Peavy to Boston, Avisail Garcia + 3 low lv specs to Sox

[Eminor3rd]

Not sure if this has been posted, but this is a great swing by Garcia. From what I've seen, a lot of his homers in the minors this year were to the opposite field

 

http://www.milb.com/multimedia/vpp.jsp?content_id=29090845

 

Unrelated to Garcia: Wow, what a meat ball haha

[Buehrle>Wood]

Yeah, Law doesn't hate the Sox. He's just completely awful at his job when it comes to them.

[GreenSox]

We are two bats and a couple of relievers away.

 

CF De Aza

2B Beckham

3B Michael Young

DH Dunn/Viciedo

1B Corey Hart

RF Garcia

LF Viciedo

SS Ramirez

C Phegley

We can't put a defensive team like that on the field. Well win 60 games again. Maybe 70 as the offense is better.

Phegly may be worse than flowers...0 walks and counting.

YOung hitters, please.

Edited July 31, 2013 by GreenSox

[2nd_city_saint787]

We can't put a defensive team like that on the field. Well win 60 games again. Maybe 70 as the offense is better.

Phegly may be worse than flowers...0 walks and counting.

YOung hitters, please.

 

Once again, young hitters aren't gonna be available in free agency and the chance of getting them in a trade seem pretty thin. If the Sox wanna compete next year it's gonna be with guys like Kendrys Morales and Curtis Granderson.

[royoung]

Wait. So you are telling me we didn't get an elite top 30 prospect who garners Miguel Cabrera comps mainly because he looks like him?

 

The Keith Law hate is pretty funny too. He didn't like Sale before the White Sox drafted him, he must hate the White Sox. He didn't like Garcia before the White Sox acquired him. Clearly he hates the White Sox.

 

I wasn't implying he has a bias towards the White Sox, I just believe he values certain things about baseball players that our talent evaluators do not and vice versa.

[royoung]

Really? Because he's a member of the White Sox? How about this from February November?

 

 

 

http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/chat/_/id/...sider-keith-law

 

but no he's White Sox and Law says death to everything White Sox

 

EDIT: I would like to add this in, which I found interesting. From Tigers Prospect Report:

 

 

 

http://tigersprospectreport.wordpress.com/...avisail-garcia/

 

So Keith Law hates the White Sox AND Tigers? That doesn't seem right, does it?

 

Now, I would suggest looking up any team and Keith Law, and you will find that Keith Law does not "like" many teams.

 

Again, I did not mean he is unprofessional and has a bias towards a certain franchise, I was implying that his way of evaluating talent seems to clash with our scouts and front office view talent.

[hammerhead johnson]

People were comparing him to MCab the moment he came up. The odds of him ever reaching that level are obviously quite low, but I think I heard that comparison in his first game.

 

Miguel Cabrera - 20 - AA - .365/.429/.609/1.038, 10.2% BB%, 16.2% K% in 303 PAs

Avisail Garcia - 21 - A+/AA - .299/.333/.455/.789, 3.5% BB%, 18.5% K% in 513 PAs

 

Even you can see how ridiculous that comparison is. The reason people compared them is because they look a hell of a lot alike. Both are 6'4'' and listed at 240 (Cabrera is a bit bigger than that now), both are Venezuelan, and both played for the Tigers. Their numbers are nothing alike.

 

I'm hopeful he'll prove me wrong, but I have very, very strong doubts.

 

I'm telling you. Balta hit his head. This isn't the same guy that posted here years ago.

[Jake]

Garcia is a great prospect, but he's not similar to Miggy at all except (of course) in appearance. He's faster, a better defender, has a better arm, and is a much, much less promising hitter. That's okay. Even the good version of him will be different than Miggy because he's going to strike out more and walk less than Miggy

[fathom]

Garcia to start in CF for Charlotte when he reports

 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/baseb...0,3177271.story

[Buehrle>Wood]

Sweet

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

Avisail 's correct pronounciation of his first name doesn't exactly role off the tonge (Ah vee say eel ) so to me its just AV for PV.

[Chisoxfn]

The White SOx havne't had this good of a position prospect in years (at least not when it comes to the "hit" tool and I for one am really excited to see Garcia with the Sox and for the first time in a long time, I expect this guy to make an all star game or two with the White Sox. Yes, I've dranken the Garcia cool aid.

 

Of course, I'll temper that by saying the only other guy in the past 5-7 years with this type of hit tool in our organization was Beckham and well he's had his issues after that rookie year. He was such a good pure hitter that first year with us and I look at Garcia in a similar fashion. He can hit the ball to all fields and the power will come. He does have some areas to improve related to his overall patience and approach but I think that will improve with time. This is a really talented kid and in my opinion I'd take him over pretty much any of the other top prospect names we heard the past couple days (I say pretty much...not necessarily all).

 

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

How is that hyperbole? I've never ever heard someone say his contract is bad. Maybe they don't have the money for it now but that still doesn't make it a bad contract.

I'm not saying the contract in itself is a bad one On an island it's a good contract. But we weren't on an island we were dealing with the trade market and the market makers said, we rather have a rental than take on that contract. So in that sense it was a bad contract.

 

On one hand you could say it wasn't Hahn fault the perceived sellers market turned into a buyers market.

 

On the other hand you could say the best GM's have to have a feeling for where the trade market was headed. I thought it was a buyers market from the beginning and was upset when the Cubs traded Garza to Tx. I wanted Peavy and Rios both to go there first but PV got hurt and Rios managed to do all he could to screw up his rep even more.

 

The worse we can say about Hahn was he may have thought it was a sellers market. Other teams weren't trading young talent and only 4 young hitters were traded and Hahn got 2 of them (Garcia and Jacobs). So in that respect he did well.

Edited August 1, 2013 by CaliSoxFanViaSWside

[BigHurt3515]

The White SOx havne't had this good of a position prospect in years (at least not when it comes to the "hit" tool and I for one am really excited to see Garcia with the Sox and for the first time in a long time, I expect this guy to make an all star game or two with the White Sox. Yes, I've dranken the Garcia cool aid.

 

Of course, I'll temper that by saying the only other guy in the past 5-7 years with this type of hit tool in our organization was Beckham and well he's had his issues after that rookie year. He was such a good pure hitter that first year with us and I look at Garcia in a similar fashion. He can hit the ball to all fields and the power will come. He does have some areas to improve related to his overall patience and approach but I think that will improve with time. This is a really talented kid and in my opinion I'd take him over pretty much any of the other top prospect names we heard the past couple days (I say pretty much...not necessarily all).

 

Kool-aid

[GreenSox]

I'm not saying the contract in itself is a bad one On an island it's a good contract. But we weren't on an island we were dealing with the trade market and the market makers said, we rather have a rental than take on that contract. So in that sense it was a bad contract.

That contract and his time on the DL didn't mesh well regarding his appeal to other teams.

Hahn did well getting a player they believe is an impact player...I just hope their evaluation, which has been spotty, is valid this time.

Edited August 1, 2013 by GreenSox

[Dick Allen]

Seriously, wiki the MLB drafts from '98-'07. Besides 2005, which was the outlier in the amount of successful draft picks, all of the other drafts fit the parameters in my post above. 2002 was an incredibly successful first round, but a good amount of the draft picks were in the mid-mid/late of the round. Sure picking top 5 will help in success rate, but don't expect our pitching to finish in the bottom five next year.

 

Think of it this way, of the the 30 1st rounders, give them a hypothetical ranking of 1-30. I guarantee you that a year after draft date if you re-ranked the players it would be an entirely different ranking.

I mentioned in another thread the year the Sox drafted Aaron Poreda, 4 of the top 8 picks have lower career WARS than him, and He wasn't exactly stellar. So hoping a team is miserable all summer just for a high pick usually doesn't work out as well as it does in other sports.

[Eminor3rd]

I mentioned in another thread the year the Sox drafted Aaron Poreda, 4 of the top 8 picks have lower career WARS than him, and He wasn't exactly stellar. So hoping a team is miserable all summer just for a high pick usually doesn't work out as well as it does in other sports.

 

I would argue that there is a different draft class every year and that it isn't useful to choose one random year to make a prediction about the future. You could also look at the 2010 draft and argue that it's crucial to get into the top 3 because you can get a generational talent there but there's a huge dropoff in talent at number 4 (Chris Sale notwithstanding), and it would be equally useless.

[Eminor3rd]

This thread is ridiculous. With our market/payroll, you play to win every year. I can't believe I'm reading people say, "I want to lose next year."

 

I refer you all to the Pirates/Royals/Padres of the late 90s/00's. Handfuls of early 1st round picks, nothing to show for it. Look at 1st rounds in the last ten years. Your first five picks will produce 2-3 MLB starters and then the last 25 picks of the round will give you 4-5 major league starters. You play to win the game. Picking #7 as opposed to #17 rarely makes a difference. This isn't the NBA/NFL.

 

No one WANTS to lose, that's why we want to get rid of our s***ty group of players and start building a better team so that we can win as soon as possible. It's more ridiculous to assume that rolling out the same set of bums again will yield different results.

[Dick Allen]

I would argue that there is a different draft class every year and that it isn't useful to choose one random year to make a prediction about the future. You could also look at the 2010 draft and argue that it's crucial to get into the top 3 because you can get a generational talent there but there's a huge dropoff in talent at number 4 (Chris Sale notwithstanding), and it would be equally useless.

It's ridiculous to want to have the worst record in baseball for several years or one of the worst because it usually won't work out in the end. People become so dissinterested in your team, if the players you draft turn out to be any good, you wind up unable to pay them.

 

The last time the Sox went into a full rebuild, they struck it rich in the first round 4 years in a row.

 

McDowell was the 5th pick in 1987. Griffey Jr. was #1, so it obviously paid off to be the worst team that year. The other 3 before McDowell weren't special, in fact, had the Sox had the 4th or 3rd pick, they really wanted Mike Harkey.

 

In 1988, the Sox drafted Robin Ventura with the 10th pick. Look at the picks before him, and tell me how it paid off not to lose even more games.

 

Frank Thomas was #7 in 1989. There were some decent players before him, Ben McDonald went #1, but if the Sox drafted higher, they really wanted Jeff Jackson, a guy who never played in the major leagues, and Frank obviously was ultimately the best player of that draft.

 

They did get Alex Fernandez with the 4th pick in 1990 and there is where it may have paid off to draft that high, however, Mike Mussina was selected with the 20th pick.

 

There are really good players in every draft outside of the top 5 picks. It took teams like Tampa and Pittsburgh many years before their draft positions really paid off, and even they have made mistakes. If losing 100 games nets you Tim Beckham, it makes zero sense to try embrace being bad. The Sox are going to draft high the next draft, but I think we all should hope its the last time they draft in the top 5 or 10 for quite some time.

[witesoxfan]

Again, I did not mean he is unprofessional and has a bias towards a certain franchise, I was implying that his way of evaluating talent seems to clash with our scouts and front office view talent.

 

For the most part, I think he's been pretty accurate

[Dick Allen]

For the most part, I think he's been pretty accurate

Usually when you take a negative view, you will be. He's willing to be way wrong on Chris Sale and brush it off because there are several more guys that are supposed to turn into stars that will not. He comes out ahead.

 

If he really was the player evaluating genius he thinks he is, he would be putting an MLB organization together, not doing chats for espn.com.

[cabiness42]

If he really was the player evaluating genius he thinks he is, he would be putting an MLB organization together, not doing chats for espn.com.

 

[witesoxfan]

He interviewed to be the Astros scouting director prior to the 2012 season but withdrew his name from consideration. Wikipedia suggests it was to spend more time with his family. I'm sure a lot of it has to do with not wanting to deal with the pressure. I have no problem with that, though I'm sure some on here will immediately claim that he is "nutless" or is a "fraidy cat" but really, these same people would crumple under the pressure of having a position that high within a professional sports organization.

 

Oh, and in that same chat, he describes Manny Machado as the "MVNTP" which is the "most valuable non-Trout player." At 20 years old, he has a 4.3 fWAR, which, given the actual definition of "most valuable," I would say that is pretty close to being correct, at least in the AL (because I am assuming that Machado will stay pretty healthy and have a long playing career and make greater than $200 million in his career). That was a pretty bold, though not altogether groundbreaking prediction on his part. There are other examples as well too.

 

From this point forward, we'll be able to use Rienzo as a measuring stick because he likes his stuff.

[Dick Allen]

He interviewed to be the Astros scouting director prior to the 2012 season but withdrew his name from consideration. Wikipedia suggests it was to spend more time with his family. I'm sure a lot of it has to do with not wanting to deal with the pressure. I have no problem with that, though I'm sure some on here will immediately claim that he is "nutless" or is a "fraidy cat" but really, these same people would crumple under the pressure of having a position that high within a professional sports organization.

 

Oh, and in that same chat, he describes Manny Machado as the "MVNTP" which is the "most valuable non-Trout player." At 20 years old, he has a 4.3 fWAR, which, given the actual definition of "most valuable," I would say that is pretty close to being correct, at least in the AL (because I am assuming that Machado will stay pretty healthy and have a long playing career and make greater than $200 million in his career). That was a pretty bold, though not altogether groundbreaking prediction on his part. There are other examples as well too.

 

From this point forward, we'll be able to use Rienzo as a measuring stick because he likes his stuff.

His opinions over the years, certainly haven't distinguished himself from anyone. If someone wants to think he really knows any more about what he's seeing than the guys who are getting paid to do the same thing, great, but I don't see it. And isn't his withdrawing his name to "spend more time with his family" indicate that spending more time with his family would hurt his job performance? Since he's spending more time with his family in his current postion, in a roundabout way, isn't he admitting his opinion is probably not as accurate as it should?

[witesoxfan]

His opinions over the years, certainly haven't distinguished himself from anyone. If someone wants to think he really knows any more about what he's seeing than the guys who are getting paid to do the same thing, great, but I don't see it. And isn't his withdrawing his name to "spend more time with his family" indicate that spending more time with his family would hurt his job performance? Since he's spending more time with his family in his current postion, in a roundabout way, isn't he admitting his opinion is probably not as accurate as it should?

 

Are you f***ing serious? The guy wants to spend more time with his family and you are suggesting that it's because he is not a good scout and not because he wants to spend more time with his family.

 

BTW, he is paid to scout players. He is a "baseball scouting writer." Tell me how he's not getting paid to scout players.