Sale's mechanics

[chw42]

I think that if you get a good major league player at any position it is a good (not wasted) pick. I wnet back and looked at all of the 10-15 picks in the MLB drafts from 1997-2004. I didn't go anumore recent because the players still have a chance to develop. Here are the picks:

 

1997

Jon Garland

Chris Enochs

Aaron Akin

Kyle peterson

Brandon Larson

Jason Dellaero

 

Garland was the only good MLB player

 

1998

Carlos Pena

Josh McKinley

Adam Everett

JM Gold

Jeff Weaver

Clint Johnson

 

Pena,Everett,Weaver the only good MLB

 

1999

Ben Sheets

Ryan Christianson

Brett Myers

Mike Paradis

Ty Howington

Jason Stumm

 

Sheets, Myers

 

2000

Joe Torres

Dave Krynzel

Joe Borchard

Shaun Boyd

Beau Hale

Chase Utley

 

Utley

 

2001

Chris Burke

Kenny Baugh

Mike Jones

Casey Kotchman

Jake Gautreau

Gabe Gross

 

Burke, maybe Kotchman and Gross

 

2002

Drew Myers

Jeremy Hermedia

Joe Saunders

Khalil Greene

Russ Adams

Scott Kazmir

 

Good draft all bit Myers

 

2003

Ian Stewart

Micheal aubrey

Lastings Milledge

Aaron Hill

Ryan Wagner

Brian Anderson

 

Stewart, Hill, Wagner

 

2004

Thomas diamond

Neil Walker

Jered Weaver

Bill Bray

Billy Butler

Stephen Drew

 

Walker,Weaver, mayber Butler and Drew

 

 

It looks to me like from picks 10-15 teams are lucky to get good contributing players. I'll take Sale being good whther it's in the pen or starting. If he's good it will not be a wasted pick.

 

Butler and Drew are only maybes?

 

3E8 said something similar. The draft is a crapshoot.

 

[Jordan4life_2007]

I think that if you get a good major league player at any position it is a good (not wasted) pick. I wnet back and looked at all of the 10-15 picks in the MLB drafts from 1997-2004. I didn't go anumore recent because the players still have a chance to develop. Here are the picks:

 

1997

Jon Garland

Chris Enochs

Aaron Akin

Kyle peterson

Brandon Larson

Jason Dellaero

 

Garland was the only good MLB player

 

1998

Carlos Pena

Josh McKinley

Adam Everett

JM Gold

Jeff Weaver

Clint Johnson

 

Pena,Everett,Weaver the only good MLB

 

1999

Ben Sheets

Ryan Christianson

Brett Myers

Mike Paradis

Ty Howington

Jason Stumm

 

Sheets, Myers

 

2000

Joe Torres

Dave Krynzel

Joe Borchard

Shaun Boyd

Beau Hale

Chase Utley

 

Utley

 

2001

Chris Burke

Kenny Baugh

Mike Jones

Casey Kotchman

Jake Gautreau

Gabe Gross

 

Burke, maybe Kotchman and Gross

 

2002

Drew Myers

Jeremy Hermedia

Joe Saunders

Khalil Greene

Russ Adams

Scott Kazmir

 

Good draft all bit Myers

 

2003

Ian Stewart

Micheal aubrey

Lastings Milledge

Aaron Hill

Ryan Wagner

Brian Anderson

 

Stewart, Hill, Wagner

 

2004

Thomas diamond

Neil Walker

Jered Weaver

Bill Bray

Billy Butler

Stephen Drew

 

Walker,Weaver, mayber Butler and Drew

 

 

It looks to me like from picks 10-15 teams are lucky to get good contributing players. I'll take Sale being good whther it's in the pen or starting. If he's good it will not be a wasted pick.

 

Ptatc, that's some solid date you provided. But you're arguing something that I don't dispute. I realize what a non-exact science the MLB draft is. That's not really my point. Now look at our current situation with our starting pitching. We've got Peavy, who let's face it, will be a major injury risk from now through the end of his contract. We've got Buehrle, who's a FA after this year. We've got Jackson, who will also be a FA after next year and his agent is that Boras guy that we seem to despise. We've got Danks, who's got only got two arb years left and appears to be determined to test the FA market [hello Yankees]. We've got NOTHING in the minors in terms of SP prospects that we could at least have some hope of stepping in if need be for 2012 or 2013. We NEED Sale to be a starter. We don't have the luxury of saying 'oh well, if worse comes to worse we can stick him in the 'pen.' We're not the Rays. Who can trade a Matt Garza and not really impede their long-term pitching situation in the least. That's why the Hudson trade drove/drives me so crazy. It just wasn't a smart baseball move short or long-term. Edwin Jackson is not a difference maker. Now you go out and trade Hudson or whatever for a Dan Haren? That's a totally different story. You don't give up 6 years of a cheap Hudson for a year and two months of Jackson, especially when his agent is someone we refuse to negotiate with. Now some fans have totally adopted this 'all-in' phenomenon and only care about 2011. Well, I'm not that way. Not too many people were thinking about 2005 when we were trotting out guys like Andy Gonzalez, Jerry Owens, Luis Terrerro, Andy Sisco and Ryan Bukvich and losing 90 games in 2007. I want to go 'all-in' every year, or close to every year.

Edited January 11, 2011 by Jordan4life

[Kenny Hates Prospects]

Ptatc, that's some solid date you provided. But you're arguing something that I don't dispute. I realize what a non-exact science the MLB draft is. That's not really my point. Now look at our current situation with our starting pitching. We've got Peavy, who let's face it, will be a major injury risk from now through the end of his contract. We've got Buehrle, who's a FA after this year. We've got Jackson, who will also be a FA after next year and his agent is that Boras guy that we seem to despise. We've got Danks, who's got only got two arb years left and appears to be determined to test the FA market [hello Yankees]. We've got NOTHING in the minors in terms of SP prospects that we could at least have some hope of stepping in if need be for 2012 or 2013. We NEED Sale to be a starter. We don't have the luxury of saying 'oh well, if worse comes to worse we can stick him in the 'pen.' We're not the Rays. Who can trade a Matt Garza and not really we impede their long-term pitching situation in the least. That's why the Hudson trade drove/drives me so crazy. It just wasn't a smart baseball move short or long-term. Edwin Jackson is not a difference maker. Now you go out and trade Hudson or whatever for a Dan Haren? That's a totally different story. You don't give up 6 years of a cheap Hudson for a year and two months of Jackson, especially when his agent is someone we refuse to negotiate with. Now some fans have totally adopted this 'all-in' phenomenon and only care about 2011. Well, I'm not that way. Not too many people were thinking about 2005 when we were trotting out guys like Andy Gonzalez and losing 90 games in 2007. I want to go 'all-in' every year, or close to every year.

1. It is beyond stupid to define any player's role on a ballclub based on how he was acquired.

2. There really is no effective dispute to ptatc's facts which you are attempting to respond to. The goal of the Rule-4 draft is to acquire talent, either to help the MLB ballclub or to be used in trade for someone who helps the MLB ballclub. Most of the players drafted do not help an organization, and often they hurt it because you have to pay them money and then play them to find out they suck. How much time and money has Cameron Maybin cost the Marlins? Most of the time players taken in the draft result in failures. Achieving any success at all is worth noting, but acquiring a closer like Sale is an incredible achievement.

3. We may not *need* Sale to be a starter, at all, at any point. Right now we need him in the bullpen because that is arguably the weakest areas of the team.

4. This team will have to be rebuilt after 2011 if we can't win and support a higher payroll. There is really no other option. Alexei, CQ, Danks, and Floyd will get major paydays, and raises go to PK, Peavy, AJ, Dunn, Rios, etc. Beckham will be in his last pre-arb year in 2012. Thornton's deal is up after the year, and he's going to make a lot of money on the open market. We probably won't retain him. Maybe you get the point. If we're forced to rebuild then Sale's role ultimately doesn't matter since we'll likely be left with far too many holes/uncertainties to contend anyway.

5. Please quit the Jackson crap. Hudson overachieved last year. He doesn't have the kind of talent Jackson does. If Jackson leaves after the year we get 2 draft picks, and we'll probably end up taking at least 1 player with those picks who has a ceiling higher than Hudson. And if Jackson helps us win in 2011 and extend the high payroll window a couple years into the future then he has likely done much more than Hudson would have done here as part of a rebuilding effort.

6. Hudson was simply not good enough to get Haren. That deal can't happen. He wasn't good enough for AGon or Prince either. Nor was he good enough for Dunn. What will you do if/when Hudson massively regresses? Will you still rant on about it incessantly?

7. You don't think Jackson is a difference maker because you don't take enough time to actually observe the game you supposedly love so much. Saying Jackson isn't a difference maker (I assume this is because he hasn't had an ace-like year to match his ace-like potential) would be like saying in 2004 that Contreras wasn't a difference maker because he hadn't done that either. Jackson has shut down stuff, and if he's hot he is capable of carrying a team through the playoffs. And if Jackson *had* been fulfilling his potential then guess what? Daniel Hudson isn't enough to acquire him, either. For someone who gets off pointing out how shallow our farm system is and the inadequacies we have in the player department and scouting departments, you sure love to overrate the s*** out of some of our products. You tried to rip me for the Brandon Allen deal and now you're all mad about it. Why? If you were fine with the deal then, why not now? Allen hasn't proven a damn thing anyway. Just one example.

8. You cannot go "all-in" every year, so there is no use dreaming about it.

 

[Jordan4life_2007]

1. It is beyond stupid to define any player's role on a ballclub based on how he was acquired.

2. There really is no effective dispute to ptatc's facts which you are attempting to respond to. The goal of the Rule-4 draft is to acquire talent, either to help the MLB ballclub or to be used in trade for someone who helps the MLB ballclub. Most of the players drafted do not help an organization, and often they hurt it because you have to pay them money and then play them to find out they suck. How much time and money has Cameron Maybin cost the Marlins? Most of the time players taken in the draft result in failures. Achieving any success at all is worth noting, but acquiring a closer like Sale is an incredible achievement.

3. We may not *need* Sale to be a starter, at all, at any point. Right now we need him in the bullpen because that is arguably the weakest areas of the team.

4. This team will have to be rebuilt after 2011 if we can't win and support a higher payroll. There is really no other option. Alexei, CQ, Danks, and Floyd will get major paydays, and raises go to PK, Peavy, AJ, Dunn, Rios, etc. Beckham will be in his last pre-arb year in 2012. Thornton's deal is up after the year, and he's going to make a lot of money on the open market. We probably won't retain him. Maybe you get the point. If we're forced to rebuild then Sale's role ultimately doesn't matter since we'll likely be left with far too many holes/uncertainties to contend anyway.

5. Please quit the Jackson crap. Hudson overachieved last year. He doesn't have the kind of talent Jackson does. If Jackson leaves after the year we get 2 draft picks, and we'll probably end up taking at least 1 player with those picks who has a ceiling higher than Hudson. And if Jackson helps us win in 2011 and extend the high payroll window a couple years into the future then he has likely done much more than Hudson would have done here as part of a rebuilding effort.

6. Hudson was simply not good enough to get Haren. That deal can't happen. He wasn't good enough for AGon or Prince either. Nor was he good enough for Dunn. What will you do if/when Hudson massively regresses? Will you still rant on about it incessantly?

7. You don't think Jackson is a difference maker because you don't take enough time to actually observe the game you supposedly love so much. Saying Jackson isn't a difference maker (I assume this is because he hasn't had an ace-like year to match his ace-like potential) would be like saying in 2004 that Contreras wasn't a difference maker because he hadn't done that either. Jackson has shut down stuff, and if he's hot he is capable of carrying a team through the playoffs. And if Jackson *had* been fulfilling his potential then guess what? Daniel Hudson isn't enough to acquire him, either. For someone who gets off pointing out how shallow our farm system is and the inadequacies we have in the player department and scouting departments, you sure love to overrate the s*** out of some of our products. You tried to rip me for the Brandon Allen deal and now you're all mad about it. Why? If you were fine with the deal then, why not now? Allen hasn't proven a damn thing anyway. Just one example.

8. You cannot go "all-in" every year, so there is no use dreaming about it.

 

You are really starting to get on my motherf***in' nerves. Now if you have a problem with me come out and say it. Stop being a little b**** with all your long-winded, jumbled together rants. I responded to ptatc in a polite and civil away and here you come with the same pointless drivel that makes people despise your ass. People here might not agree with me all the time. But it's not because I try to be a tough guy p**** over the internet. Now what do you mean it's beyond 'stupid' to define a role based on how a player was acquired? So I shouldn't expect more from the 13th pick in the first round than I would the 13th pick in the 12th round? I don't know what planet you're from. But it's not planet smart. Did I dispute ptatcs data? READ THE POST! I agreed that the draft is a non-exact science. To say we may not need Sale to be a starter at ANY point is ridiculous. Now if you put him in the 'pen for this year and this year only, I won't like it, but I can deal with it. I'm talking long-term. This has ALWAYS been about the long-term. And I don't care about Jackson's 'talent' or his 'stuff'. I care about results. Just like the entire board outside of maybe Wite wanted Javy gone. They're basically mirror images of each other. Jackson's just younger.

 

Hudson overachieved last year because you say so? So we're totally going to ignore his minor league resume and what he did in Arizona because of two bad starts with the White Sox? Nobody said he was Strasburg. But to assume he was just a fluke is retarded. Jackson is not a difference maker and never has been. He's not the worst pitcher that ever lived. But he wasn't worth the cost. That's why he's been traded 4 times in the last 5 years or whatever it's been. And as for Haren, I meant Hudson plus other prospects. And I do think our system as a whole sucks. But that doesn't mean I think every single White Sox prospect that ever lived sucks/sucked. I liked Hudson and was critical of the trade from the moment it went down. EVERYBODY knows this. It wasn't like 'oh s***, Hudson is tearing it up in Arizona, now I hate the trade.' And I admitted I was wrong about the Pena deal. I wanted to see if Coop could, and I despise these words, 'fix 'em.' And he obviously hasn't to this point. And 'all in' is a subjective term. It doesn't have to mean win the World Series every year. It means to be competitive and give yourself a legitimate shot at October every year.

 

And to the mods, I've been here long enough that you should know that I don't intentionally get confrontational like this. But KHP has been f***ing with me for a couple weeks now. Had to let it out. If a suspension is imminent then so be it.

[ptatc]

Ptatc, that's some solid date you provided. But you're arguing something that I don't dispute. I realize what a non-exact science the MLB draft is. That's not really my point. Now look at our current situation with our starting pitching. We've got Peavy, who let's face it, will be a major injury risk from now through the end of his contract. We've got Buehrle, who's a FA after this year. We've got Jackson, who will also be a FA after next year and his agent is that Boras guy that we seem to despise. We've got Danks, who's got only got two arb years left and appears to be determined to test the FA market [hello Yankees]. We've got NOTHING in the minors in terms of SP prospects that we could at least have some hope of stepping in if need be for 2012 or 2013. We NEED Sale to be a starter. We don't have the luxury of saying 'oh well, if worse comes to worse we can stick him in the 'pen.' We're not the Rays. Who can trade a Matt Garza and not really impede their long-term pitching situation in the least. That's why the Hudson trade drove/drives me so crazy. It just wasn't a smart baseball move short or long-term. Edwin Jackson is not a difference maker. Now you go out and trade Hudson or whatever for a Dan Haren? That's a totally different story. You don't give up 6 years of a cheap Hudson for a year and two months of Jackson, especially when his agent is someone we refuse to negotiate with. Now some fans have totally adopted this 'all-in' phenomenon and only care about 2011. Well, I'm not that way. Not too many people were thinking about 2005 when we were trotting out guys like Andy Gonzalez, Jerry Owens, Luis Terrerro, Andy Sisco and Ryan Bukvich and losing 90 games in 2007. I want to go 'all-in' every year, or close to every year.

 

I agree that the team would be better off if he can be a good starter. I hope and think he can be a good starter. However, if it turns out that he is not but is an effective reliever I don't think it is a wasted pick. Your previous point said it's a wasted pick if he is not in the rotation. The draft is so inexact that if the team get an effective player at any position it is a good pick.

 

[knightni]

I'd argue that Milledge is a major leaguer.

[iamshack]

I agree that the team would be better off if he can be a good starter. I hope and think he can be a good starter. However, if it turns out that he is not but is an effective reliever I don't think it is a wasted pick. Your previous point said it's a wasted pick if he is not in the rotation. The draft is so inexact that if the team get an effective player at any position it is a good pick.

If he can start, great. Make him a starter. If he is more well-suited to be a closer or elite setup man, that will work too.

 

What, we should try and force him to do one thing or the other based upon where he was drafted? Is that what is being argued here?

 

Couldn't agree with you more...if a guy turns into a serviceable or better mlb player, you're ahead of the game, as far as the draft goes.

[Kenny Hates Prospects]

You are really starting to get on my motherf***in' nerves. Now if you have a problem with me come out and say it. Stop being a little b**** with all your long-winded, jumbled together rants. I responded to ptatc in a polite and civil away and here you come with the same pointless drivel that makes people despise your ass. People here might not agree with me all the time. But it's not because I try to be a tough guy p**** over the internet. Now what do you mean it's beyond 'stupid' to define a role based on how a player was acquired? So I shouldn't expect more from the 13th pick in the first round than I would the 13th pick in the 12th round? I don't know what planet you're from. But it's not planet smart. Did I dispute ptatcs data? READ THE POST! I agreed that the draft is a non-exact science. To say we may not need Sale to be a starter at ANY point is ridiculous. Now if you put him in the 'pen for this year and this year only, I won't like it, but I can deal with it. I'm talking long-term. This has ALWAYS been about the long-term. And I don't care about Jackson's 'talent' or his 'stuff'. I care about results. Just like the entire board outside of maybe Wite wanted Javy gone. They're basically mirror images of each other. Jackson's just younger.

 

Hudson overachieved last year because you say so? So we're totally going to ignore his minor league resume and what he did in Arizona because of two bad starts with the White Sox? Nobody said he was Strasburg. But to assume he was just a fluke is retarded. Jackson is not a difference maker and never has been. He's not the worst pitcher that ever lived. But he wasn't worth the cost. That's why he's been traded 4 times in the last 5 years or whatever it's been. And as for Haren, I meant Hudson plus other prospects. And I do think our system as a whole sucks. But that doesn't mean I think every single White Sox prospect that ever lived sucks/sucked. I liked Hudson and was critical of the trade from the moment it went down. EVERYBODY knows this. It wasn't like 'oh s***, Hudson is tearing it up in Arizona, now I hate the trade.' And I admitted I was wrong about the Pena deal. I wanted to see if Coop could, and I despise these words, 'fix 'em.' And he obviously hasn't to this point. And 'all in' is a subjective term. It doesn't have to mean win the World Series every year. It means to be competitive and give yourself a legitimate shot at October every year.

 

And to the mods, I've been here long enough that you should know that I don't intentionally get confrontational like this. But KHP has been f***ing with me for a couple weeks now. Had to let it out. If a suspension is imminent then so be it.

Holy s*** dude. First off, who is being the internet tuff guy here? You sound like Antoine Dodson, talking about rape in some other thread and now this. Run tell that homeboy.

 

Yes, it is beyond stupid to define a player's role based on how he was acquired/where he was drafted. That should be self-evident. Your argument is garbage. A star closer (which is exactly what Sale is capable of becoming in that role) is valuable no matter where he was taken. He may get a combined $20-21M over a 6 year period to produce the way a $9-10M+ per player on the open market would. That is huge value. It is absolutely ridiculous of you to expect MORE than that out of any pick sans maybe top-5 or so. And maybe it's crazy to expect more even then, since top picks don't always turn out either.

 

Jackson is not Javy. Here you go with this s*** again. Jackson was rushed and has been developing slower than anticipated with the Dodgers. He improved at a constant pace since going to TB, but then fell off with the DBacks last year. Coop made a couple small changes and he became dominant for us when we needed to get on a roll. I don't see any correlation between Jackson and Javy at all. I don't see that same Javy mentality with Jackson at all. Javy has 4 plus pitches and can look like an ace, but will then walk the slap hitters to pitch with guys with power, right in the middle of an otherwise great start. Javy will turn a no-no into a 6-inning, 4 ER performance faster than anyone I've ever seen. Jackson's problems OTOH have been about consistently repeating his delivery, not taking AB's off mentally. It is in no way crazy for one to predict that Jackson will be the ace of this staff next year.

 

And I'm not trying to pick an internet war with you. You've been b****ing about this s*** all year now. Look, Hudson for Jackson was a win-now move that saw us trade a guy that most of baseball apparently felt was a #3 starter for a guy with the ability to be a true ace. You think Hudson is so vital, but in reality he's not. The ultimate goal is to win now and support our payroll. Danks, Floyd, Alexei, Rios, Paulie, Dunn, etc. these are the guys who are going to help us win, not Hudson. If we can't pay them then winning is out the window. If Jackson helps us win right now and therefore helps us contend beyond his tenure here then this deal has been a success. And the draft picks are also a bonus. Why can't you get that?

 

Hudson and who else gets us Haren? And you bring up his minor league record, and that backs up his ability to throw strikes consistently, keep the ball down, and it shows he has a nice changeup and movement on his fastball, and has some deception. I like Hudson too. But let's not pretend like he has Edwin Jackson's stuff. Let's not pretend that his scouting report reads like a true ace, because it doesn't. Maybe he becomes better than I think he's going to, but if he does, I'm not the only one fooled here. If Hudson is as good as you think he is then why did Kenny get so many "No" responses when he tried to make a deal around Hudson?

 

"All-in" means "all-in." When you are all-in in a poker game you have all your chips on the table. If you lose, you are f***ing done and you go home. All-in doesn't mean what you think it means. There are maybe two teams in baseball - IF THAT - that can afford to go "all-in" every season, and it's because they can afford to buy a farm system and buy free agents. The other 28 have to be responsible.