Y2Jimmy0 Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 http://www.espn.com/blog/keith-law/insider/post?id=6172 Keith started with 81-100 today. He had Zack Collins at 95 Zack Collins, C, Chicago White Sox Age: 22 (2/6/95) | B/T: L/R Height: 6-3 | Weight: 220 Top level: High-A | 2016: NE The White Sox think Zack Collins can catch, and sent him out as a catcher right to the High-A Carolina League after drafting him out of the University of Miami with the 10th overall pick, making him one of only two college bats from last year's draft to go straight to High-A. I don't think Collins, already big for the position and not that agile, will make it to the majors as a catcher, but I do think he can really hit, and do so with power and some on-base ability, so it might not matter in the end. When Collins keeps his swing controlled, he's short to the zone and explodes quickly from where he loads, with plenty of natural angle in his finish to hit for power, but he does get a little homer-happy and then his swing becomes unnecessarily long. His pro debut went better than anyone could have expected, with a lot of strikeouts but a .258/.418/.467 line that would have placed him among the league leaders in OBP and slugging. There is absolutely some extra value in having this kind of bat behind the plate, but if Collins' bat is as advanced as I think it is, he might hit his way off the position this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 You can forget Hansen and probably even Fulmer in the Top 100 if Collins is so low. Same with Burdi. Not sure what his opinion on Basabe is? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago White Sox Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 Would be interested to know where Law had Schwarber ranked the year after he was drafted. I think most experts agree Collins has a better chance of sticking at catcher than Scwarber. #95 feels a bit low to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveno89 Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 QUOTE (Chicago White Sox @ Jan 23, 2017 -> 08:49 AM) Would be interested to know where Law had Schwarber ranked the year after he was drafted. I think most experts agree Collins has a better chance of sticking at catcher than Scwarber. #95 feels a bit low to me. Collins is a guy I can see being a top 50 prospect by mid season if he plays up to his ability. I fully expect that bat to perform really well and he should get moved up to AA at some point before the end of the season. It's too soon to write him off at catcher Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2Jimmy0 Posted January 23, 2017 Author Share Posted January 23, 2017 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 23, 2017 -> 08:48 AM) You can forget Hansen and probably even Fulmer in the Top 100 if Collins is so low. Same with Burdi. Not sure what his opinion on Basabe is? I wouldn't be stunned to see Hansen in the just missed portion. He's a big fan. Fulmer and Burdi won't be in there because he thinks they are relievers. He thinks Lopez is too though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiSoxFanMike Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 Law doesn't think favorably of any White Sox prospect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveno89 Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Jan 23, 2017 -> 09:17 AM) Law doesn't think favorably of any White Sox prospect. Our position player prospects leave a ton to be desired Outside of Moncada, Collins, and Basabe none of our position player prospects currently project to be mlb regulars Fisher and Call were solid draft picks, but they have a bunch of questions to answer Beyond that the farm is pretty depressing position player wise Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 Law's rankings vary a lot from places like BA so I wouldn't make any judgments. I know he scouted Collins at AFL, and we are being sold that he looked so stiff behind plate because of how tired he was from his longest season ever. I wouldn't be surprised if Hansen is in next group but even if he's not, the guy had crazy success in a very short time after a middling college season. In his chats we know he thinks highly of him so it's nothing to be too upset about, if Hansen is the real deal he'll prove it soon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2Jimmy0 Posted January 23, 2017 Author Share Posted January 23, 2017 QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Jan 23, 2017 -> 09:17 AM) Law doesn't think favorably of any White Sox prospect. That's not true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Con te Giolito Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 Dont freak out about these rankings too much guys. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 Also what's funny is whining about the ranking when it's largely a very positive write-up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Con te Giolito Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 Also what's funny is whining about the ranking when it's largely a very positive write-up. Listening to Collins and the White Sox org speak I really get the feeling his chances behind the plate are being underrated by a lot of national guys. I dont expect Law to spend 3 hours of his life listening to podcasts about Zack Collins, BUT I HAVE! and I think if he did too he'd change his tune a little on the defensive side of his evaluation. So you take that kind of bullish offensive report and combine with his a positive defensive trajectory....to me I'm encouraged. I dont care about #95 whatever, I feel better about Collins after reading Law's take on him despite the ranking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveno89 Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 QUOTE (Con te Giolito @ Jan 23, 2017 -> 09:39 AM) Listening to Collins and the White Sox org speak I really get the feeling his chances behind the plate are being underrated by a lot of national guys. I dont expect Law to spend 3 hours of his life listening to podcasts about Zack Collins, BUT I HAVE! and I think if he did too he'd change his tune a little on the defensive side of his evaluation. So you take that kind of bullish offensive report and combine with his a positive defensive trajectory....to me I'm encouraged. I dont care about #95 whatever, I feel better about Collins after reading Law's take on him despite the ranking. I am very confident in Collins bat, approach and power potential. Even passable defense will make him an elite prospect in my opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2Jimmy0 Posted January 23, 2017 Author Share Posted January 23, 2017 QUOTE (raBBit @ Jan 23, 2017 -> 09:46 AM) Law's evaluations of bats have been as good as any publication writer over the internet age. He's outstanding. If I like a guy (on the position side) and then I hear Law likes him, I'll dive in and usually come out looking good. Law's evaluations of pitchers is almost like punching in numbers into a system. Under 6'1"? Under 185? Automatic reliever. 6'3"+ but very thin frame? Automatic reliever. Throws hard with bad mechanics? Automatic reliever. Law wants every pitcher to be 6'4" 215 lbs with perfect mechanics. I just don't think mechanics are as predictable as Law's writeups would give credence to. It's not even like he would argue that but he just bets on the workhorse bodies and does his presumptuous, writing-off of any guy who doesn't apply. Frankly, it's not the worst strategy given the tough task that Law has to do but at the same time, he knows some of these unconventional deliver/smaller body guys are going to work out and they're going to keep making him like bad (See Sale, See Carlos Martinez, Hopefully see Reynaldo Lopez). Completely agree here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 Yeah I liked his Garfein interview. I do think that AFL stint matters a lot though to what we'll see in pre-season rankings. But I choose to be optimistic that pilates will cure all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiSoxFanMike Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 That's right. Law said Sale was a future reliever too. lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 QUOTE (raBBit @ Jan 23, 2017 -> 09:46 AM) Law's evaluations of bats have been as good as any publication writer over the internet age. He's outstanding. If I like a guy (on the position side) and then I hear Law likes him, I'll dive in and usually come out looking good. Law's evaluations of pitchers is almost like punching in numbers into a system. Under 6'1"? Under 185? Automatic reliever. 6'3"+ but very thin frame? Automatic reliever. Throws hard with bad mechanics? Automatic reliever. Law wants every pitcher to be 6'4" 215 lbs with perfect mechanics. I just don't think mechanics are as predictable as Law's writeups would give credence to. It's not even like he would argue that but he just bets on the workhorse bodies and does his presumptuous, writing-off of any guy who doesn't apply. Frankly, it's not the worst strategy given the tough task that Law has to do but at the same time, he knows some of these unconventional deliver/smaller body guys are going to work out and they're going to keep making him like bad (See Sale, See Carlos Martinez, Hopefully see Reynaldo Lopez). Good call. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 It will be interesting to see everyone's opinion on here change regarding Newman when Law has him in the top 25 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveno89 Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 QUOTE (raBBit @ Jan 23, 2017 -> 09:46 AM) Law's evaluations of bats have been as good as any publication writer over the internet age. He's outstanding. If I like a guy (on the position side) and then I hear Law likes him, I'll dive in and usually come out looking good. Law's evaluations of pitchers is almost like punching in numbers into a system. Under 6'1"? Under 185? Automatic reliever. 6'3"+ but very thin frame? Automatic reliever. Throws hard with bad mechanics? Automatic reliever. Law wants every pitcher to be 6'4" 215 lbs with perfect mechanics. I just don't think mechanics are as predictable as Law's writeups would give credence to. It's not even like he would argue that but he just bets on the workhorse bodies and does his presumptuous, writing-off of any guy who doesn't apply. Frankly, it's not the worst strategy given the tough task that Law has to do but at the same time, he knows some of these unconventional deliver/smaller body guys are going to work out and they're going to keep making him like bad (See Sale, See Carlos Martinez, Hopefully see Reynaldo Lopez). Physical analysis is not a horrible way to scout players, but it does need to be considered amongst other factors. Fulmer and Lopez both have the physical build more prone to becoming relievers. Giolito, Kopech, Dunning, Hansen and Burdi have excellent pitchers frames though Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicago White Sox Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 23, 2017 -> 09:33 AM) Also what's funny is whining about the ranking when it's largely a very positive write-up. Who is whining about the ranking? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PolishPrince34 Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 QUOTE (raBBit @ Jan 23, 2017 -> 09:46 AM) Law's evaluations of bats have been as good as any publication writer over the internet age. He's outstanding. If I like a guy (on the position side) and then I hear Law likes him, I'll dive in and usually come out looking good. Law's evaluations of pitchers is almost like punching in numbers into a system. Under 6'1"? Under 185? Automatic reliever. 6'3"+ but very thin frame? Automatic reliever. Throws hard with bad mechanics? Automatic reliever. Law wants every pitcher to be 6'4" 215 lbs with perfect mechanics. I just don't think mechanics are as predictable as Law's writeups would give credence to. It's not even like he would argue that but he just bets on the workhorse bodies and does his presumptuous, writing-off of any guy who doesn't apply. Frankly, it's not the worst strategy given the tough task that Law has to do but at the same time, he knows some of these unconventional deliver/smaller body guys are going to work out and they're going to keep making him like bad (See Sale, See Carlos Martinez, Hopefully see Reynaldo Lopez). I actually tend to agree with Law's evaluations of starting pitchers/frames. 5'11"-6'1"" who have dominated in the last 40 years have been very few ( Pedro, Cueto, Oswalt, Tim Hudson, Guidry, Lincecum, Valenzuela, Gio Gonzalez). Yes some of these players have really panned out and were elite pitchers and Cy Young winners, but more often than not pitchers with smaller frames end up in bullpen (Wagner, Kimbrel, Robertson, Rodnery, Flash Gordon, etc) lose their plus stuff quicker, or arm/body breaks down. One of the concerns and worries I have with Carson Fulmer and Reynoldo Lopez are their size and being to withstand 162 games in the starting rotation. It's not the #1 concern with Fulmer and Lopez (Mechanics #1), but it's very high up their. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveno89 Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 QUOTE (PolishPrince34 @ Jan 23, 2017 -> 12:18 PM) I actually tend to agree with Law's evaluations of starting pitchers/frames. 5'11"-6'1"" who have dominated in the last 40 years have been very few ( Pedro, Cueto, Oswalt, Tim Hudson, Guidry, Lincecum, Valenzuela, Gio Gonzalez). Yes some of these players have really panned out and were elite pitchers and Cy Young winners, but more often than not pitchers with smaller frames end up in bullpen (Wagner, Kimbrel, Robertson, Rodnery, Flash Gordon, etc) lose their plus stuff quicker, or arm/body breaks down. One of the concerns and worries I have with Carson Fulmer and Reynoldo Lopez are their size and being to withstand 162 games in the starting rotation. It's not the #1 concern with Fulmer and Lopez (Mechanics #1), but it's very high up their. Sox were stuck in a tough spot picking #8 in 2015 Every player picked above them I think they would have drafted over Fulmer: 1) Swanson 2) Bregman 3) Rodgers 4) Tate 5) Tucker 6) Jay 7) Benintendi They did what they felt was the best selection at the time was in Fulmer. At 6' 200 lbs he has less than ideal size for a starting pitcher and likely is best suited to a bullpen role, but he should be given the opportunity to start in AAA this season Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PolishPrince34 Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 (edited) QUOTE (steveno89 @ Jan 23, 2017 -> 12:25 PM) Sox were stuck in a tough spot picking #8 in 2015 Every player picked above them I think they would have drafted over Fulmer: 1) Swanson 2) Bregman 3) Rodgers 4) Tate 5) Tucker 6) Jay 7) Benintendi They did what they felt was the best selection at the time was in Fulmer. At 6' 200 lbs he has less than ideal size for a starting pitcher and likely is best suited to a bullpen role, but he should be given the opportunity to start in AAA this season Yes, completely agree you give him every opportunity to start in AAA this season, but all signs are pointing towards a future in the bullpen. I know it's still early in his young career. Made no sense why Fulmer was rushed up last year. That was a head scratcher. #9 was Ian Happ which would of been a nice get. Edited January 23, 2017 by PolishPrince34 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiSoxFanMike Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 QUOTE (steveno89 @ Jan 23, 2017 -> 12:25 PM) Sox were stuck in a tough spot picking #8 in 2015 Every player picked above them I think they would have drafted over Fulmer: 1) Swanson 2) Bregman 3) Rodgers 4) Tate 5) Tucker 6) Jay 7) Benintendi They did what they felt was the best selection at the time was in Fulmer. At 6' 200 lbs he has less than ideal size for a starting pitcher and likely is best suited to a bullpen role, but he should be given the opportunity to start in AAA this season I wouldn't take Tate or Jay over Fulmer even now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steveno89 Posted January 23, 2017 Share Posted January 23, 2017 QUOTE (ChiSoxFanMike @ Jan 23, 2017 -> 12:29 PM) I wouldn't take Tate or Jay over Fulmer even now. Tate and Jay were perhaps overdrafted, but any of those position player prospects the Sox would have taken for sure Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.