40-man roster and Rule 5 protects

[toonsterwu]

Is there much precedent for guys who have never reached AA getting selected in Rule 5? Intuition tells me that if there is, it's guys with big stuff, and not guys like Rhee who have no bad pitches but no awesome ones(to speak nothing of his injury), and not guys like Antigua who have strong changeups but middling fastballs.

 

Flaherty is the one that I really don't get. They must really not like his defense anywhere but the corner and aren't sold on him improving much at his age. For as much as we lump him together with Lemahieu, I've never paid enough attention to the fact that Flaherty is a full 3 years older.

I thought Rhee had his fastball back into the mid 90s and had a plus change at the end of the year. If what your saying is true then I guess I don't worry so much about him getting picked up.

 

Yup, by season's end he was hitting mid-90's with regularity and had a plus change to go with a decent slider by most accounts. Now, he still sat more 92-93, as it gave him better movement, but he could reach back and gun it. Rhee's the biggest surprise to me ... I think there's a decent chance someone takes a gamble on him. Now, I think the Cubs thinking is that the stuff came late in the year, and not many teams may want to stash a starter like that on the roster, particularly someone that hadn't reached AA yet.

 

Antigua not getting protected doesn't surprise me as much. Short run of positive starts, plus while he has 2 good secondary pitches, it's debatable if he has a plus secondary pitch. Without it, he would really have to excel on command/control to make it as a starter, and a lefty pen arm without a plus secondary pitch is a minor leaguer.

[toonsterwu]

Thinking about this, the random thoughts coming to my mind are

 

1. Theo's first year as GM in Boston also involved heavy investment in Rule 5 picks, 3 in the major league phase.

 

and

 

2. They have a plan for this year that they've put together in the last few days and they believe they can execute it, and furthermore, they believe they can be competitive this year. You don't leave that many spots open on the 40 for just FA's, Doesn't necessarily mean big signings - maybe they have a list of gambles that they are comfortable making and wanted the spots.

 

This is clearly a smart group of people working in the front office, and I find it hard to imagine that, for their previous clubs, they hadn't already come up with a list of potential intriguing Rule 5 targets this off-season. They know they likely won't find starters there, but could find guys to fill roles.

 

3. This does sort of feel like a potential stab to resolve the compensation discussions in some manner.

 

I can't say there isn't a part of me that's mildly disappointed with a few of these decisions (actually, I'm only really disappointed in one and that's Rhee). We were bound to lose some guys this off-season. I count roughly 8 guys of some intrigue (positives/negatives below and possible reason as to why I think they might've been left off/why they might get picked).

 

1. Ryan Flaherty - A potentially valuable utility guy, but the Cubs have one in Jeff Baker and Ryan's not young. Question I have is - are you going to find someone better in Rule 5 to jump him?

2. Dae-Eun Rhee - Can hit mid-90's with a plus change and decent slider as a starter, but can he sit mid-90's out of the pen? Furthermore, is he ready next year?

3. Jeffry Antigua - Lefty with solid stuff, but is there a plus pitch to put in the pen next year?

4. Blake Parker - Wouldn't surprise me if he goes higher than folks think. Dime a dozen middle reliever ... but has good pen stuff to perhaps take a chance on.

5. Jay Jackson - Showed mid-90's velo in short spurts before ... but slider isn't consistent, to say the least.

6. Marcus Hatley - Stuff is too raw ... but power stuff may tempt.

7. Marwin Gonzalez - I get why he's the chic name for a guy that might be picked, but he's not a plus glove, and you've got to buy the bat turning around. I remember when Diory Hernandez was a possible Rule 5 target, and he went unpicked, and he had a better glove.

8. Kyler Burke - Too raw ... but power lefty.

 

To be honest, I'm not too sold that Gonzalez/Burke will gather that much attention. Sending Hatley to AFL may lead to a team pulliing the trigger if a scout saw something, but if that's the case, you tip your cap if he succeeds, and you move on despite all the work the Cubs have put in on Hatley. Same with Parker. I'm not too concerned about losing Antigua for good - I have high doubts he'd make it on the roster the entire year. If he does, I think you swallow hard and just tip your cap again.

 

It also wouldn't surprise me if the Cubs got wind about Rhee being a potential pick and picked him themselves.

 

Edit: In case it wasn't clear (as someone else misunderstood it as well), I meant I wonder if the Cubs might ponder pulling Rhee back with their pick in Rule 5. Admittedly doubtful, and perhaps more wishful thinking on my part, but it has happened before (once or twice, off the top).

[Little Slide Rooter]

 

It also wouldn't surprise me if the Cubs got wind about Rhee being a potential pick and picked him themselves.

 

Edit: In case it wasn't clear (as someone else misunderstood it as well), I meant I wonder if the Cubs might ponder pulling Rhee back with their pick in Rule 5. Admittedly doubtful, and perhaps more wishful thinking on my part, but it has happened before (once or twice, off the top).

 

Can they do that?

 

The thing with Rhee is that while I don't think he has quite what it takes yet to make it through a full season on a big league roster, and it's not as easy to hide a pitcher at the end of your pen as it is to hide a guy like Flaherty on your bench, but there are loopholes if a team is interested enough in keeping a guy as we learned with Donnie Veal. He didn't quite cut it at the big league level but the Pirates liked him enough to keep him around using the DL. Hopefully Rhee ends up much better than Veal and with The Cubs.

[toonsterwu]

You can pick your own guy, but then you'd have to keep them on the roster all year as well. It's admittedly doubtful that they'd take that risk now that they have left him unprotected. More wishful thinking on my part.

[Little Slide Rooter]

You can pick your own guy, but then you'd have to keep them on the roster all year as well. It's admittedly doubtful that they'd take that risk now that they have left him unprotected. More wishful thinking on my part.

 

But what if you don't keep him on the roster? Would it be any different than if you were to DFA him normally? There's no team to return him to if he's your own guy, although it's incredibly likely that someone would scoop him up if they didn't have to worry about a roster spot.

 

Rhee and Antigua are 2 of our top 5-10 pitching prospects and I don't like the idea of leaving them exposed or giving them up as compensation. Flaherty and Jay Jackson would be fine by me.

[toonsterwu]

Don't quote me on rule 5 rules, as I could be way off, but if you have to expose a player to waivers to send them back to the minors, then any team could pluck him up and take control of the Rule 5 rights, right?

 

Anyhow, I think it's probably wishful thinking on my part. The chances of them changing their mind and plucking Rhee back seem slim to none. I like Antigua, but I doubt he sticks for an entire year right now, so I'm not too worried, and if he does, then you move on, I think.

[Little Slide Rooter]

Don't quote me on rule 5 rules, as I could be way off, but if you have to expose a player to waivers to send them back to the minors, then any team could pluck him up and take control of the Rule 5 rights, right?

 

 

I'm thinking it's just like anytime you remove a guy from the 40 man and exposing him to waivers.

[Bruce Miles]

Thinking about this, the random thoughts coming to my mind are

 

1. Theo's first year as GM in Boston also involved heavy investment in Rule 5 picks, 3 in the major league phase.

 

and

 

2. They have a plan for this year that they've put together in the last few days and they believe they can execute it, and furthermore, they believe they can be competitive this year. You don't leave that many spots open on the 40 for just FA's, Doesn't necessarily mean big signings - maybe they have a list of gambles that they are comfortable making and wanted the spots.

 

This is clearly a smart group of people working in the front office, and I find it hard to imagine that, for their previous clubs, they hadn't already come up with a list of potential intriguing Rule 5 targets this off-season. They know they likely won't find starters there, but could find guys to fill roles.

 

3. This does sort of feel like a potential stab to resolve the compensation discussions in some manner.

 

I can't say there isn't a part of me that's mildly disappointed with a few of these decisions (actually, I'm only really disappointed in one and that's Rhee). We were bound to lose some guys this off-season. I count roughly 8 guys of some intrigue (positives/negatives below and possible reason as to why I think they might've been left off/why they might get picked).

 

1. Ryan Flaherty - A potentially valuable utility guy, but the Cubs have one in Jeff Baker and Ryan's not young. Question I have is - are you going to find someone better in Rule 5 to jump him?

2. Dae-Eun Rhee - Can hit mid-90's with a plus change and decent slider as a starter, but can he sit mid-90's out of the pen? Furthermore, is he ready next year?

3. Jeffry Antigua - Lefty with solid stuff, but is there a plus pitch to put in the pen next year?

4. Blake Parker - Wouldn't surprise me if he goes higher than folks think. Dime a dozen middle reliever ... but has good pen stuff to perhaps take a chance on.

5. Jay Jackson - Showed mid-90's velo in short spurts before ... but slider isn't consistent, to say the least.

6. Marcus Hatley - Stuff is too raw ... but power stuff may tempt.

7. Marwin Gonzalez - I get why he's the chic name for a guy that might be picked, but he's not a plus glove, and you've got to buy the bat turning around. I remember when Diory Hernandez was a possible Rule 5 target, and he went unpicked, and he had a better glove.

8. Kyler Burke - Too raw ... but power lefty.

 

To be honest, I'm not too sold that Gonzalez/Burke will gather that much attention. Sending Hatley to AFL may lead to a team pulliing the trigger if a scout saw something, but if that's the case, you tip your cap if he succeeds, and you move on despite all the work the Cubs have put in on Hatley. Same with Parker. I'm not too concerned about losing Antigua for good - I have high doubts he'd make it on the roster the entire year. If he does, I think you swallow hard and just tip your cap again.

 

It also wouldn't surprise me if the Cubs got wind about Rhee being a potential pick and picked him themselves.

 

Edit: In case it wasn't clear (as someone else misunderstood it as well), I meant I wonder if the Cubs might ponder pulling Rhee back with their pick in Rule 5. Admittedly doubtful, and perhaps more wishful thinking on my part, but it has happened before (once or twice, off the top).

 

 

Toons pretty much sums it up as he usually does. I haven't had a whole lot of time to look at this but the Cubs aren't worried about losing Flaherty. Talking to one person, it was pointed out that utility guys who can't play shortstop usually don't stick with big league clubs taking them in the Rule 5. I remember last year people getting all worried about the Cubs losing Marquez Smith in the Rule 5. He wasn't taken. On Rhee, the Cubs apparently don't feel he can help them immediately, so they didn't want to give him a 40-man spot. They would have liked to see him pitch more innings since the surgery, but that is what it is. Bottom line is they could lose him, but they also lost Andy Sisco and Donnie Veal.

[Little Slide Rooter]

Thinking about this, the random thoughts coming to my mind are

 

1. Theo's first year as GM in Boston also involved heavy investment in Rule 5 picks, 3 in the major league phase.

 

and

 

2. They have a plan for this year that they've put together in the last few days and they believe they can execute it, and furthermore, they believe they can be competitive this year. You don't leave that many spots open on the 40 for just FA's, Doesn't necessarily mean big signings - maybe they have a list of gambles that they are comfortable making and wanted the spots.

 

This is clearly a smart group of people working in the front office, and I find it hard to imagine that, for their previous clubs, they hadn't already come up with a list of potential intriguing Rule 5 targets this off-season. They know they likely won't find starters there, but could find guys to fill roles.

 

3. This does sort of feel like a potential stab to resolve the compensation discussions in some manner.

 

I can't say there isn't a part of me that's mildly disappointed with a few of these decisions (actually, I'm only really disappointed in one and that's Rhee). We were bound to lose some guys this off-season. I count roughly 8 guys of some intrigue (positives/negatives below and possible reason as to why I think they might've been left off/why they might get picked).

 

1. Ryan Flaherty - A potentially valuable utility guy, but the Cubs have one in Jeff Baker and Ryan's not young. Question I have is - are you going to find someone better in Rule 5 to jump him?

2. Dae-Eun Rhee - Can hit mid-90's with a plus change and decent slider as a starter, but can he sit mid-90's out of the pen? Furthermore, is he ready next year?

3. Jeffry Antigua - Lefty with solid stuff, but is there a plus pitch to put in the pen next year?

4. Blake Parker - Wouldn't surprise me if he goes higher than folks think. Dime a dozen middle reliever ... but has good pen stuff to perhaps take a chance on.

5. Jay Jackson - Showed mid-90's velo in short spurts before ... but slider isn't consistent, to say the least.

6. Marcus Hatley - Stuff is too raw ... but power stuff may tempt.

7. Marwin Gonzalez - I get why he's the chic name for a guy that might be picked, but he's not a plus glove, and you've got to buy the bat turning around. I remember when Diory Hernandez was a possible Rule 5 target, and he went unpicked, and he had a better glove.

8. Kyler Burke - Too raw ... but power lefty.

 

To be honest, I'm not too sold that Gonzalez/Burke will gather that much attention. Sending Hatley to AFL may lead to a team pulliing the trigger if a scout saw something, but if that's the case, you tip your cap if he succeeds, and you move on despite all the work the Cubs have put in on Hatley. Same with Parker. I'm not too concerned about losing Antigua for good - I have high doubts he'd make it on the roster the entire year. If he does, I think you swallow hard and just tip your cap again.

 

It also wouldn't surprise me if the Cubs got wind about Rhee being a potential pick and picked him themselves.

 

Edit: In case it wasn't clear (as someone else misunderstood it as well), I meant I wonder if the Cubs might ponder pulling Rhee back with their pick in Rule 5. Admittedly doubtful, and perhaps more wishful thinking on my part, but it has happened before (once or twice, off the top).

 

 

Toons pretty much sums it up as he usually does. I haven't had a whole lot of time to look at this but the Cubs aren't worried about losing Flaherty. Talking to one person, it was pointed out that utility guys who can't play shortstop usually don't stick with big league clubs taking them in the Rule 5. I remember last year people getting all worried about the Cubs losing Marquez Smith in the Rule 5. He wasn't taken. On Rhee, the Cubs apparently don't feel he can help them immediately, so they didn't want to give him a 40-man spot. They would have liked to see him pitch more innings since the surgery, but that is what it is. Bottom line is they could lose him, but they also lost Andy Sisco and Donnie Veal.

 

I don't remember anyone being particularly worried about losing Marquez, but I remember thinking someone would take him.

 

As for Rhee, yeah I don't think he's ready to help immediately, but he has a high enough ceiling that I'd prefer not risk losing him. Of the 3 guys they added to the roster, the only one who might be able to help immeidately is Beliveau so I don't think that's what it was about. Lake, Szczur, and Vitters are higher up on the prospect latter, but Rhee's surely top 15 and could be higher if he build on his 2011 2nd half.

[Bruce Miles]

Thinking about this, the random thoughts coming to my mind are

 

1. Theo's first year as GM in Boston also involved heavy investment in Rule 5 picks, 3 in the major league phase.

 

and

 

2. They have a plan for this year that they've put together in the last few days and they believe they can execute it, and furthermore, they believe they can be competitive this year. You don't leave that many spots open on the 40 for just FA's, Doesn't necessarily mean big signings - maybe they have a list of gambles that they are comfortable making and wanted the spots.

 

This is clearly a smart group of people working in the front office, and I find it hard to imagine that, for their previous clubs, they hadn't already come up with a list of potential intriguing Rule 5 targets this off-season. They know they likely won't find starters there, but could find guys to fill roles.

 

3. This does sort of feel like a potential stab to resolve the compensation discussions in some manner.

 

I can't say there isn't a part of me that's mildly disappointed with a few of these decisions (actually, I'm only really disappointed in one and that's Rhee). We were bound to lose some guys this off-season. I count roughly 8 guys of some intrigue (positives/negatives below and possible reason as to why I think they might've been left off/why they might get picked).

 

1. Ryan Flaherty - A potentially valuable utility guy, but the Cubs have one in Jeff Baker and Ryan's not young. Question I have is - are you going to find someone better in Rule 5 to jump him?

2. Dae-Eun Rhee - Can hit mid-90's with a plus change and decent slider as a starter, but can he sit mid-90's out of the pen? Furthermore, is he ready next year?

3. Jeffry Antigua - Lefty with solid stuff, but is there a plus pitch to put in the pen next year?

4. Blake Parker - Wouldn't surprise me if he goes higher than folks think. Dime a dozen middle reliever ... but has good pen stuff to perhaps take a chance on.

5. Jay Jackson - Showed mid-90's velo in short spurts before ... but slider isn't consistent, to say the least.

6. Marcus Hatley - Stuff is too raw ... but power stuff may tempt.

7. Marwin Gonzalez - I get why he's the chic name for a guy that might be picked, but he's not a plus glove, and you've got to buy the bat turning around. I remember when Diory Hernandez was a possible Rule 5 target, and he went unpicked, and he had a better glove.

8. Kyler Burke - Too raw ... but power lefty.

 

To be honest, I'm not too sold that Gonzalez/Burke will gather that much attention. Sending Hatley to AFL may lead to a team pulliing the trigger if a scout saw something, but if that's the case, you tip your cap if he succeeds, and you move on despite all the work the Cubs have put in on Hatley. Same with Parker. I'm not too concerned about losing Antigua for good - I have high doubts he'd make it on the roster the entire year. If he does, I think you swallow hard and just tip your cap again.

 

It also wouldn't surprise me if the Cubs got wind about Rhee being a potential pick and picked him themselves.

 

Edit: In case it wasn't clear (as someone else misunderstood it as well), I meant I wonder if the Cubs might ponder pulling Rhee back with their pick in Rule 5. Admittedly doubtful, and perhaps more wishful thinking on my part, but it has happened before (once or twice, off the top).

 

 

Toons pretty much sums it up as he usually does. I haven't had a whole lot of time to look at this but the Cubs aren't worried about losing Flaherty. Talking to one person, it was pointed out that utility guys who can't play shortstop usually don't stick with big league clubs taking them in the Rule 5. I remember last year people getting all worried about the Cubs losing Marquez Smith in the Rule 5. He wasn't taken. On Rhee, the Cubs apparently don't feel he can help them immediately, so they didn't want to give him a 40-man spot. They would have liked to see him pitch more innings since the surgery, but that is what it is. Bottom line is they could lose him, but they also lost Andy Sisco and Donnie Veal.

 

I don't remember anyone being particularly worried about losing Marquez, but I remember thinking someone would take him.

 

As for Rhee, yeah I don't think he's ready to help immediately, but he has a high enough ceiling that I'd prefer not risk losing him. Of the 3 guys they added to the roster, the only one who might be able to help immeidately is Beliveau so I don't think that's what it was about. Lake, Szczur, and Vitters are higher up on the prospect latter, but Rhee's surely top 15 and could be higher if he build on his 2011 2nd half.

 

And with Szczur, they were forced to add him after they re-did his contract and signed him toa new one so that he would forgo football.

[Guest]

btw - Great to have you out from behind the paywall, Bruce. :)

[CUBZ99]

Any site or articles with a breakdown of Rule 5 prospects that other teams left exposed?

[Guest]

Any site or articles with a breakdown of Rule 5 prospects that other teams left exposed?

 

BA will have a preview the day before.

[davell]

Toonster started a thread over on minorleagueball asking guys who were left unprotected from their teams. Right now, I'd say probably half the teams have answered. The biggest names I've heard mentioned so far are Nick Barnese from Tampa, Jordan Danks from the WS, David Bromberg and Angel Morales from the Twins, Trevor Reckling from Anaheim, David Pham from the Cards, Jonathan Galvez from the Pads, Andrew Lambo from Pittsburgh, and Denny Almonte and Greg Halman Jr from Seattle. Out of these guys, I really, really hope we take a flyer on Barnese. On another note, last year there were 19 picks made, but while I thought there was a limit as to how many guys a team can lose, evidently there is not. One year the Yanks lost 4 guys.

[Little Slide Rooter]

One thing that surprises me a bit: looking at guys like Flaherty, Jackson, and Gonzalez who still have plenty of potential but are left exposed to to roster crunches is that I'm sure every team has their guys like that who they'd like to keep but do not want to roster so why not make some trades before the Rule 5 draft rather than risk losing them? Say a team is in need of a utility guy with a decent bat, maybe they have a decent starter whose unprotected and swap them.

[wvcbxl]

Say a team is in need of a utility guy with a decent bat, maybe they have a decent starter whose unprotected and swap them.

 

In that case, wouldn't both teams need to protect an extra player?

[Little Slide Rooter]

Say a team is in need of a utility guy with a decent bat, maybe they have a decent starter whose unprotected and swap them.

 

In that case, wouldn't both teams need to protect an extra player?

 

Yeah, but if player B were filling more of a need than player A than it would be worth their while.

[Redfoot]

I read 2 different articles today that said the Yankees and Braves have interest in Flaherty and the Yankees article said they should trade up to make sure they get him. I didn't realize there is this much interest in Flaherty and it begs the question, why couldn't the Cubs trade him and get some value?

[JeffH]

I read 2 different articles today that said the Yankees and Braves have interest in Flaherty and the Yankees article said they should trade up to make sure they get him. I didn't realize there is this much interest in Flaherty and it begs the question, why couldn't the Cubs trade him and get some value?

 

Because no team is going to trade for him between now and the Rule 5 draft since they'd be at risk of losing him just like we are.

[Redfoot]

They wouldn't lose him if they put him on the 40 man roster which they will have to do if they select him in the rule 5 draft. Maybe it's because of the front office uncertainty and the new regime didn't have enough time to make a move but it seems like a missed opportunity.

[Little Slide Rooter]

With the draft 3 days away, im gojng to go ahead and say that Flaherty, Jackson, and Marwin are all picked and Rhee, Suarez, and Antigua are used as compensation for Theo and Hoyer.

[JeffH]

They wouldn't lose him if they put him on the 40 man roster which they will have to do if they select him in the rule 5 draft. Maybe it's because of the front office uncertainty and the new regime didn't have enough time to make a move but it seems like a missed opportunity.

 

They're prohibited from putting him on the 40-man roster.

[Redfoot]

Well yeah they can't put him on now but they could have a few weeks ago if they would have anticpated there would be interest in him. Again I know they didn't have a lot of time to properly evaluate everyone but it would be a shame to lose Flaherty for nothing.

[Little Slide Rooter]

I did a bit of research on players from other teams elgible for the Rule 5, and there doesnt seem to be much to get excited about, but 1 interesting option is Yankees pitching prospect Pat Venditte. He's had a very solid minor league career, but the interesting thing about him is that hes professional baseballs only "switch pitcher", and only the 2nd in modern day baseball, he first being Greg Harris who pitched from 1981-1995, and he was more a righty who threw with left arm on a few occasions. I remember hearing about him a few years ago when he first came up.

[Redfoot]

Another guy I read about is LHP Phillippe Valiquette (24) from the Mariners. He missed all of last season with an elbow injury and when he has pitched he's not very good BUT he has a 99 mph fastball. Despite the warts a lefty with a 99 mph heater should be enough to make him the first player chosen in the rule 5 draft.