whitesox61382

I just wanted to point out a few things in this thread. 1) Someone mentioned the idea of getting draft picks for Maggs if the Sox don't resign him. However, in order to get draft picks, the Sox would have to offer him arbitration, which is highly unlikely. If Maggs puts up a typical year, than he would probably get an increase(on his 14M) if taken to arbitration. Its unlikely that Maggs will get offered more then 14M/yr by another team, so the chances are that if offer arbitration that Maggs would accept and get more then the 14M he is making this year. I am willing to bet that JR will not take that risk(which is a semi wise decision IMO), so don't be so sure that the Sox will get draft picks for Maggs. Just something to keep in mind. The Sox could lose Maggs with out getting anything in return. 2) At this point I highly doubt that the Sox get Perez, Mota, AND either Miller/Jackson. From what I have heard/read LA might give the Sox Mota OR Miller/Jackson, but not both. I would honestly take Perez and Jackson for Maggs at this point. Like I pointed out earlier, I have a bad feeling that the Sox could end up getting nothing in return for Maggs if they hold onto him, so getting a quality middle of the rotation starter(which this team needs badly) and one of the top pitching prospects in the game is a decent return. You also have to factor in the 7-8M that the Sox would save in this trade as a positive. In this day of age, financial flexibility is just as valuable as the players. The Sox could than spend some of that money to find a replacement for Maggs. 3) Aboz, you don't have to be so harsh. I have actually seen Reed play in person and agree that another 1/2 year in the upper minors would do him some good. If the Sox do trade Maggs for a package of Perez(and others), than they will say about 7-8M depending on who the other players are. I have a feeling that the Sox will use some of that saved money to find a cheap replacement. Last time I checked, Mondesi and TLee were still on the market. I would like to see the Sox go after TLee if they do trade Maggs. He put together a good year last year, is still relatively young(28), is a lefty bat for the middle of the order, and he would come pretty cheap(less then 3M/yr in all likelyhood). The way that I see it. The Sox COULD trade Maggs for Perez, Jackson, TLee(money saved in the deal used to sign him), and 4-5M of financial flexibility. I think that is a pretty fair trade off that not only improves the current team, but improves the future. I would feel much more confident about this team if they got another solid middle of the rotation pitcher, even if it comes at the expense of Maggs. I would like it even more if the Sox could somehow pull off the Perez for Konerko trade, and then sign TLee to replace Konerko. That would be the most ideal situation IMO.

MSU is far from certain to make the Tourny. In fact, I would say the odds are against them if you look at them unbiasly. The fact is that they haven't looked good this year. I told you guys that MSU was overrated from the beginning. They have no depth up front(Davis is the only decent big man) and no true PG. In their 8 loses, only 1 was by fewer then 5 points, so they haven't even been close in most of those games. What quality wins do they have? At this point, their best wins are against Michigan(at home), DePaul(at home), and Minnesota(at Minn). That is not impressive, and without quality wins MSU has no shot of making it. Their schedule has been very tough, but when you compare it to other teams it isn't as tough as some people make it out to be. For example, look at another bubble teams schedule(IU) MSU(tough games) at Kansas Duke Oklahoma Kentucky at Syracuse at Wisconsin at Purdue IU(tough games) at Vanderbilt at Wake Forest Missouri Kentucky at Wisconsin Purdue Both have common opponents(Kentucky, Wisconsin, and Purdue). I would argue that at Kansas, Oklahoma, and at Syracuse are similar to at Vanderbilt(very underrated team), at Wake Forest, and Missouri. The difference between the two schedules is Duke, but as you can see the difference isn't as great as some people would think. If it comes down to MSU or IU(for example), than it will be an easy pick for the commitee. IU has much better quality wins(Xavier, at Notre Dame, at Michigan, at Minnesota, and Purdue), a better overall record, and they played 9 games without their best low post player(and went 4-5 in those games). The fact is that the Big Ten is extremely weak this year, and that they will be lucky to get 5 teams into the Tourny. Furthermore, because of the weakness of the Big Ten, MSU strength of schedule will plummet. If MSU doesn't win AT LEAST 6(maybe even 7) of their remaining game(including the Big Ten Tourny), than they won't make the Tourny. I see 5 games remaining that could be tough for them to win(Indiana, at Illnois, Purdue, at Michigan, and Wisconsin). They have to win at least 1 of those games(probably 2-3, while winning the other 5) to even have a chance to make it. Georgia made the Tourny a couple of years ago with a record around .500, but they had a few quality wins and played in a tougher conference(compared to the Big 10 this year). Mark my words, if MSU has a 15-13 record, than they won't make the Tourny. MSU fans can look at this with their bias glasses on, but the fact is that MSU is in great danger of not making the Tourny.

Stay away from Erickson. The guy is going to be 36 and hasn't pitched in the majors in 2 of the last 3 years. Even when he was healthy he wasn't a good pitcher. He has a career ERA of 4.51, and his last 3 healthy seasons he has put up the following ERA's: 99' 4.81 00' 7.87 02' 5.55 I can understand taking a chance on a guy like Person, but Erickson is done. Besides, the Sox have enough stuggling veterans(Schoenewies, Person) and unproven youngsters(Rauch, Diaz, Grille, Wright, Cotts, Pacheco) to fight for the 4th and 5th spot. Stay away from Erickson. In regards to a possible trade for Maggs. As Rex pointed out, there is no way that LA gives up BOTH Miller and Jackson. Even getting one of them(along with Perez) might be a reach. Hanrahan is definately a guy that could be involved in a trade. I am sure that Evans would much rather give the Sox Perez, Hanrahan, and probably something else for Maggs opposed to Perez and either Miller/Jackson. I have only seen Hanrahan pitch once, but I came away with the following scouting report: high 80's-low 90's fastball(decent movement), a solid breaking ball, and good control. His ceiling is as a middle of the rotation starter according to most scouts.

One QB that I think is a major sleeper is Phillip Rivers. Scouts hate his ackward side arm deliever, but its hard to argue with the sucess he has had, and what he has done for a program like NCS. It comes down to "numbers" versus "tools", and IMO Rivers has that special something to be a very good QB. He reminds me a lot of Tom Brady. Rivers accuracy is remarkable, and if you put him in the right offense(a short passing attack/west coast offense similar to the Patriots) you could have yourself a great QB. He is a winner with a great attitude and work ethic, and could be a great pick in the 3rd or 4th round(if he lasts that long).

What is your point, because it doesn't seem that you are making it clear? The difference between the Sox and the Twins is a strong minor league system. I have stated many times that the key to sucess when you have a limited payroll is a strong minor league system. The Sox built a strong minor league system, but most of the top prospects failed to deliever. Is that KW's fault? Not really. You keep pointing to Minnesota and Oakland, but those teams aren't the norm they are the exception. The majority of small-mid payroll teams struggle to reach .500, and this is the simple point that I am trying to make. While it isn't impossible to contend(and even win the WS), but the odds are staked against you. The one thing I agree with you to some degree on is that this team currently isn't heading in a specific direction. I like the fact that KW has taken some chances and tried to put a contender on the field despite a limited payroll. You can argue that this team should go with a youth movement, but the problem is that the Sox system has been very weak the past couple of years, especially in the upper minors, which makes it hard to do a young movement. Furthermore, if the Sox do go with a youth movement, than I think the fan support might fall to a level that can't be saved. This is why KW is in a tough situation. He wants to contend, but he doesn't have much money to spend and a weak minor league system to fill holes. "corner players i let go to arbitration...then either trade them or let them walk and get draft picks for them...it cost too much for players that dont play key roles...so where would i be??...way ahead on these guys..konerko would be making practically nothing this year..koch too...ordonez i dont think would get 14 million in arbitration either...i might end up paying lee more.." Unfortunately this philosophy doesn't work. If you trade or let every decent player walk(because they cost too much), than you will be in an endless cycle of struggles(see Montreal Expos). How do you figure that Konerko would be making practically nothing? Do you understand how arbitration works? If KW would have let Konerko go to arbitration he would probably be making close to what he will get now. Same goes for Koch and Ordonez. Arbitration usually rules in favor of the players. I agree that keeping Durham would have been nice, but I don't think you have a good understand of how arbitration works. Players like Koch, Konerko, and Ordonez would probably have similar salaries if taken to arbitration, which doesn't save the Sox much money, especially enough to sign someone like Durham AND IRod. I agree that a team should be strong up the middle, but solid players up the middle are fairly rare. If this team tanks the 1st half, than look for the white flag part 2 to take place. Give this team a chance. It isn't as talented on paper as the last couple, but what have those talented teams gotten the Sox. The Central is extremely weak and any of the 3 teams could win the division, so at least give this team some time. If the Sox get to the playoffs, with the tough situation that KW was put in this offseason, than I think he should get some credit and respect. We will have to wait and see.

Baggio, what is your solution to the holes at 2B and CF? Remember that you have no money to spend. Once again your grudge blinds you from reality. What happens if Harris puts up a .670 OPS next year(the same as Alomar) with solid D, which isn't that unrealistic. I disagree with you in regards to Rowand. When was he given a chance to prove himself, and please don't say the beginning of last year when he was coming back from his career threating injury. Rowand has a very respectable career OPS of .743. You might want to think about rooting for the Yankees, because thats the only team with a unlimited payroll and who can afford to put an AS at every position. "Normal" teams have to develop their own talent and can't afford an AS at every position. As long as you hold your grudge, you won't be able to view Sox management realistic(and more specificly KW). The fact is that there wasn't much that KW could do to replace Alomar and Everett, and you need to let your youngsters play if you want them to develop. This might include some struggles, but you have to be patient.

I think people are overexerating the lose of Everett and Alomar. They were here for about 2 months. Everett supplied some nice offense, but was a liability in the outfield. Alomar put up sub-par numbers with the Sox, including a .670 OPS and average D. I really don't see these two as huge loses. Colon, IMO, is the only big lose that hasn't been replaced to some degree. We are going to have to hope that either the veteran(Schoeneweis and Person) and/or the youngsters(Rauch, Diaz, Grille, Wright, Cotts, Pacheco) step up and help fill Colon's shoes. For once it would be nice if one of the Sox pitching prospects lived up to their hype.

As someone else pointed out, it is an overall ranking and not where they project them to go in the draft. It is actually a very credible site run by experts and scouts. There are some rankings that I disagree with as well, but I am sure I haven't seen most of the guys play as much as they have. Besides, I do think Gamble is a little overrated.

How can you honestly say that LHernandez isn't worth Harris and Borchard? What have either of them done in the majors? LHernandez is a solid workhorse pitcher coming off a season in which he had an ERA of 3.22. He has a very respectable career ERA of 4.22, and address the Sox major weakness. Both Harris and Borchard are going to turn 26 this year and have done nothing in the majors. It is coming to a point were the odds are against them that they will ever develop into solid major league players. If you wouldn't trade Harris and Borchard for LHernandez, than you have no understanding of "the proven versus potential" concept, and drasticly overrate the Sox talent. From a Sox standpoint, it is a pretty even trade that addresses the Sox major weakness. It would improve the Sox and its that simple? Its not going to happen, so the few Sox fans who think it is a bad trade for the Sox(which it isn't) don't have to worry.

Here is a decent website that ranks the top 100 players and also sorts them by position. http://scout.theinsiders.com/a.z?s=211&p=9...&yr=2004&nid=83

I really think the it would be wise for the Bears to take someone like Julius Jones from Notre Dame in the 3rd round or so(if he is still avalaible). I really think that Jones is one of the sleepers in this draft. He didn't get much recognition because ND really struggled and he had to split time with Ryan Grant at the beginning of the year. With that said, he put together an impressive year in which he ran for 1268 yards(including 3 200+ yard games), an impressive 5.5 yards per carry, and 10 TD's. Furthermore, he should get more credit since opponents stacked the line with 8 and 9 guys almost every play because Notre Dame had a nonexsistant passing game with freshman Brady Quinn at the helm. Not only that, but he had a below average O-line blocking for him that included 4 new starters. When you take these things into consideration his numbers become even more impressive. He also impressed a lot of scouts at the Senior Bowl workouts and his stock is soaring. He has break away speed to take it to the house on 40, 50, 60 yard runs(evidence by his 3 200 yard games and extremely impressive 4.3 40), but he also added 20 pounds of solid mussle(without losing any speed) that allows him to get those 4, 5, 6 tough yards up the middle. The bad news for the Bears is that his stock is soaring and that he could be gone by the 2nd round, but the Bears would probably be better off addressing other needs in the 1st 2 rounds, and getting someone like Jones in the 3rd or 4th round.

I have to disagree. Most experts/rankings see Jackson as a "reach" for the mid-1st round. Most experts/rankings have him projected as a late-1st/early-2nd round pick. The stat that I point to is his 4.4 yards per carry average. That is not impressive in the least bit, in fact, that is a very average YPC for a college running back. He has good physical tools, but his stats aren't impressive. It comes down to whether you think "tools" or "numbers" are more important. The NFL has show time and again that picking a guy with the good "numbers" is usually a safer bet(see Manning over Leaf). As a Colts fan, I really don't care who the Bears pick, but I have a feeling that Jackson is another A-Train in the making. Living in Pac 10 country I have seen him play on a consistant basis and didn't come away impressed with Jackson. Thats just my opinion though.

According to who? You? Thats certainly debatable. In fact, I haven't seen one ranking that has Jackson rated higher then Jones. Truth be told, I am not really sold on either guy(especially Jackson). I think this is a weak RB group, and that you could find a good back in the later rounds. I think it would be a mistake for the Bears to take Jackson with their 1st pick. They have more pressing needs.

I will take the Colts.

Docket would be a nice pick for my Colts. His stock has really been rising over the past year. Some other names that the Colts might take include Donte Hall(VT - CB) and Karlos Dansby(Auburn - LB). The Colts have 3 major weaknesses on D(DT, ML, and CB), and it is a pretty safe bet that the Colts will draft the best available player that plays one of those positions. Besides that you mock draft looks pretty accurate. You could be Mel Kiper's replacement a few years down the road. In regards to the Bear, I am not a big fan of Jackson. If they are going to take a running back, than they should take Jones(if available) or wait until the later rounds. Someone like a Julius Jones from ND will probably be available in the 2nd or 3rd round and could end up being a steal.

Let me just say that I think this trade is complete BS. I think someone has a little too much time on their hands. With that said, I think this would be a great trade for the Sox. Hernandez is a "Colon" although he isn't quite as consistant. He would be a great addition to the team. I am not a huge Soriano fan, but it is hard to ignore the numbers that he has put up the last 2 years. He singlehandly makes up for the offensive production lost by Maggs, so it is like the Sox are trading Borchard and Harris for Hernandez, which is a great trade off IMO. The 2004 team would be much better with this trade, however, I will repeat that it is complete BS(although I wish this was one of the few times I was wrong ).

Thank you upnorthsox. Rex, the point I was trying to make is that the Marlins had a big payroll in 1997(as upnorthsox points out). I wasn't comparing them to the 1997 Sox, but the current Sox since that is the topic at hand. I said that it wasn't a fair comparison because the Marlins had a payroll(in 97') that was in the top 10, while the Sox have a payroll in the middle of the pack. In regards to the payroll increase(from 2000 to 2001); that was because of mostly internal increases. It wasn't necassirily that KW got 30M to spend on FA's. The only two decent size contracts that the Sox added that offseason were DWells and Clayton, so as you can see most of the payroll increase came from players already on the roster. Furthermore, most Sox fans thought that the 2 weaknesses of the 2000 team was the lack of a true ace and a better defensive team up the middle. So what does KW do, he gets one of the top starting pitchers in the game and one of the top defensive SS in the game. Please don't compare Evans to KW. As bad as you may think KW is, Evans is 10x worse. Evans is widely regarded as one of the worst, and maybe the worst, GM in the majors. He might be on the brink of being fired when the new ownership takes over. There are litterally thousands of Dodgers fans that hate Evans as much as you hate KW. Mark my words, this team is much better off with KW compared to Evans.

When did KW blame the organizations struggles over the past couple of years on a lack of financial flexibility? I have never heard KW say such a thing, in part because he doesn't want to get on JR's bad side. Do you have an evidence(a link) to support this? The Marlins 1st WS came at a high cost. They had one of the highest payrolls in baseball, and that offseason had to trade away all their high salary players. Comparing the Sox(with a limited payroll) to the Marlins when they won their 1st WS is a poor comparison. Last years Marlins team is an example of what can happen if you make the playoffs and are playing well at the time. Hopefully this years Sox team has enough talent to win a weak Central, and anything can happen once they are in the playoffs. As far as you comparing the current roster to what the roster could look like if the Sox didn't make any moves; you have the advantage of highsight. It is easy to say keep this guy and get rid of that guy once you know how they are performing now. Unfortunately, KW doesn't have that luxery. You also go over budget. Almost all those young players you mentioned are eligible for arbitration and will get nice raises, which would probably prevent the Sox from keeping your entire "hypothetical" roster. With that said, I think the current roster has more talent when compared to your "hypothetical" roster with no moves. The 2004 rotation is just as good, if not better then the 2003. KWells and Loaiza are probably a wash. It comes down to Fogg/Wright/Rauch/Diaz versus Schoeneweis/Person/Wright/Rauch/Diaz. I would say that is a pretty fair trade off now that Fogg has been solved, although the 2004 roster offers more options and veteran experience, which give it a slight edge IMO. The bullpens are pretty similar, although there is little chance that the Sox would be able to keep Foulke. I would take Marte, Koch, and Mr. Zero over Foulke, Bradford, and Lowe. The 2004 offense is probably better then the 2000 offense(on paper). I would take Olivo over MJ. I would take Rowand over Singleton. I would take Crede over Perry. I would take Durham over Harris, however, Durham is probably gone because he cost too much. Overall, I think the 2004 team has more talent on paper than your "hypothetical" team. Furthermore, like I pointed out, you have the luxery of highsight, and your "hypothetical" team would probably be over budget, which means players like Foulke and Durham would probably be gone and replaced by youngsters or cheap FA's. I would argue that the current roster has more talent(which is what KW is responsible for) then your "hypothetical" roster with no moves. So I would have to disagree with your opinion that this team is going downhill, especially when you consider that the 2000 was a fluke. I don't care if Billy "the great" Beane was the Sox GM after the 2000 season, it still wouldn't have changed the inevitable decline that occured in 2001. With that said, I have said that this is the make or break year for KW(IMO). He was given a tough situation(a lot of key FA and little financial flexibility), partly his own doing, and if this team can make the playoffs, than I think he deserves some credit and recognition. If this team struggles to reach .500, than he should probably be fired.

Hernandez is the guy that came to mind. Baggio, do you have a link to support that 78 mph claim? I know that he threw a little for scouts from 20 different teams down in Florida, but I had not heard about a personal workout for the M's or him only topping out at 78 mph. In all honestly, Hernandez doesn't get people out because of his velocity, so even if he is only in the mid-80's I wouldn't be that concerned, especially if he signs to a minor league contract. I think Hernandez would be a good risk. He has a good arm and solid career stats, including a respetable career ERA of 4.04, opp BA of .237, opp OPS of .704, and 7.04 K:9IP. I think he would be worth the risk if he was healthy. With that said, I would be happy letting a youngster take that 5th spot as well.

If you want to place blame then you have to start at the top with JR(which you point out). When you have limited financial flexibility there is only so much you can do. Just because JR continues to not spend a lot(partially the fans fault) and will probably continue to do so, doesn't make it right to make someone else a scapegoat for his problems(KW), which it appears you are doing. The only way to consistantly contend(with a limited payroll) is to have a productive minor league system, and unfortunately the Sox have been unsucessful in that department over the past 3-4 years. I guess you can put some of that blame on KW since he plays an important role in the draft(and was formerly the head of development), but you can only place so much blame on him for prospects struggling. When he moved from the head of minor league development to GM the Sox had the #1 minor league system in the majors. Unfortunately the prospects didn't fullfil their potential. Should KW be blamed for that? You are kidding yourself if you think Baldwin would have made a difference. The Tribe had a more talented team, while the Sox were stuck with injuries and players that overachieved in 2000 coming back to reality. You missed my point about the 2000 team. You understand that it was a fluke, but you miss my point explaining why? I pointed to the starting 5 to show how drasticly they overachieved, and told you to look at what they have done since. Here are the stats of the starting staff in 2000 and what they have done since: 2000 Sirotka 15-10 3.79 ERA 197 IP Parque 13-6 4.28 ERA 187 IP Eldred 10-2 4.58 ERA 112 IP Baldwin 14-7 4.65 ERA 178 IP KWells 6-9 6.02 ERA 98.2 IP Garland 4-8 6.46 ERA 69 IP Since Sirotka - (Hasn't pitched in the majors since) Parque - 2-8 9.68 ERA 70.2 IP (Been up and down from the majors to the minors) Eldred - 7-5 4.54 ERA 73.1 IP (Pitched 6 IP in 2001 and none in 2002) Baldwin - 17-22 4.84 ERA 340 IP (Pitched a grand total of 15 IP last year) KWells - 32-34 3.78 ERA 529 IP (Developed into a solid young pitcher) Garland - 30-32 4.34 ERA 501.1 IP(Has been a solid bottom of the rotation starter) I point out these stats for 2 reasons. 1) To show how they overachieved in 2000. 2) To show how little each have done since. What should have KW done after the 2000 season. He kept most of the pitchers and they struggled or got hurt. He knew that they overachieved and tried to add a bonefide ace in DWells, but he also got hurt. If he tried to trade a couple of the overachieving pitchers/players, than everyone in baseball would have questioned those moves(breaking about a team that won 95 games). These stats show that the 2000 season was a fluke and that there was very little that KW could have done. It wasn't only the starting pitcher, but the a couple of bullpen pitchers and offensive players also overachieved. KW got himself into a no win situation, in which fans could place blame on him for something he couldn't control(a drasticly overachieving team in 2000 that returned to reality in 2001). Please say that it is in YOUR OPINION and don't clump all Sox fans into one catogory. There are some of us that are smart enough to realize that this underachieving isn't solely his fault and that the so-called "decline" isn't his doing. At some point you also have to place some blame on the players that are underachieving on the field, which KW has no control over. Its KW job to put the talent on the roster, which he has done a good job of considering that the Sox have been favored to win the division every year since he took over(one of the reasons I don't put much of the blame on him). Personally, I don't care how polite you are, asking someone to resign in front of a bunch of people at an event that is suppose to start off the season on a positive note(and pretending that you speak on behalf of all Sox fans) is a classless act. PS. I am curious, what would you have done after the 2000 season and the seasons that followed afterwards if you were in KW shoes? Its one thing to place blame on someone, but its entirely different thing to understand how to better the situation. Sorry for the length.

Baggio, its clear that you try and find ANYTHING you can to blame on KW. He could trade a bag of balls for Puljos and Prior, and you would still find something to complain about. You bias/negative rhetoric doesn't allow you to make accurate judgements on his ability/moves. I am curious as to what drives you so far to hold such a grudge against him? Nothing personal, but if you blame the fall from 2000 solely on KW, than you have no understanding of baseball. Even the casual fan could see that team was a fluke(just look at the starting staff and what they have done since: Sirotka, Eldred, Baldwin, Parque, Garland), and all the luck in the world couldn't have kept them from coming back to reality. He has made some bad trades and some good ones, but I only see one trade that I would call terrible(Ritchie for Wells, Fogg, Lowe). He isn't going to be mistaken for one of the best GM's in the game, but he isn't as bad as you make him out to be. As someone who grew up watching Scheuler do nothing, and allow this organization to be nothing better then mediocre, its nice to finally have a GM that isn't affraid to take chances and attempt to improve this team. As fans we don't even know half of the story between Thomas and Cora/KW, so placing blame on either side at this point shows nothing but bias towards one of the other side. Maybe it shouldn't have been made public, but I am sure someone would have leaked it sooner or later. PS Baggio, please show some class and be smart enough not to ask KW to resign in the question part of Soxfest. That is a completely gutless and classless act on your behalf. You can question some of his moves and decisions, but grow up and don't allow your gudge to make you do something stupid. If you really want KW to resign, than do it privately through a letter. Please don't give Sox fans a bad name, and show some class.

How can you say that Munoz put together a very good year that will keep him on the list, but Rauch and Diaz didn't? That doesn't make sense. I know that Munoz had a rough 1st couple of weeks and after that he pitched pretty solid, but even if you ignore his 1st couple of weeks his stats were very similar to Rauch and Diaz. Furthermore, as a reliever he should put up better numbers. If you are making a statistical arguement to support putting Munoz on the list, than you have to support Rauch and Diaz. Its that simple. When it comes to raw stuff, all 3 have above average but not great arms/stuff, so you really can't seperate them there. If Munoz is on the list(as a reliever with so-so numbers), than Diaz and Rauch HAVE to be on the list as starters with better numbers(and both were ranked higher in 2003 than Munoz). Its simple logic Rex. I am willing to bet that both Rauch and Diaz will be on the list this year. I see Ring as a Guardado clone. Guardado almost never tops 92, but has relies on decent movement and good control to be very effective. I think Ring is in a similar mold and could easily put up numbers similar to Guardado. Most of the recent scouting reports I have read(mostly from fall ball) say that they have been impressed with Ring and that he has been in the hig 80's-low 90's with his fastball. I think it was a mistake not to put him on the Mets list.

I don't want to beat this topic to death, but Diaz put up some pretty solid numbers last year. As I have stated many time, I hate when people point to pitchers records as an indicator of how good they are. Wins and loses are determined by the whole team and not solely the pitcher. Do you really think that Pettite wins 21 games if he pitched for the Tigers, or that Maroth loses 21 games if he pitched for the Yankees? Wins are even less important in the minors. While I hope that all the Sox minor league teams do well, I care more about the individual development of the players(especially the top prospects). This is why I throw wins and loses out the window when I am make a judgement on a minor leaguer. His hits were a little higher then you would like, but 122 hits in 115.2 IP isn't terrible. Like I mentioned in the thread the other week, the first two stats that I look at for both hitters and pitchers is BB and SO. Diaz displayed excelent control last year, walking only 2.57 batters per 9 innings. IMO good, in this case, great control is one of the most important things when moving from the minors to the majors, and it is usually a good indicator of how effective a pitcher will be in the majors(the key reason why Cotts struggled). His SO per 9 IP wasn't great at 6.46, but that isn't terrible either. His SO:BB ratio was very good at just over 2.5 SO per BB. His ERA at 3.97 was decent, but when you factor into the equation that he pitched in a great hitters park it becomes pretty good. Finally, one stat that I really like is that he only gave up 12 HR in 115.2 IP. That is pretty impressive and even more impressive when you consider that staduim that he pitches in. Overall, Diaz put together a very good year statistically with the only negative being his Hits per IP. I certainly don't see any reason to drop Diaz based on these stats. Furthermore, I count as many as 6 spots being opened up(Olivo, Ring, Webster, Gonzalez, Malone, Munoz) for new faces, so I doubt they drop Diaz who is coming off a solid season. Rauch is in a similar situation, and I doubt they drop him off the board from the #5 spot after a solid season and a great second half. How did Ring not make the Mets list? I realize that the Mets have improved their system over the past couple of years, but it is still middle of the pack at best. I guess that BA is not a big fan of relievers, because there is no other logical reasoning to leave him off the Mets list.

The thing is that they were ranked last year and both pitched pretty well this past season. Almost half of last years list won't be on this years list, so I highly doubt that they will also drop Rauch and Diaz off the list as well. It wasn't like last year was a GREAT year for Sox prospects(except for a select few). Do you really think that BA won't have Rauch and Diaz on their list, especially considering the fact that the minor league system is pretty thin when it comes to pitching? I think both Rupe and Webster will make the Texas list, although neither will be in the top 5. I don't see Bittner making the Anaheim list with their strong minor league system, and the fact that Bittner is primarily a reliever. Ring will easily make the Mets list. My guess is somewhere around 5th or 6th. So we probably did a nice job of adding to other teams top 10 list this past season.

Wow, this really makes me rethink my list(for BA at least). It will be interesting to see if Reed jumps all the way to #1 even though I think he is clearly the Sox top prospect at this point. There will be a lot of new faces with Olivo in the majors, Webster and Ring traded away, and the struggles of Malone, Gonzalez, and Munoz. Here is my edited BA top 10 list: 1)Reed 2)Honel 3)Cotts 4)Borchard 5)Rauch 6)Diaz 7)Wing 8)Anderson 9)Sweeney 10)Munoz Same players as my other list, but in a little different order.