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.
Red Sox Acquire RHP Quinn Priester for Nick Yorke
|
Post by notstarboard on Jul 30, 2024 5:43:54 GMT -5
Nick Yorke always reminded me of Michael Chavis, who was a solid-average regular until the team gets tired of having a solid-average regular who can't play the infield. Or hit fastballs above the thighs Or lay off them 😆 throwing fastballs a few inches above the zone was an automatic out
|
|
|
Post by 6fanin67 on Jul 30, 2024 6:16:56 GMT -5
Love it. This is the kind of asset I'd hope they'd acquire in sell mode. Not really sell mode, but essentially more efficient capital allocation Excess is waste, trade it for a need/ area of weakness. That is what we did here
|
|
|
Post by 6fanin67 on Jul 30, 2024 6:17:31 GMT -5
Didn't mean to imply there were. Should have probably added an if to that sentence.
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Jul 30, 2024 6:19:20 GMT -5
Crazy that Chavis was our top prospect for a minute, I’d take this Yorke over that Chavis easily
Just to be clear this is commentary on how far the system has come not the rankings
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jul 30, 2024 7:30:17 GMT -5
Crazy that Chavis was our top prospect for a minute, I’d take this Yorke over that Chavis easily Just to be clear this is commentary on how far the system has come not the rankings No offense taken. You're not wrong. That was probably the system's nadir, through the start of Casas being at the top. I'd probably take that Chavis over Yorke, but he's not a top 5 prospect in this system.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Jul 30, 2024 7:49:07 GMT -5
Yorke has a much better contact skill than Chavis. Chavis is probably a bit more of a natural athlete and it seemed like he'd have more upside defensively, but he never quite found a home. Chavis, at his peak, would not be in the top five in the system and might be as low as 10th. So yeah, while I don't think it's a great comp in terms of the player, in terms of prospect value it feels about right.
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 15,645
|
Post by cdj on Jul 30, 2024 8:10:08 GMT -5
Pirates fan buddy says he has the stuff, just needs to command it better. Too many fat pitches at the big league level. Says he’s got a bunch left in the tank though.
Also said they’re dying for position player bodies, seems like we may see Yorke at the big league level soon
|
|
|
Post by vt2carolinaroy on Jul 30, 2024 8:14:55 GMT -5
Have this weird feeling we’re going to regret choosing Grissom over Yorke. I'm with you on this one. I know he had some work to do on defense, but I think it was more serviceable than other recent options. I would much rather see him out there than Grissom, Valdez and Westbrook. Nope, Bloom had Franchy, Breslow has Grissom. It is what it is. I hope to heck both of these trades work out well for us. Not feeling good ATM.
|
|
|
Post by notstarboard on Jul 30, 2024 8:21:36 GMT -5
Have this weird feeling we’re going to regret choosing Grissom over Yorke. I'm with you on this one. I know he had some work to do on defense, but I think it was more serviceable than other recent options. I would much rather see him out there than Grissom, Valdez and Westbrook. Nope, Bloom had Franchy, Breslow has Grissom. It is what it is. I hope to heck both of these trades work out well for us. Not feeling good ATM. Everything I've read says that Grissom is likely an average defender at 2B while Yorke is likely below average. Both can hit. Grissom has just been injured or sick for most of the year. Grissom and Franchy have just about nothing in common.
|
|
|
Post by bluechip on Jul 30, 2024 8:44:41 GMT -5
Have this weird feeling we’re going to regret choosing Grissom over Yorke. I'm with you on this one. I know he had some work to do on defense, but I think it was more serviceable than other recent options. I would much rather see him out there than Grissom, Valdez and Westbrook. Nope, Bloom had Franchy, Breslow has Grissom. It is what it is. I hope to heck both of these trades work out well for us. Not feeling good ATM. It’s not really Grissom or Yorke though, at least beyond this season. Campbell is at AA. Mayer is at AA. Story is still under contract. Even medium term you could see Story or Campbell at second.
|
|
|
Post by iakovos11 on Jul 30, 2024 9:11:41 GMT -5
Have this weird feeling we’re going to regret choosing Grissom over Yorke. I'm with you on this one. I know he had some work to do on defense, but I think it was more serviceable than other recent options. I would much rather see him out there than Grissom, Valdez and Westbrook. Nope, Bloom had Franchy, Breslow has Grissom. It is what it is. I hope to heck both of these trades work out well for us. Not feeling good ATM. First, Grissom and Franchy and even remotely alike, in any way imaginable. Second, Grissom's ceiling is far higher than Yorke's. I've been a big Yorke fan, but given the depth at middle IF, I'd rather trade Yorke and keep Grissom. There are so many other 2B options (Campbell, Rimer, Arias, ZAnatello, Cespedes, etc). Third, We don't knowe if it was even a choice on the Sox end. Pirates might have been keyed on on Yorke.
|
|
|
Post by 0ap0 on Jul 30, 2024 9:21:57 GMT -5
I can imagine Grissom never quite working out. I can't imagine that whomever we end up with as a long-term 2B isn't going to be at least as good as Yorke (whom I expect to be decent).
|
|
|
Post by awalkinthepark on Jul 30, 2024 9:32:52 GMT -5
Have this weird feeling we’re going to regret choosing Grissom over Yorke. I'm with you on this one. I know he had some work to do on defense, but I think it was more serviceable than other recent options. I would much rather see him out there than Grissom, Valdez and Westbrook. Nope, Bloom had Franchy, Breslow has Grissom. It is what it is. I hope to heck both of these trades work out well for us. Not feeling good ATM. It's also not just Grissom vs. Yorke, it's 6 years of Grissom/6 years of Priester vs. 6 years of Yorke/1 year of Sale.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Jul 30, 2024 9:41:45 GMT -5
I'm with you on this one. I know he had some work to do on defense, but I think it was more serviceable than other recent options. I would much rather see him out there than Grissom, Valdez and Westbrook. Nope, Bloom had Franchy, Breslow has Grissom. It is what it is. I hope to heck both of these trades work out well for us. Not feeling good ATM. It's also not just Grissom vs. Yorke, it's 6 years of Grissom/6 years of Priester vs. 6 years of Yorke/1 year of Sale.
Exactly. This trade means they like Priester more than Yorke. If Grissom enters the equation at all, it's in that it gives them even more confidence to trade from a position of depth to upgrade the pitching.
|
|
asm18
Veteran
Posts: 2,524
|
Post by asm18 on Jul 30, 2024 9:51:58 GMT -5
It's also not just Grissom vs. Yorke, it's 6 years of Grissom/6 years of Priester vs. 6 years of Yorke/1 year of Sale. [/div][/quote] *1 Cy Young Year of Chris Sale + 1 extra year when his Club Option kicked in for being Top Ten in Cy Young Voting (sorry - couldn’t resist 😉) It does speak to Yorke’s place and the depth of position players though that even Vaughn Grissom might have his work cut out for him finding a spot next year depending on what happens with Story/Mayer and then outfield. Like the guy who Yorke would have to leapfrog is himself in a weird spot
|
|
|
Post by fenwaydouble on Jul 30, 2024 9:53:31 GMT -5
I'm with you on this one. I know he had some work to do on defense, but I think it was more serviceable than other recent options. I would much rather see him out there than Grissom, Valdez and Westbrook. Nope, Bloom had Franchy, Breslow has Grissom. It is what it is. I hope to heck both of these trades work out well for us. Not feeling good ATM. First, Grissom and Franchy and even remotely alike, in any way imaginable. Second, Grissom's ceiling is far higher than Yorke's. I've been a big Yorke fan, but given the depth at middle IF, I'd rather trade Yorke and keep Grissom. There are so many other 2B options (Campbell, Rimer, Arias, ZAnatello, Cespedes, etc). Third, We don't knowe if it was even a choice on the Sox end. Pirates might have been keyed on on Yorke. I guess I just don't understand why people feel this way. Their profiles look extremely similar to me, right down to the injury struggles and the question marks about the glove.
|
|
shagworthy
Veteran
My neckbeard game is on point.
Posts: 1,845
|
Post by shagworthy on Jul 30, 2024 10:44:03 GMT -5
It's also not just Grissom vs. Yorke, it's 6 years of Grissom/6 years of Priester vs. 6 years of Yorke/1 year of Sale. [/div][/quote] *1 Cy Young Year of Chris Sale + 1 extra year when his Club Option kicked in for being Top Ten in Cy Young Voting (sorry - couldn’t resist 😉) It does speak to Yorke’s place and the depth of position players though that even Vaughn Grissom might have his work cut out for him finding a spot next year depending on what happens with Story/Mayer and then outfield. Like the guy who Yorke would have to leapfrog is himself in a weird spot [/quote] This Exactly. I said earlier on the fact that the Sox put Valdez, Hamilton, Short, Westbrooks, pretty much anyone else with a pulse above Yorke on the depth chart as soon as Grissom couldn't play speaks volumes. Right or wrong, the Sox didn't see him as a MLB contributor. We'll find out soon enough if he can hack it in the majors.
|
|
|
Post by vt2carolinaroy on Jul 30, 2024 11:08:09 GMT -5
I'm with you on this one. I know he had some work to do on defense, but I think it was more serviceable than other recent options. I would much rather see him out there than Grissom, Valdez and Westbrook. Nope, Bloom had Franchy, Breslow has Grissom. It is what it is. I hope to heck both of these trades work out well for us. Not feeling good ATM. First, Grissom and Franchy and even remotely alike, in any way imaginable. Second, Grissom's ceiling is far higher than Yorke's. I've been a big Yorke fan, but given the depth at middle IF, I'd rather trade Yorke and keep Grissom. There are so many other 2B options (Campbell, Rimer, Arias, ZAnatello, Cespedes, etc). Third, We don't knowe if it was even a choice on the Sox end. Pirates might have been keyed on on Yorke. Implied only that we are going to see more of Grissom than we like due to a desire to make that trade look good. Not sure how you interpret my statement in any other manner.
Grissom's ceiling far higher than Yorke's? A stretch, but that's just my opinion. Talking about other 2B in the chain doesn't make Grissom a player with a higher ceiling. All's I know is they have a similar offensive profile and neither are afraid of pulling their hands in for a liner over the 2B's head. Yorke is on the slow side as far as defensive range goes, but Grissom has the worst footwork I think I've ever seen at the position. It's what I'd imagine Emo Phillips would look like if he was to lace them up. To Grissom's defense, he did come up a SS.
I'm not sure what your third point has to do with anything I said, but nice of you to pile it on. Is this a thing here, a moderator throwing around some weight to a new guy in lieu of conversation? Irrelevant points and an absolutely clear objective of putting me down? Get over yourself.
|
|
|
Post by iakovos11 on Jul 30, 2024 11:13:52 GMT -5
First, Grissom and Franchy and even remotely alike, in any way imaginable. Second, Grissom's ceiling is far higher than Yorke's. I've been a big Yorke fan, but given the depth at middle IF, I'd rather trade Yorke and keep Grissom. There are so many other 2B options (Campbell, Rimer, Arias, ZAnatello, Cespedes, etc). Third, We don't knowe if it was even a choice on the Sox end. Pirates might have been keyed on on Yorke. I guess I just don't understand why people feel this way. Their profiles look extremely similar to me, right down to the injury struggles and the question marks about the glove.
Grissom is a better athlete and has hit pretty consistently at every level - even in the big leagues (granted it was a sss, but still). Seems many think he should be solid at 2B, eventually. I think he could add value on the bases as well. Aside from this year, has Grissom had any extended injury concerns?
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Jul 30, 2024 11:17:48 GMT -5
First, Grissom and Franchy and even remotely alike, in any way imaginable. Second, Grissom's ceiling is far higher than Yorke's. I've been a big Yorke fan, but given the depth at middle IF, I'd rather trade Yorke and keep Grissom. There are so many other 2B options (Campbell, Rimer, Arias, ZAnatello, Cespedes, etc). Third, We don't knowe if it was even a choice on the Sox end. Pirates might have been keyed on on Yorke. Implied only that we are going to see more of Grissom than we like due to a desire to make that trade look good. Not sure how you interpret my statement in any other manner.
This is the kind of theory where a) the team/GM is desperate to look good in the eyes of fans like you, but b) you are savvy enough to see right through it. It's self-flattering on two different levels. In this particular scenario there's nothing that even needs explaining; it was a totally reasonable trade that most people lauded at the time and since then Grissom's gotten hurt and barely played, so spinning up this scenario where the team plays him just to look good (even though he plays poorly??) is completely hypothetical. Why not just accept what's obvious on the face of it - that they acquired Grissom because they liked him but then he got injured?
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Jul 30, 2024 11:24:35 GMT -5
First, Grissom and Franchy and even remotely alike, in any way imaginable. Second, Grissom's ceiling is far higher than Yorke's. I've been a big Yorke fan, but given the depth at middle IF, I'd rather trade Yorke and keep Grissom. There are so many other 2B options (Campbell, Rimer, Arias, ZAnatello, Cespedes, etc). Third, We don't knowe if it was even a choice on the Sox end. Pirates might have been keyed on on Yorke. I guess I just don't understand why people feel this way. Their profiles look extremely similar to me, right down to the injury struggles and the question marks about the glove.
Grissom has a minor league batting average of. 320 throughout his minor league career. Yorke is nowhere near that - is he around .270? I dont see how they're that similar.
|
|
|
Post by puzzler on Jul 30, 2024 11:41:36 GMT -5
First, Grissom and Franchy and even remotely alike, in any way imaginable. Second, Grissom's ceiling is far higher than Yorke's. I've been a big Yorke fan, but given the depth at middle IF, I'd rather trade Yorke and keep Grissom. There are so many other 2B options (Campbell, Rimer, Arias, ZAnatello, Cespedes, etc). Third, We don't knowe if it was even a choice on the Sox end. Pirates might have been keyed on on Yorke. Implied only that we are going to see more of Grissom than we like due to a desire to make that trade look good. Not sure how you interpret my statement in any other manner.
Grissom's ceiling far higher than Yorke's? A stretch, but that's just my opinion. Talking about other 2B in the chain doesn't make Grissom a player with a higher ceiling. All's I know is they have a similar offensive profile and neither are afraid of pulling their hands in for a liner over the 2B's head. Yorke is on the slow side as far as defensive range goes, but Grissom has the worst footwork I think I've ever seen at the position. It's what I'd imagine Emo Phillips would look like if he was to lace them up. To Grissom's defense, he did come up a SS.
I'm not sure what your third point has to do with anything I said, but nice of you to pile it on. Is this a thing here, a moderator throwing around some weight to a new guy in lieu of conversation? Irrelevant points and an absolutely clear objective of putting me down? Get over yourself. Grissom looks to me like he has a higher ceiling defensively. I think Yorke will be fine on defense actually, just won't have as much range as Grissom will. Yorke may currently have better hands/glove, but long term I see them the same. Also, Yorke will never play 3rd base and will never have a good arm for left field, whereas I could see Grissom developing into a decent left fielder. With the bat - I think Yorke is going to struggle to translate his power in MLB, but will have an easier time of it in Pittsburgh than he would have had in Fenway. He hits the ball the other way a ton. But Grissom has over 1500 at bats in the minors with a line of .318/.407/.471 whereas Yorke has 1600 at bats with a line of .277/.359/.437. Grissom has struggled in MLB - but I'm not sure there is anything Yorke's profile that suggests he just won't. He struggled mightily in AA in over 700 at bats - at the least compared to Grissom. Grissom is more athletic, has more speed, has better range defensively (albeit only from what I've seen in games, which isn't much) and has a stronger track record hitting than Yorke does. That to me translates to a much higher ceiling. But I'd love to hear the counterpoint as to why Yorke has a similar ceiling (or better) to Grissom.
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jul 30, 2024 11:51:19 GMT -5
While likely not a big addition to help this year, it's basically a rare prospect for prospect trade. With Red Sox adding a high end MLB ready pitcher they so needed to balance the prospect pool.
We'll see what happens, but if our GM hits on this, it's a HR type move and they've worked some magic already with Starters.
I can't wait to see what they can do with him, along with guys like Mata
|
|
|
Post by Darwin's Curve on Jul 30, 2024 11:51:52 GMT -5
First, Grissom and Franchy and even remotely alike, in any way imaginable. Second, Grissom's ceiling is far higher than Yorke's. I've been a big Yorke fan, but given the depth at middle IF, I'd rather trade Yorke and keep Grissom. There are so many other 2B options (Campbell, Rimer, Arias, ZAnatello, Cespedes, etc). Third, We don't knowe if it was even a choice on the Sox end. Pirates might have been keyed on on Yorke. I guess I just don't understand why people feel this way. Their profiles look extremely similar to me, right down to the injury struggles and the question marks about the glove.
Beyond the profiles, the stats will tell you that Grissom has hit significantly better at every level than Yorke has. Yorke was injured in his age 20 season in A ball, and except for his 38 game AAA campaign this year has not really impressed with bat or glove. Grissom hit (and fielded) his way to ATL in 2022 when he overpressed at SS, resulting in a demotion to AAA (where again he hit better than Yorke.) He was injured this year, missing ST, and his rehab starts at AAA have dragged his numbers down somewhat. I like Yorke. He's a legit prospect with a chance to blossom into an everyday MLB 2B. But Grissom is an obvious notch higher in both fielding and hitting.
|
|
|
Post by iakovos11 on Jul 30, 2024 11:56:48 GMT -5
First, Grissom and Franchy and even remotely alike, in any way imaginable. Second, Grissom's ceiling is far higher than Yorke's. I've been a big Yorke fan, but given the depth at middle IF, I'd rather trade Yorke and keep Grissom. There are so many other 2B options (Campbell, Rimer, Arias, ZAnatello, Cespedes, etc). Third, We don't knowe if it was even a choice on the Sox end. Pirates might have been keyed on on Yorke. Implied only that we are going to see more of Grissom than we like due to a desire to make that trade look good. Not sure how you interpret my statement in any other manner.
Grissom's ceiling far higher than Yorke's? A stretch, but that's just my opinion. Talking about other 2B in the chain doesn't make Grissom a player with a higher ceiling. All's I know is they have a similar offensive profile and neither are afraid of pulling their hands in for a liner over the 2B's head. Yorke is on the slow side as far as defensive range goes, but Grissom has the worst footwork I think I've ever seen at the position. It's what I'd imagine Emo Phillips would look like if he was to lace them up. To Grissom's defense, he did come up a SS.
I'm not sure what your third point has to do with anything I said, but nice of you to pile it on. Is this a thing here, a moderator throwing around some weight to a new guy in lieu of conversation? Irrelevant points and an absolutely clear objective of putting me down? Get over yourself. So disagreeing with you is putting you down? Sorry if you took it this way, but I wasn't aggressive, offensive or insulting in any way. I just listed arguments from my perspective. And I was on my phone waiting in the Dr's office, so I couldn't see how many posts you've made, although that should be irrelevant. How again am I throwing around my weight? I made some points regarding why I disagreed with your post. That's the definition of conversation. There was no clear (or vague) objective of putting you down, and frankly I cannot see how anyone could interpret it that way. If you felt I read more into your comment and points that weren't relative to that, you could simply state that, disagree with my comments, and that'd be fine. Not sure why got so defensive/upset.
|
|
|