SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
Anthony Ranaudo traded to TEX for Robbie Ross Jr
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Jan 28, 2015 11:20:26 GMT -5
...His only good season was his rookie season,... Say what? His FIP, K/9, and BB/9 were all better in his second season. Let's stay reality-based, please. Both his first two years were good, his third much less so. I don't think the higher BABIP explains it either. As someone else pointed out, this may be the Sox buying low on a decent left-hander who had a down year. That seems like a smart gamble to me, but it is a gamble. It does answer the call for more left-handed relief pitching, something that was missing. As for the value of Ranaudo and what he might bring in lower prospects... why? Does the team just keep loading up on minor leaguers? It's not as if they don't have talent down there. Why more sweepstakes tickets when you can buildout the team for the upcoming season? This is all about the opportunity cost for doing just that.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Jan 28, 2015 11:21:02 GMT -5
LOL, for the velocity guys, Drake Britton likely has the highest velocity in the pen. Every pitcher tends to be worse than they used to be if they lose velocity. Ross' 2 mph drop from 2013-2014 probably had an impact on the bad season, but it was also probably caused by getting stretched out. I'd expect it to return in the pen.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Jan 28, 2015 11:22:46 GMT -5
Boras isn't a dummy. He knows that MLB starters make far more money than AAA starters. (Also: I don't think Ranaudo being a Boras client has a single thing to do with this.) I've been thinking about this for a bit; I going to say I don't agree. One, Borass is one of the more powerful dudes in the game. Two, he has a pretty good eye for talent. I could be wrong but I don't think he's an agent to jags who want his consul. If so, that means at least one top talent evaluator thought BC nuts to not have Renaudo start over our flotsam five. Three, assuming TX also needs valuable lefty relievers (they do), this assumed objection he had with the treatment of Renaudo makes the most sense to why the trade occurred.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jan 28, 2015 11:28:37 GMT -5
I just don't see an upgrade over a guy like Badenhop or an Albers if you want to hit the time machine You say this like it's a bad thing. Those guys aren't relief aces, but for a team like the Red Sox who project to contend for the division title this year and over the next four years, the difference between an above-average reliever like Ross and your run-of-the-mill replacement-level reliever matters, and it can matter quite quite a bit. Remember, prior to the addition of Ross, their LHRP depth chart consisted of Craig Breslow, Tommy Layne, and Drake Britton, none of whom I'm confident are much more than replacement level (I'm bullish on Layne as a LOOGY, but am down on Breslow and Britton). Certainly, considering the SP depth chart, it seems clear to me that Ross projects to add more value to the 2015-18 Red Sox than Ranaudo does (I don't think I've seen anyone argue to the contrary in this thread). Of course, that said, I think it is a fair question to ask whether Ranaudo could have been traded for more value either in the past or, if they had held on to him, in the future.
|
|
TX
Veteran
Posts: 265
|
Post by TX on Jan 28, 2015 11:38:18 GMT -5
...His only good season was his rookie season,... Say what? His FIP, K/9, and BB/9 were all better in his second season. Let's stay reality-based, please. Both his first two years were good, his third much less so. I don't think the higher BABIP explains it either. As someone else pointed out, this may be the Sox buying low on a decent left-hander who had a down year. That seems like a smart gamble to me, but it is a gamble. It does answer the call for more left-handed relief pitching, something that was missing. As for the value of Ranaudo and what he might bring in lower prospects... why? Does the team just keep loading up on minor leaguers? It's not as if they don't have talent down there. Why more sweepstakes tickets when you can buildout the team for the upcoming season? This is all about the opportunity cost for doing just that. With the alternative being they're traded for relievers and backup catchers, I say yes. But of course I'd prefer their being traded today for pieces that would help, and by help I don't mean whatever insignificant value Miles, Hanigan, Ross bring to the table. I mean trading a bit more than you want to today - today being key here, because tomorrow, who knows - for pieces this team certainly looks weak on - starters with strong track records.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Jan 28, 2015 11:43:57 GMT -5
Sure Ross will most likely help us more then Ranaudo would have next year. But it's never good to trade number 5 starters for relievers. Last year Ranaudo made seven starts and had 3 quality starts. Sure his numbers weren't that impressive, but he was also closing in on almost a 180 innings which is by far a high for him. He had pitched only 140 innings the year before. Have to say think we sold low, hope I am wrong. Workman, Barnes, Owens, Johnson, Rodriguez, Escobar, Wright - 7 guys who project as pitchers who will be just as good/better than Ranaudo and who need a spot in AAA or the majors. Ranaudo also seems like a terrible fit for the bullpen, which drops his floor below guys like Escobar. The Sox needed to get rid of some of the surplus and they chose the guy with the lowest floor/ceiling combination. I have no problem with it. That's really what this trade comes down to. I understand the argument against trading away potential future value for minor upgrades, but there's only so many rotation slots to go around and therefor you can only hoard so many prospects. Ranaudo was judged to the most expendable (correctly IMO) of the current crop, and so you get this trade. And honestly, Ross is a steal for Ranaudo at this point. Same age, but with a track record of actually being useful in the major leagues, AND he's still got options? I guess you can say Ranaudo has more upside, but realistically if I was going to bet on which player has the better MLB career at this point, I'm betting Ross.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jan 28, 2015 11:50:28 GMT -5
But of course I'd prefer their being traded today for pieces that would help, and by help I don't mean whatever insignificant value Miles, Hanigan, Ross bring to the table. I mean trading a bit more than you want to today - today being key here, because tomorrow, who knows - for pieces this team certainly looks weak on - starters with strong track records. I don't think you're getting Cueto or Zimmermann or any other starting pitcher who would be a significant improvement on Boston's existing options with a package where Ranaudo is one of the headliners. That would have been true last summer and likely would have been true this summer. Guys who project as back-end starters just don't have all that much trade value, and even during Ranaudo's peak last year, I (and I suspect most front offices) still had him pegged as a back-end starter. I also certainly wouldn't describe Miley, Hanigan, and Ross as "insignificant value." The combined difference between those guys and the three guys they replaced (De La Rosa, Dan Butler, Drake Britton) is probably in the neighborhood of two to three wins and is comparable to the difference between Cueto or Zimmermann and Kelly or Masterson.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Jan 28, 2015 11:50:54 GMT -5
Of course, that said, I think it is a fair question to ask whether Ranaudo could have been traded for more value either in the past or, if they had held on to him, in the future. That's absolutely a fair question, with the counter that the exact same question applies to the Rangers and Ross. It's hard to trade a player at peak value. This is one of those times I feel like you really need to trust your internal scouting and analysis groups. We know, to throw one example out there, that Brock Holt wasn't merely a throw-in in the Hanrahan deal - the Red Sox had actively scouted him and thought he could be a decent contributor. My point is that I don't think we can look at this deal as only a dump of Ranaudo. I'm guessing the Red Sox like Ross specifically, and they were able to buy low on him.
|
|
|
Post by moonstone2 on Jan 28, 2015 11:54:37 GMT -5
I just don't see an upgrade over a guy like Badenhop or an Albers if you want to hit the time machine You say this like it's a bad thing. Those guys aren't relief aces, but for a team like the Red Sox who project to contend for the division title this year and over the next four years, the difference between an above-average reliever like Ross and your run-of-the-mill replacement-level reliever matters, and it can matter quite quite a bit. Remember, prior to the addition of Ross, their LHRP depth chart consisted of Craig Breslow, Tommy Layne, and Drake Britton, none of whom I'm confident are much more than replacement level (I'm bullish on Layne as a LOOGY, but am down on Breslow and Britton). Certainly, considering the SP depth chart, it seems clear to me that Ross projects to add more value to the 2015-18 Red Sox than Ranaudo does (I don't think I've seen anyone argue to the contrary in this thread). Of course, that said, I think it is a fair question to ask whether Ranaudo could have been traded for more value either in the past or, if they had held on to him, in the future. This is where your major league evaluation comes in: In the Red Sox situation, the Red Sox have to make decisions on pitchers who have one option left and don't project to start on the major league team this year. Farrell and Nieves have seen Ranaudo enough. If they thought that he would one day be a decent major league starter, the deal wouldn't have been made. Realistically, Ranaudo was probably sixth on the depth chart of starters. Unless he really turned it around, he wasn't going to see a lot of time on the major league roster this year. In return the Sox get another lefty who is probably more reliable than what they had and is one year removed from an excellent major league season. This cements 6 spots in the bullpen assuming no one gets or is just plain awful in spring training. Layne, Britton, Boggs, Workman and Wright will compete for that seventh spot with Britton having the inside track because he is out of options and left handed.
|
|
nomar
Veteran
Posts: 10,754
|
Post by nomar on Jan 28, 2015 11:54:51 GMT -5
I hate when people decide to treat prospect like they're constants. "Prospect hugging" isnt when a few of your prospects happen to be studs and you decide to hold onto them. We've traded our more redundant arms for useful parts for a team that is supposed to contend this year.
Ranaudo's value didn't decrease over the last year. It is was it has been.
Sometimes it seems like people just want to complain.
|
|
|
Post by brianthetaoist on Jan 28, 2015 12:01:50 GMT -5
I'm not really going to lament being rid of Ranaudo. His peripherals from last year are spooky: high strand rate, very low BABIP. Given his >50% flyball rate in Boston and career best, better than average 0.59 HR/9 as a PawSox, I figure he was experiencing some real good HR/FB juju as well. FIP pegged him at 3.86 anyhow, which aside from being high is mostly in line with his career norms. Then his cup of coffee went about as poorly as you could conceive. Now it's true that he'd already matched his career high for innings by that point, but the numbers are still pretty damning. He had the second-lowest swinging strike percentage of anyone who'd thrown 30 innings. Even more ominously, the curveball didn't fool a soul. Out of the 132 thrown, four were swung on and missed. Hitters made contact 96%! of the time they offered at the ones going for strikes. And go for strikes they did, because their chase rate was similarly pitiful and the heater was nearly as bad. It's a small sample size, to be sure, but honestly Ranaudo looks a little AAAA. I was hoping we'd use his 2.61 ERA to help lure Chapman away from the dumb Reds. Yet—and you guys obviously know better than I do—somebody somewhere was probably going to include him in their top 100. Right? Why'd we pawn him off for a reliever who got shelled? Obviously, Ross's peripherals are abhorrent. They're so bad that you can basically discount the rotation experiment entirely, if for no other reason than the 2 MPH he lost off his fastball and slider. I'm confident Ross is the same dependable worm killing southpaw he'd always been. His minor league track record kicks the snot out of the months younger Ranaudo's, anyhow. It is my hope that this trade is an example of the Red Sox targeting one of their "guys" the way Billy Beane has been. I don't know what they might see in Ross, but his K/9 does seem to fluctuate year by year from 8+ to <7 and back. The changeup and what FanGraphs calls a cutter look like good pitches across small samples, 'cept he can't throw 'em for strikes. He pounds the zone with everything else more than is normal, yet he sports a below average BB/9 far higher than the ones he had on the farm. Does the FO think the strikeouts are real and the walks are not? He had a 3.39 xFIP last we saw him in the pen. Entering his prime, I think he's at least a safe bet to provide valuable innings the next couple years. Edit: Shoot, I forgot to mention that he's throwing to the outlier best pitch framer in the big leagues now. Shameful! Rangers catchers were deleterious last year and CV is an alien sent from outer space to frame pitches Edit 2: The strikeouts are fairly real. Ross has a 9% swinging strike rate as a reliever and, though he pitches to contact, mostly average plate discipline numbers elsewhere. The American League averages 9.2% swinging strikes and 7.7 K/9. The picture is extremely promising then if we discount his rookie year. Can someone PM me or something and let me know whether it's okay if I bump the Miley thread? This is hitting the ground running on your first post ... good one. I was thinking about Ranaudo's peripherals, and not only are they bad, they are CLEARLY out of line with what the Sox are valuing this offseason. I mean, it's overly simplistic, but some of this trade can be described thusly: Robbie Ross=groundball pitcher. Anthony Ranaudo=NOT a groundball pitcher. And I suspect there's more going on with the Sox acquisition strategy for pitchers, but I haven't had any time to try to tease it out ... that Fangraphs piece is interesting about framing, for instance. Also, outside of the value proposition of the trade (what if this *is* selling high on Ranaudo?), the more I think about it, the more this seems to me that the Sox think Wright is the sixth starter on this team. I suspect Workman will be in the 'pen, the AAA lefties all seem unlikely for the first half of the season (unless I'm undervaluing Escobar), and I don't think Barnes is quite ready yet, either. So that leaves Wright as the guy that'll take some starts if a starter has to go on the DL in April. Which is ok with me ...
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Jan 28, 2015 12:06:09 GMT -5
But of course I'd prefer their being traded today for pieces that would help, and by help I don't mean whatever insignificant value Miles, Hanigan, Ross bring to the table. I mean trading a bit more than you want to today - today being key here, because tomorrow, who knows - for pieces this team certainly looks weak on - starters with strong track records. You're just not getting Cueto or Zimmermann or any other starting pitcher who would be a significant improvement on Boston's existing options with a package where Ranaudo is one of the headliners. That would have been true last summer and likely would have been true this summer. Guys who project as back-end starters just don't have all that much trade value, and even during Ranaudo's peak last year, I (and I suspect most front offices) still had him pegged as a back-end starter. I also certainly wouldn't describe Miley, Hanigan, and Ross as "insignificant value." The combined difference between those guys and the three guys they replaced (De La Rosa, Dan Butler, Drake Britton) is probably in the neighborhood of three wins and is comparable to the difference between Cueto or Zimmermann and Kelly or Masterson. A win here, and win there, and pretty soon you're talking about being a game up in the division instead of a game down. For a team that's trying to win, hell yeah I want the GM to be sweating who his backup catcher is and building as much bullpen depth as possible. For whatever potential future value is lost by trading away guys like WMB and Ranaudo, this isn't managing a stock portfolio or something. Unless you're the Astros of the past few years, you can't just hang onto every asset that might possibly increase in value, you have to build a functioning roster. The more I think about it, the more I love this move.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Jan 28, 2015 12:12:43 GMT -5
Playin' the devils advocate here, it should be pointed out that we got Varvaro for Kurcz. Slightly different situation (40 man thing) but still.
I've been one of the posters that thinks Ranaudo should have been given another year to make a decision. On the other hand, I'm still in favor of this trade because one of our weaknesses was (or is) lefties in the pen coming off down years. This adds one more possible solution to a potential problem. We have a ton of starting depth so although I do think we traded down, I also think we improved our situation.
There was an old saying that Duke Snyder was only the third best center fielder in New York. That was true but it was still Duke Snyder. Ranaudo was only the fifth best starter prospect in Pawtucket.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Jan 28, 2015 12:16:49 GMT -5
...With the alternative being they're traded for relievers and backup catchers, I say yes. But of course I'd prefer their being traded today for pieces that would help, and by help I don't mean whatever insignificant value Miles, Hanigan, Ross bring to the table. I mean trading a bit more than you want to today - today being key here, because tomorrow, who knows - for pieces this team certainly looks weak on - starters with strong track records. But that is just what they need, right? The team has players at every position, and a starting rotation, with a promising group of starters waiting in the wings. They did have more pieces they needed to fill out the roster, exactly those guys you discount. Everyone agrees the team is right around 88-89 wins. Now factor in the value of marginal wins once you get to that point in your planning process. The 1 to 1.5 WAR that might reasonably be expected from Ross and Hanigan - and that may be low - represent a significant amount of value given that calculus, millions of dollars. It's exactly what you want to do once you reach that number of expected wins. If you can do it at a reasonable cost, the do it. And they did. Every piece they've added has increased the probability that they reach the playoffs or win the division outright. I think they're building out a winning hand.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Jan 28, 2015 12:19:44 GMT -5
Then his cup of coffee went about as poorly as you could conceive. Now it's true that he'd already matched his career high for innings by that point, but the numbers are still pretty damning. He had the second-lowest swinging strike percentage of anyone who'd thrown 30 innings. Even more ominously, the curveball didn't fool a soul. Out of the 132 thrown, four were swung on and missed. Hitters made contact 96%! of the time they offered at the ones going for strikes. And go for strikes they did, because their chase rate was similarly pitiful and the heater was nearly as bad. It's a small sample size, to be sure, but honestly Ranaudo looks a little AAAA. I was hoping we'd use his 2.61 ERA to help lure Chapman away from the dumb Reds. I don't have too much to add to this, I just want to emphasize how awful Ranaudo was last year. This is why I can't get behind any of the "he was gassed" stuff. If he was merely bad, ok, maybe. But he was ATROCIOUS. How much extra credit are we supposed to give him? When your best pitch is a curveball and hitters are making contact on it 96% of the time, well, flags don't get much redder than that. He could improve substantially and still not be worthy of major league innings. I don't care what the circumstances were, he needed to show more than he did last year. Much more. Yet—and you guys obviously know better than I do— somebody somewhere was probably going to include him in their top 100. Right? Why'd we pawn him off for a reliever who got shelled? If so you should probably ignore that list and that analyst. The Sox traded him for a decent reliever because that's his realistic upside at this point.
|
|
TX
Veteran
Posts: 265
|
Post by TX on Jan 28, 2015 13:22:49 GMT -5
But of course I'd prefer their being traded today for pieces that would help, and by help I don't mean whatever insignificant value Miles, Hanigan, Ross bring to the table. I mean trading a bit more than you want to today - today being key here, because tomorrow, who knows - for pieces this team certainly looks weak on - starters with strong track records. I don't think you're getting Cueto or Zimmermann or any other starting pitcher who would be a significant improvement on Boston's existing options with a package where Ranaudo is one of the headliners. That would have been true last summer and likely would have been true this summer. Guys who project as back-end starters just don't have all that much trade value, and even during Ranaudo's peak last year, I (and I suspect most front offices) still had him pegged as a back-end starter. I also certainly wouldn't describe Miley, Hanigan, and Ross as "insignificant value." The combined difference between those guys and the three guys they replaced (De La Rosa, Dan Butler, Drake Britton) is probably in the neighborhood of two to three wins and is comparable to the difference between Cueto or Zimmermann and Kelly or Masterson. Of course not. If I implied that I didn't mean to. We are, however, getting a Cuerto or Zimmermann if BC opens up his pocketbook lined with redundant prospects. He just doesn't want to because, at his heart, he's a player development guy. He overvalues his kids all the way up until they fail after a handful of ML games, and then they're traded for change. We'll see how Miley does but the other two you can have. Even if Ross does well it's not as if LH specialists cannot be groomed. Remember our last one? Pretty good, right? Who wanted Miller before we picked him up? That's right, no one.
|
|
|
Post by moonstone2 on Jan 28, 2015 13:30:05 GMT -5
This from Gammons is very telling. From looking at pitch fx, you can see that Ross doesn't try to fool anyone. As a reliever in 2013 he relied heavily on a four seem fastball that he can get up to 96. He wasn't trying to fool anyone and it didn't seem to matter from what side the batter was hitting. Ross was up there to throw gas to the glove side of the plate and he did that roughly 75% of the time.
His problems last year seem easily explainable. Ross' four seam velocity fell significantly last year and concurrently batters swung and missed far less often and hit more line drives when they did put the ball in play. You would think that if Ross gets back to throwing gas, he should regain effectiveness.
Comparing him to Andrew Miller, another left handed gas/slider pitcher, Ross' stuff doesn't measure up. He doesn't throw as hard, and his slider doesn't have the same bite. However Ross doesn't have the history of command and control issues that have plagued Miller and far less likely to stop throwing strikes. Even last year, his walk rate and strike percentage only eroded slightly. Ross also has a changeup in his back pocket that he can use versus righties.
In many ways the Ross of 2012 and 2013 is the player that the Red Sox hoped Drake Britton would become last year. Instead Ross will do the job that the Sox had once hoped Britton would do.
|
|
TX
Veteran
Posts: 265
|
Post by TX on Jan 28, 2015 13:39:22 GMT -5
...With the alternative being they're traded for relievers and backup catchers, I say yes. But of course I'd prefer their being traded today for pieces that would help, and by help I don't mean whatever insignificant value Miles, Hanigan, Ross bring to the table. I mean trading a bit more than you want to today - today being key here, because tomorrow, who knows - for pieces this team certainly looks weak on - starters with strong track records. But that is just what they need, right? The team has players at every position, and a starting rotation, with a promising group of starters waiting in the wings. They did have more pieces they needed to fill out the roster, exactly those guys you discount. Everyone agrees the team is right around 88-89 wins. Now factor in the value of marginal wins once you get to that point in your planning process. The 1 to 1.5 WAR that might reasonably be expected from Ross and Hanigan - and that may be low - represent a significant amount of value given that calculus, millions of dollars. It's exactly what you want to do once you reach that number of expected wins. If you can do it at a reasonable cost, the do it. And they did. Every piece they've added has increased the probability that they reach the playoffs or win the division outright. I think they're building out a winning hand. Thanks for the slap! I guess I don't count in everyone because there's no way I think this is a 90 win team. Not with its pitching staff it isn't. Nope. Doesn't matter what predicted WAR counts are. Nope. Doesn't matter what the consensus is. Nope. I don't care what era it is, winning teams generally feature strong pitching staffs. Was the reason we won thrice solely hinged on stud one-twos? Who knows, but I'd guarantee you that it we swapped Porcello and Miley with any of those duos we aren't winning squat.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Jan 28, 2015 14:12:47 GMT -5
But that is just what they need, right? The team has players at every position, and a starting rotation, with a promising group of starters waiting in the wings. They did have more pieces they needed to fill out the roster, exactly those guys you discount. Everyone agrees the team is right around 88-89 wins. Now factor in the value of marginal wins once you get to that point in your planning process. The 1 to 1.5 WAR that might reasonably be expected from Ross and Hanigan - and that may be low - represent a significant amount of value given that calculus, millions of dollars. It's exactly what you want to do once you reach that number of expected wins. If you can do it at a reasonable cost, the do it. And they did. Every piece they've added has increased the probability that they reach the playoffs or win the division outright. I think they're building out a winning hand. Thanks for the slap! I guess I don't count in everyone because there's no way I think this is a 90 win team. Not with its pitching staff it isn't. Nope. Doesn't matter what predicted WAR counts are. Nope. Doesn't matter what the consensus is. Nope. I don't care what era it is, winning teams generally feature strong pitching staffs. Was the reason we won thrice solely hinged on stud one-twos? Who knows, but I'd guarantee you that it we swapped Porcello and Miley with any of those duos we aren't winning squat. We can quibble about 90 wins, but do you really think this team isn't good enough to care about the quality of it's bullpen or backup catcher?
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Jan 28, 2015 14:15:48 GMT -5
My whole objection to the deal is trading a 4/5 for a reliever coming off a down year. Also, one thing I don't get about the deal - if they didn't think Ranaudo was a starter, then why not try him out of the pen before you trade him for a pen arm? He has two above average pitches, he's a big body, and if the FB ticks up 2-4 MPH in short stints that's exactly the kind of nasty weapon you want in the 7th/8th inning. I'm also still of the mind that some of these starter candidates should get their feet wet in MLB by coming out of the pen, too. No yo-yoing them, but strictly as pen arms for 2 or 3 months.
Speaking to TX's point about "prospect hugging," I am guessing we would all love to know what deals the Front Office have been turning down when they made inquiries about Zimmerman, Cueto, Samardzija, Strasberg, Hamels, et al. No doubt everyone on the other side is asking up front for Betts and Swihart, but once they get a no on that, where do negotiations go - especially on the 1 year guys?
|
|
|
Post by moonstone2 on Jan 28, 2015 14:32:11 GMT -5
First he has no track record in the pen and Ross does, and most importantly, they probably didn't think he could do that.
|
|
|
Post by moonstone2 on Jan 28, 2015 14:34:47 GMT -5
One more word on Ross...he does have two options left, however if he's optioned after April 4, he would have to pass through optional assignment waivers. Expect him to make the team unless he's horrific this spring and then possibly be optioned depending on how the first couple of days go.
|
|
|
Post by dmaineah on Jan 28, 2015 14:41:39 GMT -5
Ross makes a nice pairing with Anthony Varvaro in the pen
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jan 28, 2015 14:41:55 GMT -5
One more word on Ross...he does have two options left, however if he's optioned after April 4, he would have to pass through optional assignment waivers. Expect him to make the team unless he's horrific this spring and then possibly be optioned depending on how the first couple of days go. There's a gentleman's agreement not to claim OAW guys, fwiw. Shouldn't be an issue. Stephen Drew last year is one really big example. Scott Atchison in the past was another.
|
|
|
Post by moonstone2 on Jan 28, 2015 14:45:59 GMT -5
One more word on Ross...he does have two options left, however if he's optioned after April 4, he would have to pass through optional assignment waivers. Expect him to make the team unless he's horrific this spring and then possibly be optioned depending on how the first couple of days go. There's a gentleman's agreement not to claim OAW guys, fwiw. Shouldn't be an issue. Stephen Drew last year is one really big example. Scott Atchison in the past was another. Gentleman's agreements have been broken in the past. In the case of Drew had the Red Sox let him go, the claiming team would have been on the hook for his entire salary. Atchison was a fringe player. If there is a player that a team really wants, I would expect the unspoken rule to go out the window.
|
|
|