Eminor3rd

6 central. And I agree regarding Heaney. I'd like them to choose Stroman, a guy with big time stuff that is overlooked because he's short. With Stroman, I can dream on Tim Lincecum, but with Heaney, I can only dream on John Danks.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jun 4, 2012 -> 05:13 PM) I agree with that, but at the same time, that strategy has long excited. However, it was more a matter of internal budgets. Now, everyone is on a level playing field and I for one am very happy about that. Let the best scouts/front offices/coaches (to develop said players) win. Not who has the biggest budget/resources to spend on the draft. I like it, as a Sox fan, because Reinsdorf wasn't going to spend either way. But before this deal, there existed a real opportunity for smaller market teams to spend big on the draft where their dollars would go much further than on the free agent market -- and in fact, teams like the Pirates, Blue Jays, and Rays did just that. In a lot of ways, I actually think that this situation favors the big markets by eliminating and opportunity for the others to gain a competitive advantage.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jun 4, 2012 -> 05:00 PM) Think of it this way, I'm a #1 pick and the slot is 1.5M. If I'm going to pay $1.5M for that pick and don't sign it, nothing lost. All I lose is what was slotted there. On the flipside, if I was strategically going overslot at that pick (say spending $2M), then that could hurt me, since I probably went underslot in other areas. However, that is strategy and whose to say you don't hedge that bet by grabbing another guy in the draft who you have cushion for if you do think that is a possibility (so you can go overslot on that guy if you miss out on your projection here). Say your sandwich pick signs for $300k above slot. You didn't plan it that way, but that's how it worked out. Some later picks sign at slot or are unsigned still. Now your first round pick demands to be X overslot, forcing you to choose between signing him and some other guys go later in the draft. He has extra leverage because if you DON'T sign him, you lose his slot money and have to pay a penalty because you are already over-budget. This is the first time there's been any discernable cost associated with NOT signing a guy. Now you have to sacrifice either way.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jun 4, 2012 -> 04:50 PM) I must be living in a hole but I was not aware of this (excerpt courtesy of bleachererport): DRAFT LOTTERY – This is not what it sounds like. For those who may have watched the anti-climactic NBA lottery the other night in which they put on display for all to see how they fix the draft to award their agenda, you will not see that concept here. Instead, it will work like this. Teams with the 10 lowest revenues (not payrolls) and 10 smallest markets will be entered into a lottery for a total of six selections immediately following the first round. Clubs that lose that lottery will go into a second lottery for six supplemental picks immediately after the second round. Also included in the second-round lottery will be any clubs that received money as part of baseball’s revenue-sharing plan. Obviously there will probably be some overlap in the qualifications as a good amount of low revenue teams also fall into the small market category. This is designed to off-set the fact that lower market teams like the Pirates who can’t typically afford to make a big splash in the free agent market but instead spend their money in the draft will now be under restrictions. Personally, I don’t think it’s a fair solution for either side. The small market teams are penalized by not allowing them to allocate their revenue the way they see fit, and the large market teams receive less bodies in the draft that is essentially a lottery to begin with. Wait, what? I never heard anything about this.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jun 4, 2012 -> 04:29 PM) You are mistaken. They would receive the draft pick in the following year. Yes, you would lose the slot for that pick (but that isn't that big of a deal in most instances, unless you went under slot on that pick with a plan of spending a little more later on). However, if the Sox couldn't sign the 13th pick, they would get the 14th pick next year. I think it will be Stroman. DJ Davis is another guy I think the Sox like and could go after (tools wise, they like guys like Davis; the prep thing, not as much, but if they go position player, its almost surely going to be a prep guy). Oh, I'm sorry, I think I misunderstood your question. I get it now. Sorry to confuse my info. However, I still think the slot dollars are a big deal, not because you need them later, but because of the leverage created by semantics as I described.

QUOTE (Jbabs34 @ Jun 4, 2012 -> 03:44 PM) Do teams still get compensation for not signing their first round pick or did that change with the new draft rules?....If it's still the same, i think it's worth drafting Giolito at 13. I know the injury is a concern and if he has TJ who cares - guys are coming back fine if not better after TJ. This draft seems pretty weak, so not signing your first round pick shouldn't hurt that bad if the rules are the same No, in fact the leverage has swung the other way. If a guy doesn't sign, the team LOSES the recommended slot for that pick from their available pool of funds. Imagine the implications: if a later round pick has signed for anything above slot, the early round guy can threaten not to sign and thus subject the team to penalties! This is just one of the new rules that I think is going to make the next couple drafts a mess until they rethink it.

Final FanGraphs mock up by Marc Hulet. He has Sox choosing Stroman: http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/f...phs-mock-draft/

I'm hoping Brinson falls to #48. Stroman sounds goo at #13, but is it too much to hope for Fried to fall there?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 4, 2012 -> 09:30 AM) I do. Those are worthless AB's and they are coming at a way higher rate than any year but 2011. He's also walking at a career high rate. His .391 wOBA is in the neighborhood of his career highs, and his 146 wRC+ is among the league leaders. Outs are outs, and K's are better than GIDPs -- and the guy is getting on base at a .376 clip. He's leading the non-Hamilton AL in homeruns. He's having an A year, no doubt, and ESPECIALLY if you consider Rios' season a B.

QUOTE (danman31 @ May 31, 2012 -> 01:48 PM) Sounds like a White Sox pick, or at least of a few years ago, but that short summary doesn't thrill me. That's what I was thinking too -- they have tended toward guys that are close to major league ready lately.

Marc Hulet posted a pseudo-mock today on FanGraphs, although it's just based on what he thinks the teams SHOULD do, not what he thinks they WILL do. Anyway, he had the White Sox down for this guy: 13. Chicago White Sox: Andrew Heaney, LHP, Oklahoma State U – Heaney is a strike-throwing southpaw with outstanding command of his three pitches: an 88-93 mph fastball, curveball and changeup. He should move quickly through the minor leagues. http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/f...aft-selections/

QUOTE (PolishPrince34 @ May 30, 2012 -> 01:12 PM) Keith Law Updated 2.0 Draft Having the Sox take Smoral. Like the upside on this pick-Big Lefty Wonder if there's any chance Giolito falls to the Sox because of his injury.

I have a feeling this thread is going to be a roller coaster this year.

If you're going to cite a stat that EVERYONE knows doesn't become reliable for way longer than 45 games, you're just showing that you have no idea what you're talking about, not that there's anything wrong with the stat. Go look at the career numbers and tell me if they don't match up.

If they win this series, I think I'll officialy have some hope for the season.

lol.

White Sox make this deal if they can. The Red Sox would have to eat some money regardless, and it wouldn't be hard to get the cash to be even considering Thornton has ~$10m left total guaranteed, and Youk has ~$13m total guaranteed with buyout. White Sox probably have to include a PTBNL or "live arm." You're trading a mid 30's guy at a position of depth for a mid 30's guy at a position of weakness -- it's a wash in terms of "rebuilding" because the money and age is similar, it just flat out makes you better. Morel sucks and is still young. All you're doing is giving him one year to play as a bench guy, because Youk gets bought out.

QUOTE (Chet Kincaid @ May 15, 2012 -> 03:47 PM) 8 runs? What the hell happened? Peavy gave up a homer and then Ventura thought Will Ohman could save the day.

There's nothing worse than being a fan of a .500 team. I seriously would rather them lose 100 games than have them constantly blue-ball me every day, every summer.

HEY ROBIN, WILL OHMAN IS A LOOGY WILL OHMAN IS A LOOGY WILL OHMAN IS A LOOGY WILL OHMAN IS A LOOGY WILL OHMAN IS A LOOGY WILL OHMAN IS A LOOGY

Is this a joke? What the flying **** are they doing? A first grade class could run this better than these clowns.

QUOTE (2nd_city_saint787 @ May 8, 2012 -> 05:19 PM) Did you also realize theyre only 2 games behind the tigers and have the same record as the angels who before the season started were title contenders?.....there are 132 games left to play guys Right, but what's going to improve? Our best players are playing well, and we can't expect the bad ones to get better. And we just sent our best starter to the bullpen.

QUOTE (JoeCoolMan24 @ May 8, 2012 -> 05:00 PM) Yeah, but everyone also assumed Sale would be in the rotation all year, Danks would be very good, Humber would be solid again, Reed would be closing out ballgames, and Morel would be hitting better. Yeah, we got the huge turn arounds from Peavy and Dunn, and decent production from Rios, but holes are appearing where we didn't expect them to. I don't know though... I mean I don't think ever go into a season expecting everyone to perform average or above average. That's what our team needed, as Balta pointed out, and that's the mirage that gave the season a glimmer of hope.

QUOTE (greg775 @ May 8, 2012 -> 04:09 PM) Was just looking at the standings. Do you realize the Sox are just a game better than the Cubs and only have two fewer losses than the Royals? Time to start winning. Season could be ova by mid May. I'm not usually this negative, but I have to point something out: Has anyone else noticed that we're experiencing the elusive "bounce back" seasons from our scapegoats Dunn/Rios/Peavy and are still below .500? I was firmly on the side of "this team could win the Central in the unlikely event that everyone played well," but now that it's unfolding before me, I'm being forced to realize that this just isn't that great of a team. Of course, I planned on Sale being a breakout SP and on Danks being better than Luke Hochevar, but there was no way that EVERYONE was going to work out.

QUOTE (SoxFan1 @ Apr 24, 2012 -> 01:44 PM) The White Sox are currently 10-6. That's a .625 winning percentage. Over the course of 162 games, if they keep this pace, it's a 101 win season. Just saying. We're also on pace to play the Athletics, Mariners, and Orioles about 80 times. Look, I hope we contend. It's definitely possible, but not likely. If we don't, I'm going to have fun watching De Aza and Viciedo turn into something and following Floyd/Peavy (and maybe Rios) trade rumors at the deadline.