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.
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,923
|
Post by ericmvan on Sept 23, 2020 22:03:03 GMT -5
OK, so if we're just calling them placeholders for a rough number of players who'll be traded off the roster, I get it. I was thinking more that I can't see them being moved for cash, for example. The math is unavoidable, as it often is with the 40-man. But there are many ways to solve the equation. Springs may have just pointed out a new solution! Or the need for one.
We don't know what Bloom thinks of the prospects he inherited. And for the most part we don't know which of the prospects he picked up he thinks he was stealing from a club that was being clueless (a move currently called "pulling a Glasnow" but will hopefully be renamed "pulling a Pivetta"), and which he thought were just fair and solid return for what he was giving up.
Which leads to a further very interesting possibility. I think one of these two things are true:
- They like Hudson Potts because they believe that with more time working with his current swing (give or take some tweaks), he will improve his swing-and-miss problem.
- They have a specific idea about an alteration to Pott's swing that might help that problem significantly.
If it's the first, why would you protect him from the Rule 5? There's no way he can afford to lose a second consecutive year of development time while sitting on an MLB bench for year and occasionally being overmatched at the plate.
If it's the second, they have to worry that some other team has the same idea and could implement the fix in ST, and that it would make him a marginally useful bench player. It would still hurt his development, pf course.
In the second scenario, it matters whether the fix they have in mind is counter-intuitive and unlikely to be dreamed up by another team, in which case they can leave him off without fear ... but that itself seems likely.
Now, we do have a data point here: they didn't put him in the player pool. he's attracted very little positive attention at Pawtucket. That suggests the first possibility is the case. If it's actually the second, the fix ism't really working yet (I don't think the press would notice unless it was), and that amounts to the same thing in terms of the risk of him being taken and not returned.
So I'm leaning towards the idea that he doesn't need to be protected. Any thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Sept 23, 2020 23:19:36 GMT -5
Potts is in the player pool and has been since the trade. For me, I like Rosario a lot better. I would think there's a decent chance he would slide by the Rule 5 but I'm seriously not so sure there. I also don't think losing a year of development would be all that significant since he's young (21). He's not much of a defender. He's not Dalbec as far as being a well rounded player goes. The power is obvious.
I should think that if he was selected, he'd be returned. How do you keep a below average defensive 3B on the roster for a year ? If a team took him and really liked him, they could assign him to the minors and offer the Sox something in trade. I believe that's what happened with Almazar to the Orioles several years ago but with a DL delay mixed in.
|
|
|
Post by blizzards39 on Sept 24, 2020 0:42:26 GMT -5
Potts is in the player pool and has been since the trade. For me, I like Rosario a lot better. I would think there's a decent chance he would slide by the Rule 5 but I'm seriously not so sure there. I also don't think losing a year of development would be all that significant since he's young (21). He's not much of a defender. He's not Dalbec as far as being a well rounded player goes. The power is obvious. I should think that if he was selected, he'd be returned. How do you keep a below average defensive 3B on the roster for a year ? If a team took him and really liked him, they could assign him to the minors and offer the Sox something in trade. I believe that's what happened with Almazar to the Orioles several years ago but with a DL delay mixed in. The one thing we are assuming is a 26 man roster. Who knows what lies ahead as far as next season. It’s entirely possible that the roster is expanded even further. This would make stashing rule 5 players all the easyer
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,923
|
Post by ericmvan on Sept 24, 2020 3:44:50 GMT -5
Potts is in the player pool and has been since the trade. For me, I like Rosario a lot better. I would think there's a decent chance he would slide by the Rule 5 but I'm seriously not so sure there. I also don't think losing a year of development would be all that significant since he's young (21). He's not much of a defender. He's not Dalbec as far as being a well rounded player goes. The power is obvious. I should think that if he was selected, he'd be returned. How do you keep a below average defensive 3B on the roster for a year ? If a team took him and really liked him, they could assign him to the minors and offer the Sox something in trade. I believe that's what happened with Almazar to the Orioles several years ago but with a DL delay mixed in. Thanks for the catch! See my revision for the reason for my mistake ... I can't recall anyone mentioning him.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Sept 24, 2020 3:46:37 GMT -5
Potts is in the player pool and has been since the trade. For me, I like Rosario a lot better. I would think there's a decent chance he would slide by the Rule 5 but I'm seriously not so sure there. I also don't think losing a year of development would be all that significant since he's young (21). He's not much of a defender. He's not Dalbec as far as being a well rounded player goes. The power is obvious. I should think that if he was selected, he'd be returned. How do you keep a below average defensive 3B on the roster for a year ? If a team took him and really liked him, they could assign him to the minors and offer the Sox something in trade. I believe that's what happened with Almazar to the Orioles several years ago but with a DL delay mixed in. Thanks for the catch! See my revision for the reason for my mistake ... I can't recall anyone mentioning him. Potts and Downs don't elicit many comments. I don't know what Potts has been working on but Downs has pretty clearly been working on defense. Crabbe spends a good deal of his time with him. In terms of brass, I know several have been mentioned but Romero is the most visible because he goes onto the field. ADD: Potts has 2 HRs. 1 to left at Pawtucket, a hanger that he mashed (Houck ?) and one at Fenway to right which wasn't on video. I haven't counted but he has his fair share of strikeouts. This is a big boy (muscular). He makes Dalbec look skinny. I don't remember any hits or walks but I'm pretty sure he has some.
|
|
|
Post by unitspin on Sept 24, 2020 6:05:45 GMT -5
A thought: How likely is it that a R5 pick is going to have higher upside than Wilson or Aybar, particularly higher enough upside to keep the R5 guy on the active roster when those two can be optioned? Consider for example that we have Arauz ranked only slightly ahead of them, and that only afterva damn good showing this year considering his situation. It was even closer 2 months ago. I see them as "traded", but interpreting that as "traded to make room" (might be wrong), I don't think that makes sense. Aybar is terribly inconsistent but flashes two plus pitches (in the true sense of flashing them - they come and go) from the left side. Wilson remade his swing last year on the fly and had really good Trackman numbers. He certainly needs work but it's an interesting toolbox. It obviously depends on who'll be available and where they're picking, but I can't see either being much worse than the R5 pick. I think that if they're picking 5, 6, or 7, you're likely correct. I was thinking of a 3 pick, which seems much likelier to turn into something.
Am I going to look at all the Rule 5 picks to see if there's any evidence to back that up? I plan not to!
What I actually mean by trading Wilson and Aybar is to include them as desirable return in trades to fill some of the six needs. I single them out only because they were not acquired by Bloom.
From a math POV, I believe they need to add six players (excluding replacing Bradley), and that means they need to shed 4 prospects you'd like to keep around if you want to leave a Rule 5 spot open. I think it's likely that all 4 of those guys will be on the 40-man before the Rule 5. You then eventually trade prospects to make room for everyone you acquire, instead of the usual move of DFA'ing your fringe guys. This indicates a deepening system!
The 4 guys I named are just my guess. If we go by the ratings here, you'd keep Chatham and trade Grullon instead. Another possibility to be dealt is Arauz.
A very interesting idea is to wait till ST starts and you can put Sale on the 60-day IL to sign the last guy for the bullpen. That would allow you to keep an extra prospect. There could well be be good pitchers holding out in the hope that ST injuries up their price. This would mean that you don't get Sale until c. June 1 when they're hoping for mid-May, but in the long run slowing him down might make more sense ... and if by mid-May they're actually talking about when he starts his rehab assignments, there's not a problem at all.
On sale everything they have been saying is he might only miss a month tops. June looks like a stretch, bloom just commented on this the other day. He is already throwing I doubt they hold him out until June.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Sept 24, 2020 11:54:42 GMT -5
I think you protect Potts. I'd DFA Chatham at this point to free up the spot. The fact Chatham didn't get a look this year is pretty damning, imo, although there's a chance he'd have gotten the look Arroyo is getting if he hadn't come along.
Now Chatham I could see getting the cash considerations treatment.
But back to Potts, with a 26-man roster, you have more room to stash, and over a longer season I could see a team playing "injury" games to send him to the minors for a bit. That said, your points make a lot of sense and I'm personally going to ruminate a bit more on them.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,923
|
Post by ericmvan on Sept 24, 2020 12:19:33 GMT -5
I think you protect Potts. I'd DFA Chatham at this point to free up the spot. The fact Chatham didn't get a look this year is pretty damning, imo, although there's a chance he'd have gotten the look Arroyo is getting if he hadn't come along. Now Chatham I could see getting the cash considerations treatment. But back to Potts, with a 26-man roster, you have more room to stash, and over a longer season I could see a team playing "injury" games to send him to the minors for a bit. That said, your points make a lot of sense and I'm personally going to ruminate a bit more on them. Meanwhile, your points are half-convincing me I'm wrong! I think it's something to consider, but not likely.
Youngsters might not know that in 1970 the Cardinals took Cecil Cooper in the Rule 5 out of low-A but returned him.
|
|
|
Post by soxin8 on Sept 29, 2020 12:19:53 GMT -5
Potts is in the player pool and has been since the trade. For me, I like Rosario a lot better. I would think there's a decent chance he would slide by the Rule 5 but I'm seriously not so sure there. I also don't think losing a year of development would be all that significant since he's young (21). He's not much of a defender. He's not Dalbec as far as being a well rounded player goes. The power is obvious. I should think that if he was selected, he'd be returned. How do you keep a below average defensive 3B on the roster for a year ? If a team took him and really liked him, they could assign him to the minors and offer the Sox something in trade. I believe that's what happened with Almazar to the Orioles several years ago but with a DL delay mixed in. I was wondering the same thing and asked that question in the Moreland trade thread. Only one response there, iakovos believing they would be protected. Seems neither is likely to see any action in the majors next year but SD didn't want to take the chance on losing them without receiving anything. I think it will be discussed and we may not know until rosters are set Nov 20. Didn't know that about Cecil Cooper. Surely would have won in 78 if he wasn't traded for Scott. Or kept Ferguson Jenkins.
|
|
|
Post by greenmonster on Sept 29, 2020 12:37:44 GMT -5
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,923
|
Post by ericmvan on Sept 29, 2020 18:30:33 GMT -5
Update from my final pitching numbers, which will be posted soon:
- Weber promoted to a keeper. The probability that he can have the command he needs to succeed often enough to be valuable just kept going up with each good outing.
- Brice promoted from probable DFA / NRI to guy you'd love to sneak through waivers, or a nice trade throw-in. And maybe there are trades that clear room for him to stay.
- Springs swaps places with him, moving down a notch.
So that's my current 41 man roster. Yes, I know. Don't rush me. But right now the move that makes the most sense is to try to sneak Mazza through waivers, but if they have to pull him back because somebody claimed him, I'm stumped.
One thing we haven't been trying to do is figure out the 39 men on the roster when it's frozen for the Rule 5. That would include 6 or 7 guys that were destined for a DFA or a trade as we fill needs.
My guess on the trims:
Pedroia, Peraza, Lin Puello Walden, Brewer, Hart, Hall, Stock, Triggs, Leyer, Kickham, Covey, Godley.
Hart can be outrighted. I believe all the others would become free agents.
|
|
|
Post by soxin8 on Oct 9, 2020 12:13:48 GMT -5
The spaghetti is sliding down the wall ... what's the verdict look like now? Keepers, Up & Down Guy Floor Phillips Valdez
Chris Mazza On the cusp Jeffrey Springs
Too soon to tell Domingo Tapia
Guys you ought to able to pass through waivers and would really like to keep for upside: Zack Godley, no options, hurt, not sure if anyone has caught his days' rest split
Austin Brice, also no options and hurt
Marcus Walden. Maybe comes back a la Brasier
Robert Stock
Guy who you could probably get through waivers and you'd like to keep for depth Ryan Weber Easy DFA's you might or might not keep around
Mike Kichkham (could promote himself into group above)
Colten Brewer Robinson Leyer Kyle Hart
WTF? Dylan Covey. He's 28, has an option left, and has good deep numbers ... but they kept him at the ATS for a month while other guys were getting hammered. Good night and Good luck.
Andrew Triggs
Matt Hall
Last night when Chapman entered the game, TBS put up a graphic of the best whiff rate for 4 seam fastballs. Chapman was 5th at 42%. One of the above pitchers was 1st at 50%. Would anyone like to guess who it is?
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Oct 9, 2020 18:56:00 GMT -5
The spaghetti is sliding down the wall ... what's the verdict look like now? Keepers, Up & Down Guy Floor Phillips Valdez
Chris Mazza On the cusp Jeffrey Springs
Too soon to tell Domingo Tapia
Guys you ought to able to pass through waivers and would really like to keep for upside: Zack Godley, no options, hurt, not sure if anyone has caught his days' rest split
Austin Brice, also no options and hurt
Marcus Walden. Maybe comes back a la Brasier
Robert Stock
Guy who you could probably get through waivers and you'd like to keep for depth Ryan Weber Easy DFA's you might or might not keep around
Mike Kichkham (could promote himself into group above)
Colten Brewer Robinson Leyer Kyle Hart
WTF? Dylan Covey. He's 28, has an option left, and has good deep numbers ... but they kept him at the ATS for a month while other guys were getting hammered. Good night and Good luck.
Andrew Triggs
Matt Hall
Last night when Chapman entered the game, TBS put up a graphic of the best whiff rate for 4 seem fastballs. Chapman was 5th at 42%. One of the above pitchers was 1st at 50%. Would anyone like to guess who it is? Not sure there but I'm hoping the Sox can resign Gonsalves to a minor league contract/spring training invite. He's a better starter than any of the listed pitchers. ADD: Abbott: “Gonsalves is a guy that can make an impact next year if we bring him back next year. I know he’s a minor-league free agent. His velo went from 89-90 — and he already had a highly rates fastball that had some carry — the velo jumped up to 94-96 mph. He got better as we went along.” www.masslive.com/redsox/2020/10/boston-red-soxs-cupboard-of-young-talent-getting-full-again-how-jarren-duran-triston-casas-bryan-mata-and-some-dark-horses-impressed-at-alternate-site-chris-cotillo-mlb-notebook.htmlHe's a tall lefty with a long stride, the ball gets on the batters fast. Also has a good curve and decent command. By the end of ATS, he was generating a ton of swing and misses from both left and right handed batters.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Oct 10, 2020 6:10:33 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by soxin8 on Oct 10, 2020 16:15:49 GMT -5
The spaghetti is sliding down the wall ... what's the verdict look like now? Keepers, Up & Down Guy Floor Phillips Valdez
Chris Mazza On the cusp Jeffrey Springs
Too soon to tell Domingo Tapia
Guys you ought to able to pass through waivers and would really like to keep for upside: Zack Godley, no options, hurt, not sure if anyone has caught his days' rest split
Austin Brice, also no options and hurt
Marcus Walden. Maybe comes back a la Brasier
Robert Stock
Guy who you could probably get through waivers and you'd like to keep for depth Ryan Weber Easy DFA's you might or might not keep around
Mike Kichkham (could promote himself into group above)
Colten Brewer Robinson Leyer Kyle Hart
WTF? Dylan Covey. He's 28, has an option left, and has good deep numbers ... but they kept him at the ATS for a month while other guys were getting hammered. Good night and Good luck.
Andrew Triggs
Matt Hall
Last night when Chapman entered the game, TBS put up a graphic of the best whiff rate for 4 seam fastballs. Chapman was 5th at 42%. One of the above pitchers was 1st at 50%. Would anyone like to guess who it is? If anyone was wondering, this is the answer: www.baseball-reference.com/players/b/briceau01.shtml
|
|
gerry
Veteran
Enter your message here...
Posts: 1,660
|
Post by gerry on Oct 10, 2020 18:59:18 GMT -5
Just reading the tea leaves, but this pandemic is refusing to go away, and many still consider it a hoax, insuring it will be here longer than necessary. It is more likely than not that ST, just 4 months away, will be impacted in some ways. .
I bring this up because after a bolluxed 2020 ST and season, including multiple injuries, missed development, CoVid residual unknowns (like ERod), and mega $$ losses by team owners, it seems too early to predict any kind of normalcy for 2021. If we have learned anything, it’s to be prepared.
A 40-man and even a 26-man roster may be a relic of the past, not only due to CoVid issues, but also the upcoming MLB contract negotiations, and the miLB re-alignment. IMO MLB shouldn’t wait, they should act now, responsibly, to be ready for yet another season that probably won’t conform to pre-CoVid ”normal” standards.
Maybe the 60 man won’t be repeated because minor league baseball, now that we know how, will probably happen in some fashion. But, to protect pitchers, rest players, and cope with possible CoVid related IL, maybe a 28 or 30 man starting roster should be repeated, backed by a 42 or 44 man team roster? This would do much to stabilize team rosters and the players looking at DFA’s, non-tenders, etc. And perhaps also increase roster size at every miLB level? This would ease the painful process of eliminating 40 teams.
A five man bench? 8 or 9 RP’s? If all these teams are allowed and encouraged to act now, pre-emptively, 2021 will be a better season for everyone, at every level, even if this plague magically disappears in April when the weather warms up.
Edited for clarity.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Oct 12, 2020 6:27:37 GMT -5
Looking at the starters from another angle...
I realize everyone is going to have a different order but the same concepts apply...
For me, with no trades or free agents the opening day starters would be:
ERod Eovaldi Perez Houck Gonsalves
with Sale, Mata, Pivetta & Mazza in the wings.
That's not bad but what's the best way to improve that ? To me, it's trading Pivetta and/or Mazza for reasonably priced but more expensive #2's and/or 3's. In today's market, they will have excess value. Houck should be untouchable and Gonsalves isn't under contract yet.
|
|
|
Post by unitspin on Oct 12, 2020 7:06:28 GMT -5
Looking at the starters from another angle... I realize everyone is going to have a different order but the same concepts apply... For me, with no trades or free agents the opening day starters would be: ERod Eovaldi Perez Houck Gonsalves with Sale, Mata, Pivetta & Mazza in the wings. That's not bad but what's the best way to improve that ? To me, it's trading Pivetta and/or Mazza for reasonably priced but more expensive #2's and/or 3's. In today's market, they will have excess value. Houck should be untouchable and Gonsalves isn't under contract yet. If we can just get a healthy erod and sale the rotation from this season to next season just got better by multiples.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Oct 12, 2020 8:03:12 GMT -5
Looking at the starters from another angle... I realize everyone is going to have a different order but the same concepts apply... For me, with no trades or free agents the opening day starters would be: ERod Eovaldi Perez Houck Gonsalves with Sale, Mata, Pivetta & Mazza in the wings. That's not bad but what's the best way to improve that ? To me, it's trading Pivetta and/or Mazza for reasonably priced but more expensive #2's and/or 3's. In today's market, they will have excess value. Houck should be untouchable and Gonsalves isn't under contract yet. If we can just get a healthy erod and sale the rotation from this season to next season just got better by multiples. Plus given Bloom's talent for combing the scrap heap, I'm pretty sure we will come up with a decent AAA starting staff.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Oct 12, 2020 8:34:39 GMT -5
Something I didn't know:
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Oct 12, 2020 9:01:41 GMT -5
Looking at the starters from another angle... I realize everyone is going to have a different order but the same concepts apply... For me, with no trades or free agents the opening day starters would be: ERod Eovaldi Perez Houck Gonsalves with Sale, Mata, Pivetta & Mazza in the wings. That's not bad but what's the best way to improve that ? To me, it's trading Pivetta and/or Mazza for reasonably priced but more expensive #2's and/or 3's. In today's market, they will have excess value. Houck should be untouchable and Gonsalves isn't under contract yet. Interesting that you'd go with Gonsalves over Pivetta here. Yes, Gonsalves' velocity was reportedly up, but he was only throwing 2-inning stints at the end of the year last year. Doesn't it seem like the move is to make him a reliever at this point? It feels like the ship has sailed on him being an MLB starter. (Understood that this is a completely hypothetical situation that we likely agree is never going to happen anyway, but what good is an internet message board if not for discussing such things? )
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Oct 12, 2020 9:19:51 GMT -5
I wouldn't want to pigeon hole him at this point based on his past role with reduced velocity, he's only 26. He also has a decent curve. Watch the last few games he pitched, tons of swing and miss and definitely better command than Pivetta. I also like his motion, simple repeatable and gets long extension which gives the batter less time to think. Just my opinion of course but if he appreciates the velocity return enough to sign a minor league contract with spring invite, I think he beats Pivetta and Mazza for the last spot.
Also (Abbott): Abbott: “Gonsalves is a guy that can make an impact next year if we bring him back next year. I know he’s a minor-league free agent. His velo went from 89-90 — and he already had a highly rates fastball that had some carry — the velo jumped up to 94-96 mph. He got better as we went along.”
ADD: Pivetta would have more trade value which is basically where I was going with the post. If the Sox come up with a #2 or #3, Pivetta won't have options and Gonsalves is in Pawtucket Woosta. Neither is likely to beat out Houck.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Oct 12, 2020 11:36:22 GMT -5
I guess.
For what it's worth, he's only a year younger than Pivetta and cleared waivers in late August. Seems unlikely to me he'd beat out Pivetta, who based on reports was sought after by multiple teams at the exact same time.
I probably do need to go back and watch him late in camp though.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Oct 12, 2020 18:56:08 GMT -5
I guess. For what it's worth, he's only a year younger than Pivetta and cleared waivers in late August. Seems unlikely to me he'd beat out Pivetta, who based on reports was sought after by multiple teams at the exact same time. I probably do need to go back and watch him late in camp though. That general statement is a major portion of my logic. Given the current financial situation throughout baseball, I don't see why Pivetta wouldn't net a very good, reasonably priced (but not minimum wage) starter with 2-3 years control. Regarding August, I recall several statements about Seabold. Pivetta was in Phillies pen, they had given up on him as a starter. His value went up when the Sox turned him back into a starter and then he had two good outings in the majors. His raw stuff is great, control of the breaking stuff not good. I believe it was Gonsalves last game, he pitched two 4 out innings and struck out 7, virtually all swing and misses, the control is there, batters generally aren't watching strikes go by. My eyes aren't good enough to evaluate movement on a screen so I concentrate on batter reactions but past scouting says good movement.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Oct 12, 2020 21:15:45 GMT -5
For what it's worth, a lot of the hitters who'd been there since the start, to my eye, looked pretty checked out at the very end of the ATS, which I can understand.
|
|
|