June 8, 20187 yr 12 minutes ago, ptatc said: I agree with you. However, with the focus on HRs I think many fans will be bash him in the future for it. Not if the White Sox are winning games and championships and he's the leader of the team.
June 8, 20187 yr 3 minutes ago, Dam8610 said: Not if the White Sox are winning games and championships and he's the leader of the team. You obviously havent been part of Soxtalk for very long. ?
June 8, 20187 yr 3 minutes ago, Dam8610 said: Not if the White Sox are winning games and championships and he's the leader of the team. Even if he isn't. If he becomes a good, valuable productive player that is a contributor that's all you can ask. If he is that, then the only way I think a rational fan could be upset is if a guy like India becomes an MVP type player.
June 8, 20187 yr 7 minutes ago, Dam8610 said: All but one is a very strong consensus... Evil, evil KW ??
June 9, 20187 yr What is gained by being catty about who you will pick? So the Reds think we may pick Singer: okay, if we pick him they can pick any of the rest, if we don't,they pick who's left. it's not like you can trade picks. I can see if it if, say, a team had a comp pick in the top 10 plus their own top 10 - in that case, who they pick would involve strategy as well as picking the best player available. Otherwise, maybe it helps in contract negotiation to show that you didn't complete focus on one guy; and the drama and uncertainty is good for draft show ratings. But basically it boils down to a FO not wanting to say who they would have picked if they guy they did pick wasn't available. Edited June 9, 20187 yr by GreenSox
June 9, 20187 yr Author 18 hours ago, Dam8610 said: All but one is a very strong consensus... I wouldn't call not having the person in charge on board "a strong consensus".
June 9, 20187 yr 2 hours ago, GreenSox said: What is gained by being catty about who you will pick? So the Reds think we may pick Singer: okay, if we pick him they can pick any of the rest, if we don't,they pick who's left. it's not like you can trade picks. I can see if it if, say, a team had a comp pick in the top 10 plus their own top 10 - in that case, who they pick would involve strategy as well as picking the best player available. Otherwise, maybe it helps in contract negotiation to show that you didn't complete focus on one guy; and the drama and uncertainty is good for draft show ratings. But basically it boils down to a FO not wanting to say who they would have picked if they guy they did pick wasn't available. I think the goal is to keep Philadelphia from knowing how much you want Madrigal. If they are split between Madrigal and Bohm, which it seems they were, then you don’t want your strong interest to tip the scales. Also, you have to negotiate with Madrigal before you pick him. It’s helpful if his adviser doesn’t know he’s number 2 on your board.
June 9, 20187 yr 1 hour ago, Timmy U said: I think the goal is to keep Philadelphia from knowing how much you want Madrigal. If they are split between Madrigal and Bohm, which it seems they were, then you don’t want your strong interest to tip the scales. Also, you have to negotiate with Madrigal before you pick him. It’s helpful if his adviser doesn’t know he’s number 2 on your board. Not sure I agree someone will take him just because you like them. Bigger issue may be making sure teams ahead with similar rankings do not take your guy and pay him below your slot. Since those teams are ahead of you all draft you don’t want them consistently at a bigger money advantage
June 9, 20187 yr 7 hours ago, southsider2k5 said: I wouldn't call not having the person in charge on board "a strong consensus". I highly doubt that that story from the Fangraphs podcast was true Edited June 9, 20187 yr by Jose Abreu
June 9, 20187 yr 7 hours ago, Timmy U said: I think the goal is to keep Philadelphia from knowing how much you want Madrigal. If they are split between Madrigal and Bohm, which it seems they were, then you don’t want your strong interest to tip the scales. Also, you have to negotiate with Madrigal before you pick him. It’s helpful if his adviser doesn’t know he’s number 2 on your board. If Philadelphia picks a guy because the White Sox like him, they need to fire their entire staff.
June 14, 20187 yr Great Falls season starts on Friday. Will be interesting to see who is assigned there and how they do.
June 14, 20187 yr 14 minutes ago, joejoedairy said: Great Falls season starts on Friday. Will be interesting to see who is assigned there and how they do. I am going to try to make it to the game on Sat. I am very interested to see who is on the roster.
June 14, 20187 yr Getz talks about a few who will be on the roster https://www.greatfallstribune.com/story/sports/2018/06/13/heres-five-players-watch-2018-great-falls-voyagers-chris-getz-director-player-development/700243002/
June 14, 20187 yr http://www.milb.com/documents/5/1/0/281242510/2018_Voyagers_Official_Roster.pdf Great Falls roster is out.
June 18, 20187 yr Still happy Sox didn't take Singer. Also, it was Schnell that Guff went with Hostetler to see play before draft.
June 22, 20187 yr Super early but Logan Taylor is 7-12 with 3 doubles in the Frontier League http://baseball.pointstreak.com/player.html?playerid=1282512&seasonid=31320 Not too sure why he was released with limited playing time
June 22, 20187 yr 1 hour ago, ChiSoxJon said: Super early but Logan Taylor is 7-12 with 3 doubles in the Frontier League http://baseball.pointstreak.com/player.html?playerid=1282512&seasonid=31320 Not too sure why he was released with limited playing time Almost would have to be some type of off the field problems or attitude.
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.