Look at Ray Ray Run

It means when evaluating via KATOH and removing prospect rankings, he fell all the way from 1 to 20. Meaning his ranking was boosted by his tools. Here you good. https://blogs.fangraphs.com/projecting-yoan-moncada/ This breaks it down a little so far.

Pal, read the article. Moncada wasn't top 25 in MiLB production yet he was the #1 prospect. He was the definition of a lots of tools, less production, prospect. I think when they removed prospect rankings from the system, Moncada dropped somewhere to around 20 or 25 in prospect rankings.

The Sox were far from the only team in baseball that thought he was the better pitcher. Fulmer was much better in college. Sometimes guys with high floors and what appears to be limited ceilings turn into Superstars - see Jose Altuve. Scouting isn't black and white. I also think people should pump their breaks on Walker Buehler. Would I take him over Fulmer today? Obviously. Is he a guaranteed + pitcher going forward? No. Walker has one + ++ pitch (his fastball) and then a whole lot of ???. Will he continue to grow and improve? Possibly, but I am not all in on the Walker Buehler camp like some are. He needs to develop his secondary stuff or he'll be an inconsistent starter going forward whose best year was his rookie year.

To his point, if the Sox signed manny for 300 million and his first few years were like Beltre in Seattle, there would be a lot of angry Sox fans. Not excusing what he said though.

As for you first point - it was even worse when I was in college. I was there pre-bat change and the numbers guys put up were absurd and it was so hard to tell if a smaller guy could actually hit the ball with authority at the next level because they could hit for power with those juiced bats. I even dropped a couple bombs - that's how juiced the bats were. I think a guy like Madrigal is much safer today than he was 15 years ago - pre-bat change. Madrigal hit the ball with authority with wood and the less juiced metal bats.

It's not easy. Nothing is easy. I said strike zone command in college DOES NOT correlate to strike zone command in professional baseball. Strike zone command in A ball doesnt even have a direct correlation to strike zone command in MlB. When you get up to AA it gets a little better but having strike zone command in college doesn't mean a whole lot. Hence why its not an indicator for a high floor guy... in fact, the article you linked states it means higher ceiling lower floor which was also my argument for steele walker. I dont disagree with you entirely but there is certainly statistical evidence that says less production and more tools has a higher bust rate than more production and lesser tools. So based on that, high floor guys can have value to a team that has taken a lot of risks on top level talent (like moncada, kopech, cease and robert.)

Guys with command issues are pretty much never high floor guys. Hence why arguing that for fulmer makes zero sense.

What you quoted literally affirms my point.

Read the article I posted. If you're really arguing the above guys weren't high ceiling low floor guys idk what to tell you pal. When your range of outcomes 2 SD either way is 6+ WAR or 0 WAR you're a high risk high reward prospect. That is the definition of a ceiling guy.

The point is they didnt target developed prospects. Kopech and moncada were both rated highly because of their tools not their production. They both had a lot of development left. That is my point. Moncada wasnt blowing the doors off in the minors.

Floor vs ceiling in most scouting circles is as follows: Floor - a guy who doesn't need to improve much to be a back end guy in the mlb now. He doesnt have great stuff - no ++ pitches - but everything he throws is around average and he has good command. His stuff will never really play up enough to be a 3 or more, but his command and arsenal make him a safe bet to be in the league for a while. Ceiling - a guy who flashes ++ tools. A pitcher with a ++ pitch paired with a secondary that lacks consistency but has great movement. Command for ceiling guys tend to be the last thing to come, if it comes at all. For the majority of their life they got by on incredible talent, but when they reach top level competition their inconsistencies come to light. Their stuff can look unhittable one day and then he can lose command entirely the next day.

Walker had more swing and miss in his game than most at his level and he is a very good athlete. I think we greatly disagree on what a floor guy is. On base skills in college do not translate to great on base skills in MiLB. There's actually not even great correlation between strike zone command in A ball and zone command in MLB.

Nothing binary about my views here. And aggressive takes? Nah, I just dont like people who add nothing. I post to the post not the poster. Many struggle with that in the internet world. I come to places like this for educated and rational opposing views because I'm not scared to learn something new or evolve. I am actually willing to change my mind on things - amazing really.

Yes, "preach" because you appear to be incapable of adding anything of substance to these discussions but for passive aggressive vibes at some and a lot of thataboy to others. The Sox targeted high ceiling guys for the rebuild. I've already posted an article clearly citing and showing this... with comparisons to other rebuilds. That was my point when discussing acquiring this guy via Intl free agency.

Based on this, floor to you means college mostly. Theres nothing about Steele Walker that says high floor.

Apparently, other pitchers drafted that high were starters or out of the league. There was a TON of risk attached to Fulmer. There was nothing safe about that pick. There were multiple teams that didn't even have Fulmer on their draft board.

Don't bother? My goodness, you don't bother because you can't present a reasonable or rational case for your side of the discussion. I don't get personal; I post what has happened. I posted a reputable source breaking it down for you, hoping maybe you could learn something from it, but apparently it's better to add nothing to a discussion but belittling nonsense of others views. Thanks for your contributions. The best part is you told me bmags was talking about the draft at the beginning so apparently, reading is a class you should consider taking up on the side as this entire discussion was about the current direction of the organization that has clearly targeted tools over production - as the article I posted very clearly states and lays out for you.

what?

Oh, sorry.. so they occasionally drafted a guy that was safer. I over spoke when I said every - I should have said the vast majority. My bad. On the other hand, you have claimed this wasn't their philosophy at all for the rebuild.

On the verge lol. Collins is in AAA 3 years after he was drafted as a "college ready hitter" according to you. That somehow proves your point? I'd disagree. Fulmer did not earn a trip to the big leagues, and he certainly hasn't been productive there. Rodon fit the bill of high ceiling and high floor. That doesn't happen often.

Internationally their philosophy is very clearly the same - very toolsy, but less production so far. I'm honestly not sure how you can continue to argue this but OK. The Sox took more risks with high ceiling talent than any other rebuild prior to them. Those are the facts. More than the Cubs and the Astros and etc. Carry on though.

What's funny is that's not what I said to start this conversation, yet I'm somehow the one who didn't read. Odd stuff. Let's break this down for you since you seem to be struggling with the facts of what happened. This thread is about signing an international free agent prospect. Not the draft. Here is how this went down: SS2k said he was disappointed that with 2 years to prepare, the Sox big take home was a limited defensive wizard... I responded with the following: "You never know how any of these guys will pan out. The Sox have a history of always going high ceiling low floor over high floor, lower ceiling players. That leads to a lot of busts. Sometimes, it's nice to maybe lock up a guy with a higher floor and a perceived lower ceiling. Those guys sometimes becomes superstars too - see Jose Ramirez. Baseball is a tricky game." That has clearly been the organizational philosophy for about a decade. Bmags responded to my post with: "In what world is this true?" So far, absolutely NOTHING about drafting was said. So the whole, Ray Ray doesn't read is nonsense. The entire formulation of this discussions delved from a comment made about a limited prospect signing with the Sox over others... and I said it's a breath of fresh air for the Sox to go after a high ceiling guy for once. BMags says since when? Then I point out about 100 players the Sox have acquired that were high ceiling, low floor with at on of risk. AFter all of that, he starts bringing up drafts from 15 years ago to support his point. So, no... I'm not the one who wasn't reading or misunderstood.

Yes, but these guys will tell you the Sox were drafting high floor guys... even though the only prospect they've had reach the majors from those draft classes and contribute is Tim Anderson who was the definition of high floor, low ceiling. Weird that they draft all these high floor guys and they never reach the big leagues... it's almost like, they weren't high floor guys.

No, I can claim their high ceiling because that's what the team targeted. In comparison to other rebuilding organizations, the Sox took a lot more risk with their player acquisitions. I posted one link from a source that isn't me, if that'll make it more "valid" to you.

Here you go: https://blogs.fangraphs.com/the-white-sox-big-bets-on-risk/ Soxtalk says the Sox don't target high ceiling, low floor guys though. Weird. You have to consider the source though, I guess...