We can't know who will be available with any certainty (though feel free to speculate along with your answer), so just tell us who you want to get, and why.
Who Would You Like the Sox to Draft in the First Round?
- Thread starter pokey_reese
- Start date
There should be options for “I have no idea” and a “cute pick” - whoever will take an under slot deal.
The top 5, maybe 6 or 7 is so amorphous that any of them with extra money to spread around seems like the best option.
The top 5, maybe 6 or 7 is so amorphous that any of them with extra money to spread around seems like the best option.
I would like the Red Sox to choose Jordan Lawlar because I miss the many incarnations of Clay Buchholz and, more pertinently, believe Lawlar is the best player available in this draft. However, I strongly doubt Lawlar is selected any lower than second overall and think the Red Sox will pick Kumar Rocker so that Liverpool can enter into a co-branding agreement with White Castle.
Judging by the conversation in the draft thread and the first post in this one, the intention was to ask who do you prefer, not what do you predict.
Mayer or Davis. Bats are statistically a better bet and I don't love any of the pitchers enough to want them over the top hitters.
I said Rocker. Maybe I'm still overly infatuated with his 19-strikeouts-on-19-curveballs game six months ago. But it's just been a long time since the Red Sox drafted and developed a top of the rotation starter. I'd be thrilled with Leiter too, the position players could be great, but Rocker feels like the best bet to end up with a homegrown stud on the mound. And he just seems fun.
Exactly this. Would love Leiter too, but Rocker has horse written all over him. Great stuff, great mix, and a professional backside.
I want Leiter but think he’s gone. The lack of a plus fastball and command of it is starting to worry me about Rocker. Because of that, I’m a Davis guy. The Red Sox really need to land this one and the top college bat has a much better chance of hitting than any pitcher.
According to fangraphs Rocker has largely sat around 94-97 with his four seamer this year. The article briefly mentions he has good command of his FB and he has a 4.81 K:BB in the NCAA overall. I think the problem seems to be that he threw a career high in pitches and then in his subsequent two starts he topped out at 92 and 94 respectively and averaged 90. The velocity came back in recent starts, but there was a strange two start dip.
His FB isn't his best pitch, but that article also mentions an intentional change in arm angle that's resulted in improved shape. I'm not sure it's fair to say he "lacks a plus fastball." Weird two start dip in velocity, but overall I don't think there is much of a knock on his repertoire.
His FB isn't his best pitch, but that article also mentions an intentional change in arm angle that's resulted in improved shape. I'm not sure it's fair to say he "lacks a plus fastball." Weird two start dip in velocity, but overall I don't think there is much of a knock on his repertoire.
You guys are getting me excited to land any one of the top four guys. And Chaim seems like he knows what he's doing, so I have a fairly high degree of confidence that whoever he takes will produce a good result.
I'd really consider Mayer if he fell to us. Plus defender, who is projected to hit for more power as he grows. He could take over SS when Xander has to eventually move to 3rd and Devers moves to 1st/DH.
I put Leiter in the poll, gun to my head. But they can't really go wrong...
I would prefer they get a premium talent and not try any underslot shenanigans, but I'm fully prepared for it to happen and understand why it's a smart strategy. But a stud SP or C prospect is needed in the system, for sure.
I hope we won't regret them losing the 3rd pick to Detroit late last season in a bout of winning... Pirates and Rangers were uncatchable as it was.
I would prefer they get a premium talent and not try any underslot shenanigans, but I'm fully prepared for it to happen and understand why it's a smart strategy. But a stud SP or C prospect is needed in the system, for sure.
I hope we won't regret them losing the 3rd pick to Detroit late last season in a bout of winning... Pirates and Rangers were uncatchable as it was.
I voted for Leiter, who seems to have just about everything you want in a pitching prospect -- successful experience at a top tier program, great stuff and a good idea about how to pitch, poise, and good health.
Shit, I just jinxed it.
That said, I love the top five contenders and trust in Chaim. That said, I reserve the right to revoke that trust if the Sox play it cute by playing cap games with that high-end pick.
Shit, I just jinxed it.
That said, I love the top five contenders and trust in Chaim. That said, I reserve the right to revoke that trust if the Sox play it cute by playing cap games with that high-end pick.
I voted Leiter but think he's definitely a top 3. If either of the two pitchers fall to 4, the Sox will take him and I'd be thrilled with Rocker, but I also think the top 3 are Rocker, Leiter and then Lawler.
I suspect they'll end up with Davis. Fine!
I suspect they'll end up with Davis. Fine!
I am excited the Sox have a top 5 pick but looking back at the top 5 picks of the 2010s drafts is sobering. The best #4 selection since Ryan Zimmerman in 2005 is Kevin Gausman with 13.9 bWAR. It is easy to get worked up about these guys when I am reading these very generous prospect profiles on all the baseball sites but the MLB draft always seems like more of a crapshoot, getting lucky with a few players you draft in the 5th round. 2015 and 2013, the years we had the 7 overall pick, we got a total of 9.8 bWAR from 2015 draftees and 0 bWAR from 2013 draftees.
I voted Lawler, but I would be happy with Mayer or Leiter as well. If they go for a hitter, I would take the guy with the best hit tool and general bat-to-ball skills, just because we've seen guys with great hand-eye coordination and bat control be able to adapt their swings for more power if they want it, but I'm not sure it works the other way around. I can't imagine a Mark Reynolds or Chris Davis type being able to turn into a high-contact singles hitter, even with coaching and incentives. Launch angle can be taught, but I'm not sure how much hand-eye skills can. Same with the pitcher, it just seems like the league is littered with guys who have great stuff but never really harness it, so give me a command/control guy and see if a coach can coax another few mph out of the arm, or up the spin rate on the curve.
So the most recent #4 pick to make the Majors is Nick Madrigal (2018) of the White Sox. I'm admittedly "scouting" based on his BBRef page right now, but he kind of seems like a throwback MI type - not much power, but he gets on base. Obviously he's still young, but barring a breakout, he seems like a pretty useful player for a good team. If he were Boston's starting 2B, I don't think I'd complain. But it's maybe a good example of how it might be wise to temper expectations a bit - more "solid regular" than "future All-Star." And Madrigal will likely wind up as one of the better players chosen in that first round! At this point, the only one the White Sox might have rather picked instead is Kelenic - subject to change!
It kind of does seem like the #4 overall pick specifically winds up disappointing fairly often, though obviously this is all hindsight. In 2017, the Rays picked Brendan McKay; he's a big talent with injury issues. The Cubs took Kyle Schwarber in 2014; he briefly seemed like he was going to be a big star, but he's kind of been more like Just A Guy and doesn't even play for them anymore. The Orioles took Bundy and Gausman in consecutive years, and both had their best years with other teams (Bundy was taken over Lindor, Springer, Rendon, Sonny Gray, and Jose Fernandez, among others). In 2008, those same Orioles too Brian Matusz one pick before the Giants took Posey. In 2007, the Pirates took Daniel Moskos while Madison Bumgarner was still out there. The year before that, they took Andrew Lincoln instead of Clayton Kershaw, Max Scherzer, or Tim Lincecum. Even Zimmerman who you mention was out-WAR'd in his own draft class by Ryan Braun, Troy Tulowitzki, and Andrew McCutchen, all of whom were taken after him.
Not sure I learned anything doing all this just now, but I thought it was interesting, at least.
The two best players available to the Red Sox at #7 based on their careers thus far were probably Tim Anderson and Aaron Judge. Nobody even mentioned those as possibilities to go that high!
All of this said, I don't know that I'd say it's a total crapshoot; I think it's more like a lot of stuff can and does happen after a team drafts a player, and only some of that is in their control. Like, does a player bust because that player is flawed in some way? Or is it because the team mishandled him somehow? I'd guess there's no one answer for this.
This is a bit off the board, but I'd really like to see them pick me.
I'm 44 years old and my baseball career peaked as a high school relief pitcher, but the bonus money would be awesome so if you ask me who I really want the Sox to draft in the first round...I want them to draft me.
My fastball has dropped from the mid-70s to the low-60s, but I'm confident I can still keep my walk rate low. And I'm an awesome clubhouse guy.
I'm 44 years old and my baseball career peaked as a high school relief pitcher, but the bonus money would be awesome so if you ask me who I really want the Sox to draft in the first round...I want them to draft me.
My fastball has dropped from the mid-70s to the low-60s, but I'm confident I can still keep my walk rate low. And I'm an awesome clubhouse guy.
This might deserve a new thread (2022 draft thread?), but for now is somewhat relevant here.
From Fangraphs
"A Conversation with Red Sox Amateur Scouting Director Paul Toboni," by David Laurila
https://blogs.fangraphs.com/a-conversation-with-red-sox-amateur-scouting-director-paul-toboni/
They spend the first part of the interview going through the nuts and bolts of scouting responsibility/hierarchy. Toboni avoids directly addressing Sox scouting/drafting philosophy -- e.g., Laurila asks for an example of something under- or over-rated by scouts and Toboni deflects with, “That’s an important question, but I’m not sure that I can give you a good answer. This kind of fits into, ‘What I should say, and what I shouldn’t say.’”
From there the conversation becomes a bit more concrete, with Toboni providing some interesting insights into Nick Yorke, Blaze Jordan and Marcelo Mayer. I was most interested in him bringing up how scouts look for the neurological component of a player's game.
Tobini: “A trait that they (Yorke and Jordan) share is, neurologically, how they process information out of the pitchers hand, where they deliver the barrel, the timing of it… that’s pretty tough to teach. If you can identify that at a younger age… I think that allows for a greater capacity to grow as a player. All that said, Nick was a little bit further ahead in terms of his level of polish. Blaze had this incredible raw toolset, but was probably a little bit behind Nick on the development curve.”
Laurila: How does a scout identify the neurological component you referred to?
Toboni: “This is part of the art of the game. It’s one of the cooler parts of scouting. When you see a player take a breaking ball… we talk about the comfort of their takes. I don’t know if you’ve seen the clip with [pitching prospect] Bryan Mata from right after Nick signed. He threw an 89 mph slider to Nick that he hit hard to right field. Nick had never seen a slider of that velocity, or even movement, but he was still able to deliver the barrel on time to the right place. That clues in a scout. To do that, you have to neurologically be in a different spot.”
From Fangraphs
"A Conversation with Red Sox Amateur Scouting Director Paul Toboni," by David Laurila
https://blogs.fangraphs.com/a-conversation-with-red-sox-amateur-scouting-director-paul-toboni/
They spend the first part of the interview going through the nuts and bolts of scouting responsibility/hierarchy. Toboni avoids directly addressing Sox scouting/drafting philosophy -- e.g., Laurila asks for an example of something under- or over-rated by scouts and Toboni deflects with, “That’s an important question, but I’m not sure that I can give you a good answer. This kind of fits into, ‘What I should say, and what I shouldn’t say.’”
From there the conversation becomes a bit more concrete, with Toboni providing some interesting insights into Nick Yorke, Blaze Jordan and Marcelo Mayer. I was most interested in him bringing up how scouts look for the neurological component of a player's game.
Tobini: “A trait that they (Yorke and Jordan) share is, neurologically, how they process information out of the pitchers hand, where they deliver the barrel, the timing of it… that’s pretty tough to teach. If you can identify that at a younger age… I think that allows for a greater capacity to grow as a player. All that said, Nick was a little bit further ahead in terms of his level of polish. Blaze had this incredible raw toolset, but was probably a little bit behind Nick on the development curve.”
Laurila: How does a scout identify the neurological component you referred to?
Toboni: “This is part of the art of the game. It’s one of the cooler parts of scouting. When you see a player take a breaking ball… we talk about the comfort of their takes. I don’t know if you’ve seen the clip with [pitching prospect] Bryan Mata from right after Nick signed. He threw an 89 mph slider to Nick that he hit hard to right field. Nick had never seen a slider of that velocity, or even movement, but he was still able to deliver the barrel on time to the right place. That clues in a scout. To do that, you have to neurologically be in a different spot.”
Here's a link to the Yorke vs. Mata AB:
View: https://twitter.com/bradfo/status/1307400556697341953?s=20&t=t-JyXaKZYz6Sv47wUfBV9Q