Jump to content

mac9001

Members
  • Posts

    1,677
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About mac9001

  • Birthday 06/01/1985

Recent Profile Visitors

2,401 profile views

mac9001's Achievements

Mentor

Mentor (12/14)

  • Very Popular Rare
  • Dedicated
  • Reacting Well
  • First Post
  • Collaborator

Recent Badges

190

Reputation

  1. I do feel to some degree they're doing him a disservice by not letting him focus on a single position. If you let him play 100 games in center he might actually prove he can be defensively valuable. He's probably the fastest guy on the team and his athleticism is vastly underrated.
  2. I don't think there's ever been an MLB team that said we have to much depth up the middle. I'm still not convinced we have any regulars on the current MLB roster that won't just fall off a cliff. As impressive as Colson was last year I'd be equally unsurprised to see a 40% K-rate next year as I would a 30+ HR season. The other guys could all put in 70 wRC+ seasons and make these decisions relatively easy. If they just keep drafting short stops with the first 3 picks for the next 3 drafts I'd be fairly content with the strategy.
  3. I don't doubt the stuff. I've seen video, looked at numbers. I believe in the stuff. But dudes who manage to throw strikes for a few months for the first time in their career while at high A ball don't leave him with feeling like this works out. I would have taken every dude with a big time fastball in the R5 draft. Take 5 of them, if even one works out it's a huge win.
  4. If the outcome of Taylor becoming a starter (ish) is 1 less bullpen arm or a few more losses that's a price worth paying. The Sox are still going to be really bad this year, if it gets us to a place where Taylor can throw 150 quality innings next year, I'm totally in favor. But the more sensible plan would be to just sent him to Charlotte for 2-3 months and let him build up to be a 5 inning guy then use him out of the pen in the 2nd half to limit innings.
  5. I'm not saying Taylor is one of your 5 starters, he's the opener for let's say Cannon and you let Cannon pitch the rest of the game if he's keeping it competitive. With how quickly guys are getting pulled I'm not sure this doesn't reduce the bullpen load.
  6. I don't see why you couldn't make Taylor a 3 inning opener. If he makes all 33 starts you're at 99 innings with a plan to get him to 150+ the following year.
  7. I'm sure Paez isn't complaining as he'll be collecting a MLB salary, but his command likely would have brought him to the bigs eventually on an appropriate development timeline. Now we're gonna take a guy from high A ball and likely try to stash him as a innings eating clean up reliever? He's obviously going to start eventually but at this point in his career and given the Sox starting depth (even if it's not quality depth there's real depth there) how likely is he to get any starts? I feel like our 2nd R5 pick is likely just waived by end of spring, but I kinda feel for the guy a bit because this probably wasn't the best move for his development. I almost feel they should limit the MLB R5 draft to players in AA/AAA and if a guy below AA is drafted they need to be placed on the 40 man and must be rostered at AAA. The R5 fee should also go up substantially.
  8. You have to figure a prospect who's value is derived almost exclusively based on his command is going to have a very fragile grip on their prospect ranking. You're almost always looking for an excuse to downgrade because they don't have the luxury of having a bad season (or missing it due to injury) and their rankings are based entirely on the performance.
  9. I like Pallette, he might even eventually have a MLB career. But he hasn't demonstrated the level of command one would require to succeed at this level. If you're willing to claim guys on waivers and make multiple R5 picks there is no shortage of dudes with stuff that lack MLB level command. We have 3-5 guys on the system right now have have legit big league stuff, but don't have anywhere near the command to succeed. If you just keep recycling these guys eventually you'll hit on one or five. Pallette should have been given a chance last year as it was time to recycle half the bullpen. I don't really have an issue losing a guy like him because they're fairly replaceable, but if you just keep the 40 man loaded with these dudes that show no progress or have demonstrated elite levels of failures then what's the plan? Wheres the strategy? If you're gonna just fill the 40 man roster with garage and let it rot you might as well do it with your home grown garage, at least there's sentimental value behind it.
  10. 1) I presume the Sox will be high on that waiver list 2) If (when) he's walking everyone there is likely not to be much of a market for his services
  11. Pretty high probability that Palette is walking 6-7 per 9 in the bigs and he's back in the Sox system by mid season. He may find his way into a MLB bullpen eventually, but his command still needs a lot of work.
  12. If he can't find success in the rotation you can hope the stuff plays up in the pen and you're still not paying him a lot. Now we need two more like just like this to have actual depth (even if it's poor depth).
  13. My point was if you did put him on the 40 he'd be eating up a spot most of the year without likely having any real shot at pitching at the MLB level. Even as a rule 5 if you stash him on the 60-day eventually you'd need to with roster him or return him and having him get some innings in at the MLB level just to keep him as a R5 pick seems like a stretch for most orgs. Logically managing his R5 status probably isn't worth the hassle of picking him.
  14. There's almost no way to take a guy like Adam's to get his 60 days in on the active roster. This is probably an example of a scenario where the rule 5 process would not benefit the player (except for the paycheck part). For him this season is just about getting some innings in to compete for a MLB roster spot in 2027. Also, since Adams was not on the active roster he wouldn't be eligible for the 60 day DL. Thus you're taking up a 40 man spot for most of the season for a guy who likely has no chance of pitching in the bigs this season.
  15. Unless you plan to make two R5 picks you might as well protect the fringe dudes. But I do feel even if we have a dude taken pretty good chance they make it back by year's end. But honestly, leaving dudes unprotected is less of a head scratcher than Davitt getting added. I would have bet every house on my street that dude makes it through.
×
×
  • Create New...