24 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

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.

-I’m uneasy with that concept of comfort level determining the #1 over all.

-We don’t have knowledge of what’s going on with the Sox diving in to educate themselves on Lackey and his camp. How comfortable are they with Lackey? He seems pretty solid.

What is the consensus opinion regarding possible slot savings, with Lackey, to be employed in later rounds?

Edited 58 minutes ago58 min by Lillian

1 minute ago, Lillian said:

What is the consensus opinion regarding possible slot savings, with the Lackey, to be employed in later rounds

Getting noteworthy savings on what many think will be the best player in the class? How do you not pick him?

So does TLR just not think Roch is any good?

I know I've been team Emerson for months but now with Colson's uncertainty down the road in regards to his back issues, I think I might even have Roch ahead of Lackey and Lackey was my #2 guy.

Noteworthy Lackey questions from today's chat.

Jeremy K.

How does the number one prospect in this draft compare to the top guy in the previous few drafts?

Keith Law

@Jeremy K. Well it depends a little on who you think is #1, but I would say Lackey is better than the top prospect in the last two drafts (on draft day - not using hindsight on those guys).

Erica W.

Personally, I think Vahn Lackey isn't getting enough love. Is there any chance he goes over Roch or Emerson and I know ss is the "premium position", but he's a gifted hitter and a great defender at Catcher. I couldn't see him going any lower than 2nd. What's your stance on him?

Keith Law

@Erica W. In today's mock, I have him going 1st. https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/7345752/2026/06/10/mlb-mock-draft-2026-vahn-lackey-tyler-bell-roch-cholowsky/ He may be the best player in the class.

Patrick O.

After the draft, approx where in your overall top 100 prospects will Roch, Emerson, and Lackey rank?

Keith Law

@Patrick O. I haven't done that exercise yet. Typically the top 2-3 guys in a draft are top 20 prospects immediately. That said, I don't have Emerson #3 on my board.

Matt M.

Is Lackey a good enough hitter to take in top 3 if he was going to be converted from catching to say an OF?

Keith Law

@Matt M. He's too good a catcher to do that, IMO.

That might be what Ray Ray is referencing?

Also here's a bonus fun one.

Liz R.

Very interesting to think about what the Chisox might do. An org in transition in many ways. I wonder how much confidence they have in their improved ability to develop players?

Keith Law

@Liz R. A lot. And they should. Colson Montgomery was a washout, striking out nearly 50% of the time in AAA, then they rebuilt his whole swing and approach and made him a viable regular. Jacob Gonzalez was a complete bust with 2+ years of poor performance; he changed his body, stance, and setup, and I think he's going to be an All-Star. They are doing real stuff with real results.

Edited 50 minutes ago50 min by DirtySox

12 minutes ago, DirtySox said:

Getting noteworthy savings on what many think will be the best player in the class? How do you not pick him?

If it means the Sox get their dream pick in the second round, yuge. Imagine the decision.

Edited 39 minutes ago39 min by Chick Mercedes

1 hour 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?

1 hour ago, Chick Mercedes said:

Slowly backing away

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

29 minutes ago, DirtySox said:

Getting noteworthy savings on what many think will be the best player in the class? How do you not pick him?

I still think that once it's time to actually make a selection, they'll take Roch Cholowsky. I'd understand taking Grady Emerson instead though. I don't really understand the Vahn Lackey thing. He'll be cheaper for sure but catchers take forever and they don't play every day. I hate the idea of taking a catcher at #1.

1 hour ago, Chick Mercedes said:

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.

Doesn't matter. SS gives you more flexibility

6 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

Doesn't matter. SS gives you more flexibility

What if Lackey can play an above average CF but Roch cannot?

1 minute ago, SoxBlanco said:

What if Lackey can play an above average CF but Roch cannot?

If they take Lackey, he's playing catcher. He could play somewhere else but he'll be a plus defender at catcher. They wouldn't move him.

49 minutes ago, DirtySox said:

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

Go to the comments, it's in response to Dante C

1 minute ago, Y2Jimmy0 said:

If they take Lackey, he's playing catcher. He could play somewhere else but he'll be a plus defender at catcher. They wouldn't move him.

Agreed. But the post I quoted was about flexibility. You take shortstops because it gives you more flexibility in general, but is it possible that’s not the case when comparing Lackey and Cholowsky?

16 minutes ago, Y2Jimmy0 said:

I still think that once it's time to actually make a selection, they'll take Roch Cholowsky. I'd understand taking Grady Emerson instead though. I don't really understand the Vahn Lackey thing. He'll be cheaper for sure but catchers take forever and they don't play every day. I hate the idea of taking a catcher at #1.

IDK. Using the factor into a calculus that includes how long it takes to bring up a prospect doesn’t even enter my own calculus. Strict talent evaluation only for the 1-1. It gets murkier as the draft goes along. But at the very top, take the talent without compromising.

9 minutes ago, SoxBlanco said:

What if Lackey can play an above average CF but Roch cannot?

What if he can?

39 minutes ago, Chick Mercedes said:

If it means the Sox get their dream pick in the second round, yuge. Imagine the decision.

Lackey + discount is beginning to feel more tempting to me than Roch, and I still really like Roch.