175 replies to this topic

[Eric Van]

Eligible players for this winter's Rule 5 draft:

MLFA
Billy Buckner
Yeiper Castillo
Caleb Clay
Jose De La Torre
Nelson Figueroa
Ruben Flores
Will Inman
Mike McDonald
Garrett Mock
Michael Olmsted
Tony Pena
Mark Prior
Nathan Striz
Jason Urquidez
Steven Wright

Ronald Bermudez
Andy LaRoche
Jason Repko
Mike Rivera
Reynaldo Rodriguez
Marquez Smith
Nate Spears
Matt Spring

Also Eligible
Chris Balcom-Miller
Jeremiah Bayer
Miguel Celestino
William Cuevas
Marco Duarte
Justin Erasmus
Josh Fields
Brock Huntzinger
Jeremy Kehrt
Will Latimer
Ryan Pressly
Manny Rivera
Charlie Rosario
Pete Ruiz
Kyle Stroup
Raynel Velette
Alex Wilson
Tyler Wilson

Michael Almanzar
Carson Blair
Dan Butler
Ryan Dent
Leonel Escobar
Jose Garcia
Zach Gentile
Derrick Gibson
Alex Hassan
Jeremy Hazelbaker
Drew Hedman
Jon Hee
Peter Hissey
Heiker Meneses
Boss Moanaroa
Oscar Perez
Felix Sanchez
Tony Thomas
Christian Vazquez
Shannon Wilkerson
Ryan Westmoreland

So, who's worth protecting? In order:

Steven Wright. They see him as a potential MLB starter, and if he improves the command of the knuckler he's been throwing for just two years, they're right. They didn't trade Lars for a 1-month Portland rotation rental.

Alex Wilson. What he's done this year doesn't translate to MLB success, but any significant improvement and he's a cost-controlled bullpen piece. Scouts thought he'd be an 8th inning guy by next year, and one off year is not enough to give up on him.

Alex Hassan. His MLE is .265 / .369 / .378, he's an average defender in an outfield corner, and prior to this year he had a big platoon split. He projects as a second-division starter of first division 4th OF, and he may well be ready for that next year.

Michael Almanzar. My rule of thumb is that you want to protect anyone who might contribute in MLB next year, or anyone who has clear upside as an above-average starter. Given his pedigree, Almanzar fits the latter description unless he goes 0 for August.

Kyle Stroup. I know I'd draft him. The MLE of his run at the end of 2011 suggests he could be an adequate last man in the pen for a bad club next year, and he has clear first-division third starter upside.


That's where I'd draw the line, but there are other folks to consider.

Jeremy Hazelbaker. Yeah, he's hit .278 / .347 / .576 since June 19, but overall he's gone backwards at the plate in AA this year, and he's about to turn 25. If it weren't for that terrible start repeating AA, he'd be fitting Hassan's description; instead, he's more equivalent to ...

Peter Hissey. Not ready to be an MLB 4th OFer, and despite his pedigree and lots of positive signs this year still projects as a 4th OFer.

Christian Vazquez. Certainly not MLB-ready next year, and the only year that he's looked like a future starter was 2011.

Dan Butler. Add an "almost" to the start of that and change 2011 to 2010.


Josh Fields. Odd that given his age, pedigree, and AA success, he's never been promoted; his MLEs say he could be in a second-division bullpen right now. I'm guessing scouts still see something that underwhelms them; if not, given our bullpen depth, he's the guy you're OK losing,

Mark Prior. We may see him in September, but if he has success I think he's more likely to end up on a contender after a waiver deal.

Jose de la Torre. He may or may not be headed for low-leverage MLB innings, and he'll have no trouble getting an invite to ST next year from someone, but he'll need a dominant August to get an MLB contract. And given our bullpen depth, that would likely be elsewhere, anyway.

Will Inman. Yet another guy who may be ready for a mop-up career who's not good enough for us.

[JakeRae]

I would think Fields is worth protecting. Stroup, considering that he hasn't pitched at all this year and has never pitched above Greenville, does not need to be protected. I think Wilson is a bit more borderline than you have him since he doesn't have the upside to be worth stashing and doesn't look ready. I think you are underrating Vazquez but agree that he isn't worth protecting this year because he is still several years away, at best. Butler might be worth protecting for the sake of making certain that organizational catching depth is maintained. Presumably, Lavarnway will be in MLB next year (as a starter or backup is hard to discern right now). I don't think they will want to risk losing their AAA starting catcher in the Rule 5 draft.

[Buzzkill Pauley]

I think there's a very solid chance they protect Olmsted, assuming that his peripherals end the season only regressing slightly.

He may be a load, but he's pitched terrifically.

[Detts]

Olmsted could force his way onto this list, depending how his stint in Portland ends up:.

39 innings in Salem, .84 WHIP, 61 SO;s

6 innings in Portland, .5 WHIP 11 SO's.

Edit: LOL I started to respond and had to take a call. Pauley beat me to the punch.

Edited by Detts, 02 August 2012 - 12:28 PM.

[gammoseditor]

I'd rather keep Vazquez than Hassan. If Vazquez puts it together he could be a solid hitting catcher, and I thought reviews of his defense were positive. Hassan's upside looks like a bench corner OF. I think we have enough of those.

[JakeRae]

Olmstead is a MLFA and is unlikely to get anyone to offer him a MLB deal. I'd love to keep him too, but he's not really relevant to the discussion of the Rule 5 draft since he'll be a free agent at that time.

As for Vazquez, I'm relatively high on him but I just can't see a team picking a catcher who has yet to play in the high minors in the Rule 5 draft.

Hassan makes sense as a RHH Daniel Nava (which is a better fit for Boston for platoon reasons). Trade Nava either in a package or just by himself for something marginally interesting and give his role and 40-man spot to Hassan.

[SaveBooFerriss]

Alex Hassan. His MLE is .265 / .369 / .378, he's an average defender in an outfield corner, and prior to this year he had a big platoon split. He projects as a second-division starter of first division 4th OF, and he may well be ready for that next year.

Hassan would be an absolutely terrible guy to protect. Based on the reports I've seen, calling him a average defender is being generous. The biggest problem is, assuming his MLE is correct, a .378 slg% simply won't cut it.

Taking a quick look, on the top 56 qualified OF, 49 had higher slg%. Of the six that had lower slg%, all but one (Francour) had at least 18 steals. So, speed mitigated their lack of power. Hassan really doesn't have any speed and his defense is great, so you are looking at a singles hitter that gets on base at a decent clip. However, with his slg%, pitchers won't be afraid to make him hit the ball.

I would much rather see Hazelbaker protected. Although I don't think he is more than a 4th or 5th OF, his defensive flexibility, speed and power makes him a potentially useful piece off the bench even if he will never hit for average.

[Carl Everetts Therapist]

Olmsted will be a decision based on how he finishes out, but more so as a minor league re-sign than a rule-5 protected pick. Word has it he's added life to his fastball (95 to 97) so he is interesting.

A guy who might be eventually selected in the rule 5 would be Caleb Clay although I wouldn't protect him.

Almanzar would be worth protecting because of the year he's had and because of his relative lack of baseball experience, although I can't see hime being selected by another team giving that he hasn't played above A ball.

I could take or leave Fields and Hassan although they'd be serviceable depth to a 2nd division team that had catastrophic injuries....

[gammoseditor]

I'd be shocked if Theo didn't select any of our unprotected players that have any kind of upside at all. The cubs aren't going anywhere next year and shouldn't have trouble having a spot on the roster or creating a phantom injury.

[RoDaddy]

I'd put Alex Wilson, Olmsted and Wright at the top of the list.

It also seems unfair that Westmoreland could be taken, given his tragic injury and the reported support given by the organization during this time. Isn't or shouldn't there be an injury exempt clause for Rule 5 eligibility for such players?

[SaveBooFerriss]

I'd put Alex Wilson, Olmsted and Wright at the top of the list.

It also seems unfair that Westmoreland could be taken, given his tragic injury and the reported support given by the organization during this time. Isn't or shouldn't there be an injury exempt clause for Rule 5 eligibility for such players?

There is absolutely no possible way another team would take Westmoreland this year. It just make no sense.

[TheGoldenGreek33]

Months in advance, we have a Rule 5 draft thread. Nothing about the Rule 4 until what, the night before it happened?

[OCD SS]

What, are you not allowed to start threads?

At least with the Rule 5 it makes sense since the questions about who might be cleared out in trades are answered.

[JakeRae]

What, are you not allowed to start threads?

At least with the Rule 5 it makes sense since the questions about who might be cleared out in trades are answered.

This, especially the part about starting threads, plus the fact that a lot of us are much better informed about the players that have been in the farm system long enough to be Rule 5 eligible than we are about the vast number of players eligible for the Rule 4 draft.

EV starts this discussion every year around this time (I think he's actually started it earlier in the past). When threads get started, people tend to post in them. When they don't, people tend not to. It's funny how that works.

[Plympton91]

I would do Vazquez, Wilson, Wright, and Almanzar for sure. Next would be Olmstead and Fields. For some who said Olmstead would be a MiLFA, that's only true if he's not added to the 40-man roster.

[Eric Van]

I would have totally included Olmsted if I'd been aware of his promotion to Portland, but I've been busy with other stuff. I may edit the original post to add him.

Yeiper Castillo and Pete Ruiz are two guys who I think are actual prospects but are at least a year away from being considered. Maybe Jose Garcia, too.

Then there are all the ex-prospects who could pull an Almanzar at some point. Chris Balcom-Miller, Miguel Celestino, Nate Spears, Heiker Meneses and to a lesser extent Justin Erasmus, Manny Rivera, and Boss Moanaroa looked much more promising a year ago. Go back another year and Felix Sanchez was promising, and after '09 Derrick Gibson was a stud and Ryan Dent was very much on the radar. You never stop watching this type of guy ... but Almanzar is the first resurrection I can remember.

Next: how many open spaces will there be? (My quick preliminary count suggested 4 or 5.)

[Eric Van]

Hassan would be an absolutely terrible guy to protect. Based on the reports I've seen, calling him a average defender is being generous. The biggest problem is, assuming his MLE is correct, a .378 slg% simply won't cut it.

Taking a quick look, on the top 56 qualified OF, 49 had higher slg%. Of the six that had lower slg%, all but one (Francour) had at least 18 steals. So, speed mitigated their lack of power. Hassan really doesn't have any speed and his defense is great, so you are looking at a singles hitter that gets on base at a decent clip. However, with his slg%, pitchers won't be afraid to make him hit the ball.

OBP is much more important. There are now 59 qualifying OFers ... and his .369 MLE would rank him 12th. The total offensive package is just a bit below average for an MLB corner OFer. And if he develops some more power, he's a good player.

You're doing the thing Bill James pointed out bad GMs do, focusing on the thing the guy can't do rather than on what he can. He would be a very useful Pawtucket shuttler for three years (,369 OBP would have him third after Ortiz and Nava) and you could see him being the 4th or 5th OFer at some point.

[j44thor]

Except that it is going to be very difficult to keep that OBP up if pitchers aren't afraid to throw him strikes. I'm not sure how that MLE can possibly be supported. He is only expecting to take a .20 drop on OBP from AAA to MLB? Nava had an OPS in AAA over 100pts higher and .28 higher OBP and is now putting up almost exactly what Hassan's MLE looks like.

I would expect a similar adjustment from Hassan. Unless he has been extremely unlucky at AAA his MLE just makes no sense.

[SaveBooFerriss]

Except that it is going to be very difficult to keep that OBP up if pitchers aren't afraid to throw him strikes. I'm not sure how that MLE can possibly be supported.

Yup, Keith Law and Kevin Goldstein were making this point on a podcast this week. Players were weak slg% have a very difficult time having their OBP translate to the majors. I just do not think there is any value in a guy who profiles a a fringe average defensively LF who is a below average runner who will have to rely almost exclusively on walks to get on base.

Law and Goldstein almost made the point that you can't scout box scores.

[Eric Van]

Yup, Keith Law and Kevin Goldstein were making this point on a podcast this week. Players were weak slg% have a very difficult time having their OBP translate to the majors. I just do not think there is any value in a guy who profiles a a fringe average defensively LF who is a below average runner who will have to rely almost exclusively on walks to get on base.

Law and Goldstein almost made the point that you can't scout box scores.

I'm pretty sure that the Davenport Translations include this phenomenon, to the extent that it exists empirically in the data. IOW, it doesn't assume that the change in walk rate is fixed; there's a formula that expresses it as a function of other rates.

I think the actual problem with the MLE is that I'm forgetting that all DTs are to a historically neutral baseline, and right now MLB is way below that. So he would not rank as high as 12th, because I would have to adjust everyone in MLB upwards if I looked at how their MLB stats were translated.

Nevertheless, the DTs do have him as an MLB-caliber hitter. Pitchers are not capable of throwing strikes at will. If you have exceptional strike zone judgment and plate discipline, you will walk a lot, even if you don't have much power. There have been plenty of such guys in MLB history.

[someoneanywhere]

I don't think Vazquez is going anywhere. He's only 22. And he's already coming on as perhaps a premium defender -- you should see his footwork and release -- with a chance to hit for power in the bigs.

Plus, according to SP, he's just been promoted to Portand.

[mabrowndog]

Eligible players for this winter's Rule 5 draft:

MLFA
Garrett Mock

You can cross him off the list. He was traded to the Astros for future considerations.

[bill]

I would do Vazquez, Wilson, Wright, and Almanzar for sure. Next would be Olmstead and Fields. For some who said Olmstead would be a MiLFA, that's only true if he's not added to the 40-man roster.

Thanks for making this list Eric, I was just wondering the other day who would be eligible for this. I like Plympton's list. Would be tough to lose Vasquez and Almanzar after their performances this year and Olmstead has been a beast in Portland.

[Castor Troy]

I want them to protect as many promising arms(Wilson,Huntzinger,Olmstead) and lottery ticket hitters() as possible. Not worried about losing a guy like Hassan especially since I think Linares is a better RH OF anyway.

Just my two cents.

Edit- had no idea a player selected in rule 5 draft has to stay on new team's 25 man ML roster fof an entire season. Now I understand why low level guys like Almanzar aren't a big risk to be taken

Edited by Castor Troy, 05 August 2012 - 11:56 AM.

[Eric Van]

In case it's not clear, part of the rationale for starting this thread when I did is that it identifies the couple of guys whose August performance will actually impact their Rule 5 case.

It'll be fun watching how Vazquez, Olmsted, and Fields do the next month. (And Almanzar, Hazelbaker, and Butler if they have extreme months.)

[Eric Van]

So, how many open spaces are we talking about?

There are currently 43 guys on the 40-man.

Cook, Matsuzaka, Padilla, and Shoppach will leave as FA.

Atchison, needing TJ, can be DFAd and signed to a minor league deal, like they did with Hill a year ago.

Speaking of which, I don't see them coming to ST with 5 MLB quality LHP, all out of options. I see them trading either Hill or Breslow.

Even if Iglesias plays another half year in AAA, they have an extra SS and can trade Punto, Aviles, or Ciriaco.

Kalish and Nava make Sweeney extraneous.

Figure that any other trades are a wash in terms of roster spots. So that's 35, which means 5 free spots, or 4 if they want to leave a spot open for a Rule 5 pick of their own.

They can make room for a sixth addition by DFAing Valencia, and a seventh by DFAing Gomez. I don't think anyone claims Valencia, who at best is an average hitting 3B and subpar fielder. Gomez I think is worth keeping around.

[Eric Van]

I'd be shocked if Theo didn't select any of our unprotected players that have any kind of upside at all. The cubs aren't going anywhere next year and shouldn't have trouble having a spot on the roster or creating a phantom injury.

Specifically, if we left Stroup unprotected and Theo didn't draft him, I'd be flabbergasted. The only guy ranked ahead of him by BA coming into this year was Wilson, who's had a terrible off year. In terms of readily realizable upside, he's either the best prospect mentioned in this thread, or second to Wright, but we just got the latter even-up for a guy ranked behind him. And there's no reason why he can't come back from his latest knee surgery like he did from the previous one.

I now see Wright, Wilson, and Stroup as the givens, Almanzar nearly so (unless he collapses this month), and then Gomez, Vazquez, Valencia, Hassan, Hazelbaker, and Butler, and Fields and Olmsted competing for the last 2 or (more likely) 3 spots. I buy the argument that Linares makes Hassan a guy you can afford to lose.

Edited by Eric Van, 07 August 2012 - 07:42 AM.

[Eric Van]

Re Olmsted: if I'm giving an indie league guy a shot in the low minors, and he's going to be an mlfa at the end of the year, I would want to protect myself against the possibility that he has enough success to warrant keeping in the organization with an eventual MLB career in mind, but not enough that he can help the big league club the next year. Otherwise, maybe he signs elsewhere, becomes MLB quality with the extra development year, and some other club reaps the benefit of your scouting acumen and gamble.

So it's possible that Olmsted is already signed for next year (SP often says that this may be the case for indie league guys, although they don't in this case), or has a team option for that, or, best of all, has a handshake agreement to re-sign a minor league deal with the club after the Rule 5 draft.

If they have the handshake deal, we can leave him out of this discussion.

If he's already signed for next year, or they have an option, or they re-sign him before the draft, that just makes him Rule 5 eligible and his being an mlfa is moot.

If they didn't protect themslves, then his being an mlfa is still not relevant. Anyone willing to draft him as a Rule 5 guy would obviously be even more willing to sign him to an MLB contract and have the flexibility of options. So if you neither put him on the 40-man roster nor re-sign him as an mlfa, if anybody is interested in him, they'll sign him to an MLB deal and start his option clock.

Since we don't know whether they have a handshake deal with him, folks including him on their list of guys they'd protect can designate an alternate in case he is.

[JakeRae]

Stroup has pitched 120 minor league innings. He has never pitched above low A. In his season at Greenville (2011) he started 21 games, threw 95.2 IP, had an ERA of 3.67, struck out 75 and walked 26. Those are intriguing numbers, but that is not a pitcher you take in the Rule 5 draft. If he is healthy in 2013 and performs well in Salem, he will be protected. But, it's a year too soon. Someone might draft him this year, but there's about a 99% chance he ends up back in Boston because he simply isn't ready to be on a MLB roster right now.

I think I'm backing away from Almanzar. As a 1B/3B with questionable defensive skills and a bat that isn't close to ready, I can't see him sticking on a MLB roster.

With some time to reflect, my list is:

Definitely Protect

Wilson - He's the only guy in the system who absolutely has to be added.

Most Likely Protect

Hassan - He provides useful AAA depth for the outfield and hits from the right side of the plate. His OBP is a legitimate MLB skill.
Wright - The trade was fairly pointless unless they protect him and he's probably good enough right now to be a long man for a bad team.
Butler/Vazquez - You need to protect at least one. Butler is borderline ready to be a MLB backup and a potentially really good one. Vazquez is a bit further away with more upside. Depending on if Vazquez remains hot for his last month, he may move up this list. 4 catchers on the 40-man is a lot but it would really be a shame to lose either of these guys.

Consider Protecting

Fields - He's got MLB stuff and is likely gone if he isn't protected but they've got too many pitchers on the 40-man to keep him right now. If they clear up the pitching roster situation, he could get protected.
Olmstead - Similar to Fields but further away and less certain to get drafted or stick. Might have a handshake deal in place to avoid this.
Hazelbaker - He's too far the depth chart for me to be too concerned with, but if they cut bait on Lin, there might be space to hang onto him.

There are some other guys that deserve to be on the Consider Protecting list, or maybe a bit lower, that have already been mentioned here. If there name has come up in this thread, they probably aren't too far off the bottom of my list.

[Eric Van]

Stroup has pitched 120 minor league innings. He has never pitched above low A. In his season at Greenville (2011) he started 21 games, threw 95.2 IP, had an ERA of 3.67, struck out 75 and walked 26. Those are intriguing numbers, but that is not a pitcher you take in the Rule 5 draft. If he is healthy in 2013 and performs well in Salem, he will be protected. But, it's a year too soon. Someone might draft him this year, but there's about a 99% chance he ends up back in Boston because he simply isn't ready to be on a MLB roster right now.

You have to hunt down my Stroup thread from last year. His season numbers are meaningless. He had missed an entire year and was hammered in his first whatever (8, IIRC) outings. After that he was completely dominant, with numbers that translated to being one of the better pitchers on the Portland staff, with a combination of GB%, K rate, and popup rate that's incredibly rare (at the MLB level the only comps I could find were ... wait for it ... Halladay and Rivera. Seriously.).

The guy you describe would never be the #20 prospect in a system as deep as ours, but that's where Callis put him, and he further identified him as a guy who could move up much higher. He was ranked higher than Weiland, Pimentel, and Raul Alcantara, higher than Vinicio, Vazquez, and Lars, who was just traded even-up for a guy everyone wants to protect.

Given all that, you really think Theo would hesitate to draft him and use him for a year as the mop-up guy in the bullpen of one of baseball's worst teams?

And speaking of guys who weren't ready to be on an MLB staff, I was at a game where a Rule 5 draftee gave up 7 runs in 3.2 IP on his way to a 6.49 ERA. If a guy has enough upside, you really don't care about him sucking as the last guy in the bullpen.

[Rudy Pemberton]

Stroup....the next Robert Coelho? This thread is always fun, but ultimately it's just jerking off. None of these guys will ever amount to anything, every year there's panic over the "40-man roster squeeze", yet have the Sox ever lost anyone of any significance? Hell, even the Sox have given up on taking a Rule 5 guy and instead give the last spot on the opening day roster to a lousy LH reliever who blows two games and never appears in the big leagues again. There are about 100 Matt White's for every Johan.

Edited by Rudy Pemberton, 07 August 2012 - 06:17 PM.

[Eric Van]

Stroup....the next Robert Coelho?

Coello was a guy who had a real shot at being a useful MLB reliever, an 11th or 12th man in a pen. Stroup is a guy who has a real shot at starting a Game 3 of a World Series. Coello barely ever made a depth chart, Stroup was BA's #20 last year, in the #10 organization in MLB, and would have ranked about #15 in an average organization, based on his scouting grade. Eggs and oranges.

every year there's panic over the "40-man roster squeeze", yet have the Sox ever lost anyone of any significance?

Umm ... because they've protected everyone of importance? Including plenty of washouts.

You just don't leave a #15 prospect unprotected, no matter how far he is from MLB (assuming he's a typical high-upside prospect and not a sure-thing utility guy type). The reason folks can't cite examples of recent big-time Rule 5 successes like Santana is that since then, almost anyone with a chance to be a big-time success is protected. Guys like Tejeda were protected when they were miles from MLB, just because of their upside.

What's happening here is that Stroup was a huge sleeper that SoSH collectively overlooked*, and when he got hurt this year in ST, the fact that he was our #20 prospect (precisely where Kyle Weiland was a year previously) has sort of slipped folks' minds.

Three Stroup posts from last year. And scroll down in the first thread for my version of a Peak Translation.


*Every member who posted at least a top 25 for last year, their Stroup ranking:

phragle 24, amfox1 not in top 26, jeff van GULLY not in top 26, JakeRae not in top 26, billy ashley 30, Jed Zeppelin 27, SoxScout not in top 25 or among 12 other guys mentioned as examples of extra guys, alskor not in top 25, gammoseditor not in top 25.

I never did the hitters but had him 11 among the pitchers after earlier saying he might be 9th ... Callis had him 8th.

it's just jerking off.

An adverb and verb rarely seen together here!

Edited by Eric Van, 07 August 2012 - 07:04 PM.

[bill]

Regarding the Sox not keeping 5 bullpen lefthanders, Hill, Breslow, Miller, Morales, who is your 5th? Even 4 is a lot but all 4 of them have pitched so well this year, especially if you move Morales to the rotation, I would like to keep them all.

Edited by bill, 08 August 2012 - 10:27 PM.

[Eric Van]

Regarding the Sox not keeping 5 bullpen lefthanders, Hill, Breslow, Miller, Morales, who is your 5th? Even 4 is a lot but all 4 of them have pitched so well this year, especially if you move Morales to the rotation, I would like to keep them all.

Doubront is the fifth potential lefty, since he's one of six potential starters. If you keep all five, plus Lester, then you start squeezing out RHP. Beckett, Buchholz, Lackey, Bailey, Aceves, Melancon, Bard is already one too many pitchers, never mind Atchison if he avoids surgery, Tazawa who'll have an option left, and Mortensen, who won't. Given the shortage of good LHR, trading one seems to make more sense than hoarding an excess.

[bill]

I don't want to hijack the thread into who the Sox should keep,(maybe a future thread on the main board) but don't you want to keep the best arms regardless? If the lefthanders were all loogy's then you would have to move two but the only one I see that way is Hill and even he did OK against righthanders. I think the 4 lefthanders and Bailey, Acevas. and the good Bard would be the top 7 and a formidable group.Melancon had a nice run in low leverage situations but still scares me. Mortenson has been a very valueable shuttle guy and Tazawa has looked very good too. I would use Tazawa as the shuttle guy next year and see if there was a market for Melancon and Mortenson if he was out of options.I apologize if this strays too much from the rule 5 discussion.I think you would wait to make any trades until near the end of spring training when you were confident of the health and effectiveness (Bard) of everyone in this group. If two got hurt in spring training, then you would have one of those situations that worked itself out.

Edited by bill, 09 August 2012 - 08:48 AM.

[Troy O'Lovely]

Having seen him last night (albeit on an off-night) I think you should take Prior out of consideration. His fastball tops out at 90 and although he mixes his pitches really well, it seems like that is the kind of thing that works a lot better against kids still learning in the minors than more experienced hitters in the majors. Considering that he needed a strikeout or a double play when I saw him (bases loaded situation with 1 out) he still tried to nibble the fastball, leading me to believe that he doesn't trust his breaking stuff enough to be a solid out pitch. I'm certainly not a scout, but I think his upside would seem to be as an Atchison type pitcher (the kind they like to call 'crafty') and therefore not necessarily the best use of a spot. Put differently, I'd rather have Stroup's upside than Prior's.

[Carl Everetts Therapist]

Quick question: Does Aaron Kurcz need to be protected? and where the heck has he been?

[Eric Van]

Quick question: Does Aaron Kurcz need to be protected? and where the heck has he been?

He's been hurt. And he has another year of exemption left. And there are 9 of SP's top 28 prospects in this class (although personally I think Vitek should be quite a bit lower):

2013
Mario Alcantara
Keith Couch
Luis Diaz
Mike Gleason
Chris Hernandez
Aaron Kurcz
Tyler Lockwood
Yunior Ortega
Matthew Price
Anthony Ranaudo
Scott Swinson
Francisco Taveras
Brandon Workman
Madison Younginer

Bryce Brentz
Garrin Cecchini
Keury De La Cruz
Dreily Guerrero
Jayson Hernandez
James Kang
Brandon Jacobs
Lucas LeBlanc
David Renfroe
Seth Schwindenhammer
Jose Vinicio
Kolbrin Vitek

[bill]

Olmstead in Portland has pitched 12 innings, giving up 3 hits, walking 2, and striking out 20.

[SaveBooFerriss]

Olmstead in Portland has pitched 12 innings, giving up 3 hits, walking 2, and striking out 20.

There are also reports that he hit 97 on the gun. I think you need to find a way to keep him.

[bill]

Fields doing all he can at Pawtucket to get a Sept call up with 9 innings, 5 hits, 2 walks, and 13 k's. Olmstead is now up to 16 innings at Portland without an earned run. I saw one gun hit 96 with him pitching on Monday but the scout behind me said he had 95 on his.The curves he threw that impressed me and Arcia, who took one for strike 3, did not impress the scout.

[Eric Van]

De La Rosa, De Jesus, and Sands are all on LA's 40-man roster. Webster is eligible for his first Rule 5 draft and will need to be added.

De Jesus has to be out of options next year, so he doesn't really change the calculus at SS where either Aviles, him, or Ciriaco will likely be dealt. I'm thinking they could trade Aviles now and go with Ciriaco / De Jesus until Iglesias is ready (which could be next April).

So Gonzalez, Crawford, Beckett, Punto -> De La Rosa, De Jesus, Sands, De Jesus; doesn't change the Rule 5 numbers at all.

Edited by Eric Van, 24 August 2012 - 11:22 PM.

[bill]

Lin's spot on the 40 man has to be in jeopardy considering he has been in the bottom 10 in ops in the international league this year.

[Eric Van]

Trying to guess at a 40-man roster. Without counting the names until I'm done!

New ace / #2 they trade for
Aceves
Bailey
Bard
Beato
Breslow or Hill
Britton
Buchholz
Carpenter
De La Rosa
Doubront
Fields
Lackey
Lester
Melancon
Miller
Morales
Olmsted?
Pimentel
Stewart
Stroup
Tazawa
Webster
Wilson
Wright

Lavarnway
Saltalamacchia

New LHH 1B
Almanzar
Ciriaco
Dejesus
Gomez
Iglesias
Midddlebrooks
Ortiz
Pedroia

Ellsbury
Kalish
Lin
Nava
Ross
Sands
Sweeney, or other LHH OF?

That's 41 if they have a deal with Olmsted and deal Sweeney and don't replace him. (Note that I've DFA'd Valencia, DFA'd Atchison and signed him to a ml deal, and traded Mortensen, since he's out of options and we'll have bullpen candidates coming out of our ears (including Beato, also out of options). I agree that Lin is the most fungible of the 41, but there's a good chance that if you trade for a SP, you'll deal Britton, Pimentel or one of the extra bullpen arms -- Beato, Carpenter, Fields, or Wilson (in addition to Mortensen, and Hill or Breslow).

I know a lot of folks here would rather protect Vazquez than Stroup, and maybe they have room for both if two or more guys are traded.

[OttoC]

Lin's spot on the 40 man has to be in jeopardy considering he has been in the bottom 10 in ops in the international league this year.

He just got called up.

[Rudy Pemberton]

I suspect Aceves and Melancon will be elsewhere.

[JakeRae]

I suspect Aceves and Melancon will be elsewhere.

I'm leaning toward keeping Breslow and Hill and sending Miller elsewhere too.

I can't see keeping both Ciriaco and DeJesus. Both are utility guys and neither has options.

[jscola85]

I'm leaning toward keeping Breslow and Hill and sending Miller elsewhere too.

I can't see keeping both Ciriaco and DeJesus. Both are utility guys and neither has options.

There may be a riot on the streets if Ciriaco gets traded. He's performing at a wildly unsustainable rate right now, so it's probably best to sell high, but the natives will get quite restless if they ship him out and don't get much in return.

[Eric Van]

There may be a riot on the streets if Ciriaco gets traded. He's performing at a wildly unsustainable rate right now, so it's probably best to sell high, but the natives will get quite restless if they ship him out and don't get much in return.

Ciriaco has had visible BABIP luck so extreme it's been almost comical, but he's also shown bat speed and hand/eye coordination that can't be reconciled with his previous suckage in the minors. So think I that after regression he's still a solid-hitting MLB SS now, and I wonder if they signed him because they saw those skills and made some kind of adjustment in his swing. He's been doing this since ST, remember.

I'd rather trade Aviles now and go into next year with Iglesias, Ciriaco, and Dejesus. Aviles cannot play 2B and 3B, for some reason; either he's your starting SS or he's somebody else's, so he's not a guy you want to hang on to once the Iglesias era starts. (Or the Bogaerts, for that matter.)

[Super Nomario]

Ciriaco has had visible BABIP luck so extreme it's been almost comical, but he's also shown bat speed and hand/eye coordination that can't be reconciled with his previous suckage in the minors. So think I that after regression he's still a solid-hitting MLB SS now, and I wonder if they signed him because they saw those skills and made some kind of adjustment in his swing. He's been doing this since ST, remember.

I'd rather trade Aviles now and go into next year with Iglesias, Ciriaco, and Dejesus. Aviles cannot play 2B and 3B, for some reason; either he's your starting SS or he's somebody else's, so he's not a guy you want to hang on to once the Iglesias era starts. (Or the Bogaerts, for that matter.)

Why do you say Aviles can't play 3B or 2B? He played both last year, for the Red Sox even. I think it's just as likely that Valentine likes Aviles' defense at SS better than either Punto's or Ciriaco's.