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
  #76  
Old 12-01-2018, 10:18 PM
A. Cavatica A. Cavatica is offline
Chief Skeptic and 2015 Preseason Predictions Contest Winner
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 7,221
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tragg View Post
No - not trading them is called building a core. Trading them, while not dereliction, would be more of the ongoing incompetence.
I'm fine with trading anyone as long as it improves the team's chances of contending for a long, long time.

Moncada? Tradeable. Anderson? Tradeable. Jimenez, Kopech, Robert, Cease, Robert, Madrigal? All tradeable if we win those trades.
Reply With Quote
  #77  
Old 12-01-2018, 11:17 PM
voodoochile's Avatar
voodoochile voodoochile is offline
Soda Jerk/U.P.W./Lester Pooh Bear
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 58,495
Blog Entries: 9
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by A. Cavatica View Post
I'm fine with trading anyone as long as it improves the team's chances of contending for a long, long time.

Moncada? Tradeable. Anderson? Tradeable. Jimenez, Kopech, Robert, Cease, Robert, Madrigal? All tradeable if we win those trades.
The only issue with this is you can win those trades but end up further from contention if the players you get back are younger and less developed. You can also win those trades for talent and readiness, but end up losing them due to the amount of money you have to spend on the new players compared to what you would have owed the guys you have. You have to have a certain amount of good young players to build around before you start filling in gaps with pricier veterans. There are so many factors that go into winning and losing a trade that it isn't as simple as saying, "got back more talent than we sent off".
__________________

Riding shotgun on the Sox bandwagon since before there was an Internet...
Reply With Quote
  #78  
Old 12-02-2018, 10:32 AM
A. Cavatica A. Cavatica is offline
Chief Skeptic and 2015 Preseason Predictions Contest Winner
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 7,221
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by voodoochile View Post
The only issue with this is you can win those trades but end up further from contention if the players you get back are younger and less developed. You can also win those trades for talent and readiness, but end up losing them due to the amount of money you have to spend on the new players compared to what you would have owed the guys you have. You have to have a certain amount of good young players to build around before you start filling in gaps with pricier veterans. There are so many factors that go into winning and losing a trade that it isn't as simple as saying, "got back more talent than we sent off".
Sure, which is why I said "as long as it improves the team's chances of contending for a long, long time."

If they trade a MLB/AAA guy for two A ball players, but each of the A-ball players turns out to be as good as the MLB/AAA guy, that's a win even if it takes a couple of years. They just need to balance it by trading some highly regarded prospects who end up going bust for an MLB/AAA guy who doesn't, or by signing a free agent to a bridge contract.

The way to win is by building a roster loaded with young talent, and plenty of depth in the system, and filling in the holes through trades and free agency. I don't really care which individual players end up on that roster.
Reply With Quote
  #79  
Old 12-02-2018, 04:44 PM
Tragg Tragg is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Gonzales LA
Posts: 15,770
Blog Entries: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by A. Cavatica View Post
I'm fine with trading anyone as long as it improves the team's chances of contending for a long, long time.

Moncada? Tradeable. Anderson? Tradeable. Jimenez, Kopech, Robert, Cease, Robert, Madrigal? All tradeable if we win those trades.
Not in my mind, unless it helps the Sox build a core - i.e. they trade those players for more young players.
They will not become contenders by trading for veterans. And that's true, even if they were good at evaluating and trading for veterans, which they aren't...they are abysmal at it.
Reply With Quote
  #80  
Old 12-03-2018, 01:04 PM
GoSox2K3 GoSox2K3 is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 2,584
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tragg View Post
Tilson never had anything better than an average year in the minors beyond rookie ball. And he's getting worse - .577 in Charlotte in 270 at bats.
BTW, the trade for him was the first move of the rebuild.

The prospects from Sale and Eaton have now had 2 full years with the Sox. In the last 5 years, they've drafted 3rd, 8th, 10th, 11th and 4th. If the young core doesn't present itself in the next year or 2, when will it? Will it ever?
I root for the White Sox. It makes me happy.
It's hard for me to maintain a positive glow about the short term prospects without tangible evidence of growth and improvement, given the history of this FO (peaked at 78 wins in what was a much easier task than this total rebuild).
Several things to unpackage in the section I bolded:

1. Prospects should be on a timetable based on their age and talent level, not on when trades for them were executed. The only one of the top prospects from those trades that is significantly behind schedule is Kopech because of TJS - and I still have very high hopes for him and don't see his injury as an indictment on the Sox organization.

2. Only one of those 5 draft picks you mentioned is approaching bust territory....and I have no objections in pinning blame of the Fulmer pick on the Sox brain trust. Rodon has the talent if only he can stay injury free. 2nd guessing his selection now is total hindsight...and it's not like we should write him off yet anyway. It's too early to write off the other 3 or to expect them to make an impact for the Sox in the next year.

3. ...then let's wait and see what the young core does in the next year or two instead of constantly using the 2018 season as a referendum on the success of the rebuild.
Reply With Quote
  #81  
Old 12-03-2018, 02:16 PM
Frater Perdurabo Frater Perdurabo is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 20,727
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GoSox2K3 View Post
2. Only one of those 5 draft picks you mentioned is approaching bust territory....and I have no objections in pinning blame of the Fulmer pick on the Sox brain trust. Rodon has the talent if only he can stay injury free. 2nd guessing his selection now is total hindsight...and it's not like we should write him off yet anyway. It's too early to write off the other 3 or to expect them to make an impact for the Sox in the next year.

I too won't object to characterizing Fulmer as "approaching bust territory," and implicating the Sox in the situation. That said, he still could develop into an effective reliever, particularly one who can pitch 2-3 innings once per series.


However, there are a couple different ways to assign blame.


First, the first and supplemental rounds of the 2015 draft have seen many "bust" pitchers. So there aren't any obvious pitchers that they missed. Fulmer was one of the consensus top college pitchers in that draft; most scouts had him rated more highly than his Vanderbilt teammate Walker Buehler, who ironically has had more success so far. It's not like the Sox were the only team to have Fulmer rated that highly, and given that they were scouting Vanderbilt, they (and other teams) were scouting Buehler as well. So then you'd have to blame them for picking pitching at all in that draft, when perhaps a position player like Ian Happ might have been a safer pick.


You could also assign blame to the Sox for rushing Fulmer while in desperate "win now" mode.
__________________
The universe is the practical joke of the General at the expense of the Particular, quoth Frater Perdurabo, and laughed. The disciples nearest him wept, seeing the Universal Sorrow. Others laughed, seeing the Universal Joke. Others wept. Others laughed. Others wept because they couldn't see the Joke, and others laughed lest they should be thought not to see the Joke. But though FRATER laughed openly, he wept secretly; and really he neither laughed nor wept. Nor did he mean what he said.
Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 12-03-2018, 04:11 PM
russ99 russ99 is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 12,515
Blog Entries: 1
Default

I think that we're looking at this the wrong way. Projecting all of a small group of prospects as stars isn't realistic.

Also, it's foolhardy to package any high-level prospect in a trade for a veteran at this point in the rebuild, giving up on 5/6 controllable years of a player to jump start a rebuild that best guesses says we're in the middle of is a bad idea no matter what player we get back.

Look at the Astros, they failed on a lot of prospects and let arguably their best one (J.D. Martinez) go because he was stagnating at the big league level.

Yet they succeeded due to the amount and overall quality of their prospect group. I believe the Sox are doing the same with their outfielders and pitchers.

Catcher and infield are a bit iffy, but nobody gets every position right.
Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 12-03-2018, 04:11 PM
WhiteSox5187 WhiteSox5187 is offline
Winner 2016 WSI Preseason Prediction Contest
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Southside
Posts: 16,366
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frater Perdurabo View Post
I too won't object to characterizing Fulmer as "approaching bust territory," and implicating the Sox in the situation. That said, he still could develop into an effective reliever, particularly one who can pitch 2-3 innings once per series.


However, there are a couple different ways to assign blame.


First, the first and supplemental rounds of the 2015 draft have seen many "bust" pitchers. So there aren't any obvious pitchers that they missed. Fulmer was one of the consensus top college pitchers in that draft; most scouts had him rated more highly than his Vanderbilt teammate Walker Buehler, who ironically has had more success so far. It's not like the Sox were the only team to have Fulmer rated that highly, and given that they were scouting Vanderbilt, they (and other teams) were scouting Buehler as well. So then you'd have to blame them for picking pitching at all in that draft, when perhaps a position player like Ian Happ might have been a safer pick.


You could also assign blame to the Sox for rushing Fulmer while in desperate "win now" mode.
I seem to recall, and I could be completely wrong about this, but a lot of scouts were dubious of Fulmer. They thought he had good stuff but I seem to recall a lot of doubts about how repeatable his delivery would be, how he'd be able to handle the workload etc. But there did seem to be some agreement that his stuff was almost major league ready and I think some scouts thought he'd benefit from working with Cooper.
__________________

Go Sox!!!
Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old 12-03-2018, 04:55 PM
Frater Perdurabo Frater Perdurabo is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 20,727
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiteSox5187 View Post
I seem to recall, and I could be completely wrong about this, but a lot of scouts were dubious of Fulmer. They thought he had good stuff but I seem to recall a lot of doubts about how repeatable his delivery would be, how he'd be able to handle the workload etc. But there did seem to be some agreement that his stuff was almost major league ready and I think some scouts thought he'd benefit from working with Cooper.
I remember that, too. I just think that it has turned out to have been a weak class of pitchers at the top of that draft. Iím sure the Sox now wish they had picked Happ or Buehler instead.
Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old 12-03-2018, 05:28 PM
DumpJerry's Avatar
DumpJerry DumpJerry is offline
Tom Feargal Hagen
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: The hearts and minds of Sox fans on 10-26-05
Posts: 28,268
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by russ99 View Post
Also, it's foolhardy to package any high-level prospect in a trade for a veteran at this point in the rebuild, giving up on 5/6 controllable years of a player to jump start a rebuild that best guesses says we're in the middle of is a bad idea no matter what player we get back.
Winner winner Chicken Dinner.

Spot on.
__________________


2020....2020.....2020....2020....2020.....
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old 12-04-2018, 10:51 AM
rdivaldi rdivaldi is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Chicago - Mayfair
Posts: 4,876
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frater Perdurabo View Post
Fulmer was one of the consensus top college pitchers in that draft; most scouts had him rated more highly than his Vanderbilt teammate Walker Buehler, who ironically has had more success so far. It's not like the Sox were the only team to have Fulmer rated that highly, and given that they were scouting Vanderbilt, they (and other teams) were scouting Buehler as well.
Actually, you'd be hard pressed to find any scouting service that didn't have Fulmer as either the #1 or #2 ranked college pitcher in 2015. Buehler was far down that list, viewed as a high floor, low ceiling pick.

Here are some Walker Buehler quotes from WSI members in 2015:

Quote:
I don't know why the Sox seem to be insistent on picking a pitcher. and yes, Buehler would be a bad reach.
Quote:
I really hope they avoid Walker Buehler. Nothing about that guy is exciting. He SCREAMS 4th or 5th SP.... and you don't really want that kind of ceiling when picking 8.
__________________
<a href=http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/attachment.php?attachmentid=3256 target=_blank>http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/v...achmentid=3256</a>

March 16, 2005 - Another happy Sox fan joins the party!
July 6, 2012 - 7 years later he's still part of it...
Reply With Quote
  #87  
Old 12-04-2018, 01:26 PM
Domeshot17 Domeshot17 is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Plainfield
Posts: 12,617
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rdivaldi View Post
Actually, you'd be hard pressed to find any scouting service that didn't have Fulmer as either the #1 or #2 ranked college pitcher in 2015. Buehler was far down that list, viewed as a high floor, low ceiling pick.

Here are some Walker Buehler quotes from WSI members in 2015:
I know I am the second, and back then he did not show what he has now. It is why baseball is so hard to project.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #88  
Old 12-04-2018, 02:00 PM
Frater Perdurabo Frater Perdurabo is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 20,727
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Domeshot17 View Post
I know I am the second, and back then he did not show what he has now. It is why baseball is so hard to project.
And thatís exactly why the gnashing of teeth over the Fulmer pick is overdone.
Reply With Quote
  #89  
Old 12-05-2018, 10:58 AM
rdivaldi rdivaldi is offline
WSI Church Elder
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Chicago - Mayfair
Posts: 4,876
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Domeshot17 View Post
I know I am the second, and back then he did not show what he has now. It is why baseball is so hard to project.

Especially since he got injured almost immediately after he was drafted and had TJS. I labeled him a complete bust in 2016....oops.
Reply With Quote
  #90  
Old 12-05-2018, 12:25 PM
Tragg Tragg is offline
WSI Prelate
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Gonzales LA
Posts: 15,770
Blog Entries: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frater Perdurabo View Post
And that’s exactly why the gnashing of teeth over the Fulmer pick is overdone.
Fine - don't hold Hahn accountable for Fulmer.
Is he accountable for Rodon? For Burdi? For Burger?

Where would this farm system be ranked if based just on drafting and international signings?

Last edited by Tragg; 12-05-2018 at 12:34 PM.
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 01:31 AM.




Design by: Michelle

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Site-specific editorial/photos Copyright ©2001 - 2008 White Sox Interactive. All rights reserved.