|
Post by jimed14 on Feb 26, 2018 12:44:21 GMT -5
So, to recap here. 1. They added Ben Taylor to the active roster two years before he was Rule 5 eligible because he was such an important immediate upgrade. 2. Used him for 17 1/3 innings. 3. Didn't call Brentz up in September because they didn't have a spot on the 40-man, despite Taylor being injured. 4. Placed him on waivers due to a roster crunch, losing him for nothing. Again, these are the sort of at-the-margins mistakes that a good organization doesn't make. I agree, and not to bring the discussion off-topic, but the current plethora of out-of-options types (Swihart, Marrero, Hembree, Wright, Johnson) fighting for a position on the 25-man roster lead me to believe more guys will be lost for nothing. You can never have enough pitching....until you actually start losing pitchers for nothing. They're either lost for nothing or they are handed spots over better players to preserve depth. The latter annoys me when it's a large difference.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Feb 26, 2018 12:48:39 GMT -5
So, to recap here. 1. They added Ben Taylor to the active roster two years before he was Rule 5 eligible because he was such an important immediate upgrade. 2. Used him for 17 1/3 innings. 3. Didn't call Brentz up in September because they didn't have a spot on the 40-man, despite Taylor being injured. 4. Placed him on waivers due to a roster crunch, losing him for nothing. Again, these are the sort of at-the-margins mistakes that a good organization doesn't make. But to be fair, it would make sense if his stuff was diminished after he went on the DL. Ian's checking to see if he caught him in any of his rehab games and has any notes, but if he came back with a significant velo drop or something, that'd represent a change in circumstances. It's tough because we don't have any pitchfx data from his rehab/option to Pawtucket in August. Also, I think we all agree at this point that it seems like point 3, when they said it, was a cover for "Farrell says he's not going to play him so we don't see the point." I think DD's comments after he was added sort of clarified that. I agree with the general point though.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Feb 26, 2018 13:11:24 GMT -5
So, to recap here. 1. They added Ben Taylor to the active roster two years before he was Rule 5 eligible because he was such an important immediate upgrade. 2. Used him for 17 1/3 innings. 3. Didn't call Brentz up in September because they didn't have a spot on the 40-man, despite Taylor being injured. 4. Placed him on waivers due to a roster crunch, losing him for nothing. Again, these are the sort of at-the-margins mistakes that a good organization doesn't make. But to be fair, it would make sense if his stuff was diminished after he went on the DL. Ian's checking to see if he caught him in any of his rehab games and has any notes, but if he came back with a significant velo drop or something, that'd represent a change in circumstances. It's tough because we don't have any pitchfx data from his rehab/option to Pawtucket in August. Also, I think we all agree at this point that it seems like point 3, when they said it, was a cover for "Farrell says he's not going to play him so we don't see the point." I think DD's comments after he was added sort of clarified that. I agree with the general point though. Sure, if he had diminished stuff, then it makes sense to have him be the first man out. But still, adding him to be the 8th guy in the bullpen out of spring training last year put all this additional pressure onto the 40-man roster basically ever since. He was a 2015 draft pick, after all. Adding him after his dynamite first full season because he looked great in spring training was a less-publicized version of the mistake they made with Jackie Bradley five years ago.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Feb 26, 2018 13:30:30 GMT -5
But to be fair, it would make sense if his stuff was diminished after he went on the DL. Ian's checking to see if he caught him in any of his rehab games and has any notes, but if he came back with a significant velo drop or something, that'd represent a change in circumstances. It's tough because we don't have any pitchfx data from his rehab/option to Pawtucket in August. Also, I think we all agree at this point that it seems like point 3, when they said it, was a cover for "Farrell says he's not going to play him so we don't see the point." I think DD's comments after he was added sort of clarified that. I agree with the general point though. Sure, if he had diminished stuff, then it makes sense to have him be the first man out. But still, adding him to be the 8th guy in the bullpen out of spring training last year put all this additional pressure onto the 40-man roster basically ever since. He was a 2015 draft pick, after all. Adding him after his dynamite first full season because he looked great in spring training was a less-publicized version of the mistake they made with Jackie Bradley five years ago. Interesting what if... If they don't add Taylor to the 40, does Jamie Callahan get traded at the deadline? They still would've probably traded for Addison Reed, but do they maybe try to use someone else? Maybe not, but just interesting.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Feb 26, 2018 13:35:34 GMT -5
Alternatively, could they have put Ysla (who had been DFA a couple weeks earlier to make room for Nunez) into that deal and saved either Nogosek or (more likely) Bautista?
|
|