Speaking of the draft:

On3

MLB Proposes Banning HS Prospects in Draft, A Potential B...

The college baseball talent pool will grow tremendously if the MLB discontinues the practice of drafting high school players.

This would be so bad for the game of baseball!

26 minutes ago, Lip Man 1 said:

Speaking of the draft:

On3

MLB Proposes Banning HS Prospects in Draft, A Potential B...

The college baseball talent pool will grow tremendously if the MLB discontinues the practice of drafting high school players.

Good bye 2027 baseball season

2 hours ago, Bob Sacamano said:

Good bye 2027 baseball season

I wouldn't be surprised if your belief is accurate.

I’d be fine with Roch or Emerson. I love Vahn, but to me that profile just adds an extra layer of uncertainty. While it would be incredible to get a franchise player, it would be moreso crushing to get a dud. A good-great regular is a good-great outcome as well.

Edited June 19Jun 19 by Lukakke Appling

I still don’t know how it could be anyone other than Roch. It shouldn’t take him that long to get to MLB and the fact that he’s right handed is a nice bonus too. I would understand Emerson if his upside was significantly higher, but I don’t think that’s the case.

4 minutes ago, ChiSoxFanMike said:

I still don’t know how it could be anyone other than Roch. It shouldn’t take him that long to get to MLB and the fact that he’s right handed is a nice bonus too. I would understand Emerson if his upside was significantly higher, but I don’t think that’s the case.

Do you agree that KenWo might be the dumbest "popular" Sox fan on twitter?

6 minutes ago, ron883 said:

Do you agree that KenWo might be the dumbest "popular" Sox fan on twitter?

I like KenWo. I don’t always agree with him but he’s a true fan and he knows his stuff.

56 minutes ago, ChiSoxFanMike said:

I still don’t know how it could be anyone other than Roch. It shouldn’t take him that long to get to MLB and the fact that he’s right handed is a nice bonus too. I would understand Emerson if his upside was significantly higher, but I don’t think that’s the case.

So play Colson at 3B and Vargas at 2B?

Seems crazy to move two players off their best positions where they provide the most value to the team.

And then there's the issue of benching Meidroth as well.

1 hour ago, caulfield12 said:

So play Colson at 3B and Vargas at 2B?

Seems crazy to move two players off their best positions where they provide the most value to the team.

And then there's the issue of benching Meidroth as well.

Even without factoring in Roch - we’re going to be facing an infield crunch sooner than later when you also consider all of the talent we already have in the minors.

2 hours ago, hi8is said:

Even without factoring in Roch - we’re going to be facing an infield crunch sooner than later when you also consider all of the talent we already have in the minors.

Carlson is the only one that would have defensive priority at both SS/2B...if he could hit at least for a 675-700 ops.

6 hours ago, hi8is said:

Even without factoring in Roch - we’re going to be facing an infield crunch sooner than later when you also consider all of the talent we already have in the minors.

That is exactly what I am hoping for, too much talent on our hands.

It is easy to Monday morning QB on drafts selections/FA/ trades but kudos to the White Sox for standing above the crowd on signing Murakami. Remember Mune was the guy that couldn't hit MLB pitching.

9 hours ago, caulfield12 said:

So play Colson at 3B and Vargas at 2B?

Seems crazy to move two players off their best positions where they provide the most value to the team.

And then there's the issue of benching Meidroth as well.

Just take the most talented player and worry about the rest later. If they deem Roch as the best player in this class, they should take him.

12 hours ago, ron883 said:

Do you agree that KenWo might be the dumbest "popular" Sox fan on twitter?

There is a metric-fuckton of candidates

12 hours ago, caulfield12 said:

So play Colson at 3B and Vargas at 2B?

Seems crazy to move two players off their best positions where they provide the most value to the team.

And then there's the issue of benching Meidroth as well.

I like the Sox infield - a group with superb skills at their respective positions. Each player fits perfectly into the line-up.

Edited June 19Jun 19 by tray

13 hours ago, caulfield12 said:

Carlson is the only one that would have defensive priority at both SS/2B...if he could hit at least for a 675-700 ops.

I have faith in his bat coming around as he grows up. Kids so young!

9 hours ago, Falstaff said:

That is exactly what I am hoping for, too much talent on our hands.

Yep yep - allows us to make some smart trades when the time is right. Question now is - is the time right?

I say no.

Not because of our teams chances this year but rather because of the perceived value of our next wave of youngsters.

16 hours ago, hi8is said:

Even without factoring in Roch - we’re going to be facing an infield crunch sooner than later when you also consider all of the talent we already have in the minors.

We will, but this isn't the time to sort it out

14 hours ago, Falstaff said:

That is exactly what I am hoping for, too much talent on our hands.

I just wish we could balance that with some outfield talent. Obviously the answer is to make some trades.

What's the going rate on the trade market for outfield value vs. infield value this year? Like are infielders more valued and puts us in a position to get a better outfielder?

4 hours ago, GreenSox said:

We will, but this isn't the time to sort it out

Agreed

On 6/19/2026 at 8:20 AM, Falstaff said:

It is easy to Monday morning QB on drafts selections/FA/ trades but kudos to the White Sox for standing above the crowd on signing Murakami. Remember Mune was the guy that couldn't hit MLB pitching.

Now Murakami is just the guy who can't run MLB bases.

As the Draft approaches, most are focused on whom they would prefer that the Sox select, with their coveted 1ST overall pick. For me, I humbly defer to the organization, and hope that those involved in the evaluation process have thoroughly done their due diligence. What I find interesting and worthy of discussion is the process and some of the typical rationals employed in executing it.

One of the most commonly advocated strategies is to simply take the best player available. It disregards factors such as the relative value of the player's defensive position, and his suitability to shift to other positions, as well as team needs. Contradicting that philosophy is the notion that shortstops should be preferred, not only because SS is a highly valued position, but also because shortstops are usually the best athletes, which makes them versatile enough to play other positions. Catchers, while considered key defenders, are less favored, due to longer required development time, susceptibility to injury and physical degradation, and the inability to play every day. 

Those are just some of the strategies and rationales cited as guiding principles in the selection process. Perhaps it would be better to focus more upon specific traits and capabilities, than to adhere strictly to those kinds of generalizations. Athleticism, versatility and durability are all valuable traits in a player's profile. 

The evaluation process becomes more nuanced using this approach. A good case in point is the evaluation of Cholowsky versus Lackey. Roch is regarded as a plus defender, at a premium defensive position, while  Vahn would seemingly carry the stigma normally associated with catchers. However, if they are evaluated more on the basis of their traits, a different picture emerges. Lackey is considered to be a better athlete with more versatility. Therefore, in this case, it is the catcher who possesses the better potential to move to another premium position. Cholowsky is a plus defensive shortstop, but he lacks the speed to play another premium position, such as centerfield, and his value would be diminished if he were moved to another infield position. Thus the cliche about never having too many shortstops doesn't apply, in this more nuanced example.

When we consider that the Sox' biggest young star is a plus defender at shortstop, and that their number 5 overall pick in last year's draft was selected primarily for his elite defense at short, the decision becomes even more difficult. Carlson, Montgomery and Cholowsky all provide the most value if they remain at SS. Carlson loses most of his value, if he is moved off of short. Montgomery appears best suited there and Roch's value would also be diminished if he were moved to second, or third. Perhaps you can indeed have too many shortstops 

Everyone remembers we had peak TA when we drafted Colson, right?

One of Bonomer or Carlson is getting traded for a starter at the deadline for sure. So you take Roch.