More Beckham Gossip

[YASNY]

Yeah, and if I'm not mistaken, Ozzie came just short of saying he was mad at Contreras for not saying anything sooner.

 

Yes, as a matter of fact he did sound annoyed, or I read it that way.

[heirdog]

exigencies[/i]?

 

It is a word but I'm not so sure it was used in context correctly...but then again, caulfield is the teacher in Thailand, I believe so maybe its used differently there.

[WCSox]

You do realize that Prior when on to have an incredibly impressive college career, right? Thereby, making himself a mega-prospect, a level that Rowand never even sniffed at? How does this even equate?

 

So Rowand is better than a high school pitcher who didn't even sign with the team that drafted him that year, and was later a #2 overall pick at the same experience level as Rowand?

 

Wow, these are some absolutely awful straw man arguments.

 

I honestly don't see how that makes Rowand a good prospect.

 

The fact that the Sox spent a first-round pick on Rowand suggests that he was at least a solid prospect. Not a can't-miss bad-ass, but certainly somebody who they projected to contribute in the bigs.

Edited April 24, 2009 by WCSox

[caulfield12]

Rowand was the #6 ranked prospect for the White Sox in 2000.

 

He was never a Top 100 prospect, but it's not like he was chopped liver, either. I guess I would have put him in the Aaron Cunningham or Jeremy Reed category of being more likely to make it as a fourth outfielder, but he surprised me. Especially his recovery after the dirt-bike incident. KW was really furious about that one. It almost ended his career with the White Sox.

Edited April 24, 2009 by caulfield12

[ThunderBolt]

Mark Prior was considered one of the best prospects in history. We're talking Hamilton/Wieters/Strasburg hype. It doesn't matter where Rowand was drafted, he was never expected to touch Prior. So, arguing that he held the same kind of value to a team during the draft is ignorant.

[WCSox]

Mark Prior was considered one of the best prospects in history. We're talking Hamilton/Wieters/Strasburg hype. It doesn't matter where Rowand was drafted, he was never expected to touch Prior. So, arguing that he held the same kind of value to a team during the draft is ignorant.

 

Speaking of ignorance, the results of that year's draft completely disagree with your statement. Rowand coming out of Cal State Fullerton was deemed to have approximately equal draft value to a phenomenally-talented-but-still-raw-and-untested Mark Prior. Prior even being picked in the first round straight out of high school speaks volumes about his ability, and it was very obvious to anybody who knows anything about baseball that Prior had MUCH more upside over the long-term. But it's clear that ML organizations often value experience and ML-readiness over raw ability on draft day.

 

[SoxAce]

Just for the record, I always laugh when I hear/read Mark Prior was a bust. This is just my opinion of course, but Prior was not a bust, especially when he was pitching in the bigs, perhaps injury prone, but that was more on the dumbass running the team. I am still very scared for Cueto and Volquez BTW, same guy who happened to f*** up Prior's arm.

Edited April 24, 2009 by SoxAce

[shago]

Slumping a bit:

 

2009 BIR Sou 22 Chw AA 13 53 10 15 4 0 2 7 1 0 5 10 1 1 0 0 1 .283 .356 .472 82

[ThunderBolt]

Just for the record, I always laugh when I hear/read Mark Prior was a bust. This is just my opinion of course, but Prior was not a bust, especially when he was pitching in the bigs, perhaps injury prone, but that was more on the dumbass running the team. I am still very scared for Cueto and Volquez BTW, same guy who happened to f*** up Prior's arm.

Agreed, the guy pitched his team into the playoffs at an incredibly young age. What happened to him is dissapointing, but not bust worthy.

[almagest]

Wow, these are some absolutely awful straw man arguments.

 

 

 

The fact that the Sox spent a first-round pick on Rowand suggests that he was at least a solid prospect. Not a can't-miss bad-ass, but certainly somebody who they projected to contribute in the bigs.

If you're not saying Rowand was a good draft pick because high-school Prior was taken right around the same spot in the draft, then what exactly are you saying? I have absolutely no idea what point you could possibly be trying to make otherwise.

[almagest]

Speaking of ignorance, the results of that year's draft completely disagree with your statement. Rowand coming out of Cal State Fullerton was deemed to have approximately equal draft value to a phenomenally-talented-but-still-raw-and-untested Mark Prior. Prior even being picked in the first round straight out of high school speaks volumes about his ability, and it was very obvious to anybody who knows anything about baseball that Prior had MUCH more upside over the long-term. But it's clear that ML organizations often value experience and ML-readiness over raw ability on draft day.

You can't say teams shied away from drafting Prior solely because he was raw. Plenty of high-school players are top draft picks, and a number of other reasons could also have contributed, such as Prior had already committing to USC by draft day, knowing he could raise his draft stock beyond a supplemental pick with a good college career, and/or wanting top 5-10 money (or more).

 

[WCSox]

If you're not saying Rowand was a good draft pick because high-school Prior was taken right around the same spot in the draft, then what exactly are you saying? I have absolutely no idea what point you could possibly be trying to make otherwise.

 

My point was that by picking Rownad in the first round, the Sox expected him to contribute in the bigs. He wasn't some chopped liver 6th-rounder that Schueler took a flyer on, but didn't expect much in return.

 

You can't say teams shied away from drafting Prior solely because he was raw.

 

I don't believe that I used the word "solely," but the results of the draft disagree with your statement. If Prior had 2-3 years of successful experience in college or the minors under his belt at that point, he would've been drafted in the top 3.

 

Plenty of high-school players are top draft picks, and a number of other reasons could also have contributed, such as Prior had already committing to USC by draft day,

 

"Commitments" to universities are fickle. Prior could've easily backed out if he liked what the Yankees were offering him.

 

knowing he could raise his draft stock beyond a supplemental pick with a good college career, and/or wanting top 5-10 money (or more).

 

I agree that this is most likely what happened. But it's difficult to argue that a "commitment" to USC had much to do with where Prior was drafted. If a team was convinced that this guy was going to be a stud and had few concerns about his durability, they would've drafted him earlier and ponied up the money. Everybody knew that Prior was going to be in the bigs after he left college. It's not like he had competing offers from the NFL or NBA on the table.

 

Edited April 27, 2009 by WCSox

[bigruss]

My point was that by picking Rownad in the first round, the Sox expected him to contribute in the bigs. He wasn't some chopped liver 6th-rounder that Schueler took a flyer on, but didn't expect much in return.

 

 

 

I don't believe that I used the word "solely," but the results of the draft disagree with your statement. If Prior had 2-3 years of successful experience in college or the minors under his belt at that point, he would've been drafted in the top 3.

 

 

"Commitments" to universities are fickle. Prior could've easily backed out if he liked what the Yankees were offering him.

 

 

 

I agree that this is most likely what happened. But it's difficult to argue that a "commitment" to USC had much to do with where Prior was drafted. If a team was convinced that this guy was going to be a stud and had few concerns about his durability, they would've drafted him earlier and ponied up the money. Everybody knew that Prior was going to be in the bigs after he left college. It's not like he had competing offers from the NFL or NBA on the table.

 

 

These are BIG time questionable statements. Just look at a guy like Zach Putnam coming out of Ann Arbor Pioneer HS, he was projected as a first or second round pick, but fell to 38th round because of his commitment to the Univ of Mich and monetary demands.

 

To some guys, commitments are a bargaining chip/safety net if a team doesnt offer them enough money in the draft, for others they are legit and they truly mean that commitment unless blown out of the water with an offer.

 

And how many teams did you see ponying up money for Rick Porcello? Very few teams want to give up that much money for a high school draft pick, tehy would rather invest it in other ways even though he was the best high school pitcher coming out of the draft. And players coming out of high school have so much leverage, with those commitments they can easily decide to reject any offer with the feeling that they can increase their stock after a few years in college. Actually, the only type of player drafted that doesnt have leverage are College Seniors, and you see them get VERY little when it comes to signing bonuses (one thing that I really disagree about, but thats economics...personally, I think its a bad message to send to college players, that it hurts them so much financially to finish school, and we all know the chances of them actually making money from baseball is very slim).