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.
2023 40-Man Roster Discussion
ericmvan
Veteran
Supposed to be working on something more important
Posts: 8,923
|
Post by ericmvan on Dec 10, 2022 5:59:28 GMT -5
Thanks to Bloom's stating the number of additions, things are in pretty clear focus, and are quite interesting.
Three or four position players. One is a DH, which they already signed. They still need a SS and a RF.
Note that if you think they were ever even considering using Hosmer as a DH rather than 10th player, or that they are still considering Yoshida in LF and Verdugo in RF (which gives them 6 lefty hitters unless they re-sign CV), you cannot make any sense of 3 or 4 position players added. It would be 2 to 4.
As I just suggested, the 4th possible addition is a catcher who hits righty. That allows Wong extra time to refine his game, and it gives you a 3rd catcher on the 40-man. Could that be a backup catcher, rather than a starter? In theory, yes, but we're going to see that it might not make sense.
Seven to nine guys overall. That means 4 or 5 pitchers, and that has to include the two guys he had signed already when he outlined the plans. So it's actually 2 or 3 more pitchers, and Jansen's one, so it's 1 or 2 left. And one of them is of course a starting pitcher, a strong #3 or better (the better, the better).
So who's the optional pitcher? It has to be a second LHR, right? And that makes perfect sense, because if Josh Taylor is healthy, he's that guy, and if he isn't, you have to get someone. If he's not healthy, he fairly likely clears waivers, so I think you can count either him or his replacement for a 40 (and 26) man slot. So there's no need to clear an extra spot for the extra pitcher -- unlike the possible extra catcher.
So, they have to make room for Jansen, Yoshida, SS, RF, SP, and maybe a C. 5 or 6 trims.
Park is an obvious DFA and hope he clears waivers guy.
Are folks aware that Darwinzon fanned 5 and walked nobody in back-to-back 1-inning stints 7/29 and 8/2, and then fanned 1 and walked 6 in 2 outings and 2 innings immediately after his recall? Here's a guy who badly needs a to go to a team where relatively nobody cares what he does. He still has nasty stuff, and I have him as fetching a lottery ticket in a trade, or being added to a package for Laureano.
They hyped Brasier continually before acquiring so many relievers that there is now no roster room left for him. They should able to to trade him for a lottery ticket to a bad team that hopes he'll be good enough to move to a contender at the deadline.
Once they add their starter, Connor Seabold and Josh Winckiwski are 9th and 10th on the SP depth chart (Crawford is 8th, and the guy they can option to the minors if they ever get all 13 guys ahead of him healthy simultaneously). They both have some small trade value, and it's easy to move one of them, perhaps in a trade for a RF.
Might the pressure of being in the Mookie trade have affected Downs? That's not crazy, so some team might see him as a scenery-change guy. Trading him would also open up more PT for Rafaela at SS, and it would be malpractice to not have him play there a lot this year. He might be your starting SS by August 1, and he could conceivably stay here until Meyer is ready. He's not going to forget how to play CF.
So that's 5 easy trims.
The 6th is tougher, because you have Dalbec and Duran as change-of-scenery candidates, but they are also MLB depth. I'd be reluctant to trade either one for that reason; they constitute the likeliest candidates to be recalled when a position player is on the IL. It'll be a few months before Rafaela, Valdez, Abreu, or Hamiltion become viable options for that role, so if you trade one and have 2 injuries you're suddenly looking at selecting Narcisco Crook. So maybe it makes more sense to deal Valdez or Abreu. Or trade Ort for a comparable relief prospect who's not yet 40-man eligible
Given the absence of a 6th guy who is excess talent (unless they're lower on Ort than you'd expect), I think it follows that they don't add a catcher unless he's a starter, and the only one that makes sense to me is CV returning on a team-friendly deal with a promise of a position on the team after he retires. He can take Varitek's role when 'Tek becomes manager.
Who is supposedly interested in CV? Twins, Giants, Diamondbacks, Guardians, maybe the Cubs. Guardians would be attractive but they are also reportedly going after Murphy. If that happens, the Sox might be the most appealing destination. Bringing CV back would help offset the loss of Xander from the clubhouse ... I'd trade Valdez (or maybe Ort) to make room.
|
|
|
Post by notstarboard on Dec 10, 2022 9:46:21 GMT -5
Thanks to Bloom's stating the number of additions, things are in pretty clear focus, and are quite interesting.
Three or four position players. One is a DH, which they already signed. They still need a SS and a RF.
Note that if you think they were ever even considering using Hosmer as a DH rather than 10th player, or that they are still considering Yoshida in LF and Verdugo in RF (which gives them 6 lefty hitters unless they re-sign CV), you cannot make any sense of 3 or 4 position players added. It would be 2 to 4.
As I just suggested, the 4th possible addition is a catcher who hits righty. That allows Wong extra time to refine his game, and it gives you a 3rd catcher on the 40-man. Could that be a backup catcher, rather than a starter? In theory, yes, but we're going to see that it might not make sense.
Seven to nine guys overall. That means 4 or 5 pitchers, and that has to include the two guys he had signed already when he outlined the plans. So it's actually 2 or 3 more pitchers, and Jansen's one, so it's 1 or 2 left. And one of them is of course a starting pitcher, a strong #3 or better (the better, the better).
So who's the optional pitcher? It has to be a second LHR, right? And that makes perfect sense, because if Josh Taylor is healthy, he's that guy, and if he isn't, you have to get someone. If he's not healthy, he fairly likely clears waivers, so I think you can count either him or his replacement for a 40 (and 26) man slot. So there's no need to clear an extra spot for the extra pitcher -- unlike the possible extra catcher.
So, they have to make room for Jansen, Yoshida, SS, RF, SP, and maybe a C. 5 or 6 trims.
Park is an obvious DFA and hope he clears waivers guy.
Are folks aware that Darwinzon fanned 5 and walked nobody in back-to-back 1-inning stints 7/29 and 8/2, and then fanned 1 and walked 6 in 2 outings and 2 innings immediately after his recall? Here's a guy who badly needs a to go to a team where relatively nobody cares what he does. He still has nasty stuff, and I have him as fetching a lottery ticket in a trade, or being added to a package for Laureano.
They hyped Brasier continually before acquiring so many relievers that there is now no roster room left for him. They should able to to trade him for a lottery ticket to a bad team that hopes he'll be good enough to move to a contender at the deadline.
Once they add their starter, Connor Seabold and Josh Winckiwski are 9th and 10th on the SP depth chart (Crawford is 8th, and the guy they can option to the minors if they ever get all 13 guys ahead of him healthy simultaneously). They both have some small trade value, and it's easy to move one of them, perhaps in a trade for a RF.
Might the pressure of being in the Mookie trade have affected Downs? That's not crazy, so some team might see him as a scenery-change guy. Trading him would also open up more PT for Rafaela at SS, and it would be malpractice to not have him play there a lot this year. He might be your starting SS by August 1, and he could conceivably stay here until Meyer is ready. He's not going to forget how to play CF.
So that's 5 easy trims.
The 6th is tougher, because you have Dalbec and Duran as change-of-scenery candidates, but they are also MLB depth. I'd be reluctant to trade either one for that reason; they constitute the likeliest candidates to be recalled when a position player is on the IL. It'll be a few months before Rafaela, Valdez, Abreu, or Hamiltion become viable options for that role, so if you trade one and have 2 injuries you're suddenly looking at selecting Narcisco Crook. So maybe it makes more sense to deal Valdez or Abreu. Or trade Ort for a comparable relief prospect who's not yet 40-man eligible
Given the absence of a 6th guy who is excess talent (unless they're lower on Ort than you'd expect), I think it follows that they don't add a catcher unless he's a starter, and the only one that makes sense to me is CV returning on a team-friendly deal with a promise of a position on the team after he retires. He can take Varitek's role when 'Tek becomes manager.
Who is supposedly interested in CV? Twins, Giants, Diamondbacks, Guardians, maybe the Cubs. Guardians would be attractive but they are also reportedly going after Murphy. If that happens, the Sox might be the most appealing destination. Bringing CV back would help offset the loss of Xander from the clubhouse ... I'd trade Valdez (or maybe Ort) to make room.
Interesting thoughts, and I love the trade speculation in particular. Personally I am not reading into that 7 to 9 number too much. You can get an extra spot for an acquisition by making a trade. You can also intend to acquire minor league players, like another catcher, that may or may not count. And then there's the fact that plans change and sometimes things don't work out. I don't think the difference between "2-4" and "3-4" is enough to say that Hosmer can be ruled out as a potential DH option. I've made my argument for that elsewhere, but it boils down to "he has value as a platoon starter at that salary, and if he's just going to be the second LHH 1B off the bench and play like 40 games a year I'd just as soon include him in a package for a player we actually need". Fangraphs projects 3.1 fWAR out of McWong, with both guys about as valuable as Vazquez on a rate basis. I can see some not believing in Wong, but to me that's a spot you don't upgrade. Wong's bat may disappoint, but I think the odds of his glove regressing to the point where he can't catch every third day are nonexistent. I like him off the bench for flexibility reasons too, since he can play positions like 2B in a pinch. I've seen reports Vazquez has offers in the 3 years at 8-10 million range, which would make no sense to beat given his age and the unlikeliness of McVazquez adding substantial value over McWong. Save that cash and use it elsewhere. I like giving Rafaela some reps at SS for versatility's sake since his CF game is already so good, but I see very little chance of him being brought up as a SS. The Sox should sign another starting middle infielder this offseason, leaving Arroyo as the backup. We'd probably need two injuries and a great showing for Rafaela at AAA, then, for Rafaela to come up in the summer and start at SS, and he probably won't come up to ride the bench. If we hold on to Park, he might even be 4th on that SS depth chart. Meanwhile, CF is free the minute Kiké gets banged up and will be free regardless on opening day 2024. Like Kiké, Rafaela is capable of playing all over, but CF is clearly his best position. I expect he will be a full-time CF at the major league level, then, with the flexibility to move around in a pinch. Unless, of course, he actually can't hit at the major league level. Then super utility makes more sense.
|
|
|
Post by vermontsox1 on Dec 13, 2022 11:26:36 GMT -5
Sox are introducing Jansen today at 2pm, so a 40-man move is coming in the next few hours.
|
|
|
Post by vermontsox1 on Dec 13, 2022 13:44:55 GMT -5
Sox are introducing Jansen today at 2pm, so a 40-man move is coming in the next few hours. Red Sox are DFA'ing Hoy Park, per Cotillo. Jansen signing is official, so the 40-man roster is still full.
|
|
|
Post by ematz1423 on Dec 13, 2022 13:51:52 GMT -5
Sox are introducing Jansen today at 2pm, so a 40-man move is coming in the next few hours. Red Sox are DFA'ing Hoy Park, per Cotillo. Jansen signing is official, so the 40-man roster is still full. Well now who is going to play SS for them in 2023!
|
|
|
Post by julyanmorley on Dec 13, 2022 13:53:51 GMT -5
Kind of weird that the hustled to skip the line for Park only to DFA him right away. I took that as a sign he was safe for the offseason
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Dec 13, 2022 13:55:09 GMT -5
Kind of weird that the hustled to skip the line for Park only to DFA him right away. I took that as a sign he was safe for the offseason “Kind of weird” this off season seems like the new “Inconceivable!” from The Princess Bride.
|
|
|
Post by dirtywaterinla on Dec 13, 2022 13:55:14 GMT -5
Sox are introducing Jansen today at 2pm, so a 40-man move is coming in the next few hours. Red Sox are DFA'ing Hoy Park, per Cotillo. Jansen signing is official, so the 40-man roster is still full. This confuses the hell out of me. Why hold onto Park, let Thad Ward go in the Rule 5 draft and then release Park after the fact?? Only thing I can think of that would justify this is that the team saw something in Ward they didn’t like.
|
|
|
Post by Jimmy on Dec 13, 2022 13:56:03 GMT -5
Red Sox are DFA'ing Hoy Park, per Cotillo. Jansen signing is official, so the 40-man roster is still full. This confuses the hell out of me. Why hold onto Park, let Thad Ward go in the Rule 5 draft and then release Park after the fact?? Only thing I can think of that would justify this is that the team saw something in Ward they didn’t like. Because Park is passable through waivers at a time when most teams are crunched on the 40 man, while Ward 100% would be claimed.
|
|
KB24
Rookie
Posts: 147
|
Post by KB24 on Dec 13, 2022 13:56:48 GMT -5
So we decided to give up Lobo for sh&ts and giggles. The offseason of joy continues....#chaimtogo
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Dec 13, 2022 13:57:17 GMT -5
Red Sox are DFA'ing Hoy Park, per Cotillo. Jansen signing is official, so the 40-man roster is still full. This confuses the hell out of me. Why hold onto Park, let Thad Ward go in the Rule 5 draft and then release Park after the fact?? Only thing I can think of that would justify this is that the team saw something in Ward they didn’t like. Well if Ward was the last man and they DFA'd him here instead of Park they would definitely lose him, as opposed to the current situation where they only might lose him. Maybe they think given the timing they can sneak Park through? They've been pretty good at that in general.
|
|
|
Post by ramireja on Dec 13, 2022 13:59:03 GMT -5
Kind of weird that the hustled to skip the line for Park only to DFA him right away. I took that as a sign he was safe for the offseason Yeah this was kind of my thought process when they made the move. Why make a trade to add a guy to the 40-man who clearly isn't going to be there once you make even a couple FA moves? That said, we should hardly even consider it a "trade." Perhaps the logic is that Park is more likely to clear waivers after this recent initial FA spending/post Rule 5 space than he was weeks ago?
|
|
|
Post by julyanmorley on Dec 13, 2022 14:06:31 GMT -5
Kind of weird that the hustled to skip the line for Park only to DFA him right away. I took that as a sign he was safe for the offseason Yeah this was kind of my thought process when they made the move. Why make a trade to add a guy to the 40-man who clearly isn't going to be there once you make even a couple FA moves? That said, we should hardly even consider it a "trade." Perhaps the logic is that Park is more likely to clear waivers after this recent initial FA spending/post Rule 5 space than he was weeks ago? I think picking the next guy to DFA is heavily influenced by the information they get from chatting with other front offices about potential trades. Fingers crossed they get Park through.
|
|
|
Post by vermontsox1 on Dec 13, 2022 14:31:58 GMT -5
I don't see how you could be particularly upset with Park getting DFA'ed. He was acquired for essentially nothing - no offense to Inmer Lobo, but his scouting report was not great. You get him on the roster then try to sneak him through waivers. If he gets claimed then no big deal, but most rosters are getting pretty full so it's probably a risk worth taking.
And it's not like he was taking a spot for Ward. If they wanted Ward on the 40-man, they could have made room. Those are two completely separate decisions.
|
|
|
Post by Guidas on Dec 13, 2022 14:35:54 GMT -5
This confuses the hell out of me. Why hold onto Park, let Thad Ward go in the Rule 5 draft and then release Park after the fact?? Only thing I can think of that would justify this is that the team saw something in Ward they didn’t like. Because Park is passable through waivers at a time when most teams are crunched on the 40 man, while Ward 100% would be claimed. And over here I have a Darwinzon Hernandez, Ryan Braiser and Kaleb Ort...
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 13,976
|
Post by cdj on Dec 13, 2022 14:40:43 GMT -5
jfc the blowback from some of you on this is INSANE
They traded nothing of value for some possible upper minors depth they’re attempting to retain. Don’t overcomplicate things!
|
|
|
Post by greenmonster on Dec 13, 2022 14:41:20 GMT -5
Kind of weird that the hustled to skip the line for Park only to DFA him right away. I took that as a sign he was safe for the offseason I'm just glad there is a plan
|
|
|
Post by grandsalami on Dec 13, 2022 14:41:50 GMT -5
jfc the blowback from some of you on this is INSANE every thread is going to be beating a dead horse over and over and over and over and over again
|
|
|
Post by vermontsox1 on Dec 13, 2022 14:41:51 GMT -5
This a thread specifically about the 40-man roster moves - please stick to the topic. Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Dec 13, 2022 14:45:00 GMT -5
jfc the blowback from some of you on this is INSANE They traded nothing of value for some depth they’re attempting to retain. Don’t overcomplicate things! Agreed. This move is a nothingburger. But… Bloom was brought in to be sustainable… this means talent evaluation at the margins. These shuffles are reminders that he gas not been unusually successful in that area. Whitlock. But otherwise, under-performance. So this move means nothing, but nothing moves actually seem the norm. He has made a lot of moves to end up adding little value to the organization. As I’ve said before, tanking was his best move — getting Mayer.
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 13,976
|
Post by cdj on Dec 13, 2022 14:45:33 GMT -5
jfc the blowback from some of you on this is INSANE They traded nothing of value for some depth they’re attempting to retain. Don’t overcomplicate things! Agreed. This move is a nothingburger. But… Bloom was brought in to be sustainable… this means talent evaluation at the margins. These shuffles are reminders that he gas not been unusually successful in that area. Whitlock. But otherwise, under-performance. So this move means nothing, but nothing moves actually seem the norm. He has made a lot of moves to end up adding little value to the organization. As I’ve said before, tanking was his best move — getting Mayer. Schreiber? Arroyo? That took 2.5 seconds
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Dec 13, 2022 14:50:19 GMT -5
Agreed. This move is a nothingburger. But… Bloom was brought in to be sustainable… this means talent evaluation at the margins. These shuffles are reminders that he gas not been unusually successful in that area. Whitlock. But otherwise, under-performance. So this move means nothing, but nothing moves actually seem the norm. He has made a lot of moves to end up adding little value to the organization. As I’ve said before, tanking was his best move — getting Mayer. Schreiber? Arroyo? That took 2.5 seconds C’mon. I like Arroyo, but he is ~2 career WAR guy. He’s a utility man. That hardly took some sort of ESP. Schreiber was good last year, I grant. But you’d have to throw him in with the Springs, Brice, Davis etc. guys that have come and gone for the squirrel to find that nut. Anyway: are you picking nits, or are you making a full throated defense of the talent evaluation?
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 13,976
|
Post by cdj on Dec 13, 2022 14:51:53 GMT -5
Schreiber? Arroyo? That took 2.5 seconds C’mon. I like Arroyo, but he is ~2 career WAR guy. He’s a utility man. That hardly took some sort of ESP. Schreiber was good last year, I grant. But you’d have to throw him in with the Springs, Brice, Davis etc. guys that have come and gone for the squirrel to find that nut. Anyway: are you picking nits, or are you making a full throated defense of the talent evaluation? No credit for claiming Arroyo at all! Seems unfair
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Dec 13, 2022 14:53:20 GMT -5
C’mon. I like Arroyo, but he is ~2 career WAR guy. He’s a utility man. That hardly took some sort of ESP. Schreiber was good last year, I grant. But you’d have to throw him in with the Springs, Brice, Davis etc. guys that have come and gone for the squirrel to find that nut. Anyway: are you picking nits, or are you making a full throated defense of the talent evaluation? No credit for claiming Arroyo at all! Seems unfair Full credit. Valuable bench guy. A bit nervous he may be starting at 2b. But again… is he your big example?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 13, 2022 14:58:13 GMT -5
|
|
|