Y2Jimmy0

Seems interesting. DSL club has been raking so far

The funniest thing about this whole this process and I'll admit that I'm a guilty party is that nothing will be decided fora while. Last year, teams didn't even seriously talk signing bonuses until morning of draft. Teams haven't had meetings, private workouts or visits at all yet. Nothing has been decided at all anywhere. With that being said, interesting info out there from Taylor Blake Ward tonight.

Grady Emerson isn't Bobby Witt Jr. Witt has more speed and power. Emerson might be Kevin McGonigle. He might even be as good as Cholowsky in 3 years.

One of these guys believes in fairy tales and the other guy may or may not. Justin Ishbia will be much more useful for me going forward, personally.

I've heard a bunch of guys in different demographics. Hoping to have a 5 round mock this week. Lots of Thome chatter obviously. Heard they really like Coleman Borthwick but I think he'll be gone. Blake Bryant is a prep righty from Georgia. Curious to see where Jack Slightom or other local guys go. There are a couple college bats that I might put in my mock.

Here's the profile for Vahn Lackey if anyone is interested: https://www.futuresox.net/2026/06/04/2026-mlb-draft-profile-vahn-lackey-wh/

Vahn Lackey just went 3-14 in regionals and 0-8 in the two elimination games. Are we onto Emerson or Lombard now?

Because taking another two pitch college starter would be fucking insanity.

They also love shortstops and the scouting director has never drafted a non SS position player in the first round.

The "multiple game collapse" is 8 plate appearances. You realize that is totally insane right? No idea what he thinks about the Sox. His family members follow FutureSox on twitter. Sox wanted to draft him in 2023 after scouting him heavily and couldn't make it work. They also have the #1 pick and it doesn't really matter.

I just care a lot about the totality of the college career.

For all the talk about Cholowsky's numbers with wood bats, I hope nobody looks at Lackey's. Or his sophomore year to that point as well. I've seen one hit wonder college guys before. Why is Vahn Lackey different?

They've been well represented at GT and ACC tourney. One reason I don't like catcher at 1:1 is that they don't play all the time.

I'm so glad they're out honestly. Done with the discourse. I wish this draft were in a week.

I'm sure it does. His swing will definitely look different in pro ball though.

My god we still have like 5 more weeks of this. How many times did he get hit by pitches on Fridays against a top starter though?

Would you take JJ Wetherholt at 1 if he were a plus defensive shortstop?

Right but why do we discard his sophomore season and place more emphasis on Roch's junior season? The discourse doesn't make sense. GT also has the best offense in the country and nobody has been able to avoid Lackey all season. I'm sure he has great makeup. I don't think that's an issue. I think the issue is spending the #1 pick on a player who should be a cornerstone but then playing him in like 120 games maximum in the big leagues. I just don't want a catcher.

The first thing I must point out is that many people are way too focused on outcomes in these tiny samples of regional games. The White Sox will factor in how guys play in the tournament but the play by play of Lackey looking better than Cholowsky isn't what the Sox are focused on and they should be removed from their jobs if they are. It's a cop out answer but the Sox need to take the best player. I'm guessing the 3 legitimate options are Cholowsky, Emerson and Lackey. The totality of their production matters. It will all be accounted for. They care a lot about makeup though and this is still a projection business. It's puzzling to me that people think any of these guys are finished products. Cholowsky is a swing and approach alteration away from looking like a guy with a much higher ceiling. He's also a great defender at shortstop and from all indications has everything the Sox look for from a makeup standpoint. Money matters too but when you have the top pick, you need to take your top guy. I love Grady Emerson. My issue with him is that he won't be much cheaper than Roch and you're basically hoping that he's as good or better than Cholowsky is in a few years. Both should be in the $9.5-$10 million range. Lackey will be cheaper than that because he has a different agent. The number I heard floated for him at #1 was $8.7 million. I've heard a lot of things though and it's tough to decipher what's true. I generally would prefer to take a shortstop and if that's Emerson, I'd be fine with it. They just better be right. I'm not that interested in taking Lackey at 1. I just don't like the idea of taking a catcher and I think taking him with the intention of moving him is dumb. I'm a coward and I'd probably still take Cholowsky but I understand why some are underwhelmed.

If the Sox drafted Lackey, I'd be shocked if they moved him. He's an awesome catcher. Moving him doesn't many any sense and I think the team agrees.

I don't understand. This isn's like an "either/or". Cholowsky has a really high ceiling and he'll get better in the player dev system too. I don't think he plateaued. There's still a huge ceiling to reach.

Okay that's not how I read it. Still though, for a club like the White Sox that has always factored in the previous season highly in evaluations, all of this will matter.

They just take forever sometimes with development and they don't play all the time due to the nature of the position. Take shortstops.

This is extremely disingenuous to say when Roch Cholowsky had the sophomore year that he had. Go look at Vahn Lackey's sophomore season. No s%*# he improved on it. What are we doing?

Again though, he had basically the same season as last year and he was the hunted this time.