White Sox Interactive Forums
Minor Observations

Welcome
Go Back   White Sox Interactive Forums > Baseball Discussions > Minor Observations
Home Chat Stats Register Blogs FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 11-03-2008, 09:08 PM
hellview hellview is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 421
Default

Quote:
Overpaying for unproven talent is a pretty stupid approach to an overall lack of usable talent in your system.
Why do you think teams overpay for prospects. Cause if/when they make it to the majors your getting solid production for pennies. Look at this current market baseball is in right now, Kyle Loshe and Carlos Silva getting 40+ million dollars. If paying a kid in high school or college 1 million dollars can get you a solid starter for 6 years for nothing that's clearly worth it. The entire Twins rotation makes less then Vasquez, that's why teams are willing to to pay a bit more at the draft.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 11-03-2008, 09:18 PM
Daver's Avatar
Daver Daver is offline
The Grand Wazoo
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: SW Suburbs
Posts: 26,641
Blog Entries: 11
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hellview View Post
Why do you think teams overpay for prospects. Cause if/when they make it to the majors your getting solid production for pennies. Look at this current market baseball is in right now, Kyle Loshe and Carlos Silva getting 40+ million dollars. If paying a kid in high school or college 1 million dollars can get you a solid starter for 6 years for nothing that's clearly worth it. The entire Twins rotation makes less then Vasquez, that's why teams are willing to to pay a bit more at the draft.
Yet the Twins compete for a division title every year, and The Devil Dogs went to the world series this year.

Your approach is flawed, you don't realize why it is flawed, and that is not my problem.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 11-03-2008, 09:20 PM
Daver's Avatar
Daver Daver is offline
The Grand Wazoo
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: SW Suburbs
Posts: 26,641
Blog Entries: 11
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Domeshot17 View Post
See, this is again where we disagree. I am not saying our entire process is not bad. I am saying, if we are going to make the commitment to bring in better coaches, to bring in Buddy Bell to oversee the process. To change not only the structure, but the philosophy in how we bring players along(which may start with ideas such as not bouncing starting pitchers from league to league so they can get some real work done), then we are we not making the stance to fill it with the players who can be the best. No team is perfect, no draft is perfect. If every draft produces a handful of good prospects it ultimately is a success. However, we are not a poor team. We have the money to sign a guy for 7 mil. 7 mil, we pissed half that away on Darrin Erstad. The scouts job is to determine what players are worth that big money. But when a top 5 talent, a Porcello falls into your lap, and you let him go to your division rival because you are scared to spend money in the draft, its unacceptable. I am not saying we have to spend the most money in the league, but we should be in the top 15, we have the resources to do it.
Spending the money on talent before you fix the system gives you a repeat of Joe Borchard. Borchard did not fail for the White Sox, the White Sox failed on him.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 11-03-2008, 09:36 PM
champagne030 champagne030 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Yorkville
Posts: 3,205
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Daver View Post
Spending the money on talent before you fix the system gives you a repeat of Joe Borchard. Borchard did not fail for the White Sox, the White Sox failed on him.
I do agree with you about this method, but I do believe Kirk Champion has a good program and grip on our young pitchers. We may have advanced hitters without merit, but I'd like to see pitchers drafted with a higher ceiling than we've taken in the past because of Kirk's development skills. Broadway and McCulloch were low ceiling guys, especially Kyle.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 11-03-2008, 09:42 PM
Daver's Avatar
Daver Daver is offline
The Grand Wazoo
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: SW Suburbs
Posts: 26,641
Blog Entries: 11
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by champagne030 View Post
I do agree with you about this method, but I do believe Kirk Champion has a good program and grip on our young pitchers. We may have advanced hitters without merit, but I'd like to see pitchers drafted with a higher ceiling than we've taken in the past because of Kirk's development skills. Broadway and McCulloch were low ceiling guys, especially Kyle.
Kirk does not control the how pitchers are moved through the system, or at least in the past he hasn't, until some system is in place to stop rushing pitchers through the system it would be a waste of money. Broadway has good mechanics and can throw just about any pitch he is taught, yet has never been allowed to stay at one level to master anything.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 11-03-2008, 10:21 PM
Craig Grebeck Craig Grebeck is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Rockford
Posts: 6,378
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Domeshot17 View Post
How do you not understand this. Jordan Danks, if the sox did not let him slip away in high school, and he was not Johns brother, maybe Sox fans would stop over rating him. He hit in the .320s in college. In the purest, simplest breakdown I can, if you don't hit in the mid .400s or better in high school you probably will not succeed at D1 ball level. When you get to College, to be a top prospect, you should hit in the high .300's to low .400s. Hitting in the low .300s is just not impressive from the collegiate level because most teams do not field strong defenses. Danks at best is going to be a pretty good lead off hitter. Less speed then a Pods but more doubles. He doesn't have the leg stride that allows him to max his power potential, and that was exploited in college. He is a plus defender with a good arm, good speed, pretty good eye and decent bat control. If you think he is anywhere near a top flight prospect you are only fooling yourself.

Poreda vs Porcello, I wouldn't even get into this arguement with me because you are going to be coming unarmed. Poreda was great in rookie ball, yes, throwing a 97 mph fastball by a bunch of guys who are now using their college degrees for employment. He pitched ok in Single A, but for a guy with his velocity he does not possess a strike out pitch beyond a fastball. He has a below average Curveball so bad hes trying to develop a slider but neither are a strike out pitch. He won't do well in high levels of the minors without a breaking ball. Without the breaking ball he also will never last as a closer. Look at Bobby Jenks, and how he dominated when he lost his velo, with a cutter and that nasty yacker.

Poreda was drafted for various reasons. He is tall, throws very hard, and he isn't a BAD prospect. however, he was an easy sign who was not using the services of Boras.

Rick Porcello on the other hand: He was the TOP prep prospect since probably Josh Beckett. He throws 90-94 steady and touches 96 97 when he wants too. He throws a SINKER at 94, and 2 different Curveballs. Both with the same drop, one sitting in the 80s the other low 70s. He has a slider/slurve that he uses to set up a lot of stuff that if he gets down to a 2 plain slider could be the best pitch he throws. His changeup is filthy. Add to the fact he can throw these for Strikes when he wants, and yes, I believe (as does every prospect rating system in baseball) that he is one of the top 6-10 pitching prospects in baseball and one of the top 20 prospects in the game. You don't have to believe me, look at baseball america, espn, rotoworld, any place, Porcello is top 20 prospect, usually sitting in the 8-12 range. Poreda usually in the 60-80 range.

There were 2 reasons only we did not draft Rick Porcello. He was asking for good draft money, and his agent was Scott Boras. Not only will passing on him haunt us, it will several times a year when we have to face him.
I stopped reading after your completely abysmal examination of college hitting. Good ****ing grief. Danks hit .021 points lower than Evan Longoria did in his last season of college. In fact, lots of guys expected Danks to go way higher than he did, but he mainly slipped because of concerns he wouldn't sign.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 11-03-2008, 10:29 PM
hellview hellview is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 421
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Daver View Post
Yet the Twins compete for a division title every year, and The Devil Dogs went to the world series this year.

Your approach is flawed, you don't realize why it is flawed, and that is not my problem.
And the Rays have spent alot of money over the last couple years signing top talent and going overslot.

And just cause the Twins can compete year in and out doesn't mean it's the wrong way to go about things. 1-2 teams are always going be able to break the norm, but that doesnt mean it's flawed.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 11-03-2008, 10:35 PM
Domeshot17 Domeshot17 is offline
WSI High Priest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Minooka
Posts: 9,592
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Craig Grebeck View Post
I stopped reading after your completely abysmal examination of college hitting. Good ****ing grief. Danks hit .021 points lower than Evan Longoria did in his last season of college. In fact, lots of guys expected Danks to go way higher than he did, but he mainly slipped because of concerns he wouldn't sign.
ask any college coach, high school coach, the numbers are not too far off.

Longoria showed wayyyyyyy more power than Danks.

This is why I hate talking about prospects. Everyone thinks everyone is going to be this all star player. Does not matter what sport. Derek Rose is going to be MJ, and Jordan Danks Griffey Jr. The guy was DISAPPOINTING at the collegiate level. He was not first day talent. He showed no power and hit for a much weaker average than expected. He is not a terrible prospect, but he is vastly over rated here. He is not a 5 tool prospect, he isn't a super stud, and odds are he won't be in anyones top 100 rankings come years start.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 11-03-2008, 10:38 PM
Daver's Avatar
Daver Daver is offline
The Grand Wazoo
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: SW Suburbs
Posts: 26,641
Blog Entries: 11
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hellview View Post
And the Rays have spent alot of money over the last couple years signing top talent and going overslot.

And just cause the Twins can compete year in and out doesn't mean it's the wrong way to go about things. 1-2 teams are always going be able to break the norm, but that doesnt mean it's flawed.
Overpaying for prospects is not the flaw I was referring too. I don't think you are capable of looking above the throw money at draft pick options, some people lack the intelligence to see the big picture, most of them are armchair GM's in baseball keeper leagues.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 11-03-2008, 10:58 PM
hellview hellview is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 421
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Daver View Post
Overpaying for prospects is not the flaw I was referring too. I don't think you are capable of looking above the throw money at draft pick options, some people lack the intelligence to see the big picture, most of them are armchair GM's in baseball keeper leagues.
Thn about you try and carry a real conversation instead of throw out your smart ass remarks every post. How about we actually discuss this?
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 11-03-2008, 11:05 PM
hellview hellview is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 421
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Craig Grebeck View Post
I stopped reading after your completely abysmal examination of college hitting. Good ****ing grief. Danks hit .021 points lower than Evan Longoria did in his last season of college. In fact, lots of guys expected Danks to go way higher than he did, but he mainly slipped because of concerns he wouldn't sign.
Don't even bring Longoria into any conversation about Danks. Cape Cod, showcases, everything. Longoria showed WAY WAY more then Danks ever did coming outta college.

Even as a college product Danks is still all "tools and projection" All the tools that scouts thought he would come into at Texas never happened. Maybe the skills will come, maybe they won't. But there's a reason he slipped in the draft.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 11-03-2008, 11:09 PM
Daver's Avatar
Daver Daver is offline
The Grand Wazoo
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: SW Suburbs
Posts: 26,641
Blog Entries: 11
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hellview View Post
Thn about you try and carry a real conversation instead of throw out your smart ass remarks every post. How about we actually discuss this?
Discuss what?
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 11-03-2008, 11:33 PM
WhiteSox5187 WhiteSox5187 is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Southside
Posts: 14,365
Default

Well I'm not going to pretend to know a whole lot about how our minor league system works or anything but I think that to a certain extent that Daver is right: just throwing money at the problem is not going to help, having a lot of good scouts will. Buerhle was drafted when? 10th round? Later? He turned out to be ok. The MLB draft is such a crap shoot, the last guy you picked who you signed for the minimum might wind up being a perennial all star while your top pick who you signed for a record bonus might never even sniff the majors.

On the other hand, I think it is equally wrong to say "Well, we're not going to pick this guy because he's a Boras client and we don't like Boras," or "Well this guy is likely to ask for a lot of money and we don't really feel like paying him that so we'll choose a guy we might be able to get later in the draft but will certainly be able to sign now."
__________________

Go Sox!!!
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 11-03-2008, 11:51 PM
Lip Man 1 Lip Man 1 is offline
WSI Guru
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Chubbuck, Idaho
Posts: 26,379
Default

More on the how and why from today's moves:

http://blogs.chicagosports.chicagotr...league-ob.html

Lip
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 11-04-2008, 01:01 AM
CashMan CashMan is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Romeoville
Posts: 1,212
Default

I really really like reading about what is happening in the minors. I wish more was posted about it.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



Forum Jump




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:56 PM.




Design by: Michelle

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Site-specific editorial/photos Copyright ©2001 - 2008 White Sox Interactive. All rights reserved.