notin

No, and I don't blame him. Swihart has already made the majors. Kopech is a headcase with a lightning arm who might burn himself out before he gets there. It happens...

Exactly. Depth - it's a good thing. People make too big of a deal of the whole "fair" aspect. Hey, life isn't fair and players under high-paying contracts will have a better chance to make every team than players who are not.

So... in order to get your point across about not asking a question with a question - which is a bit narrow; sometimes a question is the best answer - you asked a question. OK, from someone who is not a scout, Vazquez is fine defensively. The problem is - so is every other backup catcher in MLB. Whether you like defense or not, do you think Vazquez does any of those things better than most other catchers? Where do you rank him defensively? What catcher des he remind you most of?

What do you think Vazquez does that separates him from the backup catchers of the world? I've described him as Jose Molina 2.0. Think he's more Yadier? Or is career backup Jose a decent comp? Is Vazquez better or worse than Ryan Hanigan was in Cincinnati?

Saying Peavy was not a factor in the success of the 2013 team is a comment made by fans who look at his W-L record and ERA and ignore the trickle-down effect he had on that staff.

Technically I compared Moncada to Williams. Really what I did was ask a simple question - do people want championship teams or star players? Because having the latter is no guarantee of the former. Also NO ONE thought Bradley was a replacement level player in the minors. Vazquez, on the other hand, many did. Other than being minor leaguers in the same system at the same time, the two have very little in common. Bradley's early struggles don't change this. As for offensive expectations, that's not the point. The point is defensively Vazquez is similar to a lot of other catchers. He isn't the game-changing defensive force many credit him for being and his skillset is very reminiscent of a backup catcher, a skillset that has nothing to do with the offensive expectations of an outfielder. ...

Now you're comparing major league Bradley to minor league Vazquez. In the minors, where we get a glimpse of the ceiling, Bradley was an offensive force ranked among tje top 50 prospects in the game six times by three different agencies. Vazquez was never in the top 100 anywhere,which is interesting because other defensive-first catchers like Austin Hedges, were ranked. So it's not like they ignored defense. They just pegged his ceiling much lower thsn his fans like...

Not, it's all in the perspective. It's like Moncada for Sale. We all get why and no one really screams about it, except maybe a White Sox fan or two. Think of it this way - the 1938 Red Sox were a second place team. Imagine if they dealt Ted Williams that July and received a pitcher who made up the difference (granted, a big one of 9.5 games, so suspend some belief for that part for this hypothetical) to put them past the Yankees into the World Series. So no Ted Williams in Boston, but they win it all in 1938. If they won the Series, would that be a good trade? It's one more World Series than they won with 19 seasons of Ted Williams...

Not really. In fact, most publications that rate prospects praised his defense, but not much else. Basically, they typecast him as a backup catcher. There are dozens of other catchers who bring his defense to the table, including former Sox and current Chicago Legend David Ross, who lead all of MLB in release time at age 39. Yet for some reason, on BDC and here, Vazquez is treated like some sort of newfound defensive revolution to the catcher position. He's a good defensive catcher. So is Leon. So was Hanigan at one time. What none of these guys are. with the exception of Leon last season, is a complete MLB caliber starter. And even Leon carried himself on a wave of BABIP so enormous, even Stevie Wonder saw it was unsustainable...

And a $63mill pricetag...

Sounds like another intentionally unnamed trade people have been lambasting for three years, except for the not winning a ring part...

Dalbec and Chatham have so little experience right now it's hard to call them anything. Oddly, the sneaky steal of that draft might have been Ryan Scott, who I do think might surprise people. Of course, it is more likely he just flop into oblivion..

Well, if he turns into Andrew Miller, then maybe it becomes the equivalent of Miller/Rodriguez...

Pomeranz has a good head start in that he is already in the majors, which Espiniza may never accomplish. A lot can happen, including simple lacking talent or getting injured. But Pomeranz, a former top prospect himself, as not exactly pieced together a stellar career. Personally, I question his ability to even be a major leaguer starter. I think he is best used as a reliever...

I think of prospects as lottery tickets. As this is the holiday season, many people will be giving them as gifts, and they even get advertised as such. If you've ever given a lottery ticket as a gift, you know you might have given away a fortune. But the most likely scenario is you really just gave away a cheap gift with very little thought involved...

Even I clamored for prospect trades. As costly as it was, I like the Sale trade. And even the Thornburg trade was probably a good one. The trades for Kimbrel and Pomeranz not so much. I do think Dombrowski has a tendency to overvalue the role of closer. And Pomeranz was just a silly target to go so heavy on...

Dombrowski did have a great draft last year, but he realy hasn't built great farm systems since he was in Florida and had perennial top 5 picks. Granted, it's not a given to get a good farm system that way, but it does make things easier. Right now, the Sox don't really have a great farm system top to bottom. Devers has been scouted to varying degrees by various agencies. Keith Law, for example, loves him. BA not so much. We shall see what it holds. Groome, Chatham and Dalbec are in the top ten, but really all were drafted in 2016 and there will be attrition as one or more of them simply don't pan out. No one seems to like Ball, although drafting him did allow the Sox to sign Longhi, so hopefully one of them works out. Really, how many guys in the top ten do you expect to make the majors? Or become viable trade bait a la Moncada/Dubon/Kopech/etc. in the next 2 or 3 years? This system won't be very good. It does happen, and replenishing it isn't as easy as many want to believe. The biggest problem I had with Cherington is he didn't like to deal any prospects. Dombrowski is the polar opposite, dealing as many as possible (justifying his reputation). While I like this team, I also like a nice balance between the two extremes. Prospects right now are not worth what they were in trades 2 years ago, and this will handicap the Sox ability going forward just as much as not having a pipeline of players....

No they are not. Benintendi, Betts and everyone mentioned including the massively overvalued Vazquez were all on the 25 man roster at some point in 2016 when we had the terrific farm system. Vazquz is the only name who wasn't there at the end of the year, and I don't worry so much about the status of the backup catcher position as a lot of people do...

And considering Benintendi and probably Hernandez on likely to be on the MLB roster, you could probably bump a few people up a slot or two. Ball comes in at 11 when you look at it that way. Not to mention, Johnson is reaching an age where "prospect" needs to be changed to "suspect." Do that, and Ball makes the top ten. So I guess it becomes a bit difficult to rail against the horrible and devastating pick that Ball was while still saying we have a great farm system left. For the next 3 years, this won't matter much at all. After that, the long term future is not so bright. And while a lot of people like to say "I don't care about 2021, if the Sox win now it will be worth it," they are lying. We all saw plenty of posters who couldn't handle 2014 right after a ring in 2013...

It's not all about whether or not the prospects turn out to be any good. A highly-ranked prospects himself has a trade value, and if you don't have prospects anyone wants, trades become far, far more difficult..

That wouldn't bode well for 2017...

Prospects aren't worth what they used to be in trades. Three years of Yordano Ventura isn't likely to be cheaper in trade than 3 years of Tyler Thornburg, who netted a major leaguer and a prospect ranked ahead of nearly every name on that list. And the Astros of all teams are well aware of the cost of young, cheap, controllable closer, having surrendered 5 players (including MLB-ready pitchers Vince Velasquez and Brett Oberholtzer) for Ken Giles one year ago yesterday...

The Sox have devastated their system to the point where perennial whipping boy Trey Ball is on the cusp of being a top ten prospect. I don't expect it to be rebuilt rapidly, simply because Dombrowski hasn't shown the ability to do anything like that in the past since he was with Florida. Who is the best Tigers' prospect to come up since Verlander arrived 12 years ago? However, he has built a team capable of being very competitive for the next 3 seasons.

Desmond didn't have a position in Texas either and they found one for him. The plan reportedly is to use Desmond at first base, where he replaces such illuminaries as Mark Reynolds and Ben Paulsen....

If the Sox are winning they may forego a third baseman at the deadline even if Sandoval is below average. You don't need a top 5 player at every position to win, and pitching depth is usually far more important...