With Roch not improving a lot vs Soph year there is probably a little more fear that he may be closer to his max than if he had a better year. Emerson moved to what might have been weaker HS comp and thus at three years younger, you can think there is room for more improvement. The question could be if Emerson doesn't greatly improve is it because the development people failed or the scouts were wrong on ceiling? You will never know.

9 minutes ago, fathom said:

I just wonder if the Sox don’t pick Roch, will some on here finally admit he had a disappointing junior season? Ironically, I’m fine if they do pick him. Emerson is the overwhelming favorite though IMO.

Yea. I'm fine with any of the top 3. I just have a slight preference. I actually trust what they are doing on the development side for hitters. Whoever they pick I'm fully on board with. I'm just a dummy posting on a message board.

8 minutes ago, DirtySox said:

Yea. I'm fine with any of the top 3. I just have a slight preference. I actually trust what they are doing on the development side for hitters. Whoever they pick I'm fully on board with. I'm just a dummy posting on a message board.

Of course, I lost my draft expert aura when I was against the Sox picking Mike Trout. With that said, I still wish we knew if Lackey could play CF

41 minutes ago, fathom said:

I just wonder if the Sox don’t pick Roch, will some on here finally admit he had a disappointing junior season? Ironically, I’m fine if they do pick him. Emerson is the overwhelming favorite though IMO.

Disappointing doesn’t mean bad though. Obviously you want to see a player to continue ascending, but his sophomore season was really fucking good. And none of that takes into account a plus defensive profile at SS. I still think Roch will be the pick, but I trust Shirley to make the right pick. I just hope the front office doesn’t overrule him and force him to go with the college player if they do in fact prefer Emerson.

I don't know really the answer here, which makes me lean to 'cut a deal', but there's no obvious deal. I'd be happiest with Roch, and am just sanguine on Emerson. For a hs shortstop, i'd prefer some louder athletic tools.

I am just gonna hope it works out.

I have to admit a bias against high school prospects. I understand the metrics and so on about youth and upside so I'm not actually against a strategy that emphasizes high schoolers. But as a fan who wants to have an opinion about specific players, I just find it very difficult to know whether Grady Emerson is going to be good. It's harder to see him play and it's really hard to evaluate the level of competition. These are obviously problems that affect the MLB scouts looking at him too but they have more resources and such. So it's hard for me to have a strong opinion on Emerson without relying a lot on what other people say. This isn't fair at all but he also seems un-charismatic to me in interviews and watching him on the field.

Roch entered the year in pole position and I don't think he really lost it but he also didn't run away with it either. I think there's a bit under the hood to suggest he improved as a player but you could argue part of that rests on last year's production being perhaps overheated/fake/whatever. I believe in some players being safer bets than others but I don't really believe anybody is truly a safe bet. Would you be shocked if Roch Cholowsky initially posts a .650 OPS in high A?

From Kiley today on Draft Intel for all 30 teams. Sharing the top 4.

https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/49278693/2026-mlb-draft-guide-one-big-question-intel-white-sox-rays-twins-giants-pirates

Chicago White Sox

First pick: No. 1

Bonus pool: $17,592,100

One big question: What's the strategy at the top pick?

What looked like a pretty clear call entering the spring -- take college shortstop Roch Cholowsky over high school shortstop Grady Emerson -- has now become much more complicated. As Georgia Tech catcher Vahn Lackey's profile continued to rise, I felt that he was becoming a viable option at the top pick, just as the Cholowsky vs. Emerson discussion was blooming in the public and, if you believe the chatter, behind the scenes with the White Sox.

I did a quick text poll of scouts to see if they were seeing this as a virtual three-way coin flip and basically all of them said yes. I asked scouts only from teams outside of the top 10 so I could get some honest takes, and none of the scouts had their personal board lined up the same way. Some had college pitcher Jackson Flora or high school shortstop Jacob Lombard in their top three, as well. Frankly, this situation is a bit of a mess now for the White Sox: There's probably not going to be a clear, correct answer to who the best player is among their options and nobody in the industry can agree on who it is yet. White Sox fans probably will be debating this decision for years.

Tampa Bay Rays

First pick: No. 2

Bonus pool: $19,009,300

One big question: Do the Rays lean more toward upside, price or proximity at the second pick?

I don't think this question is an actual conversation happening in the Rays' room, but I more so mean the appearance of their strategy emphasizing one of these based on their decision. College stars Vahn Lackey and Roch Cholowsky both project to be in the big leagues quickly, and high schooler Grady Emerson will take longer, and some scouts think Emerson has a clearly higher ceiling but others don't see as much daylight. I don't think the cost to sign these three players will vary dramatically for the second pick, as any of them who aren't picked would expect to then go third. The Rays don't shy away from taking the best player, regardless of age/proximity or position, but when the impact could be as big and as soon as Cholowsky and Lackey offer, either would be a logical choice if Tampa Bay is on the lower end in terms of projecting Emerson's upside.

Minnesota Twins

First pick: No. 3

Bonus pool: $16,929,600

One big question: Does this year's No. 3 pick have a lot in common with the Twins' No. 5 pick in 2023?

The Twins had the fifth pick in a very clear five-player draft in 2023. Rumors swirled about how this would play out: If the Twins were lower on the player that got to them (Walker Jenkins, in the real-life scenario), would they take a clearly lesser talent for much less money to be creative later? They played hardball with Jenkins' agent (Scott Boras) and took the best player, giving him a full slot but no more. In what is widely seen as a three-player draft this year, it could be seen as an easy choice to just take the player that gets to the third pick and give them the third-highest bonus after the first two picks sign. Easy for me to say with nothing on the line, so this isn't a slam dunk, but what I've laid out is also the most likely outcome.

San Francisco Giants

First pick: No. 4

Bonus pool: $17,350,600

One big question: Do the Giants get their wish and land Emerson or Cholowsky at the fourth pick?

There has been buzz for months that the Giants are trying everything they can to get Grady Emerson or Roch Cholowsky to their pick. When this draft seemed as if it had a clear first- and second-best prospect (Cholowsky then Emerson), this was a logical thing to try with a tiny chance of working. Now that Vahn Lackey has joined the group, there's a better chance, as the Giants just need to get one team, probably the Twins, to blink and choose to take a less-consensus talent for savings. That's still unlikely, but it at least now seems conceivable. If that doesn't happen, it sounds as if San Francisco's choice will come down to Jackson Flora or Eric Booth Jr., as it appears that Jacob Lombard has fallen behind

Edited 8 hours ago8 hr by DirtySox

Besides for the question I posted about Lackey and CF, the situation also gets complicated due to the Teel factor. The Sox love Teel, and you’re not drafting Lackey to platoon. I know some will say Lackey won’t be up right away, but I don’t think it’s crazy to say he could be up by end of next year if he dominates MILB.

1 hour ago, bmags said:

I don't know really the answer here, which makes me lean to 'cut a deal', but there's no obvious deal. I'd be happiest with Roch, and am just sanguine on Emerson. For a hs shortstop, i'd prefer some louder athletic tools.

I am just gonna hope it works out.

Yeah, this angle is pretty quiet right now. If you can save a million bucks on one dude versus another, and basically give yourself another high level HS signing, that might actually break the tie for me.

The situation is a "bit of a mess" because you have three guys worthy of 1,1? That sounds like the opposite of a mess imo.

10 minutes ago, Sleepy Harold said:

They've taken the chance on injured arm talent before...

47 minutes ago, chitownsportsfan said:

The situation is a "bit of a mess" because you have three guys worthy of 1,1? That sounds like the opposite of a mess imo.

It’s a good problem theoretically, but obviously as GM you want a no doubter to help insulate yourself from selecting the wrong guy.

The general consensus here is that the Sox will take Roch; those on here who seem to have some connections seem to think it's likely Roch. Law says that the scouts want Emerson and the FO wants Lackey and Roch is a distant 3rd.
Like 2 years ago, when my only request was to not take Smith, the bloggers and those "in the know" would say "don't worry; they're not taking a pitcher." Of course, no one had much of an idea as the candidates all had questions.
But last year, everyone nailed the Carlson pick.
I am just excited to find out who it will be.

2 minutes ago, GreenSox said:

The general consensus here is that the Sox will take Roch; those on here who seem to have some connections seem to think it's likely Roch. Law says that the scouts want Emerson and the FO wants Lackey and Roch is a distant 3rd.
Like 2 years ago, when my only request was to not take Smith, the bloggers and those "in the know" would say "don't worry; they're not taking a pitcher." Of course, no one had much of an idea as the candidates all had questions.
But last year, everyone nailed the Carlson pick.
I am just excited to find out who it will be.

It's honestly a bit of a fairy tale if you'd say that 18 months ago coming off that season that in 1.5 years you'd have a .530 winning percentage, a positive RD, a 78 million dollar payroll with no bad contracts other than one remaining Beni year, a 20 WAR type position player core -- and oh, you get the 1,1 too, with all the benefits that entails throughout the draft.

3 minutes ago, chitownsportsfan said:

It's honestly a bit of a fairy tale if you'd say that 18 months ago coming off that season that in 1.5 years you'd have a .530 winning percentage, a positive RD, a 78 million dollar payroll with no bad contracts other than one remaining Beni year, a 20 WAR type position player core -- and oh, you get the 1,1 too, with all the benefits that entails throughout the draft.

That's what quality youth brings. Beni is still an albatross really, but as the only one, it's manageable. We've had some good fortune (Peters, e.g) but it's about darn time.
And yes I'm greedy: We should have been 1/1 last year and getting ready to bring up Cade Anderson. We didn't tank 2023-25: we just suc##ed.

Edited 4 hours ago4 hr by GreenSox

Even Benny was a legitimately great hitter in June (.284/.360/.597).

5 hours ago, DirtySox said:

Yea. I'm fine with any of the top 3. I just have a slight preference. I actually trust what they are doing on the development side for hitters. Whoever they pick I'm fully on board with. I'm just a dummy posting on a message board.

Don't sell yourself short Dirty Sox. You're a TREMENDOUS DUMMY.

3 minutes ago, Lukakke Appling said:

Even Benny was a legitimately great hitter in June (.284/.360/.597).

Thread drift but I think letting him DH and resting twice a week has rejuvenated his bat.

Edited 4 hours ago4 hr by chitownsportsfan

5 hours ago, fathom said:

Of course, I lost my draft expert aura when I was against the Sox picking Mike Trout. With that said, I still wish we knew if Lackey could play CF

I under stand. Is Braden fast enough to cover center? I also wonder if Banana Boy is for real.

1 hour ago, GreenSox said:

That's what quality youth brings. Beni is still an albatross really, but as the only one, it's manageable. We've had some good fortune (Peters, e.g) but it's about darn time.
And yes I'm greedy: We should have been 1/1 last year and getting ready to bring up Cade Anderson. We didn't tank 2023-25: we just suc##ed.

Not sure you can call Benintendi as “albatross” at this point. He’s not worth his contract, but he’s found a role he can be productive in and only has a year left on his contract. If a better option comes along, we can get the bulk of his contract and likely move him (pending Jerry not being a cheap f*** like usual).

I wonder if the Sox trying to get an extra pick ship has sailed at this point?

8 hours ago, fathom said:

I still wish we knew if Lackey could play CF

DING DING DING.

This is THE question of the draft if I’m in the Sox FO / scouting dept.

Doyle on Bumila. Not sure how I feel about this one. Two elbow injuries in two years might be too much for me. I think I'd rather just throw money at a healthier high upside prep arm at this point. It's a strong suit of the class. One wouldn't be hard to find at 41. Bolemon/Borthwick/Slightom/Waschmann.

https://overslotbaseball.com/articles/mlb-draft-brody-bumila-injury/

Bumila is not a normal 18-year-old. He's a 6-foot-9, 255-pound left-hander out of Bishop Feehan in Massachusetts who spent this spring doing things prep lefties simply do not do. He touched 101 mph from a remarkably low slot, holding vertical carry on a fastball that blew hitters up all spring. He was living in the upper 90s, punching out 108 hitters in 46 innings on his way to Gatorade Player of the Year in the state. Oh yeah, and also, he also happened to average 40.8 points and 20.8 rebounds a game while leading his school to a basketball state title. The engine and athleticism here are otherworldly.

The fastball is an 80. Those don't come around often. That low, unusual slot is unique in its own right from a 6-foot-9-inch hurler. When you tack on the vertical life and extension, it's the kind of pitch that can survive on its own. The changeup is the second weapon, a diving cambio that projects comfortably above-average. The slider is a work in progress; he barely trusts it yet, and the feel for spin isn't there. Fine. You don't draft an arm like this for the slider. You draft it for the ceiling, and the fastball alone carries first round discussion.

But it was not to be.

Bumila's camp informed clubs that an MRI turned up a UCL injury in that left elbow, and suddenly the outlier profile got a second, thornier layer.

So let's be honest about where this goes, and the questions ahead.

Before the news, Bumila sat 36th on our board and had climbed as high as 12th in April. He is not that anymore... not on draft night, anyway. The talent doesn't evaporate; the confidence and certainty does. What a club is buying now is a bet. It's elite, genuinely rare upside against a medical file that's already thick for a kid who can't legally drink a beer. Some war room is going to look at those traits, that fastball, that basketball-court explosiveness and decide the ceiling is worth eating the risk. I'd bet he still lands inside the top two rounds. I'd also bet he doesn't go where his stuff says he should.

Complicating the math is the fallback. Bumila is a Texas commit, but likely wouldn't pitch for the Longhorns in 2027 considering the injury and ramp up necessary as a freshman. The leverage play and the health timeline are tangled together in a way that makes the signability conversation genuinely muddy. Would Bumila consider going to school and risking a potential third injury en route to the 2029 Draft? He can still likely get seven figures in 2026. It might not be the audacious signing bonus he was expecting in April, but it's still likely to be life-altering money.

Edited 1 hour ago1 hr by DirtySox