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 philsbosoxfan on Oct 15, 2020 22:07:26 GMT -5
Let's load up on NRIs and it wouldn't need to be just starters and they wouldn't need to be players being paid minor league wages wages. The money doesn't go against the cap and really wouldn't take all that much real cash to field an entire AAA team. The contracts could include the amount that the player would make in the bigs, a number fair to the player but also attractive in trade scenarios.
It also wouldn't need to be just lower level lottery tickets coming back. We could also add a decent prospect and get back a better prospect. A one stop shopping center for the MLB. An off the top of my head example using names people are familiar with(but not necessarily realistic). We sign Tehran to that type of contract. Early on, Tehran looks like a strong candidate to return to form and the Padres are interested. We swap Tehran and Wong for Campusano.
If ever there was a year to do this....
Haha, does that make me an extremist ?
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Oct 15, 2020 22:59:39 GMT -5
For what it's worth, I feel like a number of posters are currently using NRI when they mean MLFA, right? NRI just matters for spring training, and it doesn't make sense to have more than 20 or so because there's only so much room in camp.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Oct 15, 2020 23:23:34 GMT -5
For what it's worth, I feel like a number of posters are currently using NRI when they mean MLFA, right? NRI just matters for spring training, and it doesn't make sense to have more than 20 or so because there's only so much room in camp. Yes, for me at least, the usual scenario is minor league contract with an invitation to spring training with or without a major league provision attached. There are five fields at Ft. Myers I am guessing the Sox could find room and if they go into year around XST, the players wouldn't necessarily need to go to AAA, I assume scouting will be allowed at the sites.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Oct 16, 2020 8:34:54 GMT -5
For what it's worth, I feel like a number of posters are currently using NRI when they mean MLFA, right? NRI just matters for spring training, and it doesn't make sense to have more than 20 or so because there's only so much room in camp. Yes, for me at least, the usual scenario is minor league contract with an invitation to spring training with or without a major league provision attached. There are five fields at Ft. Myers I am guessing the Sox could find room and if they go into year around XST, the players wouldn't necessarily need to go to AAA, I assume scouting will be allowed at the sites. Ray, the term "invitation to spring training" means invitation to major league spring training. That's my point. An "NRI" is a "non-roster invitee" to major league spring training, or in other words, is invited to big league camp despite not being on the 40-man roster. Every player goes to spring training. NRI has nothing to do with minor league camp. It's an MLB camp-specific term. I'm pretty sure you're just talking about minor league free agents generally.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Oct 16, 2020 14:06:27 GMT -5
Yes, for me at least, the usual scenario is minor league contract with an invitation to spring training with or without a major league provision attached. There are five fields at Ft. Myers I am guessing the Sox could find room and if they go into year around XST, the players wouldn't necessarily need to go to AAA, I assume scouting will be allowed at the sites. Ray, the term "invitation to spring training" means invitation to major league spring training. That's my point. An "NRI" is a "non-roster invitee" to major league spring training, or in other words, is invited to big league camp despite not being on the 40-man roster. Every player goes to spring training. NRI has nothing to do with minor league camp. It's an MLB camp-specific term. I'm pretty sure you're just talking about minor league free agents generally. yes, I just carried the term from eric's post. I believe that is what he's referring to, not minor league prospects that get looks at spring training. I know what it means and yes I am talking about the minor league free agents who then get invited to spring training. Sorry, I thought that was obvious, making Bonaci a NRI does nothing for us.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Oct 16, 2020 21:40:01 GMT -5
For reference, my "dream" all-star break staff from what we have available would be Sale, ERod, Eovaldi, Houck and Mata. The question becomes how do we get there from here.
I don't have one for players because we need to solve LF and 2B plus potentially DH.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,882
|
Post by ericmvan on Oct 17, 2020 4:09:12 GMT -5
For what it's worth, I feel like a number of posters are currently using NRI when they mean MLFA, right? NRI just matters for spring training, and it doesn't make sense to have more than 20 or so because there's only so much room in camp. I was talking about guys who played in MLB in 2019 and/or 2020 but because of injury or subpar performance are going to have to settle for a a split majors / minors contract with a NRI.
My idea is to identify the best N candidates for a return to form / breakout and try to sign them all by offering more money and opt-outs.
In one version of this N is based on your expected success rate and the number of guys you could fit in MLB and AAA rosters once you shed the washouts. But the other idea is to sign a few more than that and maybe be able to deal a guy or two if you do end up with more folks than will fit. Of course, there may not even be that many guys they like.
|
|
|
Post by johnsilver52 on Oct 17, 2020 5:25:56 GMT -5
For what it's worth, I feel like a number of posters are currently using NRI when they mean MLFA, right? NRI just matters for spring training, and it doesn't make sense to have more than 20 or so because there's only so much room in camp. Yes, for me at least, the usual scenario is minor league contract with an invitation to spring training with or without a major league provision attached. There are five fields at Ft. Myers I am guessing the Sox could find room and if they go into year around XST, the players wouldn't necessarily need to go to AAA, I assume scouting will be allowed at the sites. Don't forget the number of teams which play "A" and "B" games. Pretty sure if enough teams decided to hang onto a fairly large group, instead of calling up bodies off the minor league fields to play those last couple of innings the last half of ST, there could be "A" and "B" games for several teams multiple times per week, allowing for more legit competition among the type you are talking about.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Oct 17, 2020 10:15:25 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by greenmonster on Oct 18, 2020 11:31:27 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Oct 18, 2020 12:39:43 GMT -5
Question. If Rusney's contract ended this year and we still have 1 more year of control at minimum wage, why aren't we thinking about him on the 40 man ? www.fangraphs.com/players/rusney-castillo/17016/stats?position=OFRight handed batting 4th outfielder at minimum wage with an option remaining, Isn't that pretty much ideal ?
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Oct 22, 2020 2:07:07 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Oct 22, 2020 7:34:14 GMT -5
Crazy thoughts...
With the Cubs needing to reset their tax situation, the return for Osich might be far different than we are expecting.
|
|
|
Post by mwgray13 on Oct 22, 2020 9:24:58 GMT -5
My 40 Man roster as of today (no FAs):
Rodriguez
Eovaldi
Perez
Houck
Pivetta
Brewer
Hernandez
Barnes
Valdez
Taylor
Weber
Brasier
Stocks
Mazza
Hart
Mata
Seabold
Groome
Aybar
Sale
Vazquez
Dalbec
Arroyo
Bogaerts
Devers
Munoz
Verdugo
Bentitendi
Martinez
Wong
Arrauz
Chavis
Munoz
Perada
Chatham
Wilson
Rosario
Grullon
Potts
Ockimey
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,882
|
Post by ericmvan on Oct 22, 2020 14:45:38 GMT -5
Question. If Rusney's contract ended this year and we still have 1 more year of control at minimum wage, why aren't we thinking about him on the 40 man ? www.fangraphs.com/players/rusney-castillo/17016/stats?position=OFRight handed batting 4th outfielder at minimum wage with an option remaining, Isn't that pretty much ideal ? He'll be a minor league FA. And at age 33, it seems unlikely that he's still a good 4th guy. Starting at age 29, he had AAA wRC+ of 138, 120, 93, DNP.
It's a shame that his contract situation and the CBA essentially wiped out what should have been a pair of nice years as a 4th OFer.
Given the $72M, I imagine he's taken that somewhat in stride. It's a weird story -- is there anyone else who got that much money, was never hurt, was good in MLB (3.1 bWAR per 650 PA! -- mostly from insanely high DRS, but he did look good out there), yet played so little in MLB (99 G, 337 PA)?
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Oct 22, 2020 16:02:36 GMT -5
I can't imagine there's any appetite on either side for him to remain in this organization.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,882
|
Post by ericmvan on Oct 22, 2020 17:09:39 GMT -5
Let's start with guys who I believe we can be sure of making the 40-man roster that's fixed for the Rule 5 draft:
Players in italics are expected to be optioned when and if all MLB guys are healthy. Additions are marked with +.
C (2 + 2): Vazquez, Plawecki; Grullon, Wong+ CIF (2 + 1): Dalbec, Devers; Potts+ MIF (3 + 3): Bogaerts, Chavis, Arroyo; Munoz, Arauz, Chatham OF (3 +2): Benintendi, Verdugo, Martinez; Wilson, Rosario+
SP (6 + 4): Sale, Rodriguez, Eovaldi, Perez, Pivetta, Houck; Mazza, Mata+, Groome+, Seabold+ RP: (3 + 5) Barnes, Brasier, Hernandez; Taylor, Valdez, Tapia, Weber, Aybar
That's 19 definite MLB players and 17 others.
Other predictable fates:
Non-Tender / Re-sign: Peraza, Brice, Godley DFA, re-sign: Lin, Puello DFA: Hall, Triggs, Kickham, Leyer (overlooked originally) DFA, FO job: Pedroia
That leaves six pitchers for three spots, if we're leaving room for a Rule 5 draftee. I think Springs and Stock are very likely.
The other four are Covey (out of options), Walden, Hart (who apparently was never 100% this year), and Brewer. If I had to guess, they grab someone else from the waiver wire and DFA all four. I list them in the order that they are likely or desirable to survive as NRI's into next spring.
Now, in the long run, we are likely looking to add 7 players: a CF, a 4th OFer who hits RH, a backup 1B who hits LH, a starting pitcher, a closer, and 2 setup guys. (Acquiring a 2B would likely mean moving Arroyo or Chavis.) It's possible that they are so high on the trio of Valdez, Tapia, and Taylor that they only grab one setup man, but I think the odds are against that.
The first three trims would be Springs, Stock, and the waiver acquisition, all of whom you hope clear waivers. Mazza is a fourth guy you can probably do that with. There's even a chance that Munoz could be sneaked through.
That leaves two or (more likely) 3 players who need to be trimmed. We can get a handle on them by listing the candidates in inverse order of their prospect ratings, with players Bloom did not acquire in bold:
Aybar, Wilson, Grullon, Arauz, Chatham.
These could be used in trades to fill one or more of the seven needs. It's possible that Wong or even Potts could be moved; anyone higher ranked would surprise me. If they still need trims after making all their deals, in order to sign the last FA or two, I would expect these players to be traded for an interesting lottery ticket or two rather than DFA'd.
|
|
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,882
|
Post by ericmvan on Oct 22, 2020 17:13:46 GMT -5
My 40 Man roster as of today (no FAs): You forgot Vazquez and Plawecki. You really want to group them by position to prevent exactly that kind of mistake!
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Oct 22, 2020 23:02:24 GMT -5
It wouldn't surprise me to see Perez' option picked up then moved. At $6.5m he'd be attractive, even more so if the Sox could handle eating some of that.
Also, include me in the group that is not overly enamored with Grullon or Chatham.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Oct 22, 2020 23:05:11 GMT -5
Latest on the DH according to twitter is that the NL DH is in doubt for next year because both the owners and players would have to sign off. The question being if the National League owners are going to want to add payroll.
Haha, save a spot for Moreland.
|
|
|
Post by mwgray13 on Oct 23, 2020 8:50:14 GMT -5
My 40 Man roster as of today (no FAs): You forgot Vazquez and Plawecki. You really want to group them by position to prevent exactly that kind of mistake I expect Plawecki or Vazquez to get moved. I would keep Vazquez. Vazquez is in the list.
|
|
|
Post by mwgray13 on Oct 23, 2020 9:12:18 GMT -5
Let's start with guys who I believe we can be sure of making the 40-man roster that's fixed for the Rule 5 draft:
Players in italics are expected to be optioned when and if all MLB guys are healthy. Additions are marked with +.
C (2 + 2): Vazquez, Plawecki; Grullon, Wong+ CIF (2 + 1): Dalbec, Devers; Potts+ MIF (3 + 3): Bogaerts, Chavis, Arroyo; Munoz, Arauz, Chatham OF (3 +2): Benintendi, Verdugo, Martinez; Wilson, Rosario+
SP (6 + 4): Sale, Rodriguez, Eovaldi, Perez, Pivetta, Houck; Mazza, Mata+, Groome+, Seabold+ RP: (3 + 5) Barnes, Brasier, Hernandez; Taylor, Valdez, Tapia, Weber, Aybar
That's 19 definite MLB players and 17 others.
Other predictable fates:
Non-Tender / Re-sign: Peraza, Brice, Godley DFA, re-sign: Lin, Puello DFA: Hall, Triggs, Kickham DFA, FO job: Pedroia
That leaves six pitchers for three spots, if we're leaving room for a Rule 5 draftee. I think Springs and Stock are very likely.
The other four are Covey (out of options), Walden, Hart (who apparently was never 100% this year), and Brewer. If I had to guess, they grab someone else from the waiver wire and DFA all four. I list them in the order that they are likely or desirable to survive as NRI's into next spring.
Now, in the long run, we are likely looking to add 7 players: a CF, a 4th OFer who hits RH, a backup 1B who hits LH, a starting pitcher, a closer, and 2 setup guys. (Acquiring a 2B would likely mean moving Arroyo or Chavis.) It's possible that they are so high on the trio of Valdez, Tapia, and Taylor that they only grab one setup man, but I think the odds are against that.
The first three trims would be Springs, Stock, and the waiver acquisition, all of whom you hope clear waivers. Mazza is a fourth guy you can probably do that with. There's even a chance that Munoz could be sneaked through.
That leaves two or (more likely) 3 players who need to be trimmed. We can get a handle on them by listing the candidates in inverse order of their prospect ratings, with players Bloom did not acquire in bold:
Aybar, Wilson, Grullon, Arauz, Chatham.
These could be used in trades to fill one or more of the seven needs. It's possible that Wong or even Potts could be moved; anyone higher ranked would surprise me. If they still need trims after making all their deals, in order to sign the last FA or two, I would expect these players to be traded for an interesting lottery ticket or two rather than DFA'd.
Out of the 6 pitchers on the edge for a roster spot, I got Brewer, Stock, and Hart. If I could take a 4th it would be Walden. You have to imagine they like Brewer a lot since they were willing to stretch him out. Stock is a flamethrower with significant upside. Hart has more upside than Walden, and if the injury rumors are true, deserves another shot. Walden wasn't terrible, he got hammered by the Yankees early and never had a shot to bring down his ERA. I look at Walden, and think he could turn it around like Brasier, but think he is duplicitous to Mazza. Walden and Mazza have near identical repertoires. I think Walden might be the easiest to DFA and resign, which is why I left him off the 40 man. Also, I like Tapia but wouldn't be devastated if he got DFAed. I think the holes in the roster could be filled internally but wouldn't expect that group to be a division winner. I think the Sox are a pitcher or two away from really competing. I think Bauer could be had for a relatively reasonable contract (not going more then 100M/5Yr). If you got Bauer, the rest of the roster could be fixed with a trade or two. Or conversely, trade for a star pitcher, and sign a few FAs. This is the offseason in which you want to have cash available, the financial impact of the 2020 season will be felt in 2021. I expect Mid, and small market teams to be more frugal, and resourceful then ever. I dont expect a Padres/Machado $300M contract coming out of nowhere like 2 years ago.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Oct 23, 2020 10:12:23 GMT -5
Let's start with guys who I believe we can be sure of making the 40-man roster that's fixed for the Rule 5 draft: Players in italics are expected to be optioned when and if all MLB guys are healthy. Additions are marked with +.
C (2 + 2): Vazquez, Plawecki; Grullon, Wong+ CIF (2 + 1): Dalbec, Devers; Potts+ MIF (3 + 3): Bogaerts, Chavis, Arroyo; Munoz, Arauz, Chatham OF (3 +2): Benintendi, Verdugo, Martinez; Wilson, Rosario+
SP (6 + 4): Sale, Rodriguez, Eovaldi, Perez, Pivetta, Houck; Mazza, Mata+, Groome+, Seabold+ RP: (3 + 5) Barnes, Brasier, Hernandez; Taylor, Valdez, Tapia, Weber, Aybar
That's 19 definite MLB players and 17 others.
Other predictable fates:
Non-Tender / Re-sign: Peraza, Brice, Godley DFA, re-sign: Lin, Puello DFA: Hall, Triggs, Kickham DFA, FO job: Pedroia
That leaves six pitchers for three spots, if we're leaving room for a Rule 5 draftee. I think Springs and Stock are very likely. The other four are Covey (out of options), Walden, Hart (who apparently was never 100% this year), and Brewer. If I had to guess, they grab someone else from the waiver wire and DFA all four. I list them in the order that they are likely or desirable to survive as NRI's into next spring. Now, in the long run, we are likely looking to add 7 players: a CF, a 4th OFer who hits RH, a backup 1B who hits LH, a starting pitcher, a closer, and 2 setup guys. (Acquiring a 2B would likely mean moving Arroyo or Chavis.) It's possible that they are so high on the trio of Valdez, Tapia, and Taylor that they only grab one setup man, but I think the odds are against that.
The first three trims would be Springs, Stock, and the waiver acquisition, all of whom you hope clear waivers. Mazza is a fourth guy you can probably do that with. There's even a chance that Munoz could be sneaked through.
That leaves two or (more likely) 3 players who need to be trimmed. We can get a handle on them by listing the candidates in inverse order of their prospect ratings, with players Bloom did not acquire in bold: Aybar, Wilson, Grullon, Arauz, Chatham.
These could be used in trades to fill one or more of the seven needs. It's possible that Wong or even Potts could be moved; anyone higher ranked would surprise me. If they still need trims after making all their deals, in order to sign the last FA or two, I would expect these players to be traded for an interesting lottery ticket or two rather than DFA'd.
Out of the 6 pitchers on the edge for a roster spot, I got Brewer, Stock, and Hart. If I could take a 4th it would be Walden. You have to imagine they like Brewer a lot since they were willing to stretch him out. Stock is a flamethrower with significant upside. Hart has more upside than Walden, and if the injury rumors are true, deserves another shot. Walden wasn't terrible, he got hammered by the Yankees early and never had a shot to bring down his ERA. I look at Walden, and think he could turn it around like Brasier, but think he is duplicitous to Mazza. Walden and Mazza have near identical repertoires. I think Walden might be the easiest to DFA and resign, which is why I left him off the 40 man. Also, I like Tapia but wouldn't be devastated if he got DFAed. I think the holes in the roster could be filled internally but wouldn't expect that group to be a division winner. I think the Sox are a pitcher or two away from really competing. I think Bauer could be had for a relatively reasonable contract (not going more then 100M/5Yr). If you got Bauer, the rest of the roster could be fixed with a trade or two. Or conversely, trade for a star pitcher, and sign a few FAs. This is the offseason in which you want to have cash available, the financial impact of the 2020 season will be felt in 2021. I expect Mid, and small market teams to be more frugal, and resourceful then ever. I dont expect a Padres/Machado $300M contract coming out of nowhere like 2 years ago. Bauer has constantly said he plans to sign one year contracts and 5/$100 is unlikely to change his mind. He's also likely to come with a QO which means that the team that signs him will lose a second rounder and not be able to give him a QO next year. There's also a wee bit of excess luggage there. If the team were to fill in the holes internally, they would be screaming we don't plan to compete.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Oct 23, 2020 10:29:49 GMT -5
If Bauer is just going to go year by year anyway it probably makes sense for him to jusr accept the QO or play in Japan.
But yeah, no interest in giving up a 2nd rounder for one year of Bauer even if I limit the calculation to on-field considerations.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Oct 23, 2020 10:52:30 GMT -5
This is going to be a very strange year for free agents. I expect to here posters with the general theme, "We should have topped that offer." . . .
LaVelle E. Neal III @lavelleneal · 22h As of now, the DH will be AL-only next season, I'm hearing. The union and MLB would have to expand it to both leagues through bargaining.
|
|
|