View Single Post
  #40  
Old 07-19-2004, 05:01 PM
Wealz Wealz is offline
WSI Personality
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 781
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Randar68
Although they didn't draft him, you'd have to admit they developed Garland. Because you've been snake bitten, you can't be gun-shy or hesitant to take who you believe will be the best player when you can. every organization is bitten by injuries or guys who don't meet their physical potential. Even going by stats and performance-based analysis, there are still more misses than hits.
I'll give you Garland, but he came at a price that was too good to refuse -- Matt Karchner. Even though he's a success story, I think that you'd have to agree that he's devolped slower than any of us would have liked. I understand he's 24, but with as many major league innings as he has under his belt his career performance has been a mild disappointment to this point.

Have the Sox been snake bitten or is it just the nature of drafting pitchers? Minor league pitchers, pitchers in general, suffer career-threatening injuries at a much, much higher rate than position players. When you draft a pitcher not only do you have to hope they develop well, you have to pray that they don't get hurt. For the most part, you don't have to worry about a career-ending injury with a position player.

I think it would behoove a mid-revenue team like the Sox to use their premium picks every year, say first 6-7 rounds, on position players. Let someone else waste millions of dollars developing pitching for you. For instance, if the Sox had hitters in the minors they could have dealt them to the Expos for Vazquez. Or if one of those hitters could have replaced Ordonez, Ordonez could have been used to get a pitcher. I don't think it's essential to develop pitching, but it is essential to have a strong farm system, and position players are the easiest way to do that IMO
Reply With Quote