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.
|
Noah Song
Aug 13, 2023 20:29:43 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by redsox56 on Aug 13, 2023 20:29:43 GMT -5
This is perhaps a stupid question but is Song potentially an Arizona Fall League guy? Hope not. If he`s good we`d might have to protect him. As long as he's not on the 40 man roster as explained here, he could go (he's not on the 40 man roster). I think the Sox have a right to chose who they'd send. Could be good for the Sox, they'd have a chance to put him on the 40 man roster if they like what they see.
|
|
|
Post by patford on Aug 13, 2023 20:44:44 GMT -5
If Song's secondaries are there, he'd be able to hold down a 26 man slot for 3 months. Here's the way I see it. Teams have prospects on the 40 man roster who are old enough to be pretty much "known commodities." For example currently on the Sox 40 man are relief pitchers Kaleb Ort who is 31, Zack Kelly who is 28, Wyatt Mills who is 28, Justin Garza who is 29, Joe Jacques who is 28. None of those pitchers are as tantalizing as Song who is 26. There are also some older 40 man position players who have a ceiling as a bench utility role.
|
|
|
Noah Song
Aug 13, 2023 21:45:08 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Chris Hatfield on Aug 13, 2023 21:45:08 GMT -5
Hope not. If he`s good we`d might have to protect him. As long as he's not on the 40 man roster as explained here, he could go (he's not on the 40 man roster). I think the Sox have a right to chose who they'd send. Could be good for the Sox, they'd have a chance to put him on the 40 man roster if they like what they see. I think you missed the point. They were saying they don't want him to go because if he pitches well, the Red Sox might need to protect Song from teams that will want to pick him.
|
|
|
Noah Song
Aug 13, 2023 21:58:02 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by scottysmalls on Aug 13, 2023 21:58:02 GMT -5
If Song's secondaries are there, he'd be able to hold down a 26 man slot for 3 months. Here's the way I see it. Teams have prospects on the 40 man roster who are old enough to be pretty much "known commodities." For example currently on the Sox 40 man are relief pitchers Kaleb Ort who is 31, Zack Kelly who is 28, Wyatt Mills who is 28, Justin Garza who is 29, Joe Jacques who is 28. None of those pitchers are as tantalizing as Song who is 26. There are also some older 40 man position players who have a ceiling as a bench utility role. The Red Sox have used all those guys in the Majors this season. Song would take a spot from a different non MLB ready guy, not bullpen depth.
|
|
|
Post by keninten on Aug 13, 2023 22:40:59 GMT -5
Here's the way I see it. Teams have prospects on the 40 man roster who are old enough to be pretty much "known commodities." For example currently on the Sox 40 man are relief pitchers Kaleb Ort who is 31, Zack Kelly who is 28, Wyatt Mills who is 28, Justin Garza who is 29, Joe Jacques who is 28. None of those pitchers are as tantalizing as Song who is 26. There are also some older 40 man position players who have a ceiling as a bench utility role. The Red Sox have used all those guys in the Majors this season. Song would take a spot from a different non MLB ready guy, not bullpen depth. It`s time for the the young guys to start pitching in relief next year. There`s also Barraclough, Joely, Llovera, Robertson who could come off the 40. Relievers seem like the easiest pickups during the season. I`d rather see them add Song, Drohan, Wikelman, Paulino, Perales, Walter and Bonaci. Ease them in like Earl Weaver did. I`m sure I`m missing some that may need a spot. With Kenley, Martin, Whitlock, Winck, Bernardino, Schrieber, Mata, and Murphy in the pen already. They could bounce between the Sox and Worchester.
|
|
|
Noah Song
Aug 13, 2023 22:46:15 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by redsox56 on Aug 13, 2023 22:46:15 GMT -5
The Red Sox have used all those guys in the Majors this season. Song would take a spot from a different non MLB ready guy, not bullpen depth. They could bounce between the Sox and Worchester. Worcester. Pronounced Wurster. Not to be confused with Wooster. Like the team name. It's very hard to explain to people that aren't from the area. Massachusetts has a lot of middle English town names that derived from England (of course). Leicester. Leominster. Good luck with these town names. Just trying to help.
|
|
|
Post by urgent on Aug 13, 2023 22:53:03 GMT -5
Noer wouldn’t play in Wuster. Noah would play in Wustah.
Just trying to help.
|
|
|
Noah Song
Aug 13, 2023 22:59:53 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by redsox56 on Aug 13, 2023 22:59:53 GMT -5
Noer wouldn’t play in Wuster. Noah would play in Wustah. Just trying to help. I was trying to help a person understand the correct way to pronounce a city and what he said wrong, that's really hard to grasp. A lot of people who speak very good English, get it wrong. Seems like your post was just to stab at mine. So thanks.
|
|
|
Post by patford on Aug 13, 2023 23:02:14 GMT -5
The Red Sox have used all those guys in the Majors this season. Song would take a spot from a different non MLB ready guy, not bullpen depth. It`s time for the the young guys to start pitching in relief next year. There`s also Barraclough, Joely, Llovera, Robertson who could come off the 40. Relievers seem like the easiest pickups during the season. I`d rather see them add Song, Drohan, Wikelman, Paulino, Perales, Walter and Bonaci. Ease them in like Earl Weaver did. I`m sure I`m missing some that may need a spot. With Kenley, Martin, Whitlock, Winck, Bernardino, Schrieber, Mata, and Murphy in the pen already. They could bounce between the Sox and Worchester. That's my point. Song may still have a high ceiling. Fungible relief pitchers who are 28-31 years old probably have a ceiling of being back end of a bullpen type arms, teams churn through that type of pitcher. Of course Song is older and missed all that time scrunched up in helicopters. His body changed and matured. He may never be able to remake his body again but he's not ancient and we just don't know.
|
|
|
Post by keninten on Aug 13, 2023 23:15:07 GMT -5
They could bounce between the Sox and Worchester. Worcester. Pronounced Wurster. Not to be confused with Wooster. Like the team name. It's very hard to explain to people that aren't from the area. Massachusetts has a lot of middle English town names that derived from England (of course). Leicester. Leominster. Good luck with these town names. Just trying to help. I spelled it wrong but pronouce it right. I`m from NH near Mt Monadnock. Massachusetts does not use R`s. That`s what I tell them down here in TN. They always equate my accent to MA until I start using a MA drawl and they see the difference. I`m from Keene and notice a poster on here with Swanzey in his name which is next door to Keene.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Aug 13, 2023 23:16:39 GMT -5
I was trying to help a person understand the correct way to pronounce a city and what he said wrong, that's really hard to grasp. A lot of people who speak very good English, get it wrong. Seems like your post was just to stab at mine. So thanks. Please stop coming back. Not sure how many times we need to ban you before the point gets across. Get a life. Thank you.
|
|
|
Post by nonothing on Aug 13, 2023 23:29:13 GMT -5
They cannot afford to fill the 40 man with all of Drohan, Gonzalez, Perales, Song and then also up for grabs will be Fernandez, Gambrell plus guys they traded for in Hagenmann and Nunez plus Politi again and Bastardo ranked highly in low minors also. There may be guys I am missing, but they will not protect all of those guys because they have a current roster they need to mostly keep intact, plus probably 2 Free Agent slots prior to the Rule 5 draft.
They have 25 pitchers on 40-man now (inc 60-day IL who come back in offseason). Kluber, Rodriguez and Paxton will be off as free agents (though I would expect Paxton to potentially be in the mix for the FA signs mentioned above - still he comes off here). So that's 22 on roster + 2 FA signs before R5 maybe = 24 pitchers. They probably keep pitchers to ~22 of 40 spots in offseason. So in order to add pitchers, you first need to figure who comes off to sign FAs and keep roster at 22 pitchers.
Barraclough, Garza, Jacques, Llovera, Mata, Mills, Ort and Robertson are all potentially guys they have to consider giving up. These guys serve as minor league depth, not just as names on a roster. To put Song on, you have to knock off one of these guys.
I would expect if Barraclough does well, maybe they sign him back, but not before the R5 draft. Garza also seems easy to knock off. So with those guys off, you can sign 2 FA pitchers before R5 and stay at 22. Now decide how many of Jacques, Llovera, Mata, Mills, Ort and Robertson (6) you will knock off for Bastardo, Drohan, Gonzalez, Perales, Song, Fernandez, Gambrell, Hagenmann, Nunez and Politi (10). And your problem is that if you have injuries on the MLB roster, you don't ideally want to have to call up Perales for that. So you need a mix of ready-ish guys with your high upside prospects.
So where does Noah Song fit in this?
Drohan and Gonzalez (who will have ~50IP in AA only) will be protected. Just continuing in alphabetical order to not be overly specific, that costs you guys like Jacques and Llovera. I don't see them protecting Politi.
So that leaves Mata, Mills, Ort and Robertson. I think it would be hard to protect more than 1, and certainly not more than 2, of Bastardo, Perales and Song, but all are in low minors and not ready to serve as true depth for MLB roster, where Gonzalez was already a stretch. I suspect they do not protect Bastardo or Song (unless he amazes in the next month). Perales maybe. But I guess the order would be Perales, Song, Bastardo for those 3.
You can mix and match around this issue the specific names in some of the buckets, but this is generally why Song will be hard for us to protect and why it would be hard for anyone to do so because every team needs true AAA depth types on 40-man.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Aug 13, 2023 23:34:56 GMT -5
I was trying to help a person understand the correct way to pronounce a city and what he said wrong, that's really hard to grasp. A lot of people who speak very good English, get it wrong. Seems like your post was just to stab at mine. So thanks. Please stop coming back. Not sure how many times we need to ban you before the point gets across. Get a life. Thank you. You should have asked what happened to derail Mata's second coming.
|
|
mobaz
Veteran
Posts: 2,791
|
Post by mobaz on Aug 14, 2023 10:46:47 GMT -5
They cannot afford to fill the 40 man with all of Drohan, Gonzalez, Perales, Song and then also up for grabs will be Fernandez, Gambrell plus guys they traded for in Hagenmann and Nunez plus Politi again and Bastardo ranked highly in low minors also. There may be guys I am missing, but they will not protect all of those guys because they have a current roster they need to mostly keep intact, plus probably 2 Free Agent slots prior to the Rule 5 draft. They have 25 pitchers on 40-man now (inc 60-day IL who come back in offseason). Kluber, Rodriguez and Paxton will be off as free agents (though I would expect Paxton to potentially be in the mix for the FA signs mentioned above - still he comes off here). So that's 22 on roster + 2 FA signs before R5 maybe = 24 pitchers. They probably keep pitchers to ~22 of 40 spots in offseason. So in order to add pitchers, you first need to figure who comes off to sign FAs and keep roster at 22 pitchers. Barraclough, Garza, Jacques, Llovera, Mata, Mills, Ort and Robertson are all potentially guys they have to consider giving up. These guys serve as minor league depth, not just as names on a roster. To put Song on, you have to knock off one of these guys. I would expect if Barraclough does well, maybe they sign him back, but not before the R5 draft. Garza also seems easy to knock off. So with those guys off, you can sign 2 FA pitchers before R5 and stay at 22. Now decide how many of Jacques, Llovera, Mata, Mills, Ort and Robertson (6) you will knock off for Bastardo, Drohan, Gonzalez, Perales, Song, Fernandez, Gambrell, Hagenmann, Nunez and Politi (10). And your problem is that if you have injuries on the MLB roster, you don't ideally want to have to call up Perales for that. So you need a mix of ready-ish guys with your high upside prospects. So where does Noah Song fit in this? Drohan and Gonzalez (who will have ~50IP in AA only) will be protected. Just continuing in alphabetical order to not be overly specific, that costs you guys like Jacques and Llovera. I don't see them protecting Politi. So that leaves Mata, Mills, Ort and Robertson. I think it would be hard to protect more than 1, and certainly not more than 2, of Bastardo, Perales and Song, but all are in low minors and not ready to serve as true depth for MLB roster, where Gonzalez was already a stretch. I suspect they do not protect Bastardo or Song (unless he amazes in the next month). Perales maybe. But I guess the order would be Perales, Song, Bastardo for those 3. You can mix and match around this issue the specific names in some of the buckets, but this is generally why Song will be hard for us to protect and why it would be hard for anyone to do so because every team needs true AAA depth types on 40-man. Great summary! The team has made so much use of those 38/39/40 spots to cover for pitcher and infielder injuries that you have to assume they plan to do the same next year as a purported contender. It's gonna have to be someone with a really high ceiling to take a spot from major league depth if they have no chance of 2024 contributions. Perales and Gonzalez are the only ones that meet that in my view. Drohan has a chance as 2024 contributor, so I don't count him, and Bastardo is on the edge but I wonder if they opt for flexibility (catch and release DFA types) than potential there.
|
|
|
Post by ephus on Aug 16, 2023 15:29:59 GMT -5
Looks like Song got another couple of scoreless innings in when I wasn't paying attention. Very much starting to warm to the idea of keeping him in Greenville for the rest of the year to stretch him out a bit. Also a will give him a chance to pitch in in the playoffs there, and then go into the offseason with a true throwing schedule. Hopefully he sticks around next year and comes into camp in February with almost a full year back into baseball. That's where he can have an opportunity to turn some heads again.
|
|
|
Post by julyanmorley on Aug 22, 2023 9:19:30 GMT -5
|
|
badfishnbc
Veteran
Doing you all a favor and leaving through the gate in right field since 2012.
Posts: 417
|
Post by badfishnbc on Aug 22, 2023 9:57:03 GMT -5
Honestly, being realistic here, ideal situation is he shows enough in Arizona that we can trade him to a team with an open spot on their 40 man for a non-Rule 5 player. Because the roster crunch here is real and the likelihood is he gets snagged again by one of the bottom feeders.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Aug 22, 2023 10:34:22 GMT -5
Honestly, being realistic here, ideal situation is he shows enough in Arizona that we can trade him to a team with an open spot on their 40 man for a non-Rule 5 player. Because the roster crunch here is real and the likelihood is he gets snagged again by one of the bottom feeders. On the podcast they talked about how he'd slide in probably around 50th or so in the rankings. I'm just not sure why any team would be that interested in taking a 26 year old prospect in high-A who's ranked that low.
|
|
|
Post by terriblehondo on Aug 22, 2023 11:31:22 GMT -5
Honestly, being realistic here, ideal situation is he shows enough in Arizona that we can trade him to a team with an open spot on their 40 man for a non-Rule 5 player. Because the roster crunch here is real and the likelihood is he gets snagged again by one of the bottom feeders. On the podcast they talked about how he'd slide in probably around 50th or so in the rankings. I'm just not sure why any team would be that interested in taking a 26 year old prospect in high-A who's ranked that low. I think he would be taken if a team believes he can be what the scouting report on him was when he highly ranked here was accurate. I think the top end was a #2 and that he would at least be a starter. For the amount it costs why wouldn't you take a flyer on him?
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Aug 22, 2023 11:38:24 GMT -5
On the podcast they talked about how he'd slide in probably around 50th or so in the rankings. I'm just not sure why any team would be that interested in taking a 26 year old prospect in high-A who's ranked that low. I think he would be taken if a team believes he can be what the scouting report on him was when he highly ranked here was accurate. I think the top end was a #2 and that he would at least be a starter. For the amount it costs why wouldn't you take a flyer on him? Because you're only allowed to have 40 men on the 40-man roster and there are a bunch of guys who you'd be more interested in taking a flyer on than the 50th ranked prospect in the Red Sox system who's a 26 year old in high A.
Plus he just went through waivers and no team claimed him, so, revealed preferences.
|
|
|
Post by vermontsox1 on Aug 22, 2023 11:50:57 GMT -5
It's been mentioned before, but all those teams had the option to claim him off waivers and only have to keep him on the 26-man roster for 90 days. All those teams declined, so why would they pick him when he has to spend the whole season on the 26-man?
|
|
badfishnbc
Veteran
Doing you all a favor and leaving through the gate in right field since 2012.
Posts: 417
|
Post by badfishnbc on Aug 22, 2023 11:56:30 GMT -5
Plus he just went through waivers and no team claimed him, so, revealed preferences.
I think you can chalk that up to the cost of in-season business for a Rule 5 claim - you're not talking about adding him to the 40 with a waiver claim, it's the active roster. So a team like Oakland and KC is probably less inclined to do that bit of business, specifically because they probably understand the developmental damage it was doing to the prospect himself to keep him in the mix for the majors. An open spot on the 40-man roster is an opportunity of Song's patient redevelopment at the appropriate level of the minors. The Sox won't have that slot. Others may.
|
|
|
Post by seamus on Aug 22, 2023 11:57:27 GMT -5
I know there's a period where Rule 5 eligible guys can't be traded, but I'm assuming that someone could trade for him after the Rule 5 draft? If so, I suppose it's possible a team could like what they see in the Arizona Fall League enough to value him as a flyer more than the Red Sox do and trade a more traditional low minors prospect or two for him afterwards. But I think the most likely scenario is that he's going to either make it or retire as an org guy in a couple years as a member of the Red Sox.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Aug 22, 2023 12:02:24 GMT -5
Plus he just went through waivers and no team claimed him, so, revealed preferences.
I think you can chalk that up to the cost of in-season business for a Rule 5 claim - you're not talking about adding him to the 40 with a waiver claim, it's the active roster. So a team like Oakland and KC is probably less inclined to do that bit of business, specifically because they probably understand the developmental damage it was doing to the prospect himself to keep him in the mix for the majors. An open spot on the 40-man roster is an opportunity of Song's patient redevelopment at the appropriate level of the minors. The Sox won't have that slot. Others may.I'm not sure I follow this. He'd have to be on a team's 26-man roster all season if he's claimed in rule 5, right?
Which, that's another thing that works against his getting picked: a team would have to stash him on their MLB roster as a 27 year old, Thad Ward-style, and then in 2025 he'd finally be able to get on a normal development track... when he's about to turn 28?
|
|
|
Post by julyanmorley on Aug 22, 2023 12:05:46 GMT -5
It's been mentioned before, but all those teams had the option to claim him off waivers and only have to keep him on the 26-man roster for 90 days. All those teams declined, so why would they pick him when he has to spend the whole season on the 26-man? This logic is sound. I think with Song's unique situation, opinions about his future could be all over the place and prone to change based on one report, so I'm not feeling totally safe yet.
|
|
|