1 hour ago, DirtySox said:

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

The pirates price is either too high, they changed course, or they’re getting ready to take the best offer.

One of many questions that we get an answer to in the next five days!

9 hours 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.

They're going to get a pretty substantial deal with whoever they take. I see this being in the $9.5-$9.75 million range regardless with at least $1.5 million in savings at #1.

4 hours 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.

I still lean Cholowsky for lots of reasons but I wouldn't be surprised by Enerson. I'd be shocked if they took Vahn Lackey.

2 hours ago, Y2Jimmy0 said:

I'd be shocked if they took Vahn Lackey.

The past couple of days are the first we’ve heard the FO being linked to Lackey by any writers from what I recall.

Have you heard anything yourself first or second hand to corroborate?

I can't see the Sox passing on both Roch and Emerson to grab a catcher. Lackey is talented, but drafting him would be absolutely overthinking the entire process.

1 hour ago, CWSpalehoseCWS said:

I can't see the Sox passing on both Roch and Emerson to grab a catcher. Lackey is talented, but drafting him would be absolutely overthinking the entire process.

Not if Lackey has a better hit / power / athleticism profile and would excel in a move to the outfield.

Two of the three propositions there are generally believed to be true.

I just need to make a pact with myself to not talk about the draft until Friday. 🤣

40 minutes ago, hi8is said:

Not if Lackey has a better hit / power / athleticism profile and would excel in a move to the outfield.

Two of the three propositions there are generally believed to be true.

I just need to make a pact with myself to not talk about the draft until Friday. 🤣

Well, I get that, but I highly doubt a catcher would ever beat out two top tier SS options for athleticism. There's a reason good organizations focus on SS profiles - they can literally be moved anywhere. Drafting a C to simply move him to the OF feels like poor scouting or drafting for need. If you take Lackey at 1.1 he better damn well stay at C or his value plummets IMO because you're banking on the bat to carry him. I'd rather take a chance on Emerson's potential if they aren't taking Roch.

4 hours ago, CWSpalehoseCWS said:

Well, I get that, but I highly doubt a catcher would ever beat out two top tier SS options for athleticism. There's a reason good organizations focus on SS profiles - they can literally be moved anywhere. Drafting a C to simply move him to the OF feels like poor scouting or drafting for need. If you take Lackey at 1.1 he better damn well stay at C or his value plummets IMO because you're banking on the bat to carry him. I'd rather take a chance on Emerson's potential if they aren't taking Roch.

There isn't one profile that has suggested Roch could or should play CF.

Lackey beats him in pretty much every measure in terms of athleticism.

The outfield idea is 100% not destroying his knees and preserving his bat in the lineup.

And those tools would make him a plus fielder at any number of positions, especially his elite arm strength.

If you don't/can't keep Mune, Braden perhaps moves to LF with Lackey in RF/CF, Colson SS Vargas 3B Antonacci 2B Bonemer 1B and a rotating DH.

6 hours ago, CWSpalehoseCWS said:

I can't see the Sox passing on both Roch and Emerson to grab a catcher. Lackey is talented, but drafting him would be absolutely overthinking the entire process.

Lol why?

I keep reading these comments. Lackey was better than Roch this year. Taking him makes a ton of sense. Maxed out prospects should be avoided at 1-1.

Emerson is a skills based high school player which also seems really risky. Skills don't always translate level to level, but tools do.

Lackey is by far the best athlete between the three so not sure why you're saying catchers can't be more athletic than the short stops. It's undeniable that Lackey is the best athlete of the three.

Edited July 7Jul 7 by Look at Ray Ray Run

I'd take the following players over Emerson and Roch:

Lackey
Burress
Flora
Bell
Reese

For someone really far out there, I like Strosnider's tools better, and while I probably wouldn't take him over them because I'm a coward I do think he has a higher pro ceiling and I wouldn't be surprised at all to see him have a better career. So I like him more.

1 hour ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

I'd take the following players over Emerson and Roch:

Lackey
Burress
Flora
Bell
Reese

For someone really far out there, I like Strosnider's tools better, and while I probably wouldn't take him over them because I'm a coward I do think he has a higher pro ceiling and I wouldn't be surprised at all to see him have a better career. So I like him more.

yikes

2 minutes ago, Squirmin' for Yermin said:

yikes

I know everyone likes to agree with each other in the scouting space, but there's a reason baseball has such volatility in the draft. This year is wide open to me.

2 hours ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

I'd take the following players over Emerson and Roch:

Lackey
Burress
Flora
Bell
Reese

For someone really far out there, I like Strosnider's tools better, and while I probably wouldn't take him over them because I'm a coward I do think he has a higher pro ceiling and I wouldn't be surprised at all to see him have a better career. So I like him more.

Lmao

2 hours ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

I'd take the following players over Emerson and Roch:

Lackey
Burress
Flora
Bell
Reese

For someone really far out there, I like Strosnider's tools better, and while I probably wouldn't take him over them because I'm a coward I do think he has a higher pro ceiling and I wouldn't be surprised at all to see him have a better career. So I like him more.

I respect how you take a different approach than the herd. It really adds to the discussion. I am very hit tool forward, so of those listed I like Bell. Lackey has a huge upside, but his performance against velocity scares me. I think Burress has a real shot to be Wyatt Langford-lite, but as a short R/R dead pull hitting potential corner with considerable bust potential, I think he's rich for 1/1. I wish I liked Flora more. His K numbers in a mid-major conference are honestly confusing to me. I am not a Reese fan cuz of defensive questions. But I agree, they could all be solid pros.

I am fine with any of the choices - including a surprise Flora selection at max discount.

59 minutes ago, Timmy U said:

I respect how you take a different approach than the herd. It really adds to the discussion. I am very hit tool forward, so of those listed I like Bell. Lackey has a huge upside, but his performance against velocity scares me. I think Burress has a real shot to be Wyatt Langford-lite, but as a short R/R dead pull hitting potential corner with considerable bust potential, I think he's rich for 1/1. I wish I liked Flora more. His K numbers in a mid-major conference are honestly confusing to me. I am not a Reese fan cuz of defensive questions. But I agree, they could all be solid pros.

If Burress was 5'10, id feel much better. The size is of concern, no doubt about it.

9 hours ago, CWSpalehoseCWS said:

Well, I get that, but I highly doubt a catcher would ever beat out two top tier SS options for athleticism. There's a reason good organizations focus on SS profiles - they can literally be moved anywhere. Drafting a C to simply move him to the OF feels like poor scouting or drafting for need. If you take Lackey at 1.1 he better damn well stay at C or his value plummets IMO because you're banking on the bat to carry him. I'd rather take a chance on Emerson's potential if they aren't taking Roch.

I’m not saying Lackey will be anywhere near these guys, but Harper and Schwarber were both originally catchers who got moved to the outfield shortly into their professional careers. There are probably other examples as well. It’s happened before. That said, I’d just take Roch and be done with it.

29 minutes ago, ChiSoxFanMike said:

I’m not saying Lackey will be anywhere near these guys, but Harper and Schwarber were both originally catchers who got moved to the outfield shortly into their professional careers. There are probably other examples as well. It’s happened before. That said, I’d just take Roch and be done with it.

Neither possessed his raw catching tools on the defensive side...

12 hours ago, CWSpalehoseCWS said:

Well, I get that, but I highly doubt a catcher would ever beat out two top tier SS options for athleticism. There's a reason good organizations focus on SS profiles - they can literally be moved anywhere. Drafting a C to simply move him to the OF feels like poor scouting or drafting for need. If you take Lackey at 1.1 he better damn well stay at C or his value plummets IMO because you're banking on the bat to carry him. I'd rather take a chance on Emerson's potential if they aren't taking Roch.

I have never thought of them possibly moving to shortstop - only the outfield… and Lackey isn’t your normal catcher.

The only reason it is a line of reasoning I am exploring is that he has the athleticism and skills, according to numerous publications, to be able to excel out there.

So… no, it isn’t going to tank his value.

There’s also the potential to have him and Teel split time between catching, outfield, and DH where the two have a third catcher that can spell them both once every 7 to 10 days that can also rotate around those other spots.

If Boston Smith keeps it up, he could be that type of guy… a catcher who is also getting time in left already in AA.

Just another thing to consider.

3 hours ago, caulfield12 said:

Neither possessed his raw catching tools on the defensive side...

And yet the argument a lot of people are making is to take him and move him off catcher. That screams getting too cute with the draft if they did that. You can't pull that kind of stuff with the 1-1 pick. This is a really great draft to have the 1st pick. You take the best possible player and don't overthink it. To me that's Roch at 1A, with Emerson a close 1B. Lackey is very talented, but he doesn't enter the conversation for me at 1-1. It should be down to the debate if they feel they can develop Emerson to hit his ceiling potential over maximizing Rochs current skillset. I'm not super confident they can do that yet. But, this organization has started showing the ability to maximize the toolset players have to be very successful at the MLB level. We've even heard about it in the minors with Boston Smith and how they've focused on maximizing his skillset. Give me the guy comp'd to Bregman/Tulowitski. Even if he ends up only being a Swanson-type player (a 3.7 avg bWAR player), that is extremely valuable to the organization.

I don't think it's a hot take to say that defensively, Lackey would be demonstrably better than Teel at catcher.

Throwing out another name that our boy @Y2Jimmy0 mentioned with the Sox on the FutureSox Podcast. Dylan Bowen. Checks two White Sox boxes. Prep SS and Indiana. Scouting reports from BA (164) and Over-Slot (67) to get familiar below. Jimmy also reiterated that he thinks the Sox are very much on Thome which is not surprising.

Dylan Bowen SS - Hanover Central HS, St. John IN

Bowen is certainly an up-and-comer in the 2026 class with athletic tools across his entire game. He plays with an athletic flair that is hard to miss. A solid average runner with a wide, athletic stride, Bowen figures to not only get faster as the months pass, but should hold his speed into his professional career.

Offensively it's a hit tool that has really surged over the last calendar year with added strength and reps. Bowen has a whippy stroke with show-off hand speed, direct to the ball and holds no biases to the pull-side. The bat continues to improve and is slowly becoming one of the more noteworthy sticks in the region.

Defensively, Bowel plays with range and tempo up the middle of the diamond with enough arm strength to project at shortstop going forward, though an unorthodox arm action and inconsistent arm accuracy may encourage him to second base over time. Bowen plays low to the ground with quick hands, fast transfers and bounce in his step.

He's an exciting young player who continues to get better. Bowen is on the older side and will be 19.5 years old on draft day.

Scouting Grades: Hit: 55 | Power: 45 | Speed: 55 | Field: 50 | Arm: 50

Dylan Bowen SS

Ht: 5'11" | Wt: 190 | B-T: R-R

School: Hanover Central HS, Cedar Lake, Ind. Committed/Drafted: Oklahoma State. Age At Draft: 19.4.

BA Grade/Risk: 50/High

Adjusted Grade: 35

Scouts believed Bowen was a skills-over-tools player after the 2025 summer circuit, but he had a strong offseason and came out in the spring with a louder toolset that pushed him up draft boards. He also tweaked his offensive setup. After using an extremely low handset over the summer, Bowen now starts his hands higher, which gets him to his launch position with less movement. He has a solid track record of making a lot of contact and should hit plenty of line-drive doubles into the gaps with some occasional pullside power. Defensively, Bowen has the tools to stick at shortstop. He moves well with solid hands and above-average arm strength. He’s also a plus runner who will turn in 65-grade run times from home to first. Bowen is an Oklahoma State commit and comes from an athletic family. His brother, Drayk, is a linebacker at Notre Dame.

Scouting Grades: Hit: 50 | Power: 45 | Speed: 60 | Field: 50 | Arm: 55

Edited July 7Jul 7 by DirtySox

5 hours ago, Bonemer, I Hardly Know Her said:

Lmao

Whats funny is people like you who just parrot some consensus and then act like it's etched in stone and laugh at anything to the contrary.

18 minutes ago, CWSpalehoseCWS said:

And yet the argument a lot of people are making is to take him and move him off catcher. That screams getting too cute with the draft if they did that. You can't pull that kind of stuff with the 1-1 pick. This is a really great draft to have the 1st pick. You take the best possible player and don't overthink it. To me that's Roch at 1A, with Emerson a close 1B. Lackey is very talented, but he doesn't enter the conversation for me at 1-1. It should be down to the debate if they feel they can develop Emerson to hit his ceiling potential over maximizing Rochs current skillset. I'm not super confident they can do that yet. But, this organization has started showing the ability to maximize the toolset players have to be very successful at the MLB level. We've even heard about it in the minors with Boston Smith and how they've focused on maximizing his skillset. Give me the guy comp'd to Bregman/Tulowitski. Even if he ends up only being a Swanson-type player (a 3.7 avg bWAR player), that is extremely valuable to the organization.

How is this a great draft to have number 1? If anything, it's a middling draft.

7 hours ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

I'd take the following players over Emerson and Roch:

Lackey
Burress
Flora
Bell
Reese

For someone really far out there, I like Strosnider's tools better, and while I probably wouldn't take him over them because I'm a coward I do think he has a higher pro ceiling and I wouldn't be surprised at all to see him have a better career. So I like him more.

This is an absolutely ridiculous take. No scout would have Roch or Emerson ranked 6th or lower. Just a clickbait post looking for attention.

9 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

This is an absolutely ridiculous take. No scout would have Roch or Emerson ranked 6th or lower. Just a clickbait post looking for attention.

I think you and WestEddy keep telling on yourself with the "looking for attention" comments.

That's my opinion. There are thousands of baseball scouts. If you think they all share the same opinion on those players, you my friend are the delusional one. The community as a whole absolutely hive-minds their thoughts though.

These are all projections of volatile assets. It's always safe to say one or two guys are clearly above the rest, but that's less frequent the case than more. Most scouts didn't have Zach Neto ahead of Jackson Holliday. Most scouts didn't have Bonemer, Yesavage and Griffin ahead of Hagen. The differences between these guys are an adjustment or two from relevance vs irrelevance.

Edit: Just adding I'm not saying I called the above, although clearly Bonemer been my guy forever and I was/am a huge Neto guy.

Edited July 7Jul 7 by Look at Ray Ray Run