2025 Rule 5 Thread

[CaliSoxFanViaSWside]

3 hours ago, WhiteSox2023 said:

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.

Here we go again with subtle hints/ insinuations/accusations that somehow somewhere in the coaching structure lies the fault of the injuries. Of course no concrete evidence but hey lets troll the hopeful fans again.

I'm embarassed some of you still call yourself Sox fans. Again this a jab you wont see anywhere else except perhaps a Cubs forum. 

Even now with more posters starting to voice more hopeful opinions we still get the awkward machinations of conspiracy theorists hellbent on promoting the despair/inept narrative. 

[Look at Ray Ray Run]

"Say it's great to have a rule 5 pick leading your team or you're not a Sox fan!"

Edited 23 hours ago by Look at Ray Ray Run

[GreenSox]

10 hours ago, Kyyle23 said:

Why are your recent posts going up like you are writing a ransom note 

I actually have an answer for that.   ts and ys don't work on my personal laptop, so I have to copy and  paste.    I can' decide on which laptop  to buy.  

Edited 21 hours ago by GreenSox

[Chicago White Sox]

Interesting that Paez cracked Longhagen’s Top 100 list prior to the 2025 season but he fell off after a change in release point and injury.

[southsider2k5]

4 hours ago, WestEddy said:

Can you define this scouting term "didn't think enough of them"? It feels like you want to say something else, but you know this phrasing will get more of a reaction.  

Each team picked at least 40 other people to put on their 40 man rosters over the guys who were left unprotected.  I am not sure what is confusing you here.

[southsider2k5]

2 hours ago, Look at Ray Ray Run said:

"Say it's great to have a rule 5 pick leading your team or you're not a Sox fan!"

So much of that open mindedness I keep reading about. 

[caulfield12]

Last year there was a massive debate on Brewers' boards about leaving Smith unprotected.

No such buzz this year.

Petit such a big guy...hard to expect his control to hold up without some massive mechanical adjustments.

And Colorado is death to fly ball pitchers.  We'll see I guess.

[WestEddy]

26 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

Each team picked at least 40 other people to put on their 40 man rosters over the guys who were left unprotected.  I am not sure what is confusing you here.

Your need to reframe a process that all 30 teams participate in every year to pretend that the White Sox ate some other team's excrement in selecting a player in the Rule 5 draft. That confuses me. 

[southsider2k5]

49 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

So much of that open mindedness I keep reading about. 

 

19 minutes ago, WestEddy said:

Your need to reframe a process that all 30 teams participate in every year to pretend that the White Sox ate some other team's excrement in selecting a player in the Rule 5 draft. That confuses me. 

 

[WestEddy]

3 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

 

 

Why is Seal Team Six waking me up on my billionaire's orbit of Earth flight to notify me of this? 

[mac9001]

1 hour ago, Chicago White Sox said:

Interesting that Paez cracked Longhagen’s Top 100 list prior to the 2025 season but he fell off after a change in release point and injury.

You have to figure a prospect who's value is derived almost exclusively based on his command is going to have a very fragile grip on their prospect ranking. You're almost always looking for an excuse to downgrade because they don't have the luxury of having a bad season (or missing it due to injury) and their rankings are based entirely on the performance.

[WhiteSox2023]

5 hours ago, WestEddy said:

Oh stop. Then player development doesn't exist, because the players all had the talent, so the White Sox are exactly even with the rest of the league. 

Okay, let’s get back on topic.  It’s pointless to argue over a scrub organizational catcher with a 0.0 career bWAR as a means to bolster a team’s developmental prowess.

How many other MLB teams’ best starting pitcher performance (2.3 bWAR for Smith) come from a Rule 5 pick in the same year the player was chosen, rather than a starter they already had on their roster?  That’s a crazy statistic.

Edited 18 hours ago by WhiteSox2023

[soxrwhite]

6 hours ago, WhiteSox2023 said:

Okay, let’s get back on topic.  It’s pointless to argue over a scrub organizational catcher with a 0.0 career bWAR as a means to bolster a team’s developmental prowess.

How many other MLB teams’ best starting pitcher performance (2.3 bWAR for Smith) come from a Rule 5 pick in the same year the player was chosen, rather than a starter they already had on their roster?  That’s a crazy statistic.

It seems as some people here think anyone left off the 40 man roster by all the teams must be garbage. Except Pallette who is suddenly a massive loss.

 

 

 

[WhiteSox2023]

5 minutes ago, soxrwhite said:

It seems as some people here think anyone left off the 40 man roster by all the teams must be garbage. Except Pallette who is suddenly a massive loss.

 

 

 

I never once said this.  Obviously that isn’t true since Smith was the Sox best starter.  Read my post again and try to answer the question I posed.

Edited 11 hours ago by WhiteSox2023

[soxrwhite]

50 minutes ago, WhiteSox2023 said:

I never once said this.  Obviously that isn’t true since Smith was the Sox best starter.  Read my post again and try to answer the question I posed.

Yeah I just meant to comment on the topic. I accidently quoted you. My bad.

[Chicago White Sox]

8 hours ago, mac9001 said:

You have to figure a prospect whose value is derived almost exclusively based on his command is going to have a very fragile grip on their prospect ranking. You're almost always looking for an excuse to downgrade because they don't have the luxury of having a bad season (or missing it due to injury) and their rankings are based entirely on the performance.

All this makes sense.  My point was it’s exciting that one of these kids cracked a top 100 list when still in the low minors despite limited velocity.  That doesn’t happen very often, which goes to show how special this control / command and suggests his secondaries are much better than some sites are suggesting.

[WhiteSox2023]

21 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

All this makes sense.  My point was it’s exciting that one of these kids cracked a top 100 list when still in the low minors despite limited velocity.  That doesn’t happen very often, which goes to show how special this control / command and suggests his secondaries are much better than some sites are suggesting.

Yes, he has a good chance of sticking based on his control/command alone and if he continues his minor league history of walking very few.  Hopefully he mixes up his repertoire enough that his low velocity fastball doesn’t get hammered like the little we saw from Thorpe.  Gotta keep that thing away from being a mistake pitch right down the cock of the plate.

I sure wish Getz and team could scout and choose hitters as well as they seem to recently with pitchers.

Edited 10 hours ago by WhiteSox2023

[southsider2k5]

9 hours ago, mac9001 said:

You have to figure a prospect who's value is derived almost exclusively based on his command is going to have a very fragile grip on their prospect ranking. You're almost always looking for an excuse to downgrade because they don't have the luxury of having a bad season (or missing it due to injury) and their rankings are based entirely on the performance.

Not to mention if their stuff slips at all, its over.

[WhiteSox2023]

4 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

Not to mention if their stuff slips at all, its over.

That’s why it was interesting to read that Paez sits at 91/92 normally but has gotten it up to 94.  Maybe the Sox think there’s a little more juice to squeeze?

Edited 10 hours ago by WhiteSox2023

[BamaDoc]

Some of you with more knowledge of the exact rules may be able to help me here.  I have been digging on the rules applying to returning players who were rule 5 selections.  First they go through waivers- any other team can claim and rule 5 stipulations remain.  2) no waiver claim, offered back to original team for 50k.  3) Here is where I am not positive, If the original team takes them back........I think they go on the 40 man roster.   Anyone know for sure?  I do understand if the original team doesn't take them back, they can be put in drafting team's minor league system.  Not sure if the original team can take them back, DFA them (all teams already passed for MLB roster but could claim to 40 man roster and assign to minors) if original team wants to keep them but remove from 40 man.

If the draftee looks decent, I could see original team taking them back and keeping on 40.  If they have not performed well (ex pitcher with only A ball experience ) maybe the original team doesn't want to put on 40 so refuses the return/works trade etc and they remain with drafting club.

[Y2Jimmy0]

Nothing about Shane Smith is a bad thing for the White Sox. It was great scouting and they got lucky. Nobody knew he’d show up with a nasty changeup and increased velocity. Brewers would’ve protected that guy for sure. 

[WestEddy]

22 minutes ago, BamaDoc said:

Some of you with more knowledge of the exact rules may be able to help me here.  I have been digging on the rules applying to returning players who were rule 5 selections.  First they go through waivers- any other team can claim and rule 5 stipulations remain.  2) no waiver claim, offered back to original team for 50k.  3) Here is where I am not positive, If the original team takes them back........I think they go on the 40 man roster.   Anyone know for sure?  I do understand if the original team doesn't take them back, they can be put in drafting team's minor league system.  Not sure if the original team can take them back, DFA them (all teams already passed for MLB roster but could claim to 40 man roster and assign to minors) if original team wants to keep them but remove from 40 man.

If the draftee looks decent, I could see original team taking them back and keeping on 40.  If they have not performed well (ex pitcher with only A ball experience ) maybe the original team doesn't want to put on 40 so refuses the return/works trade etc and they remain with drafting club.

If the player goes through waivers unclaimed and the original team declines, they come off the 40-man. If the original team takes them back, they come off the 40-man. 

Edited 7 hours ago by WestEddy

[mac9001]

I'm sure Paez isn't complaining as he'll be collecting a MLB salary, but his command likely would have brought him to the bigs eventually on an appropriate development timeline. Now we're gonna take a guy from high A ball and likely try to stash him as a innings eating clean up reliever? He's obviously going to start eventually but at this point in his career and given the Sox starting depth (even if it's not quality depth there's real depth there) how likely is he to get any starts? 

I feel like our 2nd R5 pick is likely just waived by end of spring, but I kinda feel for the guy a bit because this probably wasn't the best move for his development. I almost feel they should limit the MLB R5 draft to players in AA/AAA and if a guy below AA is drafted they need to be placed on the 40 man and must be rostered at AAA. The R5 fee should also go up substantially.

[Timmy U]

4 hours ago, mac9001 said:

I'm sure Paez isn't complaining as he'll be collecting a MLB salary, but his command likely would have brought him to the bigs eventually on an appropriate development timeline. Now we're gonna take a guy from high A ball and likely try to stash him as a innings eating clean up reliever? He's obviously going to start eventually but at this point in his career and given the Sox starting depth (even if it's not quality depth there's real depth there) how likely is he to get any starts? 

I feel like our 2nd R5 pick is likely just waived by end of spring, but I kinda feel for the guy a bit because this probably wasn't the best move for his development. I almost feel they should limit the MLB R5 draft to players in AA/AAA and if a guy below AA is drafted they need to be placed on the 40 man and must be rostered at AAA. The R5 fee should also go up substantially.

The guys on the Baseball America podcast were raving about the Sox second pick Alexander Alberto. Said he had the best stuff of anyone chosen. Not much experience, but he throws a 100 mph cutter. So he will at least be interesting in Spting Training.

[almagest]

36 minutes ago, Timmy U said:

The guys on the Baseball America podcast were raving about the Sox second pick Alexander Alberto. Said he had the best stuff of anyone chosen. Not much experience, but he throws a 100 mph cutter. So he will at least be interesting in Spting Training.

As long as he doesn't end up at the center of a gambling scandal like the last 100 mph cutter guy I can think of.