How many rounds do we get today?  Sounds like Sox likely to take a pitcher - that accurate?

4 minutes ago, sox71 said:

Crochet is Royce Ring redux.  

LOL......Ring was a lefty closer with marginal stuff.(90-93 mph fastball) 

Edited June 10, 20205 yr by Jack Parkman

4 minutes ago, sox71 said:

Crochet is Royce Ring redux.  

This is lazy.

4 minutes ago, sox71 said:

Crochet is Royce Ring redux.  

Going back to 2002 for that one.  Luckily the White Sox didn't get scared of drafting left handed pitching in round one after this.

6 minutes ago, sox71 said:

Crochet is Royce Ring redux.  

https://web.archive.org/web/20101209211216/http://chicago.whitesox.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20020604&content_id=41765&vkey=news_cws&fext=.jsp&c_id=cws

But no tho.

4 minutes ago, PolishPrince34 said:

Crochet is more Poreda than Ring. Poreda couldn’t get right handers out and his plus velocity disappeared fairly quickly. 

Poreda had literally no secondary pitch,  Poreda was the guy the Sox tried to explain had ceiling when they passed on Porcello.  I personally thought and hoped he would turn into Matt Thornton but was way short of that.  But it was pretty clear early on that we were probably looking at Matt Thornton best case scenario and never looking at a true SP.

7 minutes ago, PolishPrince34 said:

Crochet is more Poreda than Ring. Poreda couldn’t get right handers out and his plus velocity disappeared fairly quickly. 

Crochet has a ++ slider and a + changeup. Poreda didn't have a second pitch and threw 97, which backed up to 94 in the pros. 

Edited June 10, 20205 yr by Jack Parkman

There are so many insane hot takes in this thread. It’ll be fun to look back at this in a few years and see who was right and who was way off.

56 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said:

Big, huge thing. His stuff is electric......There aren't many pitchers out there with 3 plus pitches, and he as a ++fastball and slider, along with a + change. In a normal year, he'd be long gone by the time the Sox are up. We should thank our fortune if he's there. 

If he doesn't start, you have your closer for the Sox window anyway. 

The issues I have with him are 1. He hasn't thrown many innings, some due to injury. 2. He throws from a low 3/4 angle and spins during his follow through. This is part of the reason for his deception but also the reason for the inconsistencies and shoulder issues. He'll need to straighten out a little at least and what will that do to his pitches?

2 minutes ago, ptatc said:

The issues I have with him are 1. He hasn't thrown many innings, some due to injury. 2. He throws from a low 3/4 angle and spins during his follow through. This is part of the reason for his deception but also the reason for the inconsistencies and shoulder issues. He'll need to straighten out a little at least and what will that do to his pitches?

I'm not saying that there isn't risk with Crochet.....but what do you expect outside the top 10? 

Ceiling, Ceiling, Ceiling. 

30 minutes ago, Jerksticks said:

Crochet and Abel seem like the same thing but different ages.  
 

Not much data for either.  Maybe you go Crochet just because his arm has lasted a few more years?

Abel has a much cleaner projectable motion. He will also mature and increase is velocity.

16 minutes ago, DirtySox said:

This is lazy.

Fair enough but not really comparing abilities more so making a statement about my lack of excitement. However, we were lead to believe he would be a Scott Radinsky LH reliever. 

1 minute ago, Jack Parkman said:

I'm not saying that there isn't risk with Crochet.....but what do you expect outside the top 10? 

Ceiling, Ceiling, Ceiling. 

Not saying don't take him. I would prefer one of the HS guys though. Bitsko or Abel. The draft in general is a crapshoot and all have their flaws. My personal bias with pitchers is to look at the ones that have the best chance of staying healthy. You can't teach high end stuff though.

4 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said:

Crochet has a ++ slider and a + changeup. Poreda didn't have a second pitch and threw 97, which backed up to 94 in the pros. 

We know you have a hard on for Crochet and I don’t. Poreda had a plus slider also and pitched as a successful healthy starter in college. Crochet has been a reliever, has had shoulder issues due to his short stride, and you say he has a plus change up but has difficulty getting right handed hitters out. Again a lot more safer picks at #11. Name some pitcher comparisons that was mostly been a reliever and became  a successful and injury free starter. My mind is a blank. We have Dunning, but that’s proven he’s had a difficult time health wise. I’m sorry, but at pick #11 I don’t want a reliever. How often does a Picking reliever in the first round workout? Barely ever

10 minutes ago, PolishPrince34 said:

We know you have a hard on for Crochet and I don’t. Poreda had a plus slider also and pitched as a successful healthy starter in college. Crochet has been a reliever, has had shoulder issues due to his short stride, and you say he has a plus change up but has difficulty getting right handed hitters out. Again a lot more safer picks at #11. Name some pitcher comparisons that was mostly been a reliever and became  a successful and injury free starter. My mind is a blank. We have Dunning, but that’s proven he’s had a difficult time health wise. I’m sorry, but at pick #11 I don’t want a reliever. How often does a Picking reliever in the first round workout? Barely ever

Drafting "safe" prospects is the road to a bottom 5 farm system. 

You're a Sox fan, we saw how that worked out from 2002-09. 

I don't necessarily believe that Crochet is a reliever. I think you give him a chance to start until he proves he can't. You're not getting the complete package at 11. 

Edited June 10, 20205 yr by Jack Parkman

24 minutes ago, PolishPrince34 said:

Crochet is more Poreda than Ring. Poreda couldn’t get right handers out and his plus velocity disappeared fairly quickly. 

I wouldn't compare him to either of those players.  Poreda didn't have multiple plus pitches and Ring didn't have velocity (and to be honest...neither did Poreda).  

Should take Detmers

Will take Abel

Would be happy with Detmers, Abel, Hassell, PCA, Howard, Hendricks

unhappy: Crochet, Bailey, Kjerstad

on the fence with Soderstrom

 

Im not really interested in safe picks

Just now, PolishPrince34 said:

Should take Detmers

Will take Abel

Would be happy with Detmers, Abel, Hassell, PCA, Howard, Hendricks

unhappy: Crochet, Bailey, Kjerstad

on the fence with Soderstrom

 

Im not really interested in safe picks

If you’re not interested in safe picks why do you want Detmers? He’s probably one of the safest picks in the entire draft.

3 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said:

Drafting "safe" prospects is the road to a bottom 5 farm system. 

You're a Sox fan, we saw how that worked out from 2002-09. 

I wouldn't call Fields, Gonzalez or Mitchell safe picks at all.

2 minutes ago, ptatc said:

I wouldn't call Fields, Gonzalez or Mitchell safe picks at all.

I'm talking about Ring, Anderson, Broadway, McCullough, Beckham.....

Those guys were the exception not the rule. 

Back in the pre-slot days, the Sox used to take upside guys with real flaws, like Fields and Mitchell with the Ks, Poreda with no secondary pitch, Hawkins/Walker  with the hit tool issues, etc. 

 

Edited June 10, 20205 yr by Jack Parkman

5 minutes ago, YouCanPutItOnTheBoardYES! said:

If you’re not interested in safe picks why do you want Detmers? He’s probably one of the safest picks in the entire draft.

5 out of the 6 players I would deem not safe. Detmers is the 2nd best lefty in the draft and wouldn’t need a lot of development time in the minors . Yes I agree Detmers is safe. 

Edited June 10, 20205 yr by PolishPrince34

2 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said:

I'm talking about Ring, Anderson, Broadway, McCullough, Beckham.....

Those guys were the exception not the rule. 

 

That's almost half being the exception though. They may have had some "safe" picks but it's not like it was for an extended period of time. 

1 minute ago, ptatc said:

That's almost half being the exception though. They may have had some "safe" picks but it's not like it was for an extended period of time. 

See my edit. The slot system has leveled the playing field for the Sox. 

In case anyone wanted Law's mock through 11 see below.

Quote

1.) DET - Torkelson

2.) BAL - Martin

3.) MIA - Lacy

4.) KC - Veen

5.) TOR - Meyer

6.) SEA - Hancock

7.) PIT - Gonzales

8.) SD - Detmers

9.) COL - Soderstrom

10.) LAA - PCA

11.) Chicago White Sox: Garrett Crochet, LHP, Tennessee

I’ve heard them with Crochet, Soderstrom and Mitchell; I think it’s the high-water mark for Crochet or Mitchell, and right in Soderstrom’s range.

 

Edited June 10, 20205 yr by DirtySox

3 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said:

See my edit. The slot system has leveled the playing field for the Sox. 

I guess. Taking upside guys with flaws doesn't define "safe" for me. Safe is guys with few flaws but minimal high end talent. Floor vs. ceiling guys.