ptatc

Agreed. Once they started down the total rebuild process, you have to have the patience to see it through, no matter how painful.

KW, evil incarnate.

i think for the Sox it needs to be win AND have the cubs start to fade.

True. It would be nice if they explained what was inflammed, if they could figure it out.

I will say this about the deadlinss. As ive said before if they are going to wait until next year. I would wait until the next service deadline, whenever that is, May I believe. However,I would have brought him up yesterday, if they felt he was ready to get the time in the MLB.

A September call up is different than playing for a substantial amount of time. I don't think I would do it for just September. I would do it for August and September. I agree with that.it needs to be a substantial amount of time. Edit: I know he has with the braves. I had the springer and correa examples on my brain.

Again, did they truly think he was ready at in July the previous year, where he should have been called up? Even if he is a true case we are talking about 2 or 3 players is that enough for you to base the development on your hopeful future star? Or should you just go with if you think he's ready? You may be willing to take that chance. That's fine. I would not take that chance on my, what looks to be, franchise player.

There are no examples because no one has really done it. Except for Bryant and possibly a couple more. Most teams treat their players better than that.

The Astros wanted to bring Acuna up at age 19? Was he truly ready at that time? This only applies if they were considered ready at the time.

Part of it is reserving judgement the other part is just what you believe is best for the player development in general, challenging them or being very conservative. What is best for the White Sox may be to have the player happy and treat him appropriately as opposed to just another number.

They didn't wait a full year for Acuna. He came up about a quarter into the season. You keep using examples that don't apply here.

All those players were brought up early to mid season during their first year. Unless the were truly ready the previous year, those really don't apply. I've said all along that they should wait until the next contract deadline to bring players up. A full year is a waste a month or so isn't. They are quickly approaching the time where Jimenez should just stay down. Kopech probably has reached that time with the innings limit.

Its not baseless as all individuals are different. If you have only one prescribed way to handle every single prospect, you are doing them all a disservice. My person al theory is that they know the players better than we do and should progress them as they develop. I could turn the same question around to you. Give me a specific example where staying down did not hurt their development? You can't because it really hasn't been done except for Kris Bryant.

That's true. They need to look at all of those factors physical, mental and emotional development as a player. Just depends on what they think has the highest priority.

Nothing they do with any prospect should be predicated on how the MLB is performing.

I really dont have one as the whole "don't promote them even if they are ready" is new. Kris Bryant is the first case I can think of so we'll see. However, is that a chance you want to take?

True but no one knows if he will show that in the MLB early on. It's a gamble for the Sox. If he plays well, try to sign him. If he p,says average to poorly the Sox will be glad he came up earlier to get the struggles out of the way so he will be good when they want to be competitive.

This is true for Kopech especially if they are going to have the innings limit. I was referring to the concept in general.

I do agree with his comments about pitching. Some pitchers only have so many pitches in that arm. IF that pitcher is deemed ready, don't waste them in the minors. I think this is more true with the Sox. They seem to want to try to sign their young players to extensions early on, like they did with Anderson. If this is the case the extra year of control doesn't really matter.

The way it can hurt or stall the development is that most professional athletes are very competitive by nature. The will thrive and develop better with challenges. You hear it as they progress through the minors when a player is ready for the next challenge. To blatantly not promote someone if they are ready for the next challenge may deter their progress. Think of an engineer being told to just do data entry and held back from promotions because of it. Is that worker going to be productive and willing to go the extra mile for the company? This all being said I don't think too many people on this board know him well enough to know if this is the case. Hopefully, the Sox FO does

I agree. Not that it's a bad thing though. How many of the "record contracts" truly work out.

It's crazy. Maybe they finally picked a good one from HS. When was the last one, Baines?

It is difficult but there is a standard error built into the tests giving the athlete some leeway. It is nearly impossible with a clean baseline.

Or the, see that is the reason he shouldn't be promoted comments.

That is a valid concern.