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 dcsoxfan15 on Nov 14, 2023 20:52:57 GMT -5
I understand the point, but if we expect Gillaspie to not be on the roster come opening day, why wouldn't we drop him now and add Drohan if only to preserve him as a trade piece? I don't imagine that Gillaspie will fetch more than Drohan would, and while Shane's value may not be as high as we would like, now he cannot be traded until after he makes it through the Rule 5.
Is Drohan's stock so low that we can't use him as a final piece for a trade this offseason? This seems extra confusing because Breslow has specifically talked about trading prospects, and now one of them is completely off the table.
Because that way they likely have to cut Drohan and get nothing and definitely lose him, this way there is a still an okay chance they keep him. Why do you think there's an okay chance? Ward got taken 1st overall last year and became the Nat's 13th ranked prospect heading into the season (same spot Drohan is currently at in SPtop60). Looking at the A's and Royals, two first teams in the Rule 5 and who don't care about winning, I can see multiple players that I would cut to give a young lefty starter a chance with.
|
|
|
Post by nonothing on Nov 14, 2023 20:55:10 GMT -5
I think folks are discounting how bad Drohan was in AAA. FB avg velo dropped by almost 1 mph, miss% dropped, strikeout % dropped, BB% doubled, HR% like quadrupled, even GB% dropped. He was, for one reason or another, a completely different pitcher. I'm surprised by this because his AA stint (and very strong ST) DID happen, but without that 2-month period, he's kind of ordinary. I get the thinking. I don't necessarily agree with it but I have to acknowledge the information disparity. I'd have protected him but I'm not going to immediately jump to "that was stupid." And to echo a point others have made, the comp isn't to the 40-man roster right now. It's to the 40-man roster on opening day. If Logan Gillaspie is on the roster and Drohan is lost on Rule 5, then yeah, be upset. But that's not going to happen. This "for one reason or another" is doing a lot of work. I think you guys were saying on a recent podcast that maybe you were discounting how good Drohan had been at AA. Another thing you guys like to say is that development is not linear.
The very fact that he was left unprotected is obviously a very heavy weight on the side of the scale that says he's never going to amount to anything. But knowing nothing else, if I see a prospect who distinctly adds to his arsenal over an offseason, comes out blazing, then has trouble adjusting to the next level after he's promoted, I would tend to think a) injury, b) mechanical issues, c) mental issues... and it would take me more than 89 innings to decide that he's cooked as a prospect.
If the Red Sox think differently I'm sure they have their reasons. I'd just be real curious to know what that "for one reason or another" represents.
(On another note, it's kind of impressive that people are *still* upset about leaving Ward unprotected after the season he had...)
Ward would probably have been in conversation for a rotation spot this yr had he been allowed to develop as a starter in AAA. Nats are developing as a starter now themselves. I wouldn't call myself upset, but I don't think it was smart.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Nov 14, 2023 20:56:28 GMT -5
I think folks are discounting how bad Drohan was in AAA. FB avg velo dropped by almost 1 mph, miss% dropped, strikeout % dropped, BB% doubled, HR% like quadrupled, even GB% dropped. He was, for one reason or another, a completely different pitcher. I'm surprised by this because his AA stint (and very strong ST) DID happen, but without that 2-month period, he's kind of ordinary. I get the thinking. I don't necessarily agree with it but I have to acknowledge the information disparity. I'd have protected him but I'm not going to immediately jump to "that was stupid." And to echo a point others have made, the comp isn't to the 40-man roster right now. It's to the 40-man roster on opening day. If Logan Gillaspie is on the roster and Drohan is lost on Rule 5, then yeah, be upset. But that's not going to happen. This "for one reason or another" is doing a lot of work. I think you guys were saying on a recent podcast that maybe you were discounting how good Drohan had been at AA. Another thing you guys like to say is that development is not linear. The very fact that he was left unprotected is obviously a very heavy weight on the side of the scale that says he's never going to amount to anything. But knowing nothing else, if I see a prospect who distinctly adds to his arsenal over an offseason, comes out blazing, then has trouble adjusting to the next level after he's promoted, I would tend to think a) injury, b) mechanical issues, c) mental issues... and it would take me more than 89 innings to decide that he's cooked as a prospect. If the Red Sox think differently I'm sure they have their reasons. I'd just be real curious to know what that "for one reason or another" represents. (On another note, it's kind of impressive that people are *still* upset about leaving Ward unprotected after the season he had...)
So to both sides this a bit: - Don't forget that AAA was using a different strike zone that took 2 inches off the top of the zone. That likely is doing a lot here. - At the same time, he literally was a different pitcher. He changed the new cutter to a slider that kinda sucked. I mentioned the velocity drop. That's what I was thinking about when I said the "for one reason or another" thing.
|
|
|
Post by nonothing on Nov 14, 2023 21:02:24 GMT -5
Because that way they likely have to cut Drohan and get nothing and definitely lose him, this way there is a still an okay chance they keep him. Why do you think there's an okay chance? Ward got taken 1st overall last year and became the Nat's 13th ranked prospect heading into the season (same spot Drohan is currently at in SPtop60). Looking at the A's and Royals, two first teams in the Rule 5 and who don't care about winning, I can see multiple players that I would cut to give a young lefty starter a chance with. I bet they find better players than Drohan in their draft spots, however.
|
|
|
Post by Underwater Johnson on Nov 14, 2023 21:05:46 GMT -5
Because that way they likely have to cut Drohan and get nothing and definitely lose him, this way there is a still an okay chance they keep him. Why do you think there's an okay chance? Ward got taken 1st overall last year and became the Nat's 13th ranked prospect heading into the season (same spot Drohan is currently at in SPtop60). Looking at the A's and Royals, two first teams in the Rule 5 and who don't care about winning, I can see multiple players that I would cut to give a young lefty starter a chance with. Does he have a pulse? If so, someone will give him a chance.
|
|
|
Post by dcsoxfan15 on Nov 14, 2023 21:10:11 GMT -5
Why do you think there's an okay chance? Ward got taken 1st overall last year and became the Nat's 13th ranked prospect heading into the season (same spot Drohan is currently at in SPtop60). Looking at the A's and Royals, two first teams in the Rule 5 and who don't care about winning, I can see multiple players that I would cut to give a young lefty starter a chance with. I bet they find better players than Drohan in their draft spots, however.
Here's the list of MLB's expected tough calls and their outcomes tonight. I'm having an incredibly hard time finding pitchers in their club's top 20 prospects who were healthy last year, reached AAA, and were left unprotected. Most of the unprotected guys barely played last year, had middling seasons in AA, or stayed in A+ the whole time.
If I ran a bad team like the A's, I'd gladly stash Drohan in my bullpen all year, and try to unlock whatever he had in AA to start this season, rather than taking a A+ hitter who had a solid season. No brainer.
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Nov 14, 2023 21:12:14 GMT -5
Because that way they likely have to cut Drohan and get nothing and definitely lose him, this way there is a still an okay chance they keep him. Why do you think there's an okay chance? Ward got taken 1st overall last year and became the Nat's 13th ranked prospect heading into the season (same spot Drohan is currently at in SPtop60). Looking at the A's and Royals, two first teams in the Rule 5 and who don't care about winning, I can see multiple players that I would cut to give a young lefty starter a chance with. Ward stunk. Maybe a better team picks Drohan and he stinks and is returned. I never get complaining about the rule 5 stuff until we actually have evidence they screwed it up. Hasn’t happened with Ward and certainly not with Drohan yet.
|
|
|
Post by dcsoxfan15 on Nov 14, 2023 21:21:22 GMT -5
Why do you think there's an okay chance? Ward got taken 1st overall last year and became the Nat's 13th ranked prospect heading into the season (same spot Drohan is currently at in SPtop60). Looking at the A's and Royals, two first teams in the Rule 5 and who don't care about winning, I can see multiple players that I would cut to give a young lefty starter a chance with. Ward stunk. Maybe a better team picks Drohan and he stinks and is returned. I never get complaining about the rule 5 stuff until we actually have evidence they screwed it up. Hasn’t happened with Ward and certainly not with Drohan yet. Ward was awful in 35 innings for the Nationals after never pitching in AAA. I guess we can wrap up the story on that one forever.
As to being annoyed with the Rule 5 right now? If he gets taken, which seems very likely given some of the other players left unprotected tonight, then you get absolutely nothing for a top 20 prospect that you could have protected. I can think of 4, maybe even 5 pitchers on the Red Sox roster right now that I would cut before Drohan if I needed to add a free agent.
|
|
|
Post by Underwater Johnson on Nov 14, 2023 21:34:55 GMT -5
I bet they find better players than Drohan in their draft spots, however.
Here's the list of MLB's expected tough calls and their outcomes tonight. I'm having an incredibly hard time finding pitchers in their club's top 20 prospects who were healthy last year, reached AAA, and were left unprotected. Most of the unprotected guys barely played last year, had middling seasons in AA, or stayed in A+ the whole time.
If I ran a bad team like the A's, I'd gladly stash Drohan in my bullpen all year, and try to unlock whatever he had in AA to start this season, rather than taking a A+ hitter who had a solid season. No brainer.
I live in Oakland. I'll put in a good word for you.
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 14,092
Member is Online
|
Post by cdj on Nov 14, 2023 21:47:10 GMT -5
Ward stunk. Maybe a better team picks Drohan and he stinks and is returned. I never get complaining about the rule 5 stuff until we actually have evidence they screwed it up. Hasn’t happened with Ward and certainly not with Drohan yet. Ward was awful in 35 innings for the Nationals after never pitching in AAA. I guess we can wrap up the story on that one forever.
As to being annoyed with the Rule 5 right now? If he gets taken, which seems very likely given some of the other players left unprotected tonight, then you get absolutely nothing for a top 20 prospect that you could have protected. I can think of 4, maybe even 5 pitchers on the Red Sox roster right now that I would cut before Drohan if I needed to add a free agent.
And they’ll probably waive those 4 guys! The logic behind the decision was explained pretty soundly imo- you don’t add Drohan if you don’t think it’s a lock he’ll make it through the off-season on the 40 man. I would imagine Breslow plans on turning over more than a couple of pitchers. This isn’t really anything to get worked up about Like previously stated, if the season starts and Weiss is on the 40 man then sure be mad
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Nov 14, 2023 21:51:53 GMT -5
This "for one reason or another" is doing a lot of work. I think you guys were saying on a recent podcast that maybe you were discounting how good Drohan had been at AA. Another thing you guys like to say is that development is not linear. The very fact that he was left unprotected is obviously a very heavy weight on the side of the scale that says he's never going to amount to anything. But knowing nothing else, if I see a prospect who distinctly adds to his arsenal over an offseason, comes out blazing, then has trouble adjusting to the next level after he's promoted, I would tend to think a) injury, b) mechanical issues, c) mental issues... and it would take me more than 89 innings to decide that he's cooked as a prospect. If the Red Sox think differently I'm sure they have their reasons. I'd just be real curious to know what that "for one reason or another" represents. (On another note, it's kind of impressive that people are *still* upset about leaving Ward unprotected after the season he had...)
So to both sides this a bit: - Don't forget that AAA was using a different strike zone that took 2 inches off the top of the zone. That likely is doing a lot here. - At the same time, he literally was a different pitcher. He changed the new cutter to a slider that kinda sucked. I mentioned the velocity drop. That's what I was thinking about when I said the "for one reason or another" thing. "Had a hard time adjusting to the different strike zone and gave up more walks"... "messed with his pitch mix and it wasn't really working"... These are exactly the sorts of thing where I'd think it would be worth seeing whether he could make the adjustments and get back to what he was doing in the spring.
Again, surely the team has its reasons. They obviously know more than I do. But it just looks odd on the face of it.
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 14,092
Member is Online
|
Post by cdj on Nov 14, 2023 21:56:05 GMT -5
I bet they find better players than Drohan in their draft spots, however.
Here's the list of MLB's expected tough calls and their outcomes tonight. I'm having an incredibly hard time finding pitchers in their club's top 20 prospects who were healthy last year, reached AAA, and were left unprotected. Most of the unprotected guys barely played last year, had middling seasons in AA, or stayed in A+ the whole time.
If I ran a bad team like the A's, I'd gladly stash Drohan in my bullpen all year, and try to unlock whatever he had in AA to start this season, rather than taking a A+ hitter who had a solid season. No brainer.
Interesting they didn’t even have Drohan as the toughest call for the Sox
|
|
|
Post by Jason on Nov 14, 2023 22:04:25 GMT -5
Unless I'm looking at something that wasn't updated, Philly has 2 open spots on the 40 man. So it's pretty much a guarantee they take another shot at Song, isn't it?
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 14,092
Member is Online
|
Post by cdj on Nov 14, 2023 22:05:58 GMT -5
Unless I'm looking at something that wasn't updated, Philly has 2 open spots on the 40 man. So it's pretty much a guarantee they take another shot at Song, isn't it? DD gets his man no matter what In all seriousness I don’t think it would be very smart for them to do it. They should have all their chips pushed in, they can’t be wasting 40 man spots on 27 YO projects
|
|
|
Post by dcsoxfan15 on Nov 14, 2023 22:08:49 GMT -5
Here's the list of MLB's expected tough calls and their outcomes tonight. I'm having an incredibly hard time finding pitchers in their club's top 20 prospects who were healthy last year, reached AAA, and were left unprotected. Most of the unprotected guys barely played last year, had middling seasons in AA, or stayed in A+ the whole time.
If I ran a bad team like the A's, I'd gladly stash Drohan in my bullpen all year, and try to unlock whatever he had in AA to start this season, rather than taking a A+ hitter who had a solid season. No brainer.
Interesting they didn’t even have Drohan as the toughest call for the Sox Presumably because they thought Drohan was a lock. Otherwise, including their 30th ranked Sox prospect and not their 18th is curious.
|
|
|
Post by dcsoxfan15 on Nov 14, 2023 22:09:40 GMT -5
Here's the list of MLB's expected tough calls and their outcomes tonight. I'm having an incredibly hard time finding pitchers in their club's top 20 prospects who were healthy last year, reached AAA, and were left unprotected. Most of the unprotected guys barely played last year, had middling seasons in AA, or stayed in A+ the whole time.
If I ran a bad team like the A's, I'd gladly stash Drohan in my bullpen all year, and try to unlock whatever he had in AA to start this season, rather than taking a A+ hitter who had a solid season. No brainer.
I live in Oakland. I'll put in a good word for you. Appreciate it, but I'm waiting until they move to Vegas.
Do you have any actual response though?
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 14,092
Member is Online
|
Post by cdj on Nov 14, 2023 22:11:52 GMT -5
I live in Oakland. I'll put in a good word for you. Appreciate it, but I'm waiting until they move to Vegas.
Do you have any actual response though?
People have given you the response/reasons for why he was unprotected multiple times, it’s up to you if you want to accept them as a good enough reason or not Me personally, I’m on the fence about it. He was the worst starting pitcher in AAA. But pitching depth is pitching depth. I’ll have to see what the off-season looks like before complaining about it though
|
|
|
Post by dcsoxfan15 on Nov 14, 2023 22:14:20 GMT -5
Appreciate it, but I'm waiting until they move to Vegas.
Do you have any actual response though?
People have given you the response multiple times, it’s up to you if you want to accept it as a good enough reason or not No one has explained why they think he won't be picked. That part is slightly important if you're trying to explain why not protecting him makes sense.
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 14,092
Member is Online
|
Post by cdj on Nov 14, 2023 22:16:13 GMT -5
People have given you the response multiple times, it’s up to you if you want to accept it as a good enough reason or not No one has explained why they think he won't be picked. That part is slightly important if you're trying to explain why not protecting him makes sense.
He was the worst starting pitcher in AAA and his stuff deteriorated as the season went on. They don’t necessarily think he won’t get picked- he probably will get picked just because he’s a lefty with a heartbeat in the high minors- they just probably don’t think he’s good enough to stick at this point in his development. And there’s a pretty good argument for that I’d say given his performance in AAA. If they don’t think he’s gonna be better than 40 guys they have under contract by the end of the off-season then they probably shouldn’t put him on the 40 man. Don’t have to waive him later this way! I’ll need to see the off-season play out to determine if this was smart or not
|
|
|
Post by dcsoxfan15 on Nov 14, 2023 22:21:36 GMT -5
No one has explained why they think he won't be picked. That part is slightly important if you're trying to explain why not protecting him makes sense.
He was the worst starting pitcher in AAA and his stuff deteriorated as the season went on. They don’t necessarily think he won’t get picked- he probably will get picked- they just probably don’t think he’s good enough to stick at this point in his development. And there’s a pretty good argument for that I’d say given his performance in AAA. If they don’t think he’s gonna be better than 40 guys they have under contract by the end of the off-season then they probably shouldn’t put him on the 40 man. Don’t have to waive him later this way! I'm not sure why a bad stat line at AAA, brought on by a new strike zone system and tinkering with his pitches, is enough to put him out to pasture. I just can't see any chance that a team doesn't take a chance on him, in which case it's an asset lost for absolutely nothing. That does frustrate me. I will not be frustrated if he makes it through the draft, and I'll be the first to eat my words if that happens, but if he gets picked in the first 5 spots, that would not surprise me in the slightest.
On a forum where Dombrowski got a lot of flak for overloading prospects into deals that didn't need them, it's weird to see how nonchalant everyone is about potentially losing the third best pitching prospect in the system for nothing.
|
|
|
Post by chaimtime on Nov 14, 2023 22:29:00 GMT -5
It doesn’t matter if a guy gets picked in the Rule 5 draft if the team thinks there are good odds that he gets DFA’d after getting added to the 40 man. Let’s be real, the odds of getting Drohan back after getting picked in the Rule 5 are much better than him clearing waivers. Especially if whatever he ran into in AAA is here to stay.
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 14,092
Member is Online
|
Post by cdj on Nov 14, 2023 22:30:03 GMT -5
He was the worst starting pitcher in AAA and his stuff deteriorated as the season went on. They don’t necessarily think he won’t get picked- he probably will get picked- they just probably don’t think he’s good enough to stick at this point in his development. And there’s a pretty good argument for that I’d say given his performance in AAA. If they don’t think he’s gonna be better than 40 guys they have under contract by the end of the off-season then they probably shouldn’t put him on the 40 man. Don’t have to waive him later this way! I'm not sure why a bad stat line at AAA, brought on by a new strike zone system and tinkering with his pitches, is enough to put him out to pasture. I just can't see any chance that a team doesn't take a chance on him, in which case it's an asset lost for absolutely nothing. That does frustrate me. I will not be frustrated if he makes it through the draft, and I'll be the first to eat my words if that happens, but if he gets picked in the first 5 spots, that would not surprise me in the slightest.
On a forum where Dombrowski got a lot of flak for overloading prospects into deals that didn't need them, it's weird to see how nonchalant everyone is about potentially losing the third best pitching prospect in the system for nothing.
That’s not putting him out to the pasture, that’s just saying he’s not ready to help a major league team right now. Which is probably a fact given how bad he was in AAA. And it’s more than a stat line thing, the reports on him were bad in AAA too Losing an asset for nothing would be putting him on the 40 man and then realizing you need the space and having to waive him. Putting him on the 40 man also lessens his trade value in a prospective deal (which again, these things have already all been explained in here)
|
|
|
Post by julyanmorley on Nov 14, 2023 22:32:39 GMT -5
You guys are driving me mad. Drohan was a 5th round pick who has yet to have a good season and does not have big league raw stuff.
He had a two month stretch (the first of which was preseason) where he looked like a major leaguer and everyone got excited because with pitchers you should update quickly when they show a new level of performance. Unfortunately, he followed that up with 5 dreadful months which you should also update quickly on. Every Triple-A pitcher dealt with the automatic strike zone, and zero of them had a worse BB/9 than Shane Drohan.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Nov 14, 2023 22:40:06 GMT -5
People have given you the response multiple times, it’s up to you if you want to accept it as a good enough reason or not No one has explained why they think he won't be picked. That part is slightly important if you're trying to explain why not protecting him makes sense.
Because Drohan getting picked isn't quite the question. If he gets picked and returned who cares? If he gets picked and isn't good, who cares? If he ends up having to get DFA and claimed, that's far worse.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Nov 14, 2023 22:41:33 GMT -5
Unless I'm looking at something that wasn't updated, Philly has 2 open spots on the 40 man. So it's pretty much a guarantee they take another shot at Song, isn't it? No. Song was extremely ordinary once he pitched last year. If not for what he was in 2019, he wouldn't even be close to our top 60. He's in the last spot as something of a novelty, acknowledging the slight chance he might be able to return to that. Remember, Dombrowski picked him when he hadn't pitched in 3 years and was going to be stashable on the military list. Once he pitched, they sent him back. If it wasn't worth keeping him on the roster for 1.5 months, it's not going to be worth keeping him for the whole season.
|
|
|