|
Post by Oregon Norm on Nov 16, 2023 19:23:05 GMT -5
It mined the s**t out of this website...
|
|
|
Post by foreverred9 on Nov 16, 2023 21:18:57 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Soxfansince1971 on Nov 16, 2023 23:22:32 GMT -5
I know the 2023 rule 5 draft hasn't even taken place yet but after reading that interesting write-up, gotta say if a decent chunk of those guys named have a solid year and continue through the ranks it sounds like the 2024 40 man rule 5 draft decisions are going to be very difficult. Can probably say it every year but it would seem to be in Breslow's best interests to try and parse through some 2024 rule 5 eligible guys and extract some value via trade before having to leave them open to the draft but I suppose we should get through the 2023 rule 5 and at least part of the 2024 season before saying he's gotta move some of these guys now. Breslow can trade position player talent for pitching prospects….
|
|
|
Post by Soxfansince1971 on Nov 16, 2023 23:40:04 GMT -5
I feel like you’re arguing against something nobody is actually saying. I don’t think anybody thinks Shane Drohan has no shot at ever being good again. It’s more that you have to weigh the odds that he’s MLB-caliber next year against the odds that he is not worth keeping on the 40-man going into the season. There is real a risk that he comes back good as new and they lose a valuable contributor, but just how likely do you think that is? You also haven’t really addressed what I think the main reason for not protecting him is, which is the downside risk of a DFA. Presumably, if all goes according to plan the Sox don’t think they’ll have space for him on the 40-man. Do you think odds are higher that he sticks on a 26-man roster for the full season, or that he gets DFA’d to make room for whatever offseason additions they want to make? Or even someone else in the org they decide is more worthy of that spot? Given how much of a mess he apparently was at the end of the season I’d have to say, as it stands, the latter is more likely. Well it's a question of degrees. I hereby acknowledge that a) no one is saying it's impossible for Drohan to be good again; and b) the DFA risk is real. I'm just saying that Drohan strikes me as a player who has a relatively decent chance of being good again, and that the risk of leaving him unprotected outweighs the DFA risk.
Among other things, the Red Sox will need a couple of guys with options in the Ort mold: AAA depth to fill in for injuries, etc. A couple of spots on the 40-man have to go to such players (a fact that was the source of endless consternation last year when Ort and Brasier were kept at the expense of Ward). Unlike Ward last year, Drohan himself could potentially play that role this season.
And finally: the logic in your last paragraph is perfectly reasonable, given the fact that the Red Sox left him unprotected. But I would be surprised if you'd have come to that conclusion before they did so. In other words, I don't recall anyone anticipating they'd leave Drohan unprotected before they did so. It makes perfect sense to say "well, if the team left him unprotected, I guess he wasn't as valuable a prospect as most of us thought." But that doesn't actually answer the question of why the team thought that.
Wrong, July 21 (page 1 of this thread), “I wonder if Drohan pitching so poorly at Worcester changes the likelihood that he is protected…?” I got hammered for suggesting Drohan would not be protected, but never mentioned it again (for that reason). My feeling then was that he was bad enough that he would not be protected. He pitch like s**t, to the point that every time he pitched was a sure loss for AAA Worcester.
|
|
|
Post by wcsoxfan on Nov 17, 2023 1:16:04 GMT -5
It makes sense that with only 14 (and not 15) non-mlb spots on the 40-man roster teams would protect fewer players. So I was wondering whether the inverse would also be true as 26 instead of 25 MLB roster spots would allow for more selections of rule-5 eligible players. Unfortunately the below (only 1 draft so far since the expansion) doesn't tell us anything yet, but it will be interesting if it creeps up over time. I also think that the lost minor league season is still playing a major role in the roster crunches.
2022: 15 to 99 (15.2 percent) 2021: 0 to 100 (0 percent)* 2020: 18 to 88 (20.5 percent) 2019: 11 to 62 (17.7 percent) 2018: 14 to 78 (17.9 percent) 2017: 18 to 68 (26.5 percent) 2016: 18 to 60 (30 percent) 2015: 16 to 81 (19.8 percent)
The above is based on a ratio of MLB rule-5 drafted players to available top-30 prospects. But not all drafted players are top-30 prospects, so a cross reference of the lists would be needed to make it a more apples-to-apples comparison.
*2021 rule-5 draft was cancelled
|
|
|
Post by wcsoxfan on Nov 17, 2023 1:20:41 GMT -5
How long until the Las Vegas As hire chatgptgm to run their team? First chatgptgm needs to get a job on the MLB-network draft show to prove it knows what it's doing.
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 14,532
|
Post by cdj on Nov 17, 2023 1:22:42 GMT -5
How long until the Las Vegas As hire chatgptgm to run their team? First chatgpteam needs to get a job on the MLB-network draft show to prove it knows what it's doing. Put it toe to toe with one of the biggest masterminds in the sport Harold Reynolds and see if people are still impressed with it
|
|
|
Post by Underwater Johnson on Nov 17, 2023 13:56:07 GMT -5
For me, AI is interesting as an encyclopedia that instantly collates everything you ask it for from a broad pool of data (including forum threads like these? in which case, god help it) but for applications like baseball scouting, can it look at video of a pitcher and see a violent delivery? Can it watch a kid give up a couple homers in his first outing at a new level and then start nibbling around the edges in the next couple outings, afraid to throw a strike? Does it need to be told about that kind of warning sign or cause and effect or is it going to infer it from the amount of (free, unprotected) data at its disposal, and perhaps infer other things that scouts have missed? I'm still a skeptic although it appears to write a mean book report.
|
|
|
Post by vermontsox1 on Nov 17, 2023 13:57:18 GMT -5
Let's return to the topic of the thread. Thanks!
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Nov 17, 2023 13:58:37 GMT -5
For me, AI is interesting as an encyclopedia that instantly collates everything you ask it for from a broad pool of data (including forum threads like these? in which case, god help it) but for applications like baseball scouting, can it look at video of a pitcher and see a violent delivery? Can it watch a kid give up a couple homers in his first outing at a new level and then start nibbling around the edges in the next couple outings, afraid to throw a strike? Does it need to be told about that kind of warning sign or cause and effect or is it going to infer it from the amount of (free, unprotected) data at its disposal, and perhaps infer other things that scouts have missed? I'm still a skeptic although it appears to write a mean book report. To answer your questions about AI generally speaking (not the GPT I made): 1) Yes 2) Yes 3) It can learn these trends and in some cases likely could identify things scouts missed or that would take scouts longer to confirm Add: sorry vermontsox posted before seeing your comment, won’t digress further
|
|
|
Post by patford on Nov 19, 2023 9:44:41 GMT -5
On the most recent podcast there was brief discussion about the Rule 5 draft and 90 day IL manipulations. There are two ways of exploiting the 90 day IL and both have examples connected to the Sox. A contending team can draft a player and immediately stash that player on the IL (for 90 days or even much longer) while the player "rehabs" in Florida or elsewhere. A team which isn't contending can add the player to their 26 man MLB roster and then send the player to the 90 day IL as soon as the player spends 90 days on the 26 man MLB roster. Both Ian and Chris felt MLB should do something about these loopholes but weren't sure how it can be accomplished. There's actually an easy solution to the problem. All it would take would be for the Red Sox to do exactly the same thing. Immediately there would be "inflategate" level nation wide outrage and MLB would not only change the rule but impose a hash penalty on the Sox. Kind of joking.
|
|
|
Post by philsbosoxfan on Nov 20, 2023 18:25:15 GMT -5
It just occurred to me that the draft comes on Pearl Harbor Day. Not so sure that's a good thing.
Maybe a day of infamy for the Sox.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Nov 20, 2023 18:52:08 GMT -5
It just occurred to me that the draft comes on Pearl Harbor Day. Not so sure that's a good thing. Maybe a day of infamy for the Sox. Bill Lee for Stan Papi, Dec 7, 1978. Dec 7th already is a day of infamy for the Sox.
|
|
|
Post by allenripley on Nov 20, 2023 19:29:08 GMT -5
Yep. That was Don Zimmer, who sabotaged two potential Red Sox post-season appearances ('77, '78), who demanded the Sox front office get rid of Bill Lee simply because the manager couldn't stand him. The Sox got Papi instead of a bag of balls.
|
|
|
Post by vermontsox1 on Nov 21, 2023 12:12:27 GMT -5
|
|
gerry
Veteran
Enter your message here...
Posts: 1,712
|
Post by gerry on Nov 21, 2023 12:25:33 GMT -5
Yep. That was Don Zimmer, who sabotaged two potential Red Sox post-season appearances ('77, '78), who demanded the Sox front office get rid of Bill Lee simply because the manager couldn't stand him. The Sox got Papi instead of a bag of balls. Kinda reminds me of the ongoing Cora/Verdugo drama. Really gonna miss that Mariachi walk up, gold glove in RF, good bat and eccentric personality. Oh well, he had the nerve to be late among a few other horrible, deadly dastardly deeds.
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 4,000
|
Post by jimoh on Nov 21, 2023 13:48:07 GMT -5
Yep. That was Don Zimmer, who sabotaged two potential Red Sox post-season appearances ('77, '78), who demanded the Sox front office get rid of Bill Lee simply because the manager couldn't stand him. The Sox got Papi instead of a bag of balls. Kinda reminds me of the ongoing Cora/Verdugo drama. Really gonna miss that Mariachi walk up, gold glove in RF, good bat and eccentric personality. Oh well, he had the nerve to be late among a few other horrible, deadly dastardly deeds. Comparing Don Zimmer and the players who hated him to Cora and Verdugo is like saying it snows in both Buffalo and Chapel Hill.
|
|
gerry
Veteran
Enter your message here...
Posts: 1,712
|
Post by gerry on Nov 21, 2023 14:46:10 GMT -5
True, of course, which is why I said “kinda reminds me”. Also, while not as extreme, Dugie isn’t the only player who has run afoul of the Cora way. Nor am I the only fan who resents his use of pitchers and favorites. Just an observation.
|
|
|
Post by iakovos11 on Nov 21, 2023 14:53:16 GMT -5
Let's keep this to the Rule 5 draft guys
|
|
cdj
Veteran
Posts: 14,532
|
Post by cdj on Nov 21, 2023 15:21:44 GMT -5
Could definitely see Fernandez getting snagged. Thought there was a chance he could get taken last year
|
|
|
Post by benogliviesbrother on Nov 21, 2023 18:05:08 GMT -5
Kinda reminds me of the ongoing Cora/Verdugo drama. Really gonna miss that Mariachi walk up, gold glove in RF, good bat and eccentric personality. Oh well, he had the nerve to be late among a few other horrible, deadly dastardly deeds. Comparing Don Zimmer and the players who hated him to Cora and Verdugo is like saying it snows in both Buffalo and Chapel Hill. Lovely analogy (I have been to both in winter) & I have suffered the Zip Zimmer Experience. I don't know much of Zim behind locker room doors but I do recall that a starter only got pulled after giving up six (or more) runs or when the game was over.
|
|
|
Post by benogliviesbrother on Nov 21, 2023 18:06:36 GMT -5
Let's keep this to the Rule 5 draft guys Apologies for Zipping astray.
|
|
|
Post by Soxfansince1971 on Nov 21, 2023 20:55:07 GMT -5
Yep. That was Don Zimmer, who sabotaged two potential Red Sox post-season appearances ('77, '78), who demanded the Sox front office get rid of Bill Lee simply because the manager couldn't stand him. The Sox got Papi instead of a bag of balls. Kinda reminds me of the ongoing Cora/Verdugo drama. Really gonna miss that Mariachi walk up, gold glove in RF, good bat and eccentric personality. Oh well, he had the nerve to be late among a few other horrible, deadly dastardly deeds. Disagree, Verdugo has 1 year remaining on his contract. IMO, trade him for controllable pitching. I want to see Abreu in RF as he seems to have more power, and the Red Sox can use the $9.3 million saved on starting pitching! They need the starters more than 6 outfielders. I thought the Red Sox might have protected more than 2 pitchers, but when you look at who the other options were, it really is not that surprising. I was one of a limited number who that Drohan should not be protected (page 1 of this thread). I do wonder if the Red Sox think they can pick up a Rule 5 draftee who is better than who they will loose.
|
|
|
Post by oldfaithful2019 on Nov 21, 2023 21:07:54 GMT -5
Let's keep this to the Rule 5 draft guys Apologies for Zipping astray. I see what you did there
|
|
|
Post by soxaddict on Nov 21, 2023 22:36:06 GMT -5
Could definitely see Fernandez getting snagged. Thought there was a chance he could get taken last year I agree. AA has cleared 1/4 of the Atlanta 40-man for some reason. I wouldn't be shocked if he added a couple of Rule 5s.
|
|