24 minutes ago, Harold's Leg Lift said:

Because it was different from "his" other drafts?  I wonder why........

But then...who is the good drafting boy in the FO. 

3 minutes ago, bmags said:

But then...who is the good drafting boy in the FO. 

He's there. Hopefully he gets "officailly" named scouting director.  

How sad is it that no one even knows if this is a legitimate promotion or a paper promotion to remove the guy from his current position?

This all comes from the top — Reinsdorf.  Jobs for life.

1 minute ago, Harold's Leg Lift said:

He's there. Hopefully he gets "officailly" named scouting director.  

That’s good.

I think by far my biggest frustration with Sox media was letting hostetler was poetic about how the org emphasizes best player available but then talks about how they needed to add depth in the 2016-18 drafts and that’s why it was so college heavy.

1 hour ago, Jack Parkman said:

THANK YOU!!!! That is my point. 

No. He was giving Nick credit for taking the BPA with the Madrigal and Vaughn yet you’re trashing those picks. You complain about not having any players pan out from a draft yet also b****es about picks that will almost surely pan out. So which one is it?

Look this isn’t the NBA where the best players are always pick inside the top 5 so trying to critical of not taking the high ceiling/high risk type is just dumb. There is nothing wrong with taking a perennial 3 WAR player with a top 5 pick.

 

Just now, Moan4Yoan said:

How sad is it that no one even knows if this is a legitimate promotion or a paper promotion to remove the guy from his current position?

This all comes from the top — Reinsdorf.  Jobs for life.

It's a promotion. Scouting directors make like $125000 a year to be on the road all year. This board is acting like it's a glory job or something. 

I view at as like an associate at a law firm. Work an ungodly amount for a few years and if you're good enough you get promoted to partner (aGM or etc) or you move on from them. Especially with a family.

 

5 minutes ago, bmags said:

That’s good.

I think by far my biggest frustration with Sox media was letting hostetler was poetic about how the org emphasizes best player available but then talks about how they needed to add depth in the 2016-18 drafts and that’s why it was so college heavy.

This is really an amazing point

3 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

It's a promotion. Scouting directors make like $125000 a year to be on the road all year. This board is acting like it's a glory job or something. 

I view at as like an associate at a law firm. Work an ungodly amount for a few years and if you're good enough you get promoted to partner (aGM or etc) or you move on from them. Especially with a family.

 

I saw Nick Hostetler lighting Cuban cigars with 100 dollar bills.

Now he is getting paid millions to do nothing!!!!

God knows Hahn needs help with free agency but does anyone want Hostetler being the guy to assist him?

6 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

It's a promotion. Scouting directors make like $125000 a year to be on the road all year. This board is acting like it's a glory job or something. 

I view at as like an associate at a law firm. Work an ungodly amount for a few years and if you're good enough you get promoted to partner (aGM or etc) or you move on from them. Especially with a family.

 

What percentage of Sox fans would know his name/what he did if it weren’t for the tear down. 

Edited July 25, 20196 yr by mqr

6 minutes ago, thxfrthmmrs said:

No. He was giving Nick credit for taking the BPA with the Madrigal and Vaughn yet you’re trashing those picks. You complain about not having any players pan out from a draft yet also b****es about picks that will almost surely pan out. So which one is it?

Look this isn’t the NBA where the best players are always pick inside the top 5 so trying to critical of not taking the high ceiling/high risk type is just dumb. There is nothing wrong with taking a perennial 3 WAR player with a top 5 pick.

 

I just am not a fan of taking a guy with no power or positional versatility in the top 5. I disagree with it on principle. 

edit: wrong thread

Edited July 25, 20196 yr by GermanSoxFan

4 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said:

I just am not a fan of taking a guy with no power or positional versatility in the top 5. I disagree with it on principle. 

Vaughn has power and Madrigal has GG caliber positional versatility, and has 2 or more plus tools.

1 hour ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Its wrong because that's just not how baseball drafts work for the vast majority of MLB teams. Teams dont find 1-2 good players every year. If they did, every team would be good and filled with home grown talent. Youd be able to build an entire team nearly every 5 years from just drafting and youd never have to rebuild.

The best case I've seen for massive investment in player development and scouting. Getting 1-2 good players per year means never rebuilding. What would 2-3 do?

12 minutes ago, thxfrthmmrs said:

Vaughn has power and Madrigal has GG caliber positional versatility, and has 2 or more plus tools.

Madrigal has no power and Vaughn has no positional versatility. 

Madrigal has to be Ichiro to justify picking him where they did. 

Vaughn has to hit .300 with 35 HR every year to justify  picking him where they did. 

Edited July 25, 20196 yr by Jack Parkman

21 minutes ago, Moan4Yoan said:

How sad is it that no one even knows if this is a legitimate promotion or a paper promotion to remove the guy from his current position?

This all comes from the top — Reinsdorf.  Jobs for life.

How sad that one can't even wait 24 hours to get the straight scoop.  Some reporter probably broke the story prematurely.  By this time tomorrow, we might have a lot more answers.

 

2 minutes ago, Thomas_Ventura_Roberts said:

How sad that one can't even wait 24 hours to get the straight scoop.  Some reporter probably broke the story prematurely.  By this time tomorrow, we might have a lot more answers.

 

It’s already on the Sox website.

https://www.mlb.com/whitesox/news/nick-hostetler-promoted-by-white-sox

2 minutes ago, Dam8610 said:

The best case I've seen for massive investment in player development and scouting. Getting 1-2 good players per year means never rebuilding. What would 2-3 do?

People in these discussions focus way too much on “good”, but what if we imagine a system that doesn’t need to replace its CFer with a guy that can only put up a 5 wrc+, a team that could actually internally replace a DH, or had enough depth their fifth starter didn’t need to be Omar despaigne? What if they were just not good enough to be starters but not the worst players in the league?

Thats a big advantage of good scouting and development.

4 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said:

 

Madrigal has to be Ichiro to justify picking him where they did. 

Vaughn has to hit .300 with 35 HR every year to justify that picking him where they did. 

That's simply not based in reality and just pure insanity.

You do know the average WAR of a first round pick, right?

1 minute ago, GermanSoxFan said:

That's simply not based in reality and just pure insanity.

You do know the average WAR of a first round pick, right?

Yes, the only way to justify those two picks is if they picked hall of Famers. Jack has said this like 3 times. It's more and more absurd everyday.

Just now, GermanSoxFan said:

That's simply not based in reality and just pure insanity.

You do know the average WAR of a first round pick, right?

What is the average  career WAR of a top 5 pick? Like 5-7 or something? That includes guys who never make the majors or make it and are negative WAR players. 

1 minute ago, Jack Parkman said:

What is the average  career WAR of a top 5 pick? Like 5-7 or something? That includes guys who never make the majors or make it and are negative WAR players. 

Yes, it includes the bad picks that happen too. That's kind of the point being made.

2 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said:

What is the average  career WAR of a top 5 pick? Like 5-7 or something? That includes guys who never make the majors or make it and are negative WAR players. 

So where do you get he has to be ichiro to take that high? Those are absolutely absurd expectations. 

Edited July 25, 20196 yr by mqr

1 minute ago, Jack Parkman said:

What is the average  career WAR of a top 5 pick? Like 5-7 or something? That includes guys who never make the majors or make it and are negative WAR players. 

Sure. So are you saying Madrigal will put up less than 7 career WAR?

Just now, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Yes, it includes the bad picks that happen too. That's kind of the point being made.

That still doesn't excuse making a horrible pick that high.