Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Sleepy Harold

Sox changing up their amateur scouting department according to Mark Gonzales

Recommended Posts

24 minutes ago, Harold's Leg Lift said:

Because it was different from "his" other drafts?  I wonder why........

But then...who is the good drafting boy in the FO. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How sad is it that no one even knows if this is a legitimate promotion or a paper promotion to remove the guy from his current position?

This all comes from the top — Reinsdorf.  Jobs for life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Harold's Leg Lift said:

He's there. Hopefully he gets "officailly" named scouting director.  

That’s good.

I think by far my biggest frustration with Sox media was letting hostetler was poetic about how the org emphasizes best player available but then talks about how they needed to add depth in the 2016-18 drafts and that’s why it was so college heavy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jack Parkman said:

THANK YOU!!!! That is my point. 

No. He was giving Nick credit for taking the BPA with the Madrigal and Vaughn yet you’re trashing those picks. You complain about not having any players pan out from a draft yet also b****es about picks that will almost surely pan out. So which one is it?

Look this isn’t the NBA where the best players are always pick inside the top 5 so trying to critical of not taking the high ceiling/high risk type is just dumb. There is nothing wrong with taking a perennial 3 WAR player with a top 5 pick.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Moan4Yoan said:

How sad is it that no one even knows if this is a legitimate promotion or a paper promotion to remove the guy from his current position?

This all comes from the top — Reinsdorf.  Jobs for life.

It's a promotion. Scouting directors make like $125000 a year to be on the road all year. This board is acting like it's a glory job or something. 

I view at as like an associate at a law firm. Work an ungodly amount for a few years and if you're good enough you get promoted to partner (aGM or etc) or you move on from them. Especially with a family.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, bmags said:

That’s good.

I think by far my biggest frustration with Sox media was letting hostetler was poetic about how the org emphasizes best player available but then talks about how they needed to add depth in the 2016-18 drafts and that’s why it was so college heavy.

This is really an amazing point

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

It's a promotion. Scouting directors make like $125000 a year to be on the road all year. This board is acting like it's a glory job or something. 

I view at as like an associate at a law firm. Work an ungodly amount for a few years and if you're good enough you get promoted to partner (aGM or etc) or you move on from them. Especially with a family.

 

I saw Nick Hostetler lighting Cuban cigars with 100 dollar bills.

Now he is getting paid millions to do nothing!!!!

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

It's a promotion. Scouting directors make like $125000 a year to be on the road all year. This board is acting like it's a glory job or something. 

I view at as like an associate at a law firm. Work an ungodly amount for a few years and if you're good enough you get promoted to partner (aGM or etc) or you move on from them. Especially with a family.

 

What percentage of Sox fans would know his name/what he did if it weren’t for the tear down. 

Edited by mqr
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, thxfrthmmrs said:

No. He was giving Nick credit for taking the BPA with the Madrigal and Vaughn yet you’re trashing those picks. You complain about not having any players pan out from a draft yet also b****es about picks that will almost surely pan out. So which one is it?

Look this isn’t the NBA where the best players are always pick inside the top 5 so trying to critical of not taking the high ceiling/high risk type is just dumb. There is nothing wrong with taking a perennial 3 WAR player with a top 5 pick.

 

I just am not a fan of taking a guy with no power or positional versatility in the top 5. I disagree with it on principle. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said:

I just am not a fan of taking a guy with no power or positional versatility in the top 5. I disagree with it on principle. 

Vaughn has power and Madrigal has GG caliber positional versatility, and has 2 or more plus tools.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Its wrong because that's just not how baseball drafts work for the vast majority of MLB teams. Teams dont find 1-2 good players every year. If they did, every team would be good and filled with home grown talent. Youd be able to build an entire team nearly every 5 years from just drafting and youd never have to rebuild.

The best case I've seen for massive investment in player development and scouting. Getting 1-2 good players per year means never rebuilding. What would 2-3 do?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, thxfrthmmrs said:

Vaughn has power and Madrigal has GG caliber positional versatility, and has 2 or more plus tools.

Madrigal has no power and Vaughn has no positional versatility. 

Madrigal has to be Ichiro to justify picking him where they did. 

Vaughn has to hit .300 with 35 HR every year to justify  picking him where they did. 

Edited by Jack Parkman
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Moan4Yoan said:

How sad is it that no one even knows if this is a legitimate promotion or a paper promotion to remove the guy from his current position?

This all comes from the top — Reinsdorf.  Jobs for life.

How sad that one can't even wait 24 hours to get the straight scoop.  Some reporter probably broke the story prematurely.  By this time tomorrow, we might have a lot more answers.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Thomas_Ventura_Roberts said:

How sad that one can't even wait 24 hours to get the straight scoop.  Some reporter probably broke the story prematurely.  By this time tomorrow, we might have a lot more answers.

 

It’s already on the Sox website.

https://www.mlb.com/whitesox/news/nick-hostetler-promoted-by-white-sox

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Dam8610 said:

The best case I've seen for massive investment in player development and scouting. Getting 1-2 good players per year means never rebuilding. What would 2-3 do?

People in these discussions focus way too much on “good”, but what if we imagine a system that doesn’t need to replace its CFer with a guy that can only put up a 5 wrc+, a team that could actually internally replace a DH, or had enough depth their fifth starter didn’t need to be Omar despaigne? What if they were just not good enough to be starters but not the worst players in the league?

Thats a big advantage of good scouting and development.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said:

 

Madrigal has to be Ichiro to justify picking him where they did. 

Vaughn has to hit .300 with 35 HR every year to justify that picking him where they did. 

That's simply not based in reality and just pure insanity.

You do know the average WAR of a first round pick, right?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, GermanSoxFan said:

That's simply not based in reality and just pure insanity.

You do know the average WAR of a first round pick, right?

Yes, the only way to justify those two picks is if they picked hall of Famers. Jack has said this like 3 times. It's more and more absurd everyday.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, GermanSoxFan said:

That's simply not based in reality and just pure insanity.

You do know the average WAR of a first round pick, right?

What is the average  career WAR of a top 5 pick? Like 5-7 or something? That includes guys who never make the majors or make it and are negative WAR players. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jack Parkman said:

What is the average  career WAR of a top 5 pick? Like 5-7 or something? That includes guys who never make the majors or make it and are negative WAR players. 

Yes, it includes the bad picks that happen too. That's kind of the point being made.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said:

What is the average  career WAR of a top 5 pick? Like 5-7 or something? That includes guys who never make the majors or make it and are negative WAR players. 

So where do you get he has to be ichiro to take that high? Those are absolutely absurd expectations. 

Edited by mqr
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jack Parkman said:

What is the average  career WAR of a top 5 pick? Like 5-7 or something? That includes guys who never make the majors or make it and are negative WAR players. 

Sure. So are you saying Madrigal will put up less than 7 career WAR?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Yes, it includes the bad picks that happen too. That's kind of the point being made.

That still doesn't excuse making a horrible pick that high. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×