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.
|
Post by julyanmorley on Jul 20, 2021 10:10:00 GMT -5
Does anyone have a sense of how the Red Sox 40 man roster crunch compares to the rest of the league?
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jul 20, 2021 10:11:51 GMT -5
You promote Herrmann or sign Flowers or Wieters. Those are hardly steep drop-offs from Plawecki. The point is that there are guys out there with similar skill sets to Plawecki, which goes to Chris's point that this is what makes his trade value low. I like Plawecki, I just said "if [he] fits as part of a deal," not that I think he's a centerpiece or anything like that; just if the other team likes the idea of control of Plawecki through 2022 and asks Chaim to include him. The risk is that Vazquez gets hurt badly in the next three months (and he's not what anyone would call "injury prone") and you have to survive with Herrmann instead of Plawecki; the reward is that you seal the deadline deal that you think gives your team the biggest boost. Okay but if a team can just go sign flowers or weiters without a steep drop-off from plawecki why would anyone trade anything of value for plawecki? Was about to post the same. I don't understand how Plawecki "fits as part of a deal" to begin with, and as stated, I don't think anyone is saying he's untouchable. Bringing this back to the point of the thread, I don't think having 4 catchers on the 40 is unreasonable.
|
|
|
Post by Underwater Johnson on Jul 20, 2021 21:31:06 GMT -5
Okay but if a team can just go sign flowers or weiters without a steep drop-off from plawecki why would anyone trade anything of value for plawecki? Was about to post the same. I don't understand how Plawecki "fits as part of a deal" to begin with, and as stated, I don't think anyone is saying he's untouchable. Bringing this back to the point of the thread, I don't think having 4 catchers on the 40 is unreasonable. Plawecki is controllable through next season and he's 30 years old right now, compared to 35 for both Flowers and Wieters (and also Lucroy, who was just DFAed; I think Herrmann is 33). Let's say a selling team has a young C who is a new starter or has an ETA of next year. Locking up Plawecki right now fits that team's needs, depending on their current depth chart. BAL (Severino is atrocious behind the dish), AZ (perfect complement to Kelly) and CIN (Barnhart will be a FA) come to mind off the top of my head but I'm just giving some examples, not predicting who the trading partners might be. Again, I'm not saying Plawecki is the basis for any deal, especially not in a vacuum (i.e. Plawecki alone for someone worth the same as Plawecki, which is to say not much). But I think it's pretty common knowledge that player evaluation has become pretty precise league-wide over the past few years (think of the system Craig Edwards worked up for FG), so if the Sox are trying to get a player worth a quarter and they have already offered a prospect worth two dimes in the conversation, maybe Plawecki is the nickel that gets the deal done (with the understanding of the risk and reward I outlined earlier). After all of these words about this idea (which I really didn't expect to write but I guess I have trouble making myself clear), I honestly don't think the chances of him moving are more than about 5%. But he is on the 40-man and may have some value to another club that happens to have a decent piece that Chaim really likes. And I also don't think 4 catchers on the 40-man is unreasonable. However, while some seem to think that 4 is essential under the current circumstances, I happen to think 3 would also be reasonable. (Clearly that would go back up to 4 if Vazquez got injured, unless it was severe, which I don't really want to entertain.)
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jul 21, 2021 12:26:50 GMT -5
Here's where I'm at right now: About to be added Jarren DuranCertain to be addedBrayan Bello Jeter Downs Gilberto Jimenez Would've been certain, but how do we factor in TJ?Thaddeus Ward Likely to be addedFrank German Josh Winckowski Possibly added but likely not given roster crunchKutter Crawford Durbin Feltman Kaleb Ort AJ Politi Alex Scherff Jose Adames?John Schreiber
Unlikely to be added but worth mentioningTyler Dearden Tyler Esplin Ryan Fitzgerald Devlin Granberg Oddanier Mosqueda Aaron Perry Ceddanne Rafaela Tyreque Reed John Schreiber I do not feel confident about the above at all, fwiw. I think we need to add MLFA Jose Adames. Although I'm unsure where. news.soxprospects.com/2021/07/scouting-scratch-brayan-bello-jose.html
|
|
|
Post by Addam603 on Jul 23, 2021 15:36:24 GMT -5
Looking at the guys possibly to be added: Scherff, Adames, Crawford, and Feltman have now been promoted to the next level. Give them the rest of the season to see whether or not there’s anything there.
|
|
|
Post by Underwater Johnson on Jul 24, 2021 14:29:07 GMT -5
Open spots update (one man's view): Free agents, probably not coming back: Ottavino Marwin Santana Workman Club options, probably not exercised: Andriese Richards Perez Player option, probably not exercised: JD Martinez Fungible/minor trade pieces/likeliest to pass through waivers (not all fit all three categories): Wilson Rios Chavis Arauz Valdez Plawecki Move to MLB 60-man DL? Bryan Mata Thaddeus Ward
Free agent, either coming back or replaced by someone who takes a spot: E-Rod Club option, probably exercised: Vazquez That's eight open spots (the first eight listed) and perhaps six (listed in order of least to most valuable) who could either be redundant, traded, or DFAed, depending on whether you value one of the guys who is eligible for the Rule 5/MLFA more than one of those six. Obviously, trades are dependent on specific fits with specific teams (I didn't include guys like Jimenez, Groome or Downs who would only be parts of blockbuster trades and I didn't include Dalbec because I don't think he'll be traded; I didn't include Potts or Rosario because I don't know enough about them). Moving Ward or Mata to the 60-day MLB IL seems unlikely. If E-Rod doesn't sign, he'll likely be replaced by a veteran who is currently on another team (who will need a 40-man spot) and Vazquez is a lock to return. One open spot will be taken by Chris Sale within the next 2-3 weeks, so we're down to seven. All is so quiet on the Ryan Brasier front that it seems like his chances of pitching for BOS this year are fading. As far as I can see, you can take the top seven (or your favorite seven) from Chris's list above and then start to decide if the eighth guy is worth more than someone from the fungible list (e.g. is Alex Scherff or Jose Adames more valuable than Marcus Wilson or Yacksel Rios?). Of course, the trade deadline is fast approaching and the names/numbers may change after Friday. Let's not forget that many other teams are also facing a 40-man crunch due to 2020 being counted under Rule 5, so there may be fewer teams leaving 40-man spots open. [N.B. We have not considered yet whether the Red Sox will want to leave extra spots open, perchance to draft the next Whitlock.]
|
|
|
Post by Underwater Johnson on Jul 24, 2021 14:36:19 GMT -5
Here's where I'm at right now: About to be added Jarren DuranCertain to be addedBrayan Bello Jeter Downs Gilberto Jimenez Would've been certain, but how do we factor in TJ?Thaddeus Ward Likely to be addedFrank German Josh Winckowski Possibly added but likely not given roster crunchKutter Crawford Durbin Feltman Kaleb Ort AJ Politi Alex Scherff Jose Adames?John Schreiber
Unlikely to be added but worth mentioningTyler Dearden Tyler Esplin Ryan Fitzgerald Devlin Granberg Oddanier Mosqueda Aaron Perry Ceddanne Rafaela Tyreque Reed John Schreiber I do not feel confident about the above at all, fwiw. I think we need to add MLFA Jose Adames. Although I'm unsure where. news.soxprospects.com/2021/07/scouting-scratch-brayan-bello-jose.htmlIs Victor Santos Rule 5 eligible? I thought this was one reason why the Phillies gave him up in the Chatham trade...
|
|
|
Post by soxaddict on Jul 24, 2021 14:52:04 GMT -5
Yes he is.
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 3,984
|
Post by jimoh on Jul 24, 2021 15:22:14 GMT -5
Tough to imagine that fastball playing in the major leagues in 2022.
|
|
|
Post by soxin8 on Jul 24, 2021 20:11:38 GMT -5
Is it a certainty Rosario and Potts keep their spot on the 40?
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jul 24, 2021 21:41:40 GMT -5
Is it a certainty Rosario and Potts keep their spot on the 40? The only times I've seen the Red Sox add a guy to protect him from Rule 5 and then DFA him that quick that I can remember were: - Denyi Reyes - Added in 2018 and had a thoroughly underwhelming year in 2019. Outrighted and cleared waivers. I think that was because it was a mistake to protect him in the first place. We were kind of blindsided by it and sure enough he had a thoroughly mediocre season in Portland the following year. - Williams Jerez - Added in 2015, was pretty bad in 2016 (30 walks in 65 innings) and cleared waivers. Then had a good 2017 and got added again that offseason. On Rosario and Potts, I haven't seen enough to think they'd clear waivers. Keep in mind there's two months left of the season yet - we're not even 2/3 of the way through. A lot can happen. They might get better. They might get worse. Heck, Potts has played all of 33 games.
|
|
|
Post by wcsoxfan on Jul 24, 2021 22:05:59 GMT -5
Is it a certainty Rosario and Potts keep their spot on the 40? The only times I've seen the Red Sox add a guy to protect him from Rule 5 and then DFA him that quick that I can remember were: - Denyi Reyes - Added in 2018 and had a thoroughly underwhelming year in 2019. Outrighted and cleared waivers. I think that was because it was a mistake to protect him in the first place. We were kind of blindsided by it and sure enough he had a thoroughly mediocre season in Portland the following year. - Williams Jerez - Added in 2015, was pretty bad in 2016 (30 walks in 65 innings) and cleared waivers. Then had a good 2017 and got added again that offseason. On Rosario and Potts, I haven't seen enough to think they'd clear waivers. Keep in mind there's two months left of the season yet - we're not even 2/3 of the way through. A lot can happen. They might get better. They might get worse. Heck, Potts has played all of 33 games. A quick look at Potts' triple slash lines: 2019 (AA) - .227/.290/.406 2021 (AA) - .217/.285/.409 His peripheral numbers seem similar as well (K rate is actually up slightly). As Chris mentioned, it's way too early to rush to judgement, but I would certainly be surprised if a team claimed him in the rule-5 draft without improved performance going forward.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jul 24, 2021 22:48:15 GMT -5
As Chris mentioned, it's way too early to rush to judgement, but I would certainly be surprised if a team claimed him in the rule-5 draft without improved performance going forward. But this is the rub - that's not the question on removing a guy from the 40-man. The question is whether a team would claim him on waivers. That's very different, because a team can claim him and option him. So the question becomes, is it worth exposing Potts to waivers in order to keep from exposing, say, Alex Scherff or someone like that to the Rule 5 draft? That's why you don't really see prospect types DFA'ed to make room for other prospect types.
|
|
|
Post by Underwater Johnson on Jul 25, 2021 18:54:39 GMT -5
As Chris mentioned, it's way too early to rush to judgement, but I would certainly be surprised if a team claimed him in the rule-5 draft without improved performance going forward. But this is the rub - that's not the question on removing a guy from the 40-man. The question is whether a team would claim him on waivers. That's very different, because a team can claim him and option him. So the question becomes, is it worth exposing Potts to waivers in order to keep from exposing, say, Alex Scherff or someone like that to the Rule 5 draft? That's why you don't really see prospect types DFA'ed to make room for other prospect types. I think one caveat with those two is that the team acquired them and then had to make a Rule 5 decision on them only a few months later. Would've been a tough call to leave them exposed and lose one or both for nothing right afterwards. Seems like the kind of move where you're trading for the right to give them a 1-year tryout and go from there. (And here we are.) Obviously the Padres had a deep system but they were only getting a month of Mitch Moreland (recall that the deadline was later last year) and Potts and Rosario were clearly guys that they were dealing ahead of a 40-man crunch (sound familiar?). Also, the difference between protecting a guy from the Rule 5 and DFAing a guy off the 40-man is that the team that claims the Rule 5 guy has to put him on their 26-man roster (in addition, obviously, to their 40-man roster) but the team who claims the DFAed guy still has to fit him onto their 40-man. So it's not necessarily a slam-dunk for a guy who's DFAed to get claimed by another team (just ask Austin Brice, John Schreiber, Colten Brewer, Yairo Munoz...). If Potts and Rosario are the last two guys on the Sox 40-man, they may well be good enough to be the 35th and 36th guys on a less deep roster, so there's a risk but they would also have to be that much more attractive than anyone else who is let go right before the roster deadline. Recall also that many other teams are facing a 40-man crunch due to the strange Rule 5 year. My personal inclination would be to protect Scherff, Ort, Crawford, and Adames ahead of Potts or Rosario.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jul 25, 2021 20:02:22 GMT -5
Well here's the other part - the Rule 5 pick needs to stay up for the entirety of 2022. Claiming a guy on waivers, you can try to pass him through waivers yourself whenever you want.
It's much harder to keep a Rule 5 pick than a waiver claim (again, ask John Schreiber for example, who was a waiver claim himself).
I'm not saying it's impossible they'd DFA either of those guys. but let's let the last 40% of the minor league season happen first before we call that.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,936
|
Post by ericmvan on Jul 26, 2021 3:36:06 GMT -5
Yairo Munoz has to be on this list. They liked him enough last winter to give him an MLB contract and used that to sneak him through waivers. He's had decent PT everywhere except 2B and C. After a slow start, his July numbers are silly good. He has an option left, which means his floor looks like up-and-down guy who's (much?) better than Chavis, and his ceiling is guy who can replace Marwin on the 26-man. Right now he seems very likely to get an MLB deal as an mlfa.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Jul 26, 2021 4:46:52 GMT -5
The entire picture seems likely to change with the trade deadline. In an Athletic Q&A with Bloom, he said he was aware of the coming crunch and was a consideration for trades (but not the primary consideration). I'm guessing any trades are going to be expanded.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jul 26, 2021 9:00:50 GMT -5
Yairo Munoz has to be on this list. They liked him enough last winter to give him an MLB contract and used that to sneak him through waivers. He's had decent PT everywhere except 2B and C. After a slow start, his July numbers are silly good. He has an option left, which means his floor looks like up-and-down guy who's (much?) better than Chavis, and his ceiling is guy who can replace Marwin on the 26-man. Right now he seems very likely to get an MLB deal as an mlfa. Disagree he'd get an MLB deal but you're right that he's a consideration to keep for next year as an MLFA along with Adames. they might try to cut a handshake deal with both to wait until after the Rule 5 Draft to make their deals official though.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,936
|
Post by ericmvan on Jul 26, 2021 9:28:03 GMT -5
Yairo Munoz has to be on this list. They liked him enough last winter to give him an MLB contract and used that to sneak him through waivers. He's had decent PT everywhere except 2B and C. After a slow start, his July numbers are silly good. He has an option left, which means his floor looks like up-and-down guy who's (much?) better than Chavis, and his ceiling is guy who can replace Marwin on the 26-man. Right now he seems very likely to get an MLB deal as an mlfa. Disagree he'd get an MLB deal but you're right that he's a consideration to keep for next year as an MLFA along with Adames. they might try to cut a handshake deal with both to wait until after the Rule 5 Draft to make their deals official though. Yeah, change "Right now" to "if he keeps this up." Not the crazy numbers (.425 / .468 / .630 in 74 PA in July, with a hit in all 19 games) but he starts to get consideration with an .800+ OPS in August. I always expect the best, so that's what I meant to begin with!
He's started 36 G at SS this year, but also 8 at SS, 7 at 1B, and 6 in the OF (2-3-1 from L to R). There are scenarios (wuth injuries) where you see him this year.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jul 26, 2021 9:35:06 GMT -5
Yeah his usage has been a lot different lately though, as Worcester is extremely short-handed in the outfield (Wilson of course got dinged up on fake #hugwatch night, and Gettys missed like 3 weeks before seemingly being forced back into action recently given how depleted they've been, as he's mostly been a DH lately). He's been in the OF 5 of the last 8 games. Otherwise he'd basically been their everyday 3B with spot starts at 1B (4 coming in a 5-game stretch from June into July that I think were also roster-based) and SS.
But yeah, if he continues to rake I see him as a potential call-up, although expansion only being to 28 really hurts him. I still see him as a guy who gets a minor league deal with a spring training opt-out rather than an MLB deal, even at best, though. Three of the five teams Worcester plays have pretty awful pitching staffs - I'm not sure that teams are going to look at his numbers over a two-months stretch, even if he keeps this up, and completely change the evaluation that led them to pass on him on waivers this year.
I definitely don't disagree that he'll be interesting to watch though. It's not like he's some journeyman AAAA guy. Now that Duran is up to give the team another CF, I wonder if Munoz would be a better fit with the MLB club than Santana ("wonder" probably not strong enough of a word).
|
|
|
Post by Underwater Johnson on Jul 26, 2021 12:37:55 GMT -5
Well here's the other part - the Rule 5 pick needs to stay up for the entirety of 2022. Claiming a guy on waivers, you can try to pass him through waivers yourself whenever you want. It's much harder to keep a Rule 5 pick than a waiver claim (again, ask John Schreiber for example, who was a waiver claim himself). I'm not saying it's impossible they'd DFA either of those guys. but let's let the last 40% of the minor league season happen first before we call that. Yes, rule 5 is the whole year (I think it gets more complicated if there's an injury) and DFA is a matter of sneaking him through waivers (and we all recall examples of guys who were bounced back and forth between the same two teams taking turns trying to do that -- a recent example being Joel Payamps between the Sox and Jays). I wonder how much more valuable a Rule 5 candidate would need to be than an existing 40-man prospect to warrant displacing him on the roster.
To my other point about Moreland basically being traded for the right to give Potts and Rosario a one-year try-out, Eric Longenhagen discussed this exact point in the 7/23 FG Audio episode (around 40:00) with regard to teams having "windows" of time that they will give a prospect to prove himself -- more in terms of applying what the team's coaches envision in him, rather than with box score stats (although those can also be a data point). He apparently had some reliable second-hand dope on this from the Giants.
The question then becomes if one year is long enough for the Sox to evaluate a couple of 21-22 yo position players, one of whom has been sidelined with injury for part of that year. Many also inject the issue of a prospect's provenance. For example, Alex Scherff and Kutter Crawford are not Chaim guys, whereas Potts and Rosario (and Ort and Adames and Santos) are.
It'll be fun to follow for sure.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,936
|
Post by ericmvan on Jul 29, 2021 11:57:22 GMT -5
According to Search, no one has posted anything here after June 23rd.
So I don't know where it was that Chris (IIRC) did his own breakdown of the Rule 5 crunch like the ones done at FG.
But he had Rios listed as 40-man fringe ... after his best outing in a Sox uni, Rios has a .298 wxOBA and .219 wOBA in 13 appearances since 6/23. Yeah, his BABIP is .088, but his expected BABIP is .215. Going after the edges of the zone and trading walks to get weak contact is a real thing, and one of the ways FIP is less than useless.
He is out of options, but as long as he keeps pitching like this and there's room for him, he'll stay on the roster. I'd list him as maybe fringe.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jul 29, 2021 12:18:27 GMT -5
40-man thread probably.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Aug 30, 2021 10:27:48 GMT -5
Updated projections:
Certain to be added Brayan Bello Jeter Downs Gilberto Jimenez Kutter Crawford
Would've been certain, but how do we factor in TJ? Thaddeus Ward
Likely to be added, not certain Josh Winckowski Ryan Fitzgerald?
Possibly added but likely not Victor Santos Frank German Durbin Feltman Kaleb Ort AJ Politi Jose Adames (MLFA) John Schreiber
Unlikely to be added but worth mentioning Tyler Dearden Tyler Esplin Devlin Granberg Aaron Perry Ceddanne Rafaela Tyreque Reed
|
|
|
Post by julyanmorley on Aug 30, 2021 11:11:23 GMT -5
Thanks for the list.
My one quibble is Santos. I think if he were outside the org and the Red Sox picked him in the Rule 5 this December, we'd be very happy. I know the stuff doesn't look good, but he's one of the youngest players in AA and has put up results that are well above average for his league.
|
|
|