Speaking of Vahn Lackey, he's probably just the second-best college catcher from the state of Georgia. This kid Daniel Jackson from Georgia is phenomenal. Just a sophomore, tho. Maybe next year.

Take Roch and don’t look back

16 minutes ago, oldsox said:

Speaking of Vahn Lackey, he's probably just the second-best college catcher from the state of Georgia. This kid Daniel Jackson from Georgia is phenomenal. Just a sophomore, tho. Maybe next year.

He's draft eligible and will be picked. He's not Lackey but a top 50 guy for sure. Not sure he's a catcher long-term though. Probably a corner OF guy when it's all said and done.

Edited Sunday at 11:21 PM5 days by DirtySox

3 hours ago, Soxfest said:

Take Roch and don’t look back

There’s gonna be look back. Oh boy will there be.

Keith has the White Sox going Lackey in the latest mock.

20 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Keith has the White Sox going Lackey in the latest mock.

I think he did that in his lack mock too didn’t he? And I think he said it wasn’t really what he was expecting or who he thinks is the best player (he still had Roch as his #1), but more to be contrarian for discussion purposes.

6 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

I think he did that in his lack mock too didn’t he? And I think he said it wasn’t really what he was expecting or who he thinks is the best player (he still had Roch as his #1), but more to be contrarian for discussion purposes.

This is the first Mock he had the Sox taking Lackey. He also hasn't updated his top 50 in a bit so possible Lackey has jumped Roch and he says it's what he has been hearing for the past week.

Edited Wednesday at 11:22 AM2 days by Look at Ray Ray Run

5 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

This is the first Mock he had the Sox taking Lackey. He also hasn't updated his top 50 in a bit so possible Lackey has jumped Roch and he says it's what he has been hearing for the past week.

You’re right…he had us taking Emerson last time.

Lackey has been my preference for a few weeks now, so I'm glad to hear that the Sox may be leaning in that direction. I agree with the philosophy that a team should prioritize the best player available. I also understand the appeal of shortstops, both because SS is a premium position and because shortstops are typically outstanding athletes, who are therefore capable of playing other positions. However, in this instance, Lackey is considered the better athlete.

That factor is especially important, as the Sox already have their star shortstop. They also seem committed to their catching tandem of Teel and Quero. Vargas has emerged as a future fixture at the "hot corner," and second base arguably has the most positional depth in the organization. Therefore, both Cholowsky and Lackey may need to be moved to another position, if selected.

Lackey's 5 tools and superior athleticism afford his team the luxury of playing him wherever he provides the most value, relative to the team's needs. You may know that Lackey played every position, with the exception of pitcher, in a game, for the Yellow Jackets. There is also a video of him doing gymnastic flips, during a locker room celebration. When considering athleticism, the youngster is a unicorn.

While catchers normally take longer to develop and usually need rest days, as a respite from the physically grueling punishment endured behind the plate, the Sox could use him at other positions on those days, or elect to employ him at another position, all together. Fortunately, the Sox do not have a glaring need for either a shortstop, or a catcher. For that matter, the Sox don't really have any major holes. They could figure out where he would provide the best value.

It is true that Lackey did not perform as well as Roch, during their sophomore seasons, however he outperformed him this year, and he did so against better pitching. The ACC is considered to be a better conference than the Big Ten.

Finally, I like his set up and approach in the batter's box. I have seen reports that Roch is likely going to need to make some adjustments to his. I've already mentioned elsewhere that Roch's propensity to get hit by pitches is troublesome. Major League pitchers throw too hard, in the current era, to risk injury by getting drilled so often. It also inflates his OBP, which is a little misleading, although Vahn's OBP was still significantly higher.

In the final analysis, I defer to the scouting department. They are pros and are much more capable of evaluating all of the relevant factors. I'm just glad to learn that they are apparently considering Lackey.

20 minutes ago, Lillian said:

Lackey has been my preference for a few weeks now, so I'm glad to hear that the Sox may be leaning in that direction. I agree with the philosophy that a team should prioritize the best player available. I also understand the appeal of shortstops, both because SS is a premium position and because shortstops are typically outstanding athletes, who are therefore capable of playing other positions. However, in this instance, Lackey is considered the better athlete.

That factor is especially important, as the Sox already have their star shortstop. They also seem committed to their catching tandem of Teel and Quero. Vargas has emerged as a future fixture at the "hot corner," and second base arguably has the most positional depth in the organization. Therefore, both Cholowsky and Lackey may need to be moved to another position, if selected.

Lackey's 5 tools and superior athleticism afford his team the luxury of playing him wherever he provides the most value, relative to the team's needs. You may know that Lackey played every position, with the exception of pitcher, in a game, for the Yellow Jackets. There is also a video of him doing gymnastic flips, during a locker room celebration. When considering athleticism, the youngster is a unicorn.

While catchers normally take longer to develop and usually need rest days, as a respite from the physically grueling punishment endured behind the plate, the Sox could use him at other positions on those days, or elect to employ him at another position, all together. Fortunately, the Sox do not have a glaring need for either a shortstop, or a catcher. For that matter, the Sox don't really have any major holes. They could figure out where he would provide the best value.

It is true that Lackey did not perform as well as Roch, during their sophomore seasons, however he outperformed him this year, and he did so against better pitching. The ACC is considered to be a better conference than the Big Ten.

Finally, I like his set up and approach in the batter's box. I have seen reports that Roch is likely going to need to make some adjustments to his. I've already mentioned elsewhere that Roch's propensity to get hit by pitches is troublesome. Major League pitchers throw too hard, in the current era, to risk injury by getting drilled so often. It also inflates his OBP, which is a little misleading, although Vahn's OBP was still significantly higher.

In the final analysis, I defer to the scouting department. They are pros and are much more capable of evaluating all of the relevant factors. I'm just glad to learn that they are apparently considering Lackey.

Oh no... not the mention of the backflip - Hawkins nightmares

1 minute ago, Squirmin' for Yermin said:

Oh no... not the mention of the backflip - Hawkins nightmares

I had the same thought. While i marvel at the athleticism, I cringe at the hazardous nature of such antics. I would hope that management would instruct him to stop doing it.

1 hour ago, Lillian said:

Lackey has been my preference for a few weeks now, so I'm glad to hear that the Sox may be leaning in that direction. I agree with the philosophy that a team should prioritize the best player available. I also understand the appeal of shortstops, both because SS is a premium position and because shortstops are typically outstanding athletes, who are therefore capable of playing other positions. However, in this instance, Lackey is considered the better athlete.

That factor is especially important, as the Sox already have their star shortstop. They also seem committed to their catching tandem of Teel and Quero. Vargas has emerged as a future fixture at the "hot corner," and second base arguably has the most positional depth in the organization. Therefore, both Cholowsky and Lackey may need to be moved to another position, if selected.

Lackey's 5 tools and superior athleticism afford his team the luxury of playing him wherever he provides the most value, relative to the team's needs. You may know that Lackey played every position, with the exception of pitcher, in a game, for the Yellow Jackets. There is also a video of him doing gymnastic flips, during a locker room celebration. When considering athleticism, the youngster is a unicorn.

While catchers normally take longer to develop and usually need rest days, as a respite from the physically grueling punishment endured behind the plate, the Sox could use him at other positions on those days, or elect to employ him at another position, all together. Fortunately, the Sox do not have a glaring need for either a shortstop, or a catcher. For that matter, the Sox don't really have any major holes. They could figure out where he would provide the best value.

It is true that Lackey did not perform as well as Roch, during their sophomore seasons, however he outperformed him this year, and he did so against better pitching. The ACC is considered to be a better conference than the Big Ten.

Finally, I like his set up and approach in the batter's box. I have seen reports that Roch is likely going to need to make some adjustments to his. I've already mentioned elsewhere that Roch's propensity to get hit by pitches is troublesome. Major League pitchers throw too hard, in the current era, to risk injury by getting drilled so often. It also inflates his OBP, which is a little misleading, although Vahn's OBP was still significantly higher.

In the final analysis, I defer to the scouting department. They are pros and are much more capable of evaluating all of the relevant factors. I'm just glad to learn that they are apparently considering Lackey.

I am going to say this again.

You can never have enough SSs. I don't care if you have Derrick Jeter on your roster, if you can get Arod, you bring him in and find a place to play him. Hell, Colson is currently out with a back injury. In 2 to 3 years, could it worsen? I refuse to hear that we can consider a SS because we have too many SSs. You can never have enough SSs, just like you can never have enough pitching.

You can like Lackey better, but BPA all day, and if it is a tie, the SS wins.

6 hours ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Keith has the White Sox going Lackey in the latest mock.

14 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

I am going to say this again.

You can never have enough SSs. I don't care if you have Derrick Jeter on your roster, if you can get Arod, you bring him in and find a place to play him. Hell, Colson is currently out with a back injury. In 2 to 3 years, could it worsen? I refuse to hear that we can consider a SS because we have too many SSs. You can never have enough SSs, just like you can never have enough pitching.

You can like Lackey better, but BPA all day, and if it is a tie, the SS wins.

If it’s a tie, don’t you think the Sox have more going on at SS/infield than they do at catcher? Teel is a nice idea, but so far he’s just that, an unreliable concept. Lackey shores up the catcher position. Bonemer and Carleson the infield.

12 minutes ago, Chick Mercedes said:

Anyone else notice that Jimmy seems to have backed off that it’s going to 100% be Roch in recent weeks?

Edited Wednesday at 05:19 PM2 days by Bob Sacamano

1 minute ago, Bob Sacamano said:

Anyone else notice that Jimmy seems to have backed off that it’s going to 100% be Roch in recent weeks?

Based of all his tweets/retweets today I feel like he still is very convinced Roch will be the pick.

3 minutes ago, Bob Sacamano said:

Anyone else notice that Jimmy seems to have backed off that it’s going to 100% be Roch in recent weeks?

He seems to still think it will be Roch. And I fully agree…I think Shirley really likes the kid.

Slowly backing away

2 minutes ago, Bob Sacamano said:

Anyone else notice that Jimmy seems to have backed off that it’s going to 100% be Roch in recent weeks?

Once human beings inculcate a good idea their worldview, it takes a while to warm up to an alternative view. But anyway, Lackey as a prospect went on an upward trajectory. Cholowsky plateaus in the Big 10. Momentum is real sometimes. Either way it’s nice

7 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

He seems to still think it will be Roch. And I fully agree…I think Shirley really likes the kid.

Lackey has that A plus personality and leadership gene as well. Roch had the inside track from last season and the the familiar connection already established. But business is business for big time organizations

5 minutes ago, Chick Mercedes said:

Lackey has that A plus personality and leadership gene as well. Roch had the inside track from last season and the the familiar connection already established. But business is business for big time organizations

I think both have plus makeup, so not sure I’d give Lackey an edge there. If I’m being honest, I think there is some prospect fatigue with Roch and obviously him not really taking any strides this year feeds into that. Regardless, I still feel like the Sox have a familiarly & comfort level with Roch that will push him into being the pick.

45 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

I am going to say this again.

You can never have enough SSs. I don't care if you have Derrick Jeter on your roster, if you can get Arod, you bring him in and find a place to play him. Hell, Colson is currently out with a back injury. In 2 to 3 years, could it worsen? I refuse to hear that we can consider a SS because we have too many SSs. You can never have enough SSs, just like you can never have enough pitching.

You can like Lackey better, but BPA all day, and if it is a tie, the SS wins.

Blanket statements like this almost never apply in life.

Shortstops are considered safer and good picks because of their typical athleticism meaning if they dont stick at short, they can play somewhere else if their bat plays. This means more paths towards success as a pick.

With Roch, him moving off the position actually hurts his value since he's not a great athlete but is a ++ SS. Meaning you already lose the positional flexibility and fallback position that many shortstops provide. His bat also appears more limited from the upside perspective, which means it'll play worse at other positions.

I dont actually get the Roch momentum anymore. I read in the Law article that one team had Drew Burress at the top of their board. I get that way more than a team hanging on to Cholowsky. Burress didnt out produce his freshman year as a sophomore or junior, but he was arguably as good as roch or better every year. I think I'd take Burress over Roch too.

Edit: Not saying I'd take Burress 1, just that I don't get the infatuation with Cholowsky.

Edited Wednesday at 05:50 PM2 days by Look at Ray Ray Run

I get the infactuation with Roch. But not the idea of carving his name at #1 into granite while there are clearly legitimate emerging alternatives

Edited Wednesday at 05:55 PM2 days by Chick Mercedes

One interesting quote from the chat from Law was "Lackey is a better prospect than Teel ever was. If Lackey is what everyone expects, they will move Teel."

Edited Wednesday at 05:56 PM2 days by Look at Ray Ray Run

27 minutes ago, Chick Mercedes said:

Lackey has that A plus personality and leadership gene as well. Roch had the inside track from last season and the the familiar connection already established. But business is business for big time organizations

Lackey could co-exist with Teel as well, with Lackey being a righty and Teel a lefty. One could DH while the other catches.

9 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

One interesting quote from the chat from Law was "Lackey is a better prospect than Teel ever was. If Lackey is what everyone expects, they will move Teel."

I don't see Teel mentioned at all in the chat. Can you post it?