shoot plenty of other pitchers can develop that you get in second round! Or next years first. To have a process where impact pitchers are acquired every year so keep that position stocked is important. However it doesn’t need to happen at 4 with his downside Interestingly, I read a similar article talking about how rangers fans are beating the drums of either of the two Vanderbilt pitchers. And the feeling among many right now is that lawyer won’t get past them even if those two pitchers are still there. ( just interesting they are having the same sort of tense back and forth). So I guess you're just never going to realize how aggravating it is when you repeatedly stake out false claim X, get called on it, and then claim "All im saying iz Y." It's like living in an apartment underneath a teenager learning to play the tuba.
|
|
|
Post by stevedillard on May 8, 2021 13:00:09 GMT -5
Leiter taking a break....wow. Rocker having just a weird high strikeout, high walk, high era game, Gunnar suffering from elbow soreness, and Jaden Hill already down with TJS. This is a tough year for the college ranks. This, and every year, is a tough year to use valuable draft capital and draft a pitcher rather than wait and diversify the risk in later rounds. TNSSAAPP
|
|
|
Post by tyler3 on May 8, 2021 13:11:31 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by dyoungteach on May 8, 2021 14:45:10 GMT -5
ALL I’m saying is rockers downside is kinda scary given history of pitchers that are like him in the past. We could easily be talking about another trey ball scenario. And I’m not looking for stretches to justify things. At end of day rocker is rated high right now. I believe those are rose colored glasses being worn especially given his season this season AND at that draft slot. Flaherty has averaged 94 and my statement was rocker has been BELOW 94. So no I don’t agree they are the same pitcher. Yes he can develop but shoot plenty of other pitchers can develop that you get in second round! Or next years first. To have a process where impact pitchers are acquired every year so keep that position stocked is important. However it doesn’t need to happen at 4 with his downside Interestingly, I read a similar article talking about how rangers fans are beating the drums of either of the two Vanderbilt pitchers. And the feeling among many right now is that lawyer won’t get past them even if those two pitchers are still there. ( just interesting they are having the same sort of tense back and forth). So I guess you're just never going to realize how aggravating it is when you repeatedly stake out false claim X, get called on it, and then claim "All im saying iz Y." It's like living in an apartment underneath a teenager learning to play the tuba. And around we go again.... me stating a thought. You or whomever trying to tear that thought down because it doesn’t agree with yours. I’m saying. Again. Repeated because clearly it’s not understood. No pitcher is showing to be an ace pitcher and this pitcher has 2 pitches. He has downside risk of being a reliever and I’ve given plenty of examples where other quality pitchers have been chosen later in the draft and examples of pitchers who have been taken high and failed. There is nothing false about what I said. He’s a 2 pitch pitcher that averages less than 94 on his fastball. Hell 2 weeks ago he was averaging about 90. If you don’t like my thoughts. Great. Fine. Move on. But if you want to attack me for them. Well you are going to get a strong rebuttal. If you think you know it all then why aren’t you a gm or scout?? Same as me. I might be wrong. We will see what happens and who they choose. We will see if that player by this time next year isn’t a top 100 prospect. ( I’m sure they will be). But my god man move on seriously don’t agree with me and move on! I’ll gladly do the same ..
|
|
|
Post by manfred on May 8, 2021 14:49:03 GMT -5
Is there a good source of old scouting reports? I’m curious to look back at guys like Verlander coming out of college. I don’t remember what he looked like then.
|
|
|
Post by alexcorahomevideo on May 8, 2021 14:49:18 GMT -5
If one of the two Vanderbilt pitchers falls to Boston do not over complicate things. That program knows how to get pitchers ready for the pros.
|
|
|
Post by dyoungteach on May 8, 2021 15:03:45 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by tyler3 on May 8, 2021 17:13:28 GMT -5
Believe Mayer just got another homer and is now up to 10 dingers, .414 avg., 19 walks and 2 Ks. In my opinion, which means oh so little, the tool that Lawlar beats Mayer in is speed and that’s it.
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 4,121
|
Post by jimoh on May 8, 2021 19:46:27 GMT -5
Is there a good source of old scouting reports? I’m curious to look back at guys like Verlander coming out of college. I don’t remember what he looked like then. Not real pro scouting reports, but before John Sickels stopped his website minorlaguebaseball.com he would sometimes do "prospect retrospectives" so you can google "minorlaguebaseball.com prospect retrospective Verlander" (or use the word Sickels) and come up with: www.minorleagueball.com/2017/10/5/16425604/prospect-retrospective-justin-verlanderAnd yes, it's interesting. Taken 1.2, but did not sign until the next Spring. "His college performance did not always match his stuff, as he was sometimes undone by poor command." Again, not pro scouting but his own observations and comments on stats.
|
|
|
Post by dyoungteach on May 8, 2021 20:27:00 GMT -5
So I guess you're just never going to realize how aggravating it is when you repeatedly stake out false claim X, get called on it, and then claim "All im saying iz Y." It's like living in an apartment underneath a teenager learning to play the tuba. Reminds me of the poster who was banned a while back. Banned for stating an opinion given the facts... ummm ok?
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on May 9, 2021 2:21:56 GMT -5
I'll second what jimoh says here. Sounds like mainly a 2 pitch guy. Also that's from 2020 after Flaherty developed. Rocker could easily learn an extra pitch or two on his development track. I'm not saying I want Rocker but he's got good raw stuff, looks like the body type to handle a full workload and still has room to grow. Let's not act like Rocker or anyone they take qt 4 is a finished product because they're not. ALL I’m saying is rockers downside is kinda scary given history of pitchers that are like him in the past. We could easily be talking about another trey ball scenario. And I’m not looking for stretches to justify things. At end of day rocker is rated high right now. I believe those are rose colored glasses being worn especially given his season this season AND at that draft slot. Flaherty has averaged 94 and my statement was rocker has been BELOW 94. So no I don’t agree they are the same pitcher. Yes he can develop but shoot plenty of other pitchers can develop that you get in second round! Or next years first. To have a process where impact pitchers are acquired every year so keep that position stocked is important. However it doesn’t need to happen at 4 with his downside Interestingly, I read a similar article talking about how rangers fans are beating the drums of either of the two Vanderbilt pitchers. And the feeling among many right now is that lawyer won’t get past them even if those two pitchers are still there. ( just interesting they are having the same sort of tense back and forth). I look at it this way. If Kumar Rocker is the best available talent when the fourth pick comes around the Red Sox should jump on him. I don't subscribe to this, "He's a pitcher, you can't draft him over a position player". To have championship aspirations, a team needs strong pitching, particularly an ace. If Rocker develops, he could be a #2 on a strong team or an above average #3 starter on a championship caliber team. Those are valuable commodities and worthy of a #4 pick. Or he could even develop into the ace that you're hoping for when you draft him. That happened to the Red Sox once. They drafted Roger Clemens and he certainly didn't disappoint. He came out of college almost ready for the majors, came up, a year later had a shoulder injury, recovered and became the ace the Red Sox had waited generations for. To a lesser extent, think of Jim Lonborg and Jon Lester as guys the Sox drafted who had their time as aces on championship caliber Red Sox teams. Or Rocker could develop into somebody like Carl Pavano or Tony Armas Jr or Michael Kopech, valuable commodities used as chips to trade for a Pedro Martinez or a Chris Sale. Or a Mike Paxton as a chip in a package to trade for a young Dennis Eckersley. Or an Anibal Sanchez as a chip in a package to land a young Josh Beckett. Rocker could show enough promise that he gets himself flipped for the next prime time ace available on the trade market. The fact of the matter is you could draft a Marcelo Mayer or whoever and wind up using him as a trade chip for an ace pitcher as well, as some of those deals I mentioned above utilized positions players as well (Hanley Ramirez in the Beckett deal, Moncada in the Sale deal, Bo Diaz and Ted Cox in the Eckersley deal). While a strong two-way catcher with HOF talent might be just as rare if not more rare than an ace pitcher, as Eric Van points out, teams I believe value top of the rotation starting pitching the most, even possibly more than the next Buster Posey. What teams don't want to do is have to shell out $200 - $300 plus million for a free agent starting pitcher to be their pitching ace (think David Price with the Red Sox or what the Yankees might be dealing with some day if Cole Hamels should decline well before the 9th year of his contract). What is rare to do is to have an ace fall into your lap cheaply. Other than the Sox striking gold on an injury rehabbing Luis Tiant, they have never had such good fortune. Here's hoping (but not expecting) Garrett Whitlock can give them a fraction of what Tiant gave the Sox more than 40 years ago. But you can't count on it. Your odds are better drafting your next pitching ace or using your draftee to acquire your next pitching ace - and usually a team looking to replace an ace pitcher they are trading are usually looking to replace him with one pitching, which you are at an advantage if you can supply the young replacement pitching. So if Kumar Rocker happens to be the best talent available at the time the Sox are picking 4th then they should draft him, pitcher or not, but if he's not the best talent available then they should go in a different direction. Again, position doesn't matter at that point, it's the talent that is available, which is a judgment call, one I'm not qualified to know about. All I know is if they judge him to be the best talent at that spot they take him. If not, they don't.
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 4,121
|
Post by jimoh on May 9, 2021 6:34:18 GMT -5
I look at it this way. If Kumar Rocker is the best available talent when the fourth pick comes around the Red Sox should jump on him. I don't subscribe to this, "He's a pitcher, you can't draft him over a position player". To have championship aspirations, a team needs strong pitching, particularly an ace. If Rocker develops, he could be a #2 on a strong team or an above average #3 starter on a championship caliber team. Those are valuable commodities and worthy of a #4 pick. Or he could even develop into the ace that you're hoping for when you draft him. That happened to the Red Sox once. They drafted Roger Clemens and he certainly didn't disappoint. He came out of college almost ready for the majors, came up, a year later had a shoulder injury, recovered and became the ace the Red Sox had waited generations for. To a lesser extent, think of Jim Lonborg and Jon Lester as guys the Sox drafted who had their time as aces on championship caliber Red Sox teams. Or Rocker could develop into somebody like Carl Pavano or Tony Armas Jr or Michael Kopech, valuable commodities used as chips to trade for a Pedro Martinez or a Chris Sale. Or a Mike Paxton as a chip in a package to trade for a young Dennis Eckersley. Or an Anibal Sanchez as a chip in a package to land a young Josh Beckett. Rocker could show enough promise that he gets himself flipped for the next prime time ace available on the trade market. The fact of the matter is you could draft a Marcelo Mayer or whoever and wind up using him as a trade chip for an ace pitcher as well, as some of those deals I mentioned above utilized positions players as well (Hanley Ramirez in the Beckett deal, Moncada in the Sale deal, Bo Diaz and Ted Cox in the Eckersley deal). While a strong two-way catcher with HOF talent might be just as rare if not more rare than an ace pitcher, as Eric Van points out, teams I believe value top of the rotation starting pitching the most, even possibly more than the next Buster Posey. What teams don't want to do is have to shell out $200 - $300 plus million for a free agent starting pitcher to be their pitching ace (think David Price with the Red Sox or what the Yankees might be dealing with some day if Cole Hamels should decline well before the 9th year of his contract). What is rare to do is to have an ace fall into your lap cheaply. Other than the Sox striking gold on an injury rehabbing Luis Tiant, they have never had such good fortune. Here's hoping (but not expecting) Garrett Whitlock can give them a fraction of what Tiant gave the Sox more than 40 years ago. But you can't count on it. Your odds are better drafting your next pitching ace or using your draftee to acquire your next pitching ace - and usually a team looking to replace an ace pitcher they are trading are usually looking to replace him with one pitching, which you are at an advantage if you can supply the young replacement pitching. So if Kumar Rocker happens to be the best talent available at the time the Sox are picking 4th then they should draft him, pitcher or not, but if he's not the best talent available then they should go in a different direction. Again, position doesn't matter at that point, it's the talent that is available, which is a judgment call, one I'm not qualified to know about. All I know is if they judge him to be the best talent at that spot they take him. If not, they don't. This is a great explanation of how the obvious risk in drafting a starting pitcher might (might!) be outweighed by the enormous benefit of having a draft pick turn into an ace. (Ace [for a little while] who fell into our lap: 1995 Tim Wakefield, who started his Boston career 14-1, 1.65. Third in Cy Young voting, 13th in MVP.)
|
|
|
Post by dyoungteach on May 9, 2021 9:50:25 GMT -5
I look at it this way. If Kumar Rocker is the best available talent when the fourth pick comes around the Red Sox should jump on him. I don't subscribe to this, "He's a pitcher, you can't draft him over a position player". To have championship aspirations, a team needs strong pitching, particularly an ace. If Rocker develops, he could be a #2 on a strong team or an above average #3 starter on a championship caliber team. Those are valuable commodities and worthy of a #4 pick. Or he could even develop into the ace that you're hoping for when you draft him. That happened to the Red Sox once. They drafted Roger Clemens and he certainly didn't disappoint. He came out of college almost ready for the majors, came up, a year later had a shoulder injury, recovered and became the ace the Red Sox had waited generations for. To a lesser extent, think of Jim Lonborg and Jon Lester as guys the Sox drafted who had their time as aces on championship caliber Red Sox teams. Or Rocker could develop into somebody like Carl Pavano or Tony Armas Jr or Michael Kopech, valuable commodities used as chips to trade for a Pedro Martinez or a Chris Sale. Or a Mike Paxton as a chip in a package to trade for a young Dennis Eckersley. Or an Anibal Sanchez as a chip in a package to land a young Josh Beckett. Rocker could show enough promise that he gets himself flipped for the next prime time ace available on the trade market. The fact of the matter is you could draft a Marcelo Mayer or whoever and wind up using him as a trade chip for an ace pitcher as well, as some of those deals I mentioned above utilized positions players as well (Hanley Ramirez in the Beckett deal, Moncada in the Sale deal, Bo Diaz and Ted Cox in the Eckersley deal). While a strong two-way catcher with HOF talent might be just as rare if not more rare than an ace pitcher, as Eric Van points out, teams I believe value top of the rotation starting pitching the most, even possibly more than the next Buster Posey. What teams don't want to do is have to shell out $200 - $300 plus million for a free agent starting pitcher to be their pitching ace (think David Price with the Red Sox or what the Yankees might be dealing with some day if Cole Hamels should decline well before the 9th year of his contract). What is rare to do is to have an ace fall into your lap cheaply. Other than the Sox striking gold on an injury rehabbing Luis Tiant, they have never had such good fortune. Here's hoping (but not expecting) Garrett Whitlock can give them a fraction of what Tiant gave the Sox more than 40 years ago. But you can't count on it. Your odds are better drafting your next pitching ace or using your draftee to acquire your next pitching ace - and usually a team looking to replace an ace pitcher they are trading are usually looking to replace him with one pitching, which you are at an advantage if you can supply the young replacement pitching. So if Kumar Rocker happens to be the best talent available at the time the Sox are picking 4th then they should draft him, pitcher or not, but if he's not the best talent available then they should go in a different direction. Again, position doesn't matter at that point, it's the talent that is available, which is a judgment call, one I'm not qualified to know about. All I know is if they judge him to be the best talent at that spot they take him. If not, they don't. This is a great explanation of how the obvious risk in drafting a starting pitcher might (might!) be outweighed by the enormous benefit of having a draft pick turn into an ace. (Ace [for a little while] who fell into our lap: 1995 Tim Wakefield, who started his Boston career 14-1, 1.65. Third in Cy Young voting, 13th in MVP.) At end of day I don’t care, but let’s hope whomever they pick becomes a true impact player. We haven’t had a pick this high in as long as I’ve followed the Red Sox. So here’s hoping this group is good as scouting and finds that impact player.
|
|
|
Post by wOBA Fett on May 9, 2021 12:28:29 GMT -5
Is there a good source of old scouting reports? I’m curious to look back at guys like Verlander coming out of college. I don’t remember what he looked like then. mlb.mlb.com/mlb/draftday/y2004/search.jspBest you'll get: COMMENT: LEAN, WIRY STRONG. LONG ARMS. THIN WAIST. TAPERS TO LONG, STRONG LEGS. BODY SIMILAR TO ANDY ASHBY. NO WINDUP, 3/4 DELIVERY. LOOSE, LIVE, QUICK ARM. PWR FB W/ OCCAISIONAL RUN INTO RHH, BAT BREAKER. NASTY, HARD SLIDER, 3/4 TILT, LATE BITE IN ZONE, KNEE BUCKLER. FRANCHISE TYPE PITCHER. NUMBER ONE STARTER. OVERPOWERING STUFF. WILL GET THERE QUICK.
|
|
|
Post by azblue on May 9, 2021 12:34:48 GMT -5
The amunt of information to which we have access is dramatically less than the information available to the teams drafting in the top 4.
There are 9 weeks before the draft. The options that the Sox will have are very exciting. This should be fun. If we were in the Red Sox war room the day before the draft and all of us had a vote, I could understand the drawn weapons. We are not.
|
|
|
Post by dirtdog on May 9, 2021 17:12:13 GMT -5
This is a great explanation of how the obvious risk in drafting a starting pitcher might (might!) be outweighed by the enormous benefit of having a draft pick turn into an ace. (Ace [for a little while] who fell into our lap: 1995 Tim Wakefield, who started his Boston career 14-1, 1.65. Third in Cy Young voting, 13th in MVP.) At end of day I don’t care, but let’s hope whomever they pick becomes a true impact player. We haven’t had a pick this high in as long as I’ve followed the Red Sox. So here’s hoping this group is good as scouting and finds that impact player. 1967 Mike Garman who was a journeyman major leaguer.
|
|
|
Post by dyoungteach on May 9, 2021 17:23:20 GMT -5
At end of day I don’t care, but let’s hope whomever they pick becomes a true impact player. We haven’t had a pick this high in as long as I’ve followed the Red Sox. So here’s hoping this group is good as scouting and finds that impact player. 1967 Mike Garman who was a journeyman major leaguer. Good thing I wasn’t around then and didn’t follow them then
|
|
|
Post by azblue on May 9, 2021 19:05:50 GMT -5
1967 Draft picks--Interesting to see who the Sox could have drafted at No. 3
Pick Player Team Position Hometown/School 1 Ron Blomberg New York Yankees 1B Atlanta 2 Terry Hughes Chicago Cubs SS Spartanburg, South Carolina 3 Mike Garman Boston Red Sox RHP Caldwell, Idaho 4 Jon Matlack New York Mets LHP West Chester, Pennsylvania 5 John Jones Washington Senators C St. Joseph, Tennessee 6 John Mayberry Houston Astros 1B Detroit, Michigan 7 Brian Bickerton Oakland Athletics LHP Santee, California 8 Wayne Simpson Cincinnati Reds RHP Los Angeles 9 Mike Nunn California Angels C Greensboro, North Carolina 10 Ted Simmons St. Louis Cardinals C Southfield, Michigan 11 Jack Heidemann Cleveland Indians SS Brenham, Texas 12 Andrew Finlay Atlanta Braves OF Sacramento, California 13 Dan Haynes Chicago White Sox 3B East Point, Georgia 14 Phil Meyer Philadelphia Phillies LHP Downey, California 15 Jim Foor Detroit Tigers LHP Ferguson, Missouri 16 Joe Grigas Pittsburgh Pirates OF Brockton, Massachusetts 17 Steve Brye Minnesota Twins 3B-OF Oakland, California 18 Dave Rader San Francisco Giants C Bakersfield, California 19 Bobby Grich Baltimore Orioles SS Long Beach, California 20 Don Denbow Los Angeles Dodgers 3B Southern Methodist University Other notable selections [2]
Round Pick Player Team Position 2 27 Vida Blue Kansas City Athletics Pitcher 2 29 Dave Kingman* California Angels Pitcher 2 30 Jerry Reuss St. Louis Cardinals Pitcher 2 39 Don Baylor Baltimore Orioles Outfielder 3 52 Ralph Garr Atlanta Braves Second Baseman 3 56 Richie Zisk Pittsburgh Pirates Outfielder 4 68 Fred Kendall Cincinnati Reds Catcher 4 78 Steve Busby* San Francisco Giants Pitcher 4 80 Steve Yeager Los Angeles Dodgers Catcher 5 96 Dave Goltz Minnesota Twins Pitcher 8 157 Dave Lopes* San Francisco Giants Outfielder 10 189 Lenny Randle* St. Louis Cardinals Shortstop 11 216 Al Hrabosky* Minnesota Twins Pitcher 15 296 Rick Dempsey Minnesota Twins Catcher 20 396 Gary Lavelle San Francisco Giants Pitcher 20 397 Doug Rau* Baltimore Orioles Pitcher 26 503 Dusty Baker Atlanta Braves Outfielder 31 587 Chris Chambliss* Cincinnati Reds First Baseman 32 599 Dan Pastorini* New York Mets Shortstop 43 779 Archie Manning* Atlanta Braves Shortstop 60 924 Steve Rogers* New York Yankees Pitcher
* Did not sign
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 4,121
|
Post by jimoh on May 9, 2021 19:40:05 GMT -5
1967 Draft picks--Interesting to see who the Sox could have drafted at No. 3 Pick Player Team Position Hometown/School 1 Ron Blomberg New York Yankees 1B Atlanta 2 Terry Hughes Chicago Cubs SS Spartanburg, South Carolina 3 Mike Garman Boston Red Sox RHP Caldwell, Idaho 4 Jon Matlack New York Mets LHP West Chester, Pennsylvania 5 John Jones Washington Senators C St. Joseph, Tennessee 6 John Mayberry Houston Astros 1B Detroit, Michigan 7 Brian Bickerton Oakland Athletics LHP Santee, California 8 Wayne Simpson Cincinnati Reds RHP Los Angeles 9 Mike Nunn California Angels C Greensboro, North Carolina 10 Ted Simmons St. Louis Cardinals C Southfield, Michigan 11 Jack Heidemann Cleveland Indians SS Brenham, Texas 12 Andrew Finlay Atlanta Braves OF Sacramento, California 13 Dan Haynes Chicago White Sox 3B East Point, Georgia 14 Phil Meyer Philadelphia Phillies LHP Downey, California 15 Jim Foor Detroit Tigers LHP Ferguson, Missouri 16 Joe Grigas Pittsburgh Pirates OF Brockton, Massachusetts 17 Steve Brye Minnesota Twins 3B-OF Oakland, California 18 Dave Rader San Francisco Giants C Bakersfield, California 19 Bobby Grich Baltimore Orioles SS Long Beach, California 20 Don Denbow Los Angeles Dodgers 3B Southern Methodist University Other notable selections [2] Round Pick Player Team Position 2 27 Vida Blue Kansas City Athletics Pitcher 2 29 Dave Kingman* California Angels Pitcher 2 30 Jerry Reuss St. Louis Cardinals Pitcher 2 39 Don Baylor Baltimore Orioles Outfielder 3 52 Ralph Garr Atlanta Braves Second Baseman 3 56 Richie Zisk Pittsburgh Pirates Outfielder 4 68 Fred Kendall Cincinnati Reds Catcher 4 78 Steve Busby* San Francisco Giants Pitcher 4 80 Steve Yeager Los Angeles Dodgers Catcher 5 96 Dave Goltz Minnesota Twins Pitcher 8 157 Dave Lopes* San Francisco Giants Outfielder 10 189 Lenny Randle* St. Louis Cardinals Shortstop 11 216 Al Hrabosky* Minnesota Twins Pitcher 15 296 Rick Dempsey Minnesota Twins Catcher 20 396 Gary Lavelle San Francisco Giants Pitcher 20 397 Doug Rau* Baltimore Orioles Pitcher 26 503 Dusty Baker Atlanta Braves Outfielder 31 587 Chris Chambliss* Cincinnati Reds First Baseman 32 599 Dan Pastorini* New York Mets Shortstop 43 779 Archie Manning* Atlanta Braves Shortstop 60 924 Steve Rogers* New York Yankees Pitcher * Did not sign Sox also got Carlton Fisk with the 4th pick of the Jan 1967 draft.
|
|
|