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.
Red Sox Trade CJ Chatham to the Phillies For PTBNL/Cash
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Jul 17, 2021 16:14:17 GMT -5
If there isn't velocity, he's likely to pass the Rule 5 draft without putting him on the 40 man.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,928
|
Post by ericmvan on Jul 18, 2021 1:58:33 GMT -5
If there isn't velocity, he's likely to pass the Rule 5 draft without putting him on the 40 man. Yes. Successful Rule 5 guys either have enough upside to be worth stashing for a year, or are good enough to contribute. A potentially useful up-and-down guy is neither.
BTW, although he is now 21, this is his age 20 season. His birthday was 5 days ago. A .227 / .263 / .427 allowed at age 20 in AA doesn't suck.
He has a huge reverse split, so his splitter (a "split-change" is just a slower splitter) seems like a plus or better pitch indeed.
One wonders whether Chaim has a mechanical tweak to add a little velo and/or a different way of using his pitches to take advantage of the splitter. He seems likely to be the youngest (easily) and one of the most interesting non-40-man starting pitchers at Worcester next year.
|
|
vokuhila
Veteran
Posts: 796
Member is Online
|
Post by vokuhila on Jul 18, 2021 2:23:36 GMT -5
Longenhage & McDaniel from 2019: If he develops velocity, Santos could be very good very quickly because he can do everything else. He has a plus-flashing split-action changeup and can locate an average slider. His fastball moves, and he can run it back onto his gloveside corner or just off the plate to his arm side. But it’s hard to say if Santos will grow into more fastball because his frame is already maxed out. The scouting reports of rising high school seniors Jesus Luzardo and Forrest Whitley read an awful lot like that before each of them altered their training and conditioning, and experienced a huge jump in velocity. Whether Santos is a candidate for ‘reverse projection’ in this way is hard to say, but it’s fair to assume some growth on the fastball through sheer physical maturity. If Santos retains his command at greater velocities, he’s going to move quickly and could be a monster. If the velo doesn’t come, he’ll have to keep proving year after year that he can gets guys out with 40 velo.
Longenhage & McDaniel from 2020: Fastball Slider Splitter Command Sits/Tops 35/35 45/50 55/60 35/60 87-91 / 92 There’s no change here. Santos was listed on the Phillies instructs roster but I can’t find anyone who saw him, and a pitch data source with whom I spoke didn’t have anything from the Fall either. He also worked out with Escogido before the LIDOM season but didn’t pitch for them: A pitchability teenager with a good changeup, Santos slings in average stuff, some of which plays up because of his funky, long arm action. His realistic ceiling is that of a fifth or sixth starter. (Fall Instructional League)
So...hope he doesn't get picked in Rule5, give him a full offseason of conditioning, reevaluate at the end of next season.
|
|
|
Post by bcsox on Jul 18, 2021 8:43:35 GMT -5
Not every guy we pick up gets the benefit of Chaim or the RS must see a defect that they can fix. I saw it a lot in the Fabian thread and mixed in other threads as well. My guess is the Phillies said to the Sox, either we will give you 25K, or this guy. The Sox may have just said this kid is a warm body, we are not starving for $$, let’s take a gamble. In saying that, I think it’s a good move.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jul 18, 2021 9:22:09 GMT -5
The Phillies-focused guys I follow on Twitter were not thrilled with this, not necessarily at the loss of Santos but the loss of Santos in this particular deal when he could've been used for something else. They also surmised that this was Dombrowski overpaying for a guy he liked when he was with the Red Sox.
Which all sounds about exactly right for DD, right?
Also we're hearing really good things about him, including that the velo is higher than FG has it.
|
|
|
Post by arquimedezbozo on Jul 18, 2021 9:24:30 GMT -5
Chatham was only released outright because he was (drum roll) injured at the time (oblique) and couldn’t be put on waivers. Dombrowski is evidently a fan and they re-signed him but he got hurt again (broken hand) and hasn’t played since June 2nd, though he’s still on the Iron Pigs roster. “We needed a roster spot. When we [released him], we had the right to do that. He wasn’t on our club at that point,” Dombrowski said. “However, you can’t ask outright waivers on an injured player. That’s against the rules, so it really was the only way that we could get him off our roster, and we needed a roster spot at this time.” thatballsouttahere.com/2021/03/30/phillies-cj-chatham-dave-dombrowski/
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,928
|
Post by ericmvan on Jul 18, 2021 10:22:03 GMT -5
Chatham was only released outright because he was (drum roll) injured at the time (oblique) and couldn’t be outrighted. put on waivers. Dombrowski is evidently a fan and they re-signed him but he got hurt again (broken hand) and hasn’t played since June 2nd, though he’s still on the Iron Pigs roster. “We needed a roster spot. When we [released him], we had the right to do that. He wasn’t on our club at that point,” Dombrowski said. “However, you can’t ask outright waivers on an injured player. That’s against the rules, so it really was the only way that we could get him off our roster, and we needed a roster spot at this time.” thatballsouttahere.com/2021/03/30/phillies-cj-chatham-dave-dombrowski/Corrected it.
To clarify, because he was on the IL, he couldn't be put on outright waivers, where he stays in your system if he clears. He was placed on release waivers, where he becomes a free agent if he clears. Which he did.
|
|
|
Post by Underwater Johnson on Jul 18, 2021 11:27:52 GMT -5
Well, I remember Chatham as having a pretty decent contact stick...not much power for good sized guy...but not a chump. I could see him making it in a utility type roll or back end bench guy. For whatever reason, he's never been able to stay on the field. A lot of guys have bad luck with fluke injuries but that's not my recollection of him -- a lot of pulls and strains and the like.
|
|
|
Post by Underwater Johnson on Jul 18, 2021 11:37:56 GMT -5
Longenhage & McDaniel from 2019:If he develops velocity, Santos could be very good very quickly because he can do everything else. He has a plus-flashing split-action changeup and can locate an average slider. His fastball moves, and he can run it back onto his gloveside corner or just off the plate to his arm side. But it’s hard to say if Santos will grow into more fastball because his frame is already maxed out. The scouting reports of rising high school seniors Jesus Luzardo and Forrest Whitley read an awful lot like that before each of them altered their training and conditioning, and experienced a huge jump in velocity. Whether Santos is a candidate for ‘reverse projection’ in this way is hard to say, but it’s fair to assume some growth on the fastball through sheer physical maturity. If Santos retains his command at greater velocities, he’s going to move quickly and could be a monster. If the velo doesn’t come, he’ll have to keep proving year after year that he can gets guys out with 40 velo. Longenhage & McDaniel from 2020:Fastball Slider Splitter Command Sits/Tops 35/35 45/50 55/60 35/60 87-91 / 92 There’s no change here. Santos was listed on the Phillies instructs roster but I can’t find anyone who saw him, and a pitch data source with whom I spoke didn’t have anything from the Fall either. He also worked out with Escogido before the LIDOM season but didn’t pitch for them: A pitchability teenager with a good changeup, Santos slings in average stuff, some of which plays up because of his funky, long arm action. His realistic ceiling is that of a fifth or sixth starter. (Fall Instructional League) So...hope he doesn't get picked in Rule5, give him a full offseason of conditioning, reevaluate at the end of next season. I don't know how this profile compares to guys who have been picked in the Rule 5 but it sounds like a guy that a rebuilding team would happily keep on their 26-man roster during a lost season, pitching in a mop up role, while they try to help him increase his velo. Seems a lot easier to increase velo in a guy with natural command than increase command in a guy with natural velo.
|
|
|
Post by Underwater Johnson on Jul 18, 2021 12:43:16 GMT -5
Would Thaddeus Ward be a good comp for Santos? Stuff not overpowering but when he hands the ball to his skipper, there's a lot of goose eggs on the board...
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jul 18, 2021 12:53:22 GMT -5
Would Thaddeus Ward be a good comp for Santos? Stuff not overpowering but when he hands the ball to his skipper, there's a lot of goose eggs on the board... Not at all. Ward sits 91-94 T96 and had two potential plus pitches in his slider and cutter.
|
|
vokuhila
Veteran
Posts: 796
Member is Online
|
Post by vokuhila on Jul 18, 2021 13:22:22 GMT -5
What is the history for prospect-for-prospect trades in these 40man/rule5 crunches? Is there any? I assume you have problems getting someone of similar value back, because you have very little leverage...everyone knows why you want to shop prospect x.
|
|
|
Post by jmanny24 on Jul 18, 2021 13:52:29 GMT -5
The Phillies-focused guys I follow on Twitter were not thrilled with this, not necessarily at the loss of Santos but the loss of Santos in this particular deal when he could've been used for something else. They also surmised that this was Dombrowski overpaying for a guy he liked when he was with the Red Sox. Which all sounds about exactly right for DD, right? Also we're hearing really good things about him, including that the velo is higher than FG has it. I'd like to hear more about what you're hearing. Is there enough of a velo uptick to think possible starter?
|
|
radiohix
Veteran
'At the end of the day, we bang. We bang. We're going to swing.' Alex Verdugo
Posts: 6,305
Member is Online
|
Post by radiohix on Jul 18, 2021 14:01:45 GMT -5
The Phillies-focused guys I follow on Twitter were not thrilled with this, not necessarily at the loss of Santos but the loss of Santos in this particular deal when he could've been used for something else. They also surmised that this was Dombrowski overpaying for a guy he liked when he was with the Red Sox. Which all sounds about exactly right for DD, right? Also we're hearing really good things about him, including that the velo is higher than FG has it. It's 91-92 mph in this video.
|
|
|
Post by bcsox on Jul 18, 2021 15:04:01 GMT -5
Wasn’t Santos ranked in the high 40’s in the Phillies system. I am all for ta liking prospects but Ward is our 20th ranked prospect and likely only not higher due to a significant arm injury. I imagine this kid is going to be in the 40’s for the Sox system? Is he a better pitching prospect than Zeferjohn, Murphy, Weiland, Witkowski?
|
|
|
Post by benogliviesbrother on Jul 18, 2021 15:11:03 GMT -5
The Phillies-focused guys I follow on Twitter were not thrilled with this, not necessarily at the loss of Santos but the loss of Santos in this particular deal when he could've been used for something else. They also surmised that this was Dombrowski overpaying for a guy he liked when he was with the Red Sox. Which all sounds about exactly right for DD, right? Also we're hearing really good things about him, including that the velo is higher than FG has it. It's 91-92 mph in this video. Foulke got a lot of outs with 90-91 paint and a terrific change. Saberhagen too. They overmatched hitters. And then there's Koji ...
|
|
|
Post by jmei on Jul 18, 2021 15:14:04 GMT -5
Is Greg Maddux the next comp? Yes, you can be effective topping out in the low 90s, especially if you have plus command or spin rate. But it means you don’t have quite as much margin for error.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Jul 18, 2021 15:24:48 GMT -5
There's also the idea of working to increase his velocity if they can. Do they do that before or after the Rule 5 draft? It's not as if scouts would ignore those changes.
|
|
vokuhila
Veteran
Posts: 796
Member is Online
|
Post by vokuhila on Jul 18, 2021 15:34:07 GMT -5
That's what i was thinking aswell, hence the idea to push the conditioning to the off season. You could try to even hide him in the bulpen. I assume starters will get a better look in the draft...no idea if that's even worth considering...
|
|
|
Post by benogliviesbrother on Jul 18, 2021 15:38:56 GMT -5
Is Greg Maddux the next comp? Yes, you can be effective topping out in the low 90s, especially if you have plus command or spin rate. But it means you don’t have quite as much margin for error. I believe that is the point I was making. Citing examples of players who had success with (vaguely) similar "stuff," oughtn't be interpreted as making a comp. Good golly, are you new around here (or to polite discourse in general)? One need not quite as much margin of error when one has plus command. More "power" (ie, bat miss-ability) vs. more command? I suppose it ultimately becomes a math problem. Personal anecdote: as a young athlete, in another sport, I actually made the choice to forego power for command. I overhauled my mechanics almost entirely. It was a good decision for me. In tough moments, I'd argue there's nothing more important than knowing where the ball's going. Regrettably, I couldn't bring myself to make the same decision with my golf swing. I just loved watching the ball sail, the electric feeling in my wrists. Ah, the folly of youth.
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 14,031
Member is Online
|
Post by cdj on Jul 18, 2021 17:28:26 GMT -5
Is Greg Maddux the next comp? Yes, you can be effective topping out in the low 90s, especially if you have plus command or spin rate. But it means you don’t have quite as much margin for error. I’m throwing a Julian Tavarez/Rolando Arrojo comp on him Our guy has LONG arm action sheesh
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jul 18, 2021 19:37:16 GMT -5
Wasn’t Santos ranked in the high 40’s in the Phillies system. I am all for ta liking prospects but Ward is our 20th ranked prospect and likely only not higher due to a significant arm injury. I imagine this kid is going to be in the 40’s for the Sox system? Is he a better pitching prospect than Zeferjohn, Murphy, Weiland, Witkowski? Ward is a top 10 guy if healthy. Not sure why the comparison.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Jul 19, 2021 10:31:55 GMT -5
Is Greg Maddux the next comp? Yes, you can be effective topping out in the low 90s, especially if you have plus command or spin rate. But it means you don’t have quite as much margin for error. I believe that is the point I was making. Citing examples of players who had success with (vaguely) similar "stuff," oughtn't be interpreted as making a comp. Good golly, are you new around here (or to polite discourse in general)? One need not quite as much margin of error when one has plus command. More "power" (ie, bat miss-ability) vs. more command? I suppose it ultimately becomes a math problem. Personal anecdote: as a young athlete, in another sport, I actually made the choice to forego power for command. I overhauled my mechanics almost entirely. It was a good decision for me. In tough moments, I'd argue there's nothing more important than knowing where the ball's going. Regrettably, I couldn't bring myself to make the same decision with my golf swing. I just loved watching the ball sail, the electric feeling in my wrists. Ah, the folly of youth. Is the mod new around here? What is the point of saying there have been pitchers who threw 90 and succeeded, but they aren’t comps? There have been fat guys who ran surprisingly well. Not comps, but, you know, of note. If Saberhagen isn’t a comp, then how is his fastball germane? I guess it seems reasonable to assume if you say x does something, and y did the same thing, it is a comparison.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jul 19, 2021 11:07:19 GMT -5
Because you're ignoring everything else. Randy Johnson was a tall pitcher and he was a HOF. Jacob Webb is also a tall pitcher, ergo, he might be a HOFer.
Having a single similarity does not a comp make. Comparing Maddox to every pitcher without top-line velo ignores that Maddox had arguably the best control of any pitcher ever, insane movement, and a keen mind for pitching. "A guy before him did it" fails to account for what needed to have happened for the guy before him to do it.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Jul 19, 2021 11:17:12 GMT -5
Because you're ignoring everything else. Randy Johnson was a tall pitcher and he was a HOF. Jacob Webb is also a tall pitcher, ergo, he might be a HOFer. Having a single similarity does not a comp make. Comparing Maddox to every pitcher without top-line velo ignores that Maddox had arguably the best control of any pitcher ever, insane movement, and a keen mind for pitching. "A guy before him did it" fails to account for what needed to have happened for the guy before him to do it. While I agree with this, it kind of makes me wonder what the point of comps is in the first place. Do we gain anything other than misunderstanding by saying "Player A = Player B (but with caveats x, y, and z)"?
|
|
|