Timmy U Posted October 19 Share Posted October 19 Here’s my theory of what things may look like in a month. Feel free to point out that I am likely very wrong. Mason Adams, rep, Aldrin Batista, rhp Prelander Berroa, rhp * Cam Booser, lhp Sean Burke, rhp *Ky Bush, lhp Jonathan Cannon, rhp Juan Carela, rhp *Fraser Ellard, lhp Jairo Iriarte, rhp Yoendrys Gomez, rhp Wikelman Gonzalez, rhp *Bryan Hudson, lhp Jordan Leasure, rhp Davis Martin, rhp Tanner McDougal, rhp *Shane Murphy, lhp Peyton Pallette, rhp Shane Smith, rhp Grant Taylor, rhp Drew Thorpe, rhp Mike Vasil, rhp Steven Wilson, rhp Korey Lee, c #Edgar Quero, c Kyle Teel, c #Brooks Baldwin,ss/2b/3b/of Tim Elko, 1b Curtis Mead, 1b/3b/2b Chase Meidroth, inf *Colson Montgomery, ss Bryan Ramos, 3b Lenyn Sosa, 2b/3b/1b Miguel Vargas, 1b/3b/dh *Andrew Benintendi, of Luis Robert, of * Mike Tauchman, of (arb 3) Rule 5 Eligible but leaving off *Samuel Zavala, of Duncan Davitt, rhp Ben Peoples, rhp% Eric Adler, rhp% Adisyn Coffey, rhp% *Tyler Schweitzer, lhp Wilfred Veras, of DJ Gladney, of Connor McCullough, rhp 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenSox Posted October 19 Share Posted October 19 (edited) Is Eisert a factor here? Your list looks accurate. I'd give consideration to protecting Coffee, McCullough, Schweitzer (in that order). None of those guys are that likely to get picked, but I'd hate to lose one in order to save several of the org. talents that they are protecting. Perhaps the better answer is to not protect any of them (including the org. guys) and leave some spots open for more flexibility for sign or trade Edited October 19 by GreenSox Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timmy U Posted October 19 Author Share Posted October 19 I left Eisert off this iteration cuz I kinda hate him. You are correct. He probably makes it. Plenty of other guys who could go tho. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenSox Posted October 19 Share Posted October 19 (edited) 21 minutes ago, Timmy U said: I left Eisert off this iteration cuz I kinda hate him. You are correct. He probably makes it. Plenty of other guys who could go tho. LOL Yea, I'd have Mead off my list for that reason. Eisert, Boozer, Wilson...these guys need to have a)good seasons then b)traded in June or July. And not for guys who are going to be at the bottom of this list this time, next year. Edited October 19 by GreenSox 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestEddy Posted October 19 Share Posted October 19 1 hour ago, GreenSox said: Is Eisert a factor here? Your list looks accurate. I'd give consideration to protecting Coffee, McCullough, Schweitzer (in that order). None of those guys are that likely to get picked, but I'd hate to lose one in order to save several of the org. talents that they are protecting. Perhaps the better answer is to not protect any of them (including the org. guys) and leave some spots open for more flexibility for sign or trade I think the philosophy is to not protect guys who are simply exposed, but guys who could seriously get taken. Mason Adams can be a major league starter. He can be stowed on the 60-day IL, then get his 90 days in the bullpen, and the selecting team has a starting prospect. Coffey ties up a 26-man slot with a pitcher who was walking about 6 per 9 IP at AAA. Most organizations have their own versions of that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted October 19 Share Posted October 19 4 hours ago, GreenSox said: Is Eisert a factor here? Your list looks accurate. I'd give consideration to protecting Coffee, McCullough, Schweitzer (in that order). None of those guys are that likely to get picked, but I'd hate to lose one in order to save several of the org. talents that they are protecting. Perhaps the better answer is to not protect any of them (including the org. guys) and leave some spots open for more flexibility for sign or trade Nobody is picking any of those guys. It would be a waste to start their clocks 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldsox Posted October 20 Share Posted October 20 I thought Schultz had to be protected. Wasn't he 19 when drafted? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sleepy Harold Posted October 20 Share Posted October 20 1 hour ago, oldsox said: I thought Schultz had to be protected. Wasn't he 19 when drafted? Schultz is R5 eligible next year. Colson was 19 when he was drafted, Noah was 18. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestEddy Posted October 20 Share Posted October 20 23 hours ago, Timmy U said: I left Eisert off this iteration cuz I kinda hate him. You are correct. He probably makes it. Plenty of other guys who could go tho. I think Jairo Iriarte and Bryan Hudson are probably hanging by a thread. I'd try to sneak Elko through during some heavy waiver wire week activity. But keeping a guy on the 40 man during the off-season is free, so they're not cutting anyone until they have to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWSpalehoseCWS Posted October 22 Share Posted October 22 Adams coming off TJ surgery, I'd think he'd be a safe bet to leave off. Would another team really risk carrying a guy that isn't even necessarily going to be ready to start the year? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timmy U Posted October 22 Author Share Posted October 22 3 minutes ago, CWSpalehoseCWS said: Adams coming off TJ surgery, I'd think he'd be a safe bet to leave off. Would another team really risk carrying a guy that isn't even necessarily going to be ready to start the year? I think that is a bonus. Less time on the mlb roster makes it easier to keep him. I think 2 TJS guys were taken in the Rule 5 last year. If you like him, you probably protect. If you question the ceiling and feel he’s replaceable, you roll the dice. I am sort of in between on him cuz I like hard throwers. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted October 22 Share Posted October 22 25 minutes ago, CWSpalehoseCWS said: Adams coming off TJ surgery, I'd think he'd be a safe bet to leave off. Would another team really risk carrying a guy that isn't even necessarily going to be ready to start the year? And he's not THAT good anyway. If you could grab a top 50 arm that way, sure. But I am not sure even if fully healthy that Adams is a Rule 5 pick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sleepy Harold Posted October 22 Share Posted October 22 34 minutes ago, CWSpalehoseCWS said: Adams coming off TJ surgery, I'd think he'd be a safe bet to leave off. Would another team really risk carrying a guy that isn't even necessarily going to be ready to start the year? He'd be more appealing IMO because he could spend a good chunk of time on the 60-day IL to free up that 40-man space until he's ready. Quote A Rule 5 Draft pick can be placed on the Major League injured list, but he must be active for a minimum of 90 days to avoid being subject to the aforementioned roster restrictions in the next campaign. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWSpalehoseCWS Posted October 22 Share Posted October 22 29 minutes ago, Timmy U said: I think that is a bonus. Less time on the mlb roster makes it easier to keep him. I think 2 TJS guys were taken in the Rule 5 last year. If you like him, you probably protect. If you question the ceiling and feel he’s replaceable, you roll the dice. I am sort of in between on him cuz I like hard throwers. But he has to stay on the active roster for the team that claims him for 90 days. So you're looking at a team rehabbing him in ST, then somehow working him back immediately into a MLB bullpen to hit the minimum days required. I just can't see it being a possibility with the amount of arms out there that are more likely to be selected and healthier. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted October 22 Share Posted October 22 53 minutes ago, Timmy U said: I think that is a bonus. Less time on the mlb roster makes it easier to keep him. I think 2 TJS guys were taken in the Rule 5 last year. If you like him, you probably protect. If you question the ceiling and feel he’s replaceable, you roll the dice. I am sort of in between on him cuz I like hard throwers. I think you have to have them on the roster for a certain amount of time though. Can’t just stash on IL all season or as long as you wish. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted October 22 Share Posted October 22 25 minutes ago, Sleepy Harold said: He'd be more appealing IMO because he could spend a good chunk of time on the 60-day IL to free up that 40-man space until he's ready. They still have to open a 40 man roster spot for him until the end of spring training when the 60 day IL opens Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted October 22 Share Posted October 22 24 minutes ago, CWSpalehoseCWS said: But he has to stay on the active roster for the team that claims him for 90 days. So you're looking at a team rehabbing him in ST, then somehow working him back immediately into a MLB bullpen to hit the minimum days required. I just can't see it being a possibility with the amount of arms out there that are more likely to be selected and healthier. When did he have the TJ surgery? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buehrle>Wood Posted October 22 Share Posted October 22 23 minutes ago, CWSpalehoseCWS said: But he has to stay on the active roster for the team that claims him for 90 days. So you're looking at a team rehabbing him in ST, then somehow working him back immediately into a MLB bullpen to hit the minimum days required. I just can't see it being a possibility with the amount of arms out there that are more likely to be selected and healthier. I dont believe he has to stay on the active roster at all. The 90 days would be for not to have the rule 5 rules come into play the following year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sleepy Harold Posted October 22 Share Posted October 22 22 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said: They still have to open a 40 man roster spot for him until the end of spring training when the 60 day IL opens Correct, a bad team could make that work easily IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted October 22 Share Posted October 22 (edited) 34 minutes ago, Buehrle>Wood said: I dont believe he has to stay on the active roster at all. The 90 days would be for not to have the rule 5 rules come into play the following year. He does. Unless I’m misunderstanding Edited October 22 by Bob Sacamano Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sleepy Harold Posted October 22 Share Posted October 22 You're correct. Time (at least 90 days) needs to be spent on the active roster in order for that team to gain control of said player sans R5 selection rules. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWSpalehoseCWS Posted October 22 Share Posted October 22 (edited) 2 hours ago, Buehrle>Wood said: I dont believe he has to stay on the active roster at all. The 90 days would be for not to have the rule 5 rules come into play the following year. I believe he could theoretically stay "hurt" all year, but then he has all the requirements of a R5 again for the following 2027 season. No team is going to do that unless the guy is Skenes level. Plus, is there even going to be a 2027 season? So 2028... I joke, but... Edited October 22 by CWSpalehoseCWS 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWSpalehoseCWS Posted October 22 Share Posted October 22 2 hours ago, Bob Sacamano said: When did he have the TJ surgery? April 2nd. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chitownsportsfan Posted October 22 Share Posted October 22 Great thread. Thanks. Most people that start this type of thread think they should be GM. Appreciate the humility here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted October 22 Share Posted October 22 16 hours ago, Sleepy Harold said: Correct, a bad team could make that work easily IMO. But why? Nothing about Adams screams a guy you have to lock down a roster spot for a year for, especially with injury. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.