The 2013-2014 40-Man Roster (Post Peavy Deal)

FYP below

Current 40-man (44 players): Ortiz, Lester, Pedroia, Ellsbury, Buchholz, Doubront, Tazawa, Bard, Lackey, Kalish (60-day DL), Saltalamacchia, Morales, Miller (60-day DL), Lavarnway, Middlebrooks, Britton, Bailey, Nava, Breslow, Ross (60-day DL), Webster, De La Rosa, Wilson, Wright, Butler, Vazquez, Hassan, Gomes, Victorino, Uehara, Dempster, Hanrahan (60-day DL), Holt, Drew, Napoli, Carp, Bradley Jr., De La Torre, Beato, Snyder, Workman, Thornton, Peavy, Villarreal

Free Agents (6 players): Ellsbury, Saltalamacchia, Hanrahan, Drew, Napoli, and Thornton (assuming team doesn't pick up option)

Non-Tender Candidates (3 players): Bailey, Bard, and Villarreal

Locks to be added (4 players): Bogaerts, Cecchini, Ranaudo and Brentz

Possibilities to be added (3 players): Hernandez, Almanzar, and Hazelbaker

DFA Candidates If Needed (5 players): Snyder, Beato, De La Torre, Hassan, and Butler

Koji is a free agent too

I don't see how they protect Hazelbaker instead of Hassan. Not that anyone said they would, but I don't see it. they obviously like Hassan a lot to protect him this year and he's done nothing but reinforce whatever good feelings they would have had.

I know it doesn't show up through Cot's, but Koji has had it in every contract he has signed that he is a free agent at the end of the contract. Are we sure that isn't in his current deal as well?

I haven't looked at his contract, so I cannot say for sure. I am going by our 40-man roster pulldown and another site. If we hear differently, we'll change it. I assume, even if he were a free agent, that the Red Sox would want to re-sign him and he would agree to remain on the team.

Right now I can't see adding Almanzar, Hernandez, or Hazelbaker - maybe Huntzinger or an under-the-radar relief pitcher? Pressly wasn't really mentioned before being picked last year.

Having 11 starters at AAA & the Majors would be excessive, so maybe something changes there.

My take, with comparison's to amfox's breakdown:

Free Agents (5): Ellsbury, Saltalamacchia, Hanrahan, Drew, Napoli.

Just for the sake of crunching numbers, let's not assume Thornton's option isn't picked up.

Players to be added (5): Bogaerts, Cecchini, Ranaudo, Almanzar and Brentz.

I don't see how Brentz is a lock to be added, while Almanzar just a possibility or even a longshot. Almanzar was the more valued amateur ($1.5M bonus versus $890K) and has at least matched Brentz at the plate the last two seasons (.287, .270 EqA versus .273, .276) while being one level behind him but two years younger, and while having a chance to stick at a significantly tougher defensive position (worth .013 points of EqA). It's almost impossible to make a rational argument that Brentz is still the better prospect. They are both guys who project to be MLB bench players with upside to be regulars, but it seems to me that Almanzar has a better shot at it.

Unlike most years, when there are players on the cusp, I don't see anyone worth debating. Matthew Price might come closest, and the others I expect people to be naming include Keury De La Cruz, Jeremy Hazelbaker, Heiker Meneses, Jose Vinicio, Kyle Stroup, and Mario Alcantara. But none of these either project to be good MLB players, or capable of contributing anything at the MLB level next year.

You might sign mlfa Brock Huntzinger to an MLB deal if the system were thinner, but given that there were seven relievers they let go last year that found their way onto other 40-man rosters (Scott Atchison and Rich Hill via non-tender, Josh Fields and Ryan Pressly via the Rule 5, David Carpenter and Sandy Rosario via waivers, and Michael Olmsted as an mlfa), I doubt there's any urgency to do that.

So we've got 44 players and need to trim 4 or 5 (in many years they like to sit at 39 to allow a Rule 5 pick of their own). So here are 9 10 possible trims, in order of likelihood, more or less. Note that the guys who are spared are candidates to be DFA'd or traded when a FA is signed.

1. Non-tendering Andrew Bailey. They're not going to pay him to rehab.
2. Non-tendering Daniel Bard. Sad. And I'm convinced he's hurt.
3. Declining Matt Thornton's option. If he pitches great the rest of the way, though, they might change their minds.
4. DFA'ing Jose De La Torre. He has swing-and-miss stuff, but can't throw enough strikes. Exactly the sort of guy who becomes a dominant setup man the next year (q.v. Carpenter, Rosario) and exactly the type who gets killed (q.v. Fields, Olmsted). So you'd like to keep him around but wouldn't hesitate to let him go.
5. Trading Ryan Dempster. They're not going to pay a 6th starter $13.5M. And given the depth of young pitching in the system, there's no point in waiting until ST to see if an injury promotes him to 5th. But they may not be able to move him before the winter meetings.

The last four five are less likely.

6. DFA'ing Brandon Snyder. He looks like a useful bench player, and it wouldn't surprise me at all if he pulls a hangnail muscle at just about the point in August that Middlebrooks looks ready to be recalled. But I could also see them losing him on a waiver claim.
7. Trading Franklin Morales. They don't need four LHR, and Drake Britton is making a terrific argument that he belongs in next year's pen. And the idea of Morales as a SP has to appeal to teams with less starting depth. I think this is also likelier to happen next ST, as they check on Miller's health and hope that there are teams who've had a rash of pitching injuries and might be willing to pay top dollar.
8. Trading Ryan Lavarnway. It's pretty clear that they're doing the opposite of grooming him for next year's starting job, and right now his upside looks like Todd Pratt or Kelly Shoppach rather than Piazza Light. And there's no room at Pawtucket next year (Christian Vazquez and Dan Butler). I think this probably happens next spring, since he's useful if any of the four catchers ahead of him (including whoever they obtain as a regular) get hurt. But possibly sooner, of course.
Edit: Alternately, they might feel that the reason Lavarnway's bat has faded the last two years is that he's concentrated on catching, and try him for a year as Pawtucket's DH / 1B and see if it revives. It wouldn't be the first time that's happened. That might make more sense than selling low on him.
9. DFA'ing Pedro Beato. He'll be a useful guy to ride the Pawtucket shuttle, but you could live without that.
10. DFA'ing Ryan Villareal, since he's out of options. But they usually go into ST with one or two such guys in addition to the 12 pitchers they expect to take north. His upside is obvious.

Alex Hassan and Dan Butler currently rank 3rd and 5th in the system in position-adjusted Davenport Peak Projections. Butler, in fact, has probably had the third most surprisingly good season in the system, after Cecchini and Betts. They're not being DFA'd.

Briefly - defensively Brentz is a RF while Almanzar seems to be ticketed to 1B, and failing that DH. Thinking he has a chance to stick at 3B is I think a minority view at this point. You may also have noticed that SP ranks Brentz about 10 spots above Almanzar, and I don't remember a recent national publication that had Almanzar above Brentz. Prevailing opinion isn't always correct but humility would warn one against preemptive sneering.

When I said that there was no rational argument for considering Brentz better than Almanzar, that wasn't meant to be a sneer at those who have it the other way around, because I'm well aware that everyone thinks that. The intended tone was, OMG, if you look at the evidence systematically and in detail, and with an open mind, you will be really surprised to find that this is the case. I certainly could have made that more clear! In any case, I apologize if what I've said sounds like I'm trying to impose my beliefs on others. They're my opinions, and they're stated forcefully because a ton of careful thought has gone into them (based on forty years of prospect watching and sabermetric analysis), but they are only meant to encourage debate.

If we knew that Almanzar had no chance to stay at 3B, I might have them as roughly equal prospects. But I've read better assessments of his fielding than SP has given him, and, most tellingly, I think, Clay Davenport's TotalZone-like system for minor-league fielding (which generally correlates really well with scouting reports) has him rated at about +13 runs per 150 games (last three years, weighted 3-2-1). That doesn't mean he's been a good fielder, but it does mean that somehow he's been making more plays than average, maybe a lot more. That leads me to think he has a significant chance to stay at 3B. And of course among the others with that minority opinion are the Red Sox FO, who still have him playing mostly at 3B.

Re SP's rankings: they do a phenomenal job covering the Sox system, and I read almost every word posted here. But their prospect rankings have always struck me as inconsistent. The biggest problem is not in projecting guys, but in translating the projections into rankings that reflect sabermetric reality. Relief prospects, for instance, are insanely overvalued (Alex Wilson ahead of Christian Vazquez, Jose De La Torre ahead of Steven Wright). We know pretty much who Brock Holt is now, a guy who has a coin-toss chance of being a useful MLB bench player. There's no way that makes him a better prospect than Almanzar, who has a somewhat better chance of being a bench player and a small one of being a good regular, perhaps a very good one.

As far as Brentz goes, I think the enthusiasm over him from 2011 has blinded folks to just how unimpressive he's been the last two years. One such year has always been given a mulligan, but two years like that in a row, and a prospect should be dropping like a stone, especially when the so-so years are in the high minors at ages 23 and 24. SP still has Brentz as the #5 position player prospect; I've got him somewhere between 12th and 15th.

In terms of national publications ranking the two, none have gone that far down the Sox' depth chart.

So you understand the rational argument why Brentz is rated better than Almanzar (better defense at a more valuable position, better scouting reports), you just disagree with it. A few more specific notes:

You're dismissing 6 points of EqA like it's a meaningless difference. EqA has a very small spread because it's calibrated to batting average, and so 6 points is a rather significant gap. That gap is more evident in other stats. For instance, compare Almanzar's 111 wRC+ and Brentz's 120 wRC+.

You're also way overvaluing age-advanceness. While it's certainly important, especially at lower levels, it's much less meaningful when you (a) have players at different levels and (b) are comparing a college draftee with an IFA. One years' worth of age-advancement isn't a magic wand that you can wave away a better performance at a higher level with. At best, it means Almanzar has a little more projection left.

I'd also like to see links to scouting reports that indicate that Almanzar has a chance of sticking at 3B. I've never seen on to the best of my knowledge, and the minor league defensive +/- is very rudimentary at best. If you're firmly of the opinion that Almanzar is a 1B, and a mediocre defensive one at best, Brentz is pretty unambiguously the better prospect.

I just don't like Almanzar, in general, as a prospect in this system. He has some power, yes, but he doesn't have a real position to stick at and there is no way that he starts in this organization over WMB, Bogaerts, or Cecchini. I think that he is best off in another organization that has less 3B/1B prospects of quality. I think that he isn't going to get picked in the Rule-5 because he is so raw, still, and overall he's not ready for MLB pitching. If he can't hit MLB pitching, then what use is he to a team?

I may be the wrong one to chime in, since I had Cecchini nowhere near the 2014 40 man in April. But my thoughts...

I doubt they give up Hassan. I'd almost rather they DFA Lavarnway than Butler. I think if Salty somehow accepts the tender (doubtful) they trade/turf Lavarnway, which they should do anyway, given the defense.

I doubt they give up on Hassan, and may just have to roll with Haze or Brentz. I kinda like Haze better though I think the consensus has Brentz ahead.

I said beginning of the year ago Kalish never puts on a Boston uni again (before the latest setback), and I still think that. I know we ran up against issues with DFA/60-day with Hassan, but Kalish may be a goner for the 40 man. I just don't see the value. I see more value in Bard than Kalish, to be honest.

I think Almanzar prob gets returned if picked, and if KDLC gets R5D you laugh at the $25,000 you just made. Also "while having a chance to stick at a significantly tougher defensive position" is pretty insane. Almanzar is not sticking at 3B any more than Mauro Gomez did.

I'm not the highest guy on Brentz in the world (I tend to have him a bit lower than the site rankings do, although I understand and respect the argument that has him higher than I do), but I'm even lower on Almanzar. I do think there's a slight chance they protect him, but only if there are acres of room on the 40-man.

• You mention the bonuses, which are meaningless in that A) it's not apples to apples comparing a draftee to an IFA, and B) we're years past each of them signing. Xander Bogaerts got less than either of them did - should that matter when we compare him with either player? Of course not.
• Whatever Almanzar's EQA is, he's been pretty uninspiring for two months now. .256/.323/.352 with 2 home runs in 223 PA since 6/7. Since the start of July he's .235/.308/.303 in 133 PA. Brentz's line was at least relatively consistent throughout his season before he went down, if nothing else. However much he improved his prospect stock the first two months of the season, he's come back down the last two. If Almanzar is unable to pull out of this before the end of the year (making it a slump as opposed to turning back into a pumpkin), I'd be VERY surprised if he's protected.
• As important as age might be when you compare prospects, it's not important for Rule 5 purposes, where the important thing is whether a guy is ready to be in the majors now or not.
• Even if Almanzar "has a chance to stick" at third, which I'll give you for the sake of argument, he's awful there based on most scouting reports. It's tough to gauge it by when the Sox have had him playing each position - he played a lot of his 1B when he was with Vitek, and has mostly played 3B since in large part because of Travis Shaw's presence at 1B. Since Cecchini was promoted to Portland, Almanzar has played more 3B than 1B when in the field (I thought it'd basically be a 1B platoon once Cecchini got there), but he's played a bunch of DH (17 times versus 15 games at 3B and 8 games at 1B while Shaw has played 1B 34 times and DH 5 times). If we're to read anything into the usage, it's that the club would rather give time in the field to Travis Shaw than Almanzar. Even if he's a 3B down the line, he'd apparently be a bad one, and while reports on Brentz's D have been mixed, they've been better than Almanzar's. So he's a poor defender at a more premium defensive position. Color me unexcited by that prospect.
• Speaking of the fielding, if whatever Davenport stats you're using are based on the milb.com PBP, I wouldn't put a ton of stock into them. Having seen how the sausage is made on those in the press box, and seen how inconsistent they are on things like BIP data, I'm not a fan of using anything based on it with players on different teams.
• Biggest thing we're missing here: Almanzar scouts horribly in part because of the lack of effort and lax approach, which I haven't heard any improvements on this year. Maybe this could go either way - a team could think he'd care more in the majors, or (more likely in my opinion) they won't want anything to do with him given how fringy he'd be to make a club to begin with.
• And I'm not sure how Diaz shows us anything with respect to what they'll do with Almanzar. They've also shown the willingness to leave guys who are higher in the system unprotected, e.g. Jorge Jimenez, who was drafted by the Marlins and almost made the team (and is a much better comp for the type of player Almanzar is/projects to be than Diaz was), and Jeremy Hazelbaker, whose line last year in Double-A was better than Almanzar's is this year (nearly exact same BA and OBP, and 40 more points of slugging and an ability to steal bags).

And just a reminder to everyone to direct any discussion of the site rankings to the meta forum. Thanks.