2025 Rule 5 Thread

[WestEddy]

9 minutes ago, WhiteSox2023 said:

Well, I never used the word “embarrassing”.  I said that it is “sad” that the Sox didn’t already have similar starting pitching talent as Smith.  That is an indictment of the Sox, not the Twins, Tigers, or Brewers.

The OP started with that. Yeah, it's sad that the Sox got in between, where all the starters flamed out at the same time, and there was literally nobody in the upper levels to step in. Sosa, Baldwin and Cannon really just got thrown to the dogs. Ramos. Ellard. Schultz and Monty were too far away to even dream on. 

Reminds me of starting pitching in the late 70s. Guys like Chris Knapp, Ross Baumgarten, Richard Wortham. Steve Trout was in there, Francisco Barrios. Right before Brit Burns, Dotson, Hoyt all started bubbling to the surface. That's what Shane Smith, Davis Martin, Sean Burke and Cannon feel like. Maybe Smith hangs in there with the coming deluge of elite pitching. 

[WhiteSox2023]

17 minutes ago, WestEddy said:

The OP started with that. Yeah, it's sad that the Sox got in between, where all the starters flamed out at the same time, and there was literally nobody in the upper levels to step in. Sosa, Baldwin and Cannon really just got thrown to the dogs. Ramos. Ellard. Schultz and Monty were too far away to even dream on. 

Reminds me of starting pitching in the late 70s. Guys like Chris Knapp, Ross Baumgarten, Richard Wortham. Steve Trout was in there, Francisco Barrios. Right before Brit Burns, Dotson, Hoyt all started bubbling to the surface. That's what Shane Smith, Davis Martin, Sean Burke and Cannon feel like. Maybe Smith hangs in there with the coming deluge of elite pitching. 

Well, durability is an important pitcher attribute as well.  That’s why this Jedixson Paez pick is interesting.  He doesn’t walk anyone and his best pitch is a changeup.  I read that he usually sits at 91/92 but has gotten it up to 94.  Sounds like he could have a better fastball than Drew Thorpe if the Sox can squeeze a bit more out of it, but it shouldn’t be at the risk of messing up his arm.

Edited 10 hours ago by WhiteSox2023

[Bob Sacamano]

42 minutes ago, WestEddy said:

But then how embarrassing is it that the Twins' 41st best player was taken by the Tigers and started in CF and was 4th best on the team in bWAR? But while Tiger fans are running away and hiding for the shame, the Brewers just signed him to a major league contract. How embarrassing is it that the Brewers are guaranteeing a 26-man spot to a guy who was only another team's 41st best player, and then he wasn't even good enough for the team who picked him to keep him? 

Maybe the moral is that any sports fans who give a s%*# about what other people should be embarrassed about...should be embarrassed. 

 

 

To be fair, it is embarrassing. Baddoo is terrible.

[WhiteSox2023]

6 minutes ago, Bob Sacamano said:

To be fair, it is embarrassing. Baddoo is terrible.

The Brewers also signed Greg Jones to a minor league deal.  Almost as bad.  🤣

[WestEddy]

1 minute ago, WhiteSox2023 said:

The Brewers also signed Greg Jones to a minor league deal.  Almost as bad.  🤣

Brewers trying to get their mojo back by copying the team who's copying them. 

[Autumn Dreamin]

Not sure I understand why it should be sad or embarrassing that the Sox found value in their Rule 5 guys last year, when finding value that other teams didn't see or couldn't realize is exactly what they should be doing with their timeline and plethora of available innings/ABs?

Basically every avenue of player acquisition other than drafting 1.1 involves your organization committing an amount of roster space, development time, draft position, money, etc. to a player that other orgs didn't think was worth it at the time. 

Is getting a surprise hit in the mid rounds of the draft "sad" because a player other teams passed on ended up outplaying existing options in your system? Or is it possible that being correctly ahead of the "market" on a player is a good thing actually? Maybe even key for a team in this position?

Like sure, I guess in a dream world the Sox just have a rotation of 5 WAR aces with no room for Smith. In a world where the Sox aren't losing 100, he's not their "ace" or all star. But it's odd to talk like he's a bottom 5 SP who would never crack a single other MLB rotation. He was an above replacement level player on a team in dire need of them, so I don't get why we should be using the Brewers' particular 40 man machinations as a demerit against his production.

Almost every piece of Rule 5 coverage leading into yesterday hat tipped the Sox for finding two objectively solid pieces last year, but on here nabbing a fine starter for $100k and a versatile reliever for free is a shame for the Sox because...they should have already had better players? Because another team was willing to gamble on leaving them available in a Rule 5 draft where few players get taken and even fewer stick?

Improve the roster but also never acquire talent that other teams didn't see first is an awfully tough needle to thread.

[Chicago White Sox]

2 hours ago, WhiteSox2023 said:

Well, I never used the word “embarrassing”.  I said that it is “sad” that the Sox didn’t already have similar starting pitching talent as Smith.  That is an indictment of the Sox, not the Twins, Tigers, or Brewers.

I mean, they had a SP in Crochet that is leagues better than Smith, but we are rebuilding and traded him in the offseason to add multiple positional pieces.  We also had three major league ready SP’s go down with TJS in spring training, which is super fluky and certainly hurt our SP depth to start the season.

[southsider2k5]

I think the point the OP was getting at is that out our 40 current man roster, 4 of them weren't good enough for the other teams 40 man rosters, including the fact that Smith and Vasil both were still good enough to make it through a full season with the White Sox. We couldn't even be bothered to protect a ton of eligible players, and only one of them was good enough to attract the attention of another franchise during the same time period.

For my sense the "embarrassment" wouldn't be with finding other better players from other rosters, it is that the talent gap on the roster is so wide, that we keep finding the sheer amount of players who weren't good enough to be on other rosters, but are still able to replace much worse players on the Sox roster, and vastly improve it.  That just screams lack of depth on our 40, at least to me.  The historic returns on the Rule 5 are so minimal. 

[Chicago White Sox]

14 minutes ago, Autumn Dreamin said:

Not sure I understand why it should be sad or embarrassing that the Sox found value in their Rule 5 guys last year, when finding value that other teams didn't see or couldn't realize is exactly what they should be doing with their timeline and plethora of available innings/ABs?

Basically every avenue of player acquisition other than drafting 1.1 involves your organization committing an amount of roster space, development time, draft position, money, etc. to a player that other orgs didn't think was worth it at the time. 

Is getting a surprise hit in the mid rounds of the draft "sad" because a player other teams passed on ended up outplaying existing options in your system? Or is it possible that being correctly ahead of the "market" on a player is a good thing actually? Maybe even key for a team in this position?

Like sure, I guess in a dream world the Sox just have a rotation of 5 WAR aces with no room for Smith. In a world where the Sox aren't losing 100, he's not their "ace" or all star. But it's odd to talk like he's a bottom 5 SP who would never crack a single other MLB rotation. He was an above replacement level player on a team in dire need of them, so I don't get why we should be using the Brewers' particular 40 man machinations as a demerit against his production.

Almost every piece of Rule 5 coverage leading into yesterday hat tipped the Sox for finding two objectively solid pieces last year, but on here nabbing a fine starter for $100k and a versatile reliever for free is a shame for the Sox because...they should have already had better players? Because another team was willing to gamble on leaving them available in a Rule 5 draft where few players get taken and even fewer stick?

Improve the roster but also never acquire talent that other teams didn't see first is an awfully tough needle to thread.

Unfortunately many here refuse to accept that Getz has made some structural improvements to the organization and that the fruits of those labors will not be seen overnight.  As such, it’s easy to blame Getz for a lot of the shortcomings he inherited with the major league roster and focus on the bad.  And don’t get me wrong, he’s certainly partly to blame for our PD failures but he also didn’t get to set the budgets and make the investments in data & technology needed to modernize his function.  The reality is Smith & Vasil should be viewed as huge wins and early signs that the foundational work is starting to pay off.

[WhiteSox2023]

25 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

I mean, they had a SP in Crochet that is leagues better than Smith, but we are rebuilding and traded him in the offseason to add multiple positional pieces.  We also had three major league ready SP’s go down with TJS in spring training, which is super fluky and certainly hurt our SP depth to start the season.

We all knew Crochet was going to be traded and they had no intention of keeping him, so I don’t see him counting.  Also, durability is a thing.  I realize pitchers get hurt a lot but the Sox had so many pitcher injuries and surgeries that you have to wonder if it was truly fluky.

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

3 hours ago, Nardiwashere said:

What am I missing?  Soxtalk is now mad at the team because Shane Smith was good?  

Mad? It's hilarious. I like Shane Smith, but there's no situation where an entire organization should be incapable of turning out a player better than a player another team let go of for free.

[WestEddy]

16 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

I think the point the OP was getting at is that out our 40 current man roster, 4 of them weren't good enough for the other teams 40 man rosters, including the fact that Smith and Vasil both were still good enough to make it through a full season with the White Sox. We couldn't even be bothered to protect a ton of eligible players, and only one of them was good enough to attract the attention of another franchise during the same time period.

For my sense the "embarrassment" wouldn't be with finding other better players from other rosters, it is that the talent gap on the roster is so wide, that we keep finding the sheer amount of players who weren't good enough to be on other rosters, but are still able to replace much worse players on the Sox roster, and vastly improve it.  That just screams lack of depth on our 40, at least to me.  The historic returns on the Rule 5 are so minimal. 

That's not right. Guys like Paez and Alberto were in organizations who probably figured they could be snuck past the Rule 5 because they were still in A-ball. So calling them "not good enough" is silly. Both were ranked prospects. 

I mean, twisting one's self into a pretzel to make arguments about why the team you root for sucks is reason enough to be embarrassed. 

[WestEddy]

3 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Mad? It's hilarious. I like Shane Smith, but there's no situation where an entire organization should be incapable of turning out a player better than a player another team let go of for free.

So now, an All-Star assignment is a full-proof method of judging talent? LOL. 

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

3 hours ago, hogan873 said:

Sure.  But I think if the Brewers knew how Smith would perform they would have protected him.  A more accurate way to look at it would be the #1 starter and all star for the Sox would have been a #3/#4 starter and NOT an all star on about 25 other teams.

To discount the success Smith had just to say how much the Sox suck is not fair to Smith.

Shane Smith, literally, would not have led another pitching staff in baseball in WAR - Only the White Sox. Shane Smith is a nice piece, him leading the team is an obvious indictment on the quality of players you have in your organization. That's the point. No one is mad at Shane.

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

Just now, WestEddy said:

So now, an All-Star assignment is a full-proof method of judging talent? LOL. 

He led the pitching staff in fWAR and was second on the team in fWAR to a guy who wasn't on the team at the All-Star break. You OK?

[almagest]

3 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Mad? It's hilarious. I like Shane Smith, but there's no situation where an entire organization should be incapable of turning out a player better than a player another team let go of for free.

It's good that he wasn't actually the best player on the roster by b or fWAR, then.

[southsider2k5]

5 minutes ago, WestEddy said:

That's not right. Guys like Paez and Alberto were in organizations who probably figured they could be snuck past the Rule 5 because they were still in A-ball. So calling them "not good enough" is silly. Both were ranked prospects. 

I mean, twisting one's self into a pretzel to make arguments about why the team you root for sucks is reason enough to be embarrassed. 

I wish you could do this once without resulting to insults, but here we are.

Quite literally the teams that lost these players didn't think enough of them to put them on to their 40 man rosters.  That is an absolute fact.  No Baghdad Bob needed here.  If they the only reason they didn't get protected is because they thought 29 other teams wouldn't think enough of them to pick them, then yes, they are making a judgement call that they aren't good enough to be rostered over other players they already have on their 40, even with the chance at getting picked.

[WhiteSox2023]

9 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Mad? It's hilarious. I like Shane Smith, but there's no situation where an entire organization should be incapable of turning out a player better than a player another team let go of for free.

Exactly.  The Sox obviously saw something they liked in Smith.  I don’t remember if they tweaked him in any way or helped him add a new pitch once they acquired him, but how could the Sox not be able to churn out a pitcher of equal status as Smith or better with all the chances they have had over the years?  I mean, the fact that their best chance at producing a good starting pitcher for the 2025 season was from the rarity of striking gold in the Rule 5 draft as opposed to numerous drafts and other player acquisition possibilities over recent years?  That’s pretty crazy to think about.

Edited 8 hours ago by WhiteSox2023

[WestEddy]

3 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

He led the pitching staff in fWAR and was second on the team in fWAR to a guy who wasn't on the team at the All-Star break. You OK?

Besides my face hurting from laughing at the supreme effort to turn a scouting and coaching victory into a negative, yeah, I'm fine. 

[Dick Allen]

Building your team through Rule 5 draft picks is a way to always draft in the top 10.  The Sox did great in the rule 5 last year with the pick and the trade.  Expecting anything close to that in the next decade would be ridiculous.

[almagest]

Just now, WhiteSox2023 said:

Exactly.  The Sox obviously saw something they liked in Smith.  I don’t remember if they tweaked him in any way or helped him add a new pitch once they acquired him, but how could the Sox churn out a pitcher of equal status as Smith with all the chances they have had over the years?  I mean, the fact that their best chance at producing a good pitcher for the 2025 season was from the rarity of striking gold in the Rule 5 draft as opposed to numerous drafts and other player acquisition possibilities?  That’s pretty crazy to think about.

Maybe we should give them more than one season to do so? Shane Smith may end up being lightning in a bottle, or he may end up being a consistently solid starting pitcher. Some of the hurt pitchers might come back and be good. Some of the guys on the staff now might end up being good. There's a long way to go with a lot of young players.

Johan Santana was a rule 5 pick by the Twins. I doubt they were too torn up by him being their best pitcher by fWAR in 2002.

[southsider2k5]

1 minute ago, almagest said:

Maybe we should give them more than one season to do so? Shane Smith may end up being lightning in a bottle, or he may end up being a consistently solid starting pitcher. Some of the hurt pitchers might come back and be good. Some of the guys on the staff now might end up being good. There's a long way to go with a lot of young players.

Johan Santana was a rule 5 pick by the Twins. I doubt they were too torn up by him being their best pitcher by fWAR in 2002.

Again, I think this goes back to the OP.  It is so hard to find gold in the Rule 5, that just by the sheer volume of what we have seen the past few years of picks, it is hard to see anything other than a major talent gap in the Sox system vs the rest of baseball.

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

5 minutes ago, WhiteSox2023 said:

Exactly.  The Sox obviously saw something they liked in Smith.  I don’t remember if they tweaked him in any way or helped him add a new pitch once they acquired him, but how could the Sox not be able to churn out a pitcher of equal status as Smith or better with all the chances they have had over the years?  I mean, the fact that their best chance at producing a good starting pitcher for the 2025 season was from the rarity of striking gold in the Rule 5 draft as opposed to numerous drafts and other player acquisition possibilities over recent years?  That’s pretty crazy to think about.

Crazy or hilarious. Depends on how you look at it! 

4 minutes ago, WestEddy said:

Besides my face hurting from laughing at the supreme effort to turn a scouting and coaching victory into a negative, yeah, I'm fine. 

Yes, the Sox are so good at scouting and coaching that they needed another teams castaway to lead them. 

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

3 minutes ago, almagest said:

Maybe we should give them more than one season to do so? Shane Smith may end up being lightning in a bottle, or he may end up being a consistently solid starting pitcher. Some of the hurt pitchers might come back and be good. Some of the guys on the staff now might end up being good. There's a long way to go with a lot of young players.

Johan Santana was a rule 5 pick by the Twins. I doubt they were too torn up by him being their best pitcher by fWAR in 2002.

Johan Santana had a WAR of zero his rookie year, which was 11th on their team. If it was the same as Shane Smith's that year, he'd have been their 4th best pitcher.

You can really tell a Getz apologists by how defensive they get when you make a basic joke about building your team through the Rule 5 draft. 

[Nardiwashere]

21 minutes ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

Mad? It's hilarious. I like Shane Smith, but there's no situation where an entire organization should be incapable of turning out a player better than a player another team let go of for free.

You think Shane Smith is the best player on the Sox?