"Enter Call. The junior, who was credited with the RBI walk to win the Big Ten tournament, laced a single into an unoccupied left field to end it (against VA Tech).

Star Roch Cholowsky was the first player to reach his jubilant teammate, seconds later joined by a sea of blue jerseys. They will take on Saint Mary’s at 4 p.m. ET on Sunday for a spot in the regional final against Cal Poly."

Edited yesterday at 10:41 AM1 day by caulfield12

9 hours ago, ron883 said:

I know you don't take a stud catcher off the position regularly... But is it crazy to think Lackey in CF would be easily preferred over a catcher? Feels like you'd get way more value out of a stud CFer. Wish we know how he'd play out there.

@Y2Jimmy0 are you still firmly in the "pick Roch" camp?

9 hours ago, SoxBlanco said:

I’m also curious to hear what James thinks at this point. The only thing I’d give the nod to Roch to at this point is that he plays SS.

But Lackey is having a better season, improved upon last year, plays in a better conference, and has an arrow that is pointing straight up.

The first thing I must point out is that many people are way too focused on outcomes in these tiny samples of regional games. The White Sox will factor in how guys play in the tournament but the play by play of Lackey looking better than Cholowsky isn't what the Sox are focused on and they should be removed from their jobs if they are. It's a cop out answer but the Sox need to take the best player. I'm guessing the 3 legitimate options are Cholowsky, Emerson and Lackey. The totality of their production matters. It will all be accounted for. They care a lot about makeup though and this is still a projection business. It's puzzling to me that people think any of these guys are finished products. Cholowsky is a swing and approach alteration away from looking like a guy with a much higher ceiling. He's also a great defender at shortstop and from all indications has everything the Sox look for from a makeup standpoint. Money matters too but when you have the top pick, you need to take your top guy. I love Grady Emerson. My issue with him is that he won't be much cheaper than Roch and you're basically hoping that he's as good or better than Cholowsky is in a few years. Both should be in the $9.5-$10 million range. Lackey will be cheaper than that because he has a different agent. The number I heard floated for him at #1 was $8.7 million. I've heard a lot of things though and it's tough to decipher what's true. I generally would prefer to take a shortstop and if that's Emerson, I'd be fine with it. They just better be right. I'm not that interested in taking Lackey at 1. I just don't like the idea of taking a catcher and I think taking him with the intention of moving him is dumb. I'm a coward and I'd probably still take Cholowsky but I understand why some are underwhelmed.

https://www.boston.com/sports/boston-red-sox/2013/05/29/players_at_other_positions/

Biggio, Dale Murphy, Carlos Delgado, Ibanez, Daulton Varsho

Edited yesterday at 12:43 PM1 day by caulfield12

47 minutes ago, Y2Jimmy0 said:

The first thing I must point out is that many people are way too focused on outcomes in these tiny samples of regional games. The White Sox will factor in how guys play in the tournament but the play by play of Lackey looking better than Cholowsky isn't what the Sox are focused on and they should be removed from their jobs if they are. It's a cop out answer but the Sox need to take the best player. I'm guessing the 3 legitimate options are Cholowsky, Emerson and Lackey. The totality of their production matters. It will all be accounted for. They care a lot about makeup though and this is still a projection business. It's puzzling to me that people think any of these guys are finished products. Cholowsky is a swing and approach alteration away from looking like a guy with a much higher ceiling. He's also a great defender at shortstop and from all indications has everything the Sox look for from a makeup standpoint. Money matters too but when you have the top pick, you need to take your top guy. I love Grady Emerson. My issue with him is that he won't be much cheaper than Roch and you're basically hoping that he's as good or better than Cholowsky is in a few years. Both should be in the $9.5-$10 million range. Lackey will be cheaper than that because he has a different agent. The number I heard floated for him at #1 was $8.7 million. I've heard a lot of things though and it's tough to decipher what's true. I generally would prefer to take a shortstop and if that's Emerson, I'd be fine with it. They just better be right. I'm not that interested in taking Lackey at 1. I just don't like the idea of taking a catcher and I think taking him with the intention of moving him is dumb. I'm a coward and I'd probably still take Cholowsky but I understand why some are underwhelmed.

Good point about makeup. Do you know anything about Lackey’s makeup?

Also, it’s really not the small sample size from regional games that people are looking at, is it? The full season stats for Lackey are insane, and he’s doing it in a better conference than Cholowsky. Slugging around .800 with a BB% near 18% has to be pretty rare.

I’m trying to think of players in the last 15 years or so who have done that. Ivan Menendez and Brent Rooker come to mind, but they were 1B/LF type players who struck out close to 20% of the time.

Kris Bryant obviously did it. He had one of the best college seasons ever.

Andrew Vaughn is probably the best comparison when looking at slugging that high, walking that much, and not striking out much.

12 minutes ago, SoxBlanco said:

Good point about makeup. Do you know anything about Lackey’s makeup?

Also, it’s really not the small sample size from regional games that people are looking at, is it? The full season stats for Lackey are insane, and he’s doing it in a better conference than Cholowsky. Slugging around .800 with a BB% near 18% has to be pretty rare.

I’m trying to think of players in the last 15 years or so who have done that. Ivan Menendez and Brent Rooker come to mind, but they were 1B/LF type players who struck out close to 20% of the time.

Kris Bryant obviously did it. He had one of the best college seasons ever.

Andrew Vaughn is probably the best comparison when looking at slugging that high, walking that much, and not striking out much.

Right but why do we discard his sophomore season and place more emphasis on Roch's junior season? The discourse doesn't make sense. GT also has the best offense in the country and nobody has been able to avoid Lackey all season. I'm sure he has great makeup. I don't think that's an issue. I think the issue is spending the #1 pick on a player who should be a cornerstone but then playing him in like 120 games maximum in the big leagues. I just don't want a catcher.

6 minutes ago, Y2Jimmy0 said:

Right but why do we discard his sophomore season and place more emphasis on Roch's junior season? The discourse doesn't make sense. GT also has the best offense in the country and nobody has been able to avoid Lackey all season. I'm sure he has great makeup. I don't think that's an issue. I think the issue is spending the #1 pick on a player who should be a cornerstone but then playing him in like 120 games maximum in the big leagues. I just don't want a catcher.

I don’t think anybody is ignoring Roch’s 2025 season. But wouldn’t you want a guy whose arrow is pointing up rather than pointing sideways or slightly down?

And if you take Lackey, you can’t play him only 120 games. You would need to play him at a different position for another 30 games or so.

Look, both guys are great. I’m just pushing you on it because I like to hear from both sides. I’m reading many pro-Lackey posts lately, and I want to read more pro-Cholowsky posts.

43 minutes ago, SoxBlanco said:

I don’t think anybody is ignoring Roch’s 2025 season. But wouldn’t you want a guy whose arrow is pointing up rather than pointing sideways or slightly down?

And if you take Lackey, you can’t play him only 120 games. You would need to play him at a different position for another 30 games or so.

Look, both guys are great. I’m just pushing you on it because I like to hear from both sides. I’m reading many pro-Lackey posts lately, and I want to read more pro-Cholowsky posts.

https://sports.yahoo.com/articles/roch-cholowskys-case-no-1-120007754.html

There you go. That said, the competition in the ACC across the board is always going to beat the cold weather B10.

North Carolina and FSU is way better than Oregon, USC and Nebraska.

Edited yesterday at 02:47 PM1 day by caulfield12

Has anyone mentioned Roch's extraordinary propensity to get hit by pitches? if you subtract the 15 more HBP's for Roch, compared to Lackey's, the disparity in their OBP numbers is even greater. Getting hit so frequently may be acceptable for a guy like Antonacci, but not for a valued top of the Draft SS. Getting hit 24 times in 60 games is not conducive to avoiding injury.

Lillian is back! I hope you are enjoying your lefties.

1 minute ago, DirtySox said:

Lillian is back! I hope you are enjoying your lefties.

Yes, it's very gratifying to see that the front office appears to have made a concerted effort to create better balance in the lineup. At this point, the Sox might need a little more power from the right side. Roch, or Lackey would address that need.

35 minutes ago, Lillian said:

Yes, it's very gratifying to see that the front office appears to have made a concerted effort to create better balance in the lineup. At this point, the Sox might need a little more power from the right side. Roch, or Lackey would address that need.

We're almost TOO left handed at this point. It's getting out of hand.

Get me some righties!

1 hour ago, Lillian said:

Has anyone mentioned Roch's extraordinary propensity to get hit by pitches? if you subtract the 15 more HBP's for Roch, compared to Lackey's, the disparity in their OBP numbers is even greater. Getting hit so frequently may be acceptable for a guy like Antonacci, but not for a valued top of the Draft SS. Getting hit 24 times in 60 games is not conducive to avoiding injury.

My god we still have like 5 more weeks of this. How many times did he get hit by pitches on Fridays against a top starter though?

3 minutes ago, Y2Jimmy0 said:

My god we still have like 5 more weeks of this. How many times did he get hit by pitches on Fridays against a top starter though?

He gets hit a lot because up and in is the current hole in his swing. He does a great job on low and away offspeed

While stats are nice, it does come down to tools and ability. Some guys might be great college players, but will their abilities translate?

1 hour ago, Y2Jimmy0 said:

My god we still have like 5 more weeks of this. How many times did he get hit by pitches on Fridays against a top starter though?

Can Roch do it on a cold night in Stoke?

Vaughn is growing on me some, but still don’t like the idea of taking a catcher at the 1.01 and find it super unlikely they’d move him off that spot.

4 hours ago, Y2Jimmy0 said:

The number I heard floated for him at #1 was $8.7 million. I've heard a lot of things though and it's tough to decipher what's true

Sign me up all day long.

4 hours ago, Y2Jimmy0 said:

I'm a coward

It’s “easy” - I’d say, to be a “coward” when you’re going 1:1.

Otherwise the totality of your sentiment was exactly to a T the logic all LLM models were expressing. 😆

Likely because you are expressing industry standards and they too were pulling industry standards when I explicitly instructed them to omit any ranking data from publications.

3 hours ago, SoxBlanco said:

Good point about makeup. Do you know anything about Lackey’s makeup?

Leader of the team, always beaming ear to ear, a joy in the clubhouse and respectful kid. Mentally tough.

Those are all descriptive words I’ve heard applied to him.

I’m afraid he’s going to end up with the Twins and will be a terror against us for years.

usually you hear that SS are the most versatile athlete on the field and can play almost anywhere but C/P, but let's say the Sox draft Roch, that would be 4 of our top 5 SS who have never played the outfield afaik, not sure if Billy Carlson has or if he can

15 minutes ago, joejoesox said:

usually you hear that SS are the most versatile athlete on the field and can play almost anywhere but C/P, but let's say the Sox draft Roch, that would be 4 of our top 5 SS who have never played the outfield afaik, not sure if Billy Carlson has or if he can

Carlson is arguably the best defensive SS of the crop. He should be the least likely to move.

UCLA definitely feeling the pressure.

Only up 3-2 vs. StMary's in the fourth.

Cholowsky had a ball play him at SS.

Nebraska getting rolled today by ASU after losing yesterday.

UCLA vs St Mary's: https://dlhd.pk/watch.php?id=316

Roch 1 for 3, with a K this game, no RBIs

5-4 UCLA in the 6th, St Mary's adds another run on a wild pitch and a basehit to right

Georgia Tech vs Oklahoma, 2-0 GT in the 1st, Lackey 0-1 with a K so far

Top of the 9th, Roch up, first pitch pops up in foul territory.

Edited 23 hours ago23 hr by joejoesox