Dominikk85

I like what Hahn did in the last two deals. He went all out for the top guy and tanked the back end. The 3 and 4 guys of the cubs deal aren't prospects and clarkin is probably a quad A type but that allowed them getting the top guys. Getting the top 100 guys cease, eloy and rutherford is more important than getting solid back end guys.

With the nats trade you have to consider 2 things. -madsen is 37 and Doolittle is very good but also has an extensive injury background. -the As get rid of the salary of the two guys and they get a controllable guy with treinen back who has a bad year but is not old and could bounce back. So the As loose salary, get two prospects and get a reliever back who could be a decent flip candidate next year. In that light the trade doesn't look as bad, beane gets something back for two guys who have solid stats but could easily worth nothing next year. Robertson is a better chip than that especially if the sox eat some money. He is not chapman or miller but he could net a back end top 100 prospect that his team doesn't love (that probably removes high upside low level prospects like rutherford or groome but guys with maybe a slightly falling stock like mateo could work). Don't expect much on top of that prospect though, every top 100 guy would be great.

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Jul 17, 2017 -> 10:00 AM) I'm not really talking about signing FA....they can do that when they have a hole or 2 to plug when they are ready to go. That's the mistake this (same) FO made in 2014-2015: tried to plug 8 holes with free agents. They will have to sign a few cheapies here and there just to field a team next year. But as the prospects get called up, they are going to have to be fluid and flexible - move some to find players who may better fit what they are trying to do....especially as they don't draft very well (I'll believe the improvement when I see it) and this set of prospects may very well be it. And they have some young players right now that they will have to figure out what to do with to minimize the amount of "rotting on the vine." Definitely some need to be moved but prospect for prospect trades are pretty rare for better prospects and generally most teams want to let their prospects play it out and see who makes it. Of course ideally you sell high on guys that bust but in these days the other organisations have almost as much information about your guys than you have. The usual procedure is call the prospects you have up and start to trade them when you already have a good team.

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Jul 16, 2017 -> 03:52 PM) If the plan is to wait until they fill out a championship team with this specific set of prospects plus whoever they draft in the next year or 2, then it likely will take 10 years. That's the Royals method. No trades or FA signings obviously won't work and at some point additions need to be made but now is not the time for that. The core needs to be internal and then you can make a couple additions at the right spot with FA signings or trades. Cubs didn't sign a Harper either but they had two big signings with Heyward and Lester and a couple more smaller ones with lackey, zobrist and others.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jul 16, 2017 -> 06:09 AM) The significance of high minor league k rates for BA Top 100 prospects over nearly twenty years https://www.minorleagueball.com/2011/4/22/2...-league-k-rates Perhaps one of the most interesting conclusions is that six years ago, 22-24% was the cutoff number, not 30%. Admittedly, there are not a ton of revolutionary conclusions here. Traditional prospecting wisdom is supported strongly, as it's abundantly clear that, ceteris paribus, high strikeout rates are not helpful in a prospect's development. It appears as though the success rates for prospect development drop sharply when strikeout rates hit about 22%. Furthermore, minor league strikeout rates are strongly negatively related with both major league at-bats and OPS. However, among successfully developed prospects, minor league strikeout rates are positively related with major league OPS, indicating that the prospects that become the best MLB hitters tend to be sluggers with moderately high strikeout rates. A second point to note is the abundance of defensive-minded players who don't strikeout much, but also don't produce much offensively. Lastly, it's clear that players tend to increase their strikeout rates in the minors upon graduation to the majors by about 1%. Again, the conclusions made here are by no means revolutionary. That being said, it's good to have the numbers to back up conventional wisdom, and I'm sure there are various extensions to this study that could increase its usefulness. For now, though, we can use the data to help make predictions about prospects going forward, and become a little more wary of high strikeout rates. . . .extremely excellent actually. I’m going to need some time to absorb this good info but, a couple points come to mind. Personally, as far as my own comments on this matter, I may have said that striking out is a good thing but, what I also said and really MEAN was that . . . just as many, if not more players fail because they dont make hard contact as players fail becasue they can’t make contact. I’m not certain If that was completely adressed here or not. Maybe you guys can tell me? The reason I found it hard to initialize a study was because its hard to “isolate” just the strikeouts . . . An example: If you have two prospects, both are 19, both played in full-season A ball and they hit like THIS Player A: 500 Pa’s , 35 2B, 25 Hrs, 125 Ks Player B: 500 Pa’s, 34 2B, 26 Hrs, 70 Ks I would obviously expect player B to have more future sucess. My point though us that player A types tend to have more power , not equal power, than players with less strikouts and if we match thier numbers, other than the Ks, you adding in a group of players with a better skillset. I still think that what Nick Franklin is doing has a more sucessful track record that say, what a Carlos Triunfel is doing, number wise. I feel like we tend to notice the guys who strike out and then fail more than the guys, who don’t strike out and fail perhaps? In either case, great work much appreciated! Mlb k rate is now 3% higher than 2011. 150 Ks is nothing huge anymore. Above 25% it probably still is a red flag though. You can still succeed but a lot needs to go right - you need to hit the ball hard - you need to keep it off the ground -you need to walk - you need to limit weak contact and pop ups If the Ks are high there is a lot of pressure on your other bat skills.of you have 80 game power and you walk 12+% it can work even with above 30% (gallo) but with 60 power and 10% walks it doesn't really work anymore.

I give the rebuild now a 9. The talent Hahn got is off the charts but it also is quite unusual that a rebuilding team has so many controllable assets in their prime, usually it is more like the Brewers or Phillies who have one or two solid assets to sell and a few more OK ones. Thus a high return was expected and I would have liked a few more "safe" hitters (low to medium high Ks with a high walk rate which limits the bust potential). But then again those safe mlb ready hitting prospects like benintendi probably just weren't available and hahn still get an off the charts haul of talent even though a few of them have big risk and some recent clouds of doubt around them. But maybe it was even good that hahn bought a little low on giolito and moncada after their early big league struggles rather than buying a safer prospect with a lower ceiling because it could mean that the value increases again. The guys are still risky but them again you want to win a WS and not just build an OK team so you probably need to take some gambles. Personally I'm more of a fan of building around safer hitters with good plate discipline but I can see why one would go with the upside and to his credit hahn did get some "safe" types of hitters in the draft (collins, burger) although they are more 1B types. Overall it is still a very good and especially fast effort by hahn and he can make it even better the next months.

QUOTE (SonofaRoache @ Jul 14, 2017 -> 11:59 PM) I get that scoreboard watching is fun, but in all honest picks 1-5 are a crapshoot anyway. From 2002-2014 there were four guys that lived up to the hype. I don't care where we draft, as long as we find the right player. Of course there are many years were the 4 or 5 pick is better than the one or two but statistically the one pick is by far the most productive. http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/the-changin...of-draft-picks/ Also you get a lot more slot money to sign better second and third rounders. A high pick is no guarantee but the sox should at least make the top4 if not top3.

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jul 15, 2017 -> 02:58 PM) So basically, they are getting Yrizarri for, uhh, free, I guess? They could have used the money but could not sign anyone above 300k or so. So they could sign a bunch of low profile guys but that doesn't really make sense as the the talent pool is not that large.

Why are you even discussing the panda thing? There is zero percent chance that that will happen.

QUOTE (Quin @ Jul 15, 2017 -> 09:29 AM) Definitely prefer Ockimey, Hernandez,and Lozada to Ball and Cosart and I think that would be the consensus. Ball does seem like a classic White Sox reclamation a la Humber. I don't really like the return. Longenhagen has neither of the 3 rated higher than 40 FV. For comparison low top 100 prospects are 50s (projected average regular) whole comp picks are usually like 45s. 45 means projected future utility and 40 basically replacement level bench guy. I would have preferred 1 45 prospect over 2 40s and a 35. That return is basically worse than a comp pick. Now of course frazier isn't a big chip anymore and he is a rental but the guys are not really prospects but more organizational depth guys. I would have preferred a comp pick but probably the risk of him taking it would have been to high so that return is better than nothing. But neither of the guys is a real prospect so I would not get too excited.

I say send Robertson and 10 m to Washington for carter kieboom. Not a top100 yet but he is a shortstop, was drafted in the first round 2 years ago and really raked so far. He will be a top100 soon and the Sox really need middle infield prospects as that is still a weak spot of the system.

QUOTE (hi8is @ Jul 13, 2017 -> 03:21 PM) Mayo says burger, sheets, and skoug will all be top 100 on new list Sheets definitely not. Burger maybe but I don't think so. Usually only top10-15 overall picks are top100 right away, the guys below that have to prove themselves at least a season or so.

Yes probably clearly the number one system. The system is a little on the risky side (moncada, kopech, giolito, cease) and there is still a lack of middle infield and catching prospects (if collins turns out to be more of a DH rather than a catcher) but every system has its holes and the upside and number of top prospects is off the charts.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jul 13, 2017 -> 06:08 AM) Between Rodgers and Jimenez, who would you take first? SS and catcher are so key. We obviously can't get Turner, Seager, Correa, Lindor, etc. And Dansby Swanson has been a disaster this year, just like Timmy Anderson. Same with Bregman. Well, disappointing, at the very least. Tatis, Jr., haha? Russell and Baez are the obvious names. To get Jimenez and one of those two, who else do you give the Cubs? Kahnle? Swarzak? Holland? MiGo? Shields, writing off almost all of his remaining salary? Obvious Maddon connection there. Seems impossible to also get Candelario too, biting off a bit much. Bregman is not hitting bad, he just isn't hitting that well for a 3b. His wRC+ is 104 which is quite good for a shortstop. Bregman came up as a shortstop but had to be moved because second and short are blocked.

I hope he doesn't rule it out. I understand there is a rivalry between sox and cubs fans and ut would hurt uf quintana is in a WS Parade but the cubs are not really a rival of the Sox (different league and division) and I could not care less if the cubs win 5 more championships if it means the sox win one. I'm not saying they should deal with the cubs but they should at least listen to offers and if the cubs make the best offer they should take it. Cubs really need a starter and I think they would be interested in quintana.

Advantage of hard throwers is the plan B. Most wild hard throwers never improve command enough to start in mlb but they still become relievers. With the soft tossers you usually have more of a 5th starter ceiling and more likely a 6th/spot starter or long man and often a AAAA innings eater. Best is a hard thrower with command but that is rare and we are talking about a top10 overall prospect.

In the NL the sellers are pretty clear but in the AL there are like 10 Teams competing for the playoffs, only the A's are clear sellers. That is good for the Sox, especially that the rays and royals are still in it and not selling.

Give the nats Robertson and Kahnle for robles (and a minor second piece).

A lot of talk is about position players and rightfully so but don't the white Sox also need another SP prospect? They have giolito, kopech and lopez but each of them has a risk because of the command. If one of them has to move to the pen who will become the rest of the rotation? They can certainly sign a free agent when it is time but I still think they need at least one more high level prospect because a lot of the other pitching prespects are relievers.

Good rebuild so far. They got a good return in both big trades, albeit some of the players are risky and complemented that with some supposedly low risk college players in the draft (collins, Rodon, burger). They still lack pieces though, especially up the middle (shortstop, Centerfielders, 2b if moncada has to move to of, catcher if collins has to move). Also another high level starting pitching prospect since giolito and kopech both come with some relief risk related to their command development (both could make it as starters but I would not be surprised if one became a reliever). Overall the rebuild started well but there are still holes in the system that have to be filled.

QUOTE (Joshua Strong @ Jun 22, 2017 -> 09:10 AM) I honk this thread is ridiculous. As someone said, you're worried about the team's young shortstop, who didn't start playing baseball till he was 17/18 in the first year of a rebuild? Problem is that he is basically below average in all three important facets of hitting (contact, plate discipline and power). Not saying he cant fix that but that is a lot to fix. Still of course there are other things to worry about right now of course.

QUOTE (Scoots @ Jun 22, 2017 -> 08:58 PM) Okay, I know there is already a Q thread out there somewhere, but this one is fresh and up to date. So, let's say Q restores his value and has a couple more outstanding starts. Considering the moves the Sox have made, with a future 3B/DH in Davidson/Burger, SS in Anderson, 2B in Moncada, 1B in Abreu (He isn't going anywhere), Catcher in Collins and loads of pitching prospects, their infield is pretty well set for the future. You could even throw Yolmer and Leury in there. You got Robert in Center and Avi in right, plus if you want to put Engel as a starting outfielder you could, too early to tell with him. Don't know what we have with Tilson either. With all that said, who are YOU trading for in Q? You can never have enough pitching in my opinion, so I say another pitcher and an outfielder who can hit, at least, maybe a catcher as well. I still think you need infielders: -It is not clear if burger can stay at third -some scouts like moncada better in the OF - anderson can't hit Get middle infield prospects and maybe CF prospects. Those later can still move to corners but corner guys can't move up the middle. Also another SP prospect wouldn't be bad. They have pitching depth but giolito, Kopech and even Lopez all have some "reliever" risk to them. I think ideal would be a package of a SP prospect and a very good middle infield prospect.

I wrote this before a few times http://www.soxtalk.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=102439 Anderson wasn't really better last year. A little more power but still high K, low BB and mediocre but not terrible power for a MIF. That doesn't really work, last year a huge babip covered up for this but now not anymore. There is still some hope as he is very raw and had a late start but that bat is extremely raw and might never get around. He still can be an OK shortstop but then he at least needs to improve his fielding.

I dont really think so. Of course those "swing change first basemen" out there are no bad pieces (like Alonso, bour, morrison) but they are all already or around 30 and really not much of an upgrade over abreu. Also the sox have a lot of corner types in their system already, the focus now should be on up the middle talent, which is something the Sox still severely lack in their system. Apart from moncada and Robert there are really no prospects that have the potential for elite defense and bat up the middle positions. Power and on base percentage is very important in the modern game but you now also need defense and athleticism as well as production up the middle.just a collection of big sluggers who can get on base a little is not enough anymore (see this year's Oakland A's who slug like crazy but lose all the time). You need power in these days but since everyone hits for power now it is not that much of a difference maker anymore as it was 5 years ago. 5 years ago you could punt defense and win with good on base sluggers but today small second basemen hit 20 bombs so that doesnt work anymore.The trend now is powerful teams that are also athletic and great in the field (like the Cubs last year). I don't think it is bad that Hahn got a few hopefully solid on base and power pieces with burger, collins and sheets as a foundation for the offense but now the Sox need up the middle position talent that can hit and field. Not everyone can have a machado, seager, correa, bryant or arenado but that is the type of player that dominates the game in 2017 and not guys like Giambi or so anymore like in 2000.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jun 18, 2017 -> 07:45 AM) Rodon was the best college pitcher and considered close to the show. Lewis was not the best high school player, and was only selected 1-1 because he struck a deal. He came out ahead. Yes. He signed under slot for 1-1 but he was projected around 5-6th overall and he got more money than that.