Register now to remove this ad

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 29 of 29

Thread: Baseball America Top 100

  1. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by sk7326 View Post
    Kinda sorta - if Dombrowski showed up, did his analysis of the farm, identified Benintendi and Devers as the keepers and decided everything else was better sourced by the major league team, at least within the time frame which matters here. Espinoza and Kopech were ultimately dealt because they were pitchers, and come with an inherently much wider range of outcomes than position players. I was not a fan of the Pomeranz trade, but the idea of seeing a toolsy single-A pitcher with a wiry frame and saying "there's a lot of risk there" is pretty defensible.

    Moncada they looked at him in 2016 and clearly decided he was not the best 3B prospect in the org - so time to use him to get Sale.
    As we have already seen with Espinoza...
    "Let's go!" - Joseph Kelly Jr

  2. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by sk7326 View Post
    Oh I disagree there - I mean the Cubs put a ton of chips on the table in 2016, because they knew they had a great team ... and those players deserved the best possible swing at a title. Even if it didn't work - it was the right thing to do. Life is precious, and you have to pounce on opportunities.

    This is not a defense of "Bagwell for Andersen" moves which were just a poor use of resources.

    The Sox built this team the right way - it is hard to have an issue with using blocked minor leaguers and lower level pitchers to try to fill in some gaps. It is on Henry to prioritize finding kids for the next generation (and to open up the checkbook for the stars of today when appropriate).
    My point is this: If given the choice between having monster team for 3 years, then potentially being out of contention for the next 3 years, or of having a contending team year in an year out, I'm going with the latter. How much greater is the monster team's probability of winning the World Series over the contending team. Is it a big enough difference to go for broke? IMO, it's not.

    If Dombrowski keeps us in contention after 2020, then I will readily admit how wrong I was.

  3. #18
    It's hard to imagine us being totally out of contention for 3 years, if we are right below the luxury tax from 2020 to 2022.

    It's easy to imagine us not being a top contender from 2021 to 2022 or 2023, but I doubt we finish 4th or 5th for 2 out of 3 seasons, let alone all 3.

    We will struggle to fill the roster with quality, inexpensive players, but the budget should keep us fairly competitive (make the playoffs 1 out of those 3 years?).

    I'm hoping we get some surprises from the farm, but I'm not overly optimistic.

  4. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by moonslav59 View Post
    It's hard to imagine us being totally out of contention for 3 years, if we are right below the luxury tax from 2020 to 2022.

    It's easy to imagine us not being a top contender from 2021 to 2022 or 2023, but I doubt we finish 4th or 5th for 2 out of 3 seasons, let alone all 3.

    We will struggle to fill the roster with quality, inexpensive players, but the budget should keep us fairly competitive (make the playoffs 1 out of those 3 years?).

    I'm hoping we get some surprises from the farm, but I'm not overly optimistic.
    I'm not saying that we'll necessarily finish in last place (or even 4th), but rather that we will not be expected to make the postseason for those seasons. It might not be for 3 years, but then again, it might be.

  5. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by Kimmi View Post
    I'm not saying that we'll necessarily finish in last place (or even 4th), but rather that we will not be expected to make the postseason for those seasons. It might not be for 3 years, but then again, it might be.
    Or not.

  6. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by sk7326 View Post
    Kinda sorta - if Dombrowski showed up, did his analysis of the farm, identified Benintendi and Devers as the keepers and decided everything else was better sourced by the major league team, at least within the time frame which matters here. Espinoza and Kopech were ultimately dealt because they were pitchers, and come with an inherently much wider range of outcomes than position players. I was not a fan of the Pomeranz trade, but the idea of seeing a toolsy single-A pitcher with a wiry frame and saying "there's a lot of risk there" is pretty defensible.

    Moncada they looked at him in 2016 and clearly decided he was not the best 3B prospect in the org - so time to use him to get Sale.
    Probably. Maybe DD really wanted Moncada over Devers, but the CWS insisted on Moncada.

    Or not.

  7. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by Bellhorn04 View Post
    Or not.
    LOL Touche'.

  8. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by moonslav59 View Post
    Probably. Maybe DD really wanted Moncada over Devers, but the CWS insisted on Moncada.

    Or not.
    I agree. It does appear that Dombrowski made the right choice on who to keep, but maybe it really wasn't his choice.

  9. #24
    Very important year coming up for groome. He needs to pitch to his potential while putting his father’s issues behind him. A very tall order.

    His stuff is really good and his curveball is a plus pitch. How does that translate starting in April?

    Is he pitches to his ability, he could be in Portland by August. (Hopefully with matta)

  10. #25
    Groome will be 19 for most of the 2018 season and has a max of 55IP in a season to this point. My anticipation is he will have an innings cap around 100-110. It will be hard for him to traverse A and A+ ball with that innings cap.
    The rebuild is complete.

  11. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by Larry Cook View Post
    Very important year coming up for groome. He needs to pitch to his potential while putting his father’s issues behind him. A very tall order.

    His stuff is really good and his curveball is a plus pitch. How does that translate starting in April?

    Is he pitches to his ability, he could be in Portland by August. (Hopefully with matta)
    Mata is 18 and Groome is 19.

    soxprospects.com has Mata starting the season in high-A ball (Salem) and Groome starting the season in low-A (Greenville).

    I guess it's possible one or both end the season in Portland, but I'm not sure if that should be the measure used to judge their 2018 success.

    Both have high ceilings. soxprospects.com gives Groome a 3-7 scale and Mata a 3-6 scale.

    BTW, Tanner Houck, 21, starts the year in Greenville, according to soxprospects.com. His scale is also listed at 3-6.

  12. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by moonslav59 View Post
    Mata is 18 and Groome is 19.
    Sometimes I overlook just how young some of these prospects are. Especially when it feels like we've been talking about them for a long time.

  13. #28
    If Groome just pitches for a full season, it would be a success to me.
    "Let's go!" - Joseph Kelly Jr

  14. #29
    I saw matta pitch a couple games last season. His stuff does not scream like groome’s but sometimes when you stand next to a super bright light like groome, talent evaluators tend to be blinded to just how good your stuff is. And that is why I am very high in matta’s potential as a #3 or #4 starter.

    Did not see houck pitch in pro ball last year, but saw him a couple times in college. Best bet for him is he is our future closer.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •