Look at Ray Ray Run

Looks like rain should be out of there by 315. Just in time.

Come on pal. You're really reaching here. 1.75 million in baseball is absolutely nothing. Harping on this is b****ing just to b****.

Yeah preller liked him so much he didnt sign him for a little over a million 12 months earlier despite having pool space. Preller is an asshat and FOS.

K

Basebe has some serious gonads - I think you are spot on there. He's one of those kids that you could throw in the big leagues today, and he could start 0-40 with 39k's and if you talked to him, he'd tell you he's ready to break through and he's figured it out. It's one of the reasons I really love Basebe - he has that desire to take on a challenge. I heard something about him after the futures game, where a teammate asked him if he realized how fast the pitch was he just turned around... and he told them, seemed like a regular fastball to me. Not sure how true the story is, but found it amusing.

Jimmy Lambert is must watch MiLB TV.

Glad you bumped this thread - I was looking for it the other day to see the response to this trade from many people in the.... HOW DO YOU TRADE TATIS CAMP after Tatis became something no one expected. Most everyone - with the exception of 3-4 posters, said giving up Tatis was no big deal. As I expected. Hindsight makes every fan a genius and great GM. Here's why a guy like Tatis should give the Sox hope, instead of doom. It shows that international prospect rankings for young guys are mostly bunk. There's more variance in their reliability than even regular college rankings which aren't reliable either. It shows the Sox can hit in that market without signing the best guy in the rankings.

I think the big concern with Tatis is the same one Yoan had/has. Tatis could break Yoan's k record this year if he plays enough. He has to improve his contact skills but he's certainly young enough to do it... but it's also one of the harder tools to improve on.

Oh noooo. Please don't.

Montas... this year's Jharel Cotton for the A's. Great spring, but won't mean much when the game starts and he can't throw strikes. Ironically they were both in the Rich Hill deal.

Yes. My view on this is always the same. Coming up early does not hurt a player, it merely exposes him for who he truly is. Adjustments are the name of the game in the MLB. Failure is also an inevitable outcome at some point as a player. How you adjust and deal with failure is what separates the stars from the nobodies. All accelerating a players path does is expose their ability, or lack their of, to adjust and evolve as a player. Moncada had nothing left to learn in the minors. He may not have dominated entirely but in order for him to take the next step he has to figure it out vs the best. Confidence matters but not as much as most think. Every baseball in the world will fail at some point. It doesnt really matter where it happens... what matters is how they adjust and bounce back. Whether that's in college, A ball, AAA or MLB doesnt matter. In fact, at the MLB level you'll at least have the most resources to figure it out.

This won't be popular, but enhanced development via illegal assistance possible? His father was a steroid user. It doesn't mean he is, and it's entirely possibly that he just continued to grow and mature and figured something out... but the kid got big, very quickly. Could be natural growth or maybe not.

Pitching is a little different. Only so many bullets in that arm and using them early and wearing them down if theyre ready is a good organizational philosophy. Paddack has already had one TJ too.

Why are you discussing something like this in a thread about Yolbert Sanchez? Couldnt you start another thread to voice your opinion about threads going in different directions?

it didnt get lost. He still got the notification. He chose to not respond on his own accord - not because of another discussion in the thread. Also, the discussion included sources and outside citations that were interesting reads as well. It was not an "I'm right youre wrong" discussion. Some may have done that, but others gave rational and educated view points as to why the had that opinion. Frequently, just as in real life, a topic can evolve from it's initial starting point. The point of entry was related to Yolbert but the conversation evolved - that's typically how conversations in real life and internet forums go.

I never understood this angle. It's a white Sox and baseball forum. The only people who view these things as arguments are those with closed minds. I post thoughts in hope of reciprocating equally valid and reasonable points from others in rebuttal. That is how you learn new things. It's not an argument, it's a discussion with counter viewpoints. Nothing more. The only people who view things like this on the internet as arguments are those who get angry and worked up by a random strangers comments, and those who have no desire to learn something new... I check in for the views of those who disagree with me. Not to have my thoughts and opinions reaffirmed by everyone. Nothing is gained from that.

I posted a link describing the immense amount of risk moncada had attached to him for a #1 prospect - compared to others.

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.