Jump to content

Zack Burdi not coming to Chicago this season


Baron
 Share

Recommended Posts

QUOTE (GreenSox @ Aug 17, 2016 -> 01:30 PM)
Didn't devalue him. Wanted to trade him when his value was at a premium. Still do. Buy low, sell high works a lot better than the Williams/Hahn buy high, sell low approach.

Seems his value is a little higher now. You said he wasn't as good as his numbers. Turns out he was better. Sort of the definition of devalue. But hey, you might have received a couple of prospects who could be good some day and you could have always blamed Robin or someone else on the Sox coaching staff for not getting more out of Eaton and increasing his trade value.

Edited by Dick Allen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 296
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Aug 17, 2016 -> 10:49 AM)
Then you must be really happy you aren't a Cubs fan or Indians fan or Red Sox fan. Look at all the minor league talent they gave up for relief pitchers.

Well I am happy that I'm not a Cubs fan or Indians fan or Red Sox fan. You are spot on about that! But getting back to the original point, again, I think I'd rather be drafting the Noah Syndergaards of the world or a five-tool position player in the first round over Jake Burdi types.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Thad Bosley @ Aug 17, 2016 -> 01:47 PM)
Well I am happy that I'm not a Cubs fan or Indians fan or Red Sox fan. You are spot on about that! But getting back to the original point, again, I think I'd rather be drafting the Noah Syndergaards of the world or a five-tool position player in the first round over Jake Burdi types.

Well they did draft Alec Hansen. Maybe he's one of those. The fact remains, if any of these guys are successful, it was a good draft pick. There is a lot of failure from even teams with no Jerry Reinsdorf influence at that stage of the draft.

 

The White Sox are just picking the best player on their board. It's what most teams do.

Edited by Dick Allen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Aug 17, 2016 -> 12:50 PM)
Well they did draft Alec Hansen. Maybe he's one of those. The fact remains, if any of these guys are successful, it was a good draft pick. There is a lot of failure from even teams with no Jerry Reinsdorf influence at that stage of the draft.

 

The White Sox are just picking the best player on their board. It's what most teams do.

Yes Dick, we know that's what most teams do. All that is going on here at a White Sox fan message board is White Sox fans simply having a debate as to why Jake Burdi was the best player on the team's board at #26. Maybe history will prove out that he was, and maybe it won't. But given that Burdi is a reliever, questioning his pick in the first round is certainly reasonable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Thad Bosley @ Aug 17, 2016 -> 02:08 PM)
Yes Dick, we know that's what most teams do. All that is going on here at a White Sox fan message board is White Sox fans simply having a debate as to why Jake Burdi was the best player on the team's board at #26. Maybe history will prove out that he was, and maybe it won't. But given that Burdi is a reliever, questioning his pick in the first round is certainly reasonable.

 

 

I have no idea who Jake Burdi is

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Thad Bosley @ Aug 17, 2016 -> 02:08 PM)
Yes Dick, we know that's what most teams do. All that is going on here at a White Sox fan message board is White Sox fans simply having a debate as to why Jake Burdi was the best player on the team's board at #26. Maybe history will prove out that he was, and maybe it won't. But given that Burdi is a reliever, questioning his pick in the first round is certainly reasonable.

Questioning it just because he is a reliever is a reach. And you don't even seem to know who you are arguing about.

Edited by Dick Allen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Hatchetman @ Aug 17, 2016 -> 10:36 AM)
A top 20 reliever is worth about 1.5 to 2.0 WAR

A top 20 starter is worth about 5 WAR

One pitches a whole lot less innings, so in theory, the value of the reliever on a per inning basis is magnified vs. a starter. I would agree a great or elite starter is better then a reliever. But the value of relievers in this day in age is much greater then it was a decade ago or multiple decades ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Jake @ Aug 17, 2016 -> 02:32 PM)
Regarding Hansen, I have to take a college pitcher's rookie league production with a huge grain of salt.

Of course, but the good thing is, the numbers couldn't be expected to be better, and if he can get his mechanics right and throw strikes, he is a top of the rotation possibility. Right now, many of this draft's selections look great. A few will fall off the radar. Hopefully Hansen isn't one.

Edited by Dick Allen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Jake @ Aug 17, 2016 -> 02:32 PM)
Regarding Hansen, I have to take a college pitcher's rookie league production with a huge grain of salt.

 

The thing is, high rookie league is a much higher level of competition than OU was, and his numbers have gone up a ton since he got into the Sox system. I mean I am not all in by any stretch, but there is zero doubt that there has been some kind of adjustment made, and Hansen's control is astronomically better than it was in college. His walk rate has gone from 6.79 BB/9 at OU to 5.14 at AZL to 2.64 in GF. His walk rate in the minors is lower than any year he had at OU. His walk rate in the MiLB is literally HALF of what it was at OU. Something has changed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So here's my attempt at logic on that draft pick.

 

Take as a given that most picks in the late 20s will not amount to much and the value of those picks on average is ~2 WAR. Most picks in that range are guys who never make the big leagues, and there's what, 1 out of 10 who become a really good player, fair?

 

If you view the guy as a reliever only, which is the only fair interpretation of the guy being rushed up to the big leagues as a reliever and starting his service time this year, then that player has a reduced ceiling compared to a guy who could be a starter.

 

However, if you're evaluating the quality of the pick, both the ceiling and the probability of success matter as well. So yes, his ceiling may be lower, but if you think he has a 20% chance of being a successful reliever, then compared to guys around him with a 10% chance then that's the right pick despite the lower ceiling.

 

But there's one problem with drafting a guy as a reliever and keeping him there. If you draft a guy as a starter and keep him there for several years...if he flops as a starter he could still become a valuable player if you move him to the bullpen. If the White Sox are intending to keep Burdi as a reliever the next 2-3 seasons and he winds up being Daniel Webb, they're not going to be able to convert him into a starter while he's still in this organization because it will take more years than he has options to stretch him out.

 

In other words...you draft a reliever highly, you better be darn sure you're right on him. You better be willing to bet your job on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 17, 2016 -> 02:52 PM)
So here's my attempt at logic on that draft pick.

 

Take as a given that most picks in the late 20s will not amount to much and the value of those picks on average is ~2 WAR. Most picks in that range are guys who never make the big leagues, and there's what, 1 out of 10 who become a really good player, fair?

 

If you view the guy as a reliever only, which is the only fair interpretation of the guy being rushed up to the big leagues as a reliever and starting his service time this year, then that player has a reduced ceiling compared to a guy who could be a starter.

 

However, if you're evaluating the quality of the pick, both the ceiling and the probability of success matter as well. So yes, his ceiling may be lower, but if you think he has a 20% chance of being a successful reliever, then compared to guys around him with a 10% chance then that's the right pick despite the lower ceiling.

 

But there's one problem with drafting a guy as a reliever and keeping him there. If you draft a guy as a starter and keep him there for several years...if he flops as a starter he could still become a valuable player if you move him to the bullpen. If the White Sox are intending to keep Burdi as a reliever the next 2-3 seasons and he winds up being Daniel Webb, they're not going to be able to convert him into a starter while he's still in this organization because it will take more years than he has options to stretch him out.

 

In other words...you draft a reliever highly, you better be darn sure you're right on him. You better be willing to bet your job on it.

 

Yeah this is my beef with what has taken place since draft. He was drafted and it was "oh Sox must think he can start" then we hear Hostetler say they'll decide in offseason, which makes sense. But if they bring him up it just screams to me that this is the start of his career as a reliever and there will be no attempt to stretch him out in offseason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (bmags @ Aug 17, 2016 -> 02:58 PM)
Yeah this is my beef with what has taken place since draft. He was drafted and it was "oh Sox must think he can start" then we hear Hostetler say they'll decide in offseason, which makes sense. But if they bring him up it just screams to me that this is the start of his career as a reliever and there will be no attempt to stretch him out in offseason.

They know he doesn't have the command to be a starter yet. He throws 102. That's pretty good. Was it wrong the Reds didn't try to make Chapman a starter? One problem with guys that have this gift of triple digit gas out of the bullpen, you make them a starter, and suddenly it's 94 or 95. If it doesn't work out, many times it doesn't come back. If this guy is Nate Jones or Bobby Jenks, or someone of that ilk, it was a good pick. If he becomes an elite closer, we will be very happy the Sox decided to spend the 26th pick on a reliever. I am of the belief they are not going to stretch him out.

 

 

I guess a good question for the people opposed is if your scouts think this guy's ceiling is an elite closer and he has 102 MPH gas, what is the highest position he should be drafted? Is the second round OK?

 

The White Sox just need as many guys possible to be successful. What round they ultimately were drafted in makes no difference after the signing bonuses are paid.

Edited by Dick Allen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 17, 2016 -> 02:52 PM)
But there's one problem with drafting a guy as a reliever and keeping him there. If you draft a guy as a starter and keep him there for several years...if he flops as a starter he could still become a valuable player if you move him to the bullpen. If the White Sox are intending to keep Burdi as a reliever the next 2-3 seasons and he winds up being Daniel Webb, they're not going to be able to convert him into a starter while he's still in this organization because it will take more years than he has options to stretch him out.

 

In other words...you draft a reliever highly, you better be darn sure you're right on him. You better be willing to bet your job on it.

That's the explanation.

Bravo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Jake @ Aug 17, 2016 -> 02:32 PM)
Regarding Hansen, I have to take a college pitcher's rookie league production with a huge grain of salt.

He had a pretty good pedigree with some question marks in the draft and slid, and they've moved him up one level where he continues to dominate. I'd say thats a pretty good sign.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Jake @ Aug 17, 2016 -> 02:32 PM)
Regarding Hansen, I have to take a college pitcher's rookie league production with a huge grain of salt.

 

The telling stat for Hansen is going to be walk rate. He was considered the favorite by some to be 1:1 before the season, but his control imploded on him. His K:BB in college this year was 25:13 in the pros so far it is 57:13. His WHIP at OU was 1.62 compared to .71 as a pro. Yes he is facing inferior competition, but if he can throw strikes, he has a chance to be as good as any other pitcher in that draft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Aug 17, 2016 -> 03:04 PM)
They know he doesn't have the command to be a starter yet. He throws 102. That's pretty good. Was it wrong the Reds didn't try to make Chapman a starter? One problem with guys that have this gift of triple digit gas out of the bullpen, you make them a starter, and suddenly it's 94 or 95. If it doesn't work out, many times it doesn't come back. If this guy is Nate Jones or Bobby Jenks, or someone of that ilk, it was a good pick. If he becomes an elite closer, we will be very happy the Sox decided to spend the 26th pick on a reliever. I am of the belief they are not going to stretch him out.

 

 

I guess a good question for the people opposed is if your scouts think this guy's ceiling is an elite closer and he has 102 MPH gas, what is the highest position he should be drafted? Is the second round OK?

 

The White Sox just need as many guys possible to be successful. What round they ultimately were drafted in makes no difference after the signing bonuses are paid.

 

The Reds did try to make Chapman a starter.

 

http://grantland.com/the-triangle/r-i-p-to...roldis-chapman/

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...