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.
2017 Rule 5 Watch (Update: Beeks, Buttrey, Shepherd added)
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,932
|
Post by ericmvan on Oct 13, 2017 15:15:33 GMT -5
If we protect him as we ought to, no one right now will gamble on trading for him, because it means trusting the MLE's. It's much easier to trust the MLE's when you already have the player and he represents a sunk cost! So the optimum strategy is to trust them, protect him, get him some MLB experience in 2018 to establish trade value, and then decide whether to keep him as the 4th OFer in 2019 and 2020 or trade him. He'll always have more value starting for someone else than coming off the bench for you, but, maybe the return in trade won't match the downgrade to the next available 4th OFer option. I don't know that I agree with this bit, because Castillo also scouted quite well this year and his defense limits his downside. If a team got good reports and has a a San Francisco Giants-sized hole in center field they may (and should) consider trading for him. EDIT: Think of it this way - there is absolutely a sweet spot here, moreso than for any other player in the organization, to make a good value trade. If the Red Sox can get more value than 4th-OF Castillo and the acquiring team is giving up less value than starting-OF Castillo is worth, then a deal should work. For argument's sake, let's say Castillo is a 2.5 WAR player as a starter, but only a 1.5 WAR player in the role the Red Sox would be able to give him. If they can get the equivalent return of a 2.0 WAR expected value, then everybody wins. And those numbers aren't intended to be projections, just to show that there's absolutely a range where the Red Sox should consider trading him and another team should consider trading for him. Terrific point. I'm probably over-estimating the reluctance to trust ml performance in today's front offices. They have all sorts of data to go along with their scouting reports, too. Furthermore, with the ability of Benintendi and/or Betts to play CF, Brentz is probably a better fit for us as a 4th OFer than Castillo. So right now, I say you protect both Brentz and Castillo, but you look to trade Castillo and keep Brentz. Whereas previously I wanted to option Castillo, establish trade value for Brentz, and have Castillo as the 4th OFer going forward. The revised plan is much better. A big part of my change of heart is Brentz's surprisingly solid defensive numbers in the minors, as crunched by BP. I always thought he looked decent out there in the tiny sample we saw of him.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,932
|
Post by ericmvan on Oct 13, 2017 15:39:43 GMT -5
Looking at the current 40 man, some easy subtractions are Hembree, Young, Abad, Boyer Possible removals - Owens, Elias, Taylor, Fister, Reed, Davis Additions from injury list - Wright, Hernandez, Thornburg; bye bye Rutledge and Ross That means 10 come off, 3 go on - leaves 7 spots. Add Beeks, Brentz (or Barfield?), Ockimey, Chavis perhaps? Just a finger in the wind right now of course....going to be lots of changes we can't even foresee at the moment Young, Abad, Boyer, Fister, Reed, and Davis are all free agents and hence automatic removals. Ditto Nunez and Moreland. Ockimey and Chavis don't need to be protected until next winter. With Ross, it's better if he's kept on the 40-man until after the Rule 5 draft, when he can be taken off by not tendering him a contract. That makes him a free agent, and you can strike a deal with him beforehand to come back as a ml free agent with a split contract if he makes the MLB roster at any point. If you take him off the roster before the draft, he can be claimed by another team. They'd probably non-tender him, too, but it would give them an inside edge on getting him to ST as a non-roster invitee. By waiting, you're basically indicating that you still think he's an MLB-caliber player, just one not worth what he'll get in arbitration. If you look at the prospect rankings here, the only guys who are adds are Beeks and Brentz and maybe Shepherd. (Aneury Tavarez didn't hit in AAA and was never regarded as a prospect before last year, so I think he's too high at 24.) Castillo is an obvious add as well. That there's just no roster crunch means you can keep Owens and Elias around to see if they resurrect themselves. The one interesting guy you mention is Barfield. If this were 50 years ago, when teams had 7-man benches, you might well protect him, because he looks like he can hit MLB LHP right now. But there's no room on anyone's roster for a 5th outfielder these days. We have one more year of control on him before he becomes a minor league free agent, so he will actually be useful -- if we have some OF injuries, he can be selected and optioned up and down. He'll have to hit in AAA first, of course.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Oct 13, 2017 17:10:36 GMT -5
A big part of my change of heart is Brentz's surprisingly solid defensive numbers in the minors, as crunched by BP. I always thought he looked decent out there in the tiny sample we saw of him. Every recent report I've gotten is that Brentz is awful on defense. I'm also not enthused by the fact they had him working out at 1B and it never got far enough along that they tried him there in-game.
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Oct 13, 2017 18:58:55 GMT -5
I've never seen a report that Brentz was terrible in the OF. I do know that he has a very strong arm. The 4-5 games I saw him, sss and no scout, he did not look like a butcher. He is sturdy in structure like a Gomes and certainly not a gazelle, but I didn't cringe when a ball was hit in his direction.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Nov 17, 2017 12:29:25 GMT -5
So the time we actually should be talking about this nobody is? Funny. Deadline is Monday to add players to the 40-man. Get your final guesses in here for celebration/ridicule as appropriate. My guess: 100% sure they will add Beeks 80% sure they will add Shepherd 50% sure they will add Buttrey That's it. For reference, new list page is at www.soxprospects.com/rule5.htm. The Wiki is dead (long live the Wiki).
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Nov 17, 2017 12:51:02 GMT -5
So the time we actually should be talking about this nobody is? Funny. Deadline is Monday to add players to the 40-man. Get your final guesses in here for celebration/ridicule as appropriate. My guess: 100% sure they will add Beeks 80% sure they will add Shepherd 50% sure they will add Buttrey That's it. For reference, new list page is at www.soxprospects.com/rule5.htm. The Wiki is dead (long live the Wiki). This is a long way off from when there were 18 guys it looked like might be worth adding. A few got added already (Devers, Travis, Maddox, etc.), a couple more got traded (including Callahan who was an obvious add), and several more fell off. Anyway, I'd have said less than 50% with Shepherd a month ago, but with him working as a starter in winter ball I'm wondering if there's a more specific plan for him to be used as a long-man/piggyback type. I'll throw a 20% chance on Justin Haley just because he's been drafted once, so if he gets taken again he goes on waivers instead of getting offered back. Trying to think of who has a real chance to be drafted: -Obviously Shepherd and Buttrey if they aren't protected. -Haley. -Kyle Martin -Tavarez could probably stick as a fourth outfielder. Same as Haley, it would be his second time being taken. -Mars is a longer shot to stick but it's not impossible that someone would bring him in. -Castillo has been discussed - a team would have to like him as a starter to take him, but if someone does they should take him because you usually can't find your starting center fielder in the Rule 5. -Cosart is fits the profile as this year's guy the Orioles take and use for 14 1/3 innings, totally stunting his development while wasting a 25-man spot that could've been used on someone who might actually have helped them.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Nov 18, 2017 14:58:45 GMT -5
I raised my number on Shepherd for the same reason, especially since Dombrowski was speaking knowledgeably about him recently.
There's also Ball, of course, if a team wants to move him to the pen as the Red Sox are now long overdue to do.
And Harrison Cooney came back from Tommy John throwing much harder than he ever has, although he also can't throw strikes. I wouldn't bet on it happening but there's a non-zero chance he's picked if a team's got good reports on him.
|
|
|
Post by nonothing on Nov 19, 2017 23:25:44 GMT -5
Sounds like Beeks, Shepard and Cosart being reported as likely adds. Nobody thinks Barfield belongs? Those are the 4 that seem to make most sense to me. Tavarez would be bummer to lose and more risk I think that he would be gone for good, and he seems like he should be #5 kept. I don't think anybody can carry Ball or Buttrey for a year at this point, so I don't see a need to protect them. Haley could be lost, but it seems like they are grooming Shepard for depth as SP, and with Velazquez also already on roster from right side, hard to see Haley getting a real shot.
With 3 spots, that brings up question of whether we will DFA anyone. Can we really afford to lose a 30HR hitter, even if he is older in Barfield? If we might trade Bradley and/or Castillo, do we really want to lose Tavarez? It is very hard to see Owens sticking on any roster for a year since he cannot throw strikes. So I would personally rather see him DFA'd to keep Barfield. And if we are not going to play Marrero over Hernandez and Lin, it might be time to let him go if we cannot trade him for value. Tavarez probably provides more value to the Sox over the next 6 years than Marrero.
Not worried about Castillo getting chosen because if he is, then we get salary relief for a guy we can't afford well in the big league and yet are paying too much for and has too much potential to sit at AAA at this point. I do think somebody can get a great player in Castillo, but I don't think we have the money to roster him unless we make other moves first -- so a loss I think we have to leave as a possibility. But again, that makes Tavarez more important to protect in my mind.
Does anyone know if Holt is truly healthy, or if he might go because they cannot rely on him to be symptom free from concussions? I am not sure what situation he is in health wise and wonder if anyone else knows more. Concussion thing seemed very bad for him. Sad.
|
|
|
Post by Mike Andrews on Nov 20, 2017 9:07:28 GMT -5
My take: 100% on Beeks. 40-50% on Shepherd. I think he gets drafted if he's not added, so I get it. I still personally wouldn't do add him. I'd take the roster flexibility over adding a 15th bullpen option. 0-10% chance on anybody else. I don't see them filling up the 40-man now given that they clearly plan to add a bat in the coming weeks.
I do have concern that Barfield could get drafted.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Nov 20, 2017 9:20:23 GMT -5
Sorry for an uneducated question here, but why would Buttrey be added to the 40 man roster? Doesn't he have the highest upside and wouldn't there be a good chance somebody else drafts him in the Rule 5 draft? Trying to go by memory I can't remember if he made it up to Pawtucket. I thought he had. I thought that unlike Shepherd who would be marginal, Buttrey could have a chance to be the type of pitcher who could "pitch with responsibility" as Tito Francona likes to say.
I'm definitely missing something. What am I missing?
|
|
|
Post by sibbysisti on Nov 20, 2017 10:00:57 GMT -5
Sorry for an uneducated question here, but why would Buttrey be added to the 40 man roster? Doesn't he have the highest upside and wouldn't there be a good chance somebody else drafts him in the Rule 5 draft? Trying to go by memory I can't remember if he made it up to Pawtucket. I thought he had. I thought that unlike Shepherd who would be marginal, Buttrey could have a chance to be the type of pitcher who could "pitch with responsibility" as Tito Francona likes to say. I'm definitely missing something. What am I missing?[/quote). Buttrey did play ten games in Pawtucket with a 1-1 w/l record recording a 7.64 era. Sox sent him to AFL to work on some issues as he was a starter earlier in his career. Heven't yet seem him play so can't comment on whether he should be protected.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,932
|
Post by ericmvan on Nov 20, 2017 12:13:50 GMT -5
My take: 100% on Beeks. 40-50% on Shepherd. I think he gets drafted if he's not added, so I get it. I still personally wouldn't do add him. I'd take the roster flexibility over adding a 15th bullpen option. 0-10% chance on anybody else. I don't see them filling up the 40-man now given that they clearly plan to add a bat in the coming weeks. I think they'll go to 39, add two bats (Martinez and Moreland or another 1B), and trade Hembree to open up the second spot. They can also DFA Jerez if they need roster space. They were losing him as a free agent anyway if they hadn't added him. There's no room for Hembree on the roster next year anyway, and if you trade him now rather than in ST, that gives you the roster flexibility to add Shepherd. And you don't want to lose Shepherd for the very reason that you have to move a solid reliever off the 40 because he doesn't fit in the 25. Forty years ago he'd be snapped up instantly. But it's tough to find room for a platoon corner OFer in the age of 4- and 5-man benches. You need a team that has: 1) A corner OFer who doubles as the backup CF 2) A corner OF who hits LH and needs to be platooned (or someone at another position that needs to be platooned, with position switches opening up a spot for a corner OF or DH) 3) Nobody better than Barfield (as we have with Brentz) B) Alternately, lots of LHB in the lineup and an existing bench with lots of versatility The Sox will know if any team fits that description, and if Barfield gets protected, that's why. But I think they would have already figured that out, and wouldn't have added Jerez if they planned to.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Nov 20, 2017 12:45:19 GMT -5
I don't think they'll DFA him, but Henry Owens had an 8.86 ERA in six AFL starts. He walked 13 and hit 5 against 15 strikeout in 21 1/3. I know he has some upside as a reliever, but I'd rather have Chandler Shepherd in 2018, and it's not clear that I'd prefer Owens long-term.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Nov 20, 2017 12:47:50 GMT -5
Beeks, Shepherd and Buttrey added to 40 man.
|
|
|
Post by nonothing on Nov 20, 2017 14:10:14 GMT -5
Awesome -- three more relievers! I know one is converting to starter, and maybe Buttrey will be more likely to throw strikes and stick on a major league roster than Cosart. Still -- I would like to have seen Barfield protected, as well as Tavarez. Maybe more moves to come in trade later today. But not looking good for keeping offense in the system. We love relievers, especially right-handed ones.
|
|
|
Post by swingingbunt on Nov 20, 2017 14:22:57 GMT -5
If DD is serious about converting Johnson and Elias to relievers, then by my count the Sox now have 15 relievers on the 40 man roster. That seems high.
|
|
|
Post by Mike Andrews on Nov 20, 2017 15:17:15 GMT -5
Wrong in my prediction. My reasoning for disagreeing with the latter 2 moves still stands. We'll see how it shakes out.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Nov 20, 2017 15:38:29 GMT -5
Awesome -- three more relievers! I know one is converting to starter, and maybe Buttrey will be more likely to throw strikes and stick on a major league roster than Cosart. Still -- I would like to have seen Barfield protected, as well as Tavarez. Maybe more moves to come in trade later today. But not looking good for keeping offense in the system. We love relievers, especially right-handed ones. Keep in mind that a player selected in Rule 5 needs to stick on the club's 25-man roster. Tavarez is a difficult one to do that with, as his skillset is not all that conducive to an MLB bench role. He's not great defensively, is supposedly fast but has never been a great base stealer, and doesn't have a ton of pop. Plus he's coming off an injury-plagued season in which, let's be honest here, he wasn't all that great in Pawtucket (sub-.300 OBP isn't getting it done with his profile - he needs to hit). I'll be surprised if he's picked, especially since it doesn't look like he's playing winter ball in the DR, presumably to heal up. Barfield is an interesting case, but keep in mind that he was playing independent ball in late May of this past season. He had a great campaign for Portland, but going from a guy in indy ball to a Rule 5 pick in three months is a pretty tall order. Might a team take a chance on the pop? Maybe. I'm not inclined to think so but will admit it's a non-zero chance. Now, as for RPs, they're much, much easier to stash in the back of your bullpen for the required period (see, e.g., Jason Garcia, Josh Fields, Ryan Pressly, etc.). Buttrey is coming off a very good stint in Arizona, which probably increased the chances he'd be taken in Rule 5. Shepherd is a guy they seem to have some kind of plan for. And note that they did trade away a couple more RPs they probably would have had to protect in Callahan and Bautista (note that he shoved for St. Lucie after the trade, so while not a certainty to protect, he might be picked), so this is something they're cognizant of. Remember, protecting a player from Rule 5 isn't necessarily about which is the better player or prospect, but more about which is the most likely player to be selected and stick who you mind losing. There's a reason 12 of the 18 players selected in Rule 5 last year were pitchers, which kept with the general trend. This goes back to a few years ago, when many of us were befuddled that the Red Sox protected Alex Hassan and left Josh Fields exposed. The latter was selected (as was Ryan Pressly), while Hassan played in 3 games for the Red Sox. As another 'tweener, not unlike Tavarez, Hassan was probably a better prospect than either Fields or Pressly, but seemed very unlikely to be selected in Rule 5 given his skillset. It was a decision that didn't matter much (you could say that about this one as well), but it was a decision on the margins that seemed wrong when it was made and later events seemed to confirm that. Yeah, there's a lot of pitchers on the 40, but that'll probably work itself out. Guys are going to have to come off as major leaguers are acquired. My guess is it'll be from the glut of relievers you mention (and probably Owens, at this point).
|
|
|
Post by wildsox on Nov 20, 2017 18:49:09 GMT -5
So does this mean that Trey Ball is available in the Rule 5?
|
|
|
Post by soxcentral on Nov 21, 2017 6:58:56 GMT -5
Wrong in my prediction. My reasoning for disagreeing with the latter 2 moves still stands. We'll see how it shakes out. By adding both Buttrey and Shepherd I'm going to assume that DD expects to be throwing in a reliever as part of an upcoming deal and wants to preserve depth after the fact. As his MO with the Sox is to make 3 for 1 type trades the lack of space on the 40 man is probably very temporary.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Nov 21, 2017 8:06:33 GMT -5
So does this mean that Trey Ball is available in the Rule 5? Yep. As is Kohl Stewart, who was taken at #4 and everyone would have been thrilled with at #7.
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Nov 21, 2017 8:20:00 GMT -5
Mark Appel also just got DFAed.
|
|
|
Post by kungfuizzy on Nov 21, 2017 9:49:04 GMT -5
What a bust Trey Ball was. Austin Meadows was the pick there. Why the last second change? The one blemish on Ben's sterling player development career. I guess the one positive of having the 30th best farm system in baseball thanks to DD is the fact no one is going to get taken from our rule 5 stash, except maybe Ball.
|
|
|
Post by kungfuizzy on Nov 21, 2017 9:50:35 GMT -5
Mark Appel also just got DFAed. Good. Grab him and put him in the pen. Not a big enough splash move for DD to make. But would make a ton of sense. The worst farm system in baseball can only go up and we need talent and youth any way that the Sox can get it.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Nov 21, 2017 10:19:05 GMT -5
What a bust Trey Ball was. Austin Meadows was the pick there. Why the last second change? The one blemish on Ben's sterling player development career. I guess the one positive of having the 30th best farm system in baseball thanks to DD is the fact no one is going to get taken from our rule 5 stash, except maybe Ball. What a fun conversation to bring up again. It's like the Trey Ball pick is the modern day Babe Ruth blunder.
|
|
|