Rule 5 eligibles after the 2005 season

[craig]

I definitely wouldn't bother protecting Billy Petrick as he comes back from his labrum surgery. I wouldn't protect Hagerty or Blasko. I definitely would protect Marmol, Marshall, Nolasco, Pie and Sing this offseason, haven't thought much about Craig but he'd come after those first 5.

 

Agree that Marmol, Marshall, Nolasco, and Pie are in... *if* Marshall's arm is expected to be healthy. If ITI is wrong and he needs shoulder surgery or something, different story. Sing maybe, although I don't think it would be the end of the world to expose him, and I'm not sure how much the Cubs like him or how they see him contributing as a big-leaguer. When a guy is hitting 6th for the home stretch, when offense is his strength, I wonder how much they really like him?

 

Won't be much trouble fitting those first 4 on. What happens with Sing, Ryu or Brownlie will depend on some scouting stuff (if Ryu was regularly throwing in the 89-93 range, and touching 95 on occassion; he's on. If he was mostly 88-90, less clear. If Brownlie was getting into the 92's more regularly late in the season, and if they still think that may become more consistent in future, he could make it. After the Sisco thing, they'd look pretty sillly if they let Brownlie go, then he showed up throwing 92-94 next spring and looked really solid...)

 

I don't think Craig has any shot whatsoever.

 

Will be some issue with who to deroster. Cubs have tended to be pretty slow to deroster people. Lewis seems like the only no-brainer. Leiecester obvioius candidate. Koronka and Rohlicek are good suggestions, but the Cubs have an undying love for lefties, so they may see things differently. Other possibilities, IMO, could be Fontenot (hasn't been improving, no power, not notable defensively, pretty expendable...); Soto (he'll stay, just to have a catcher, but he's obviously not close to being an asset major-leaguer); Aardsma (seems pretty limited). Obviously Mitre, Welle, Leiecester are all out of options, so two or all three of those will be gone by opening day.

[CubinNY]

Aardsma (seems pretty limited).

 

I thought Aardsma was supposed to be prjected as a quality BP arm. I'm I wrong?

[goonys evil twin]

Aardsma (seems pretty limited).

 

I thought Aardsma was supposed to be prjected as a quality BP arm. I'm I wrong?

 

That was the story at the time of the trade, however, his numbers in West Tenn did not impress me:

 

33 G

50.6 IP

43 K

32 BB

.259 AVG against

3.91 ERA

 

Not a dominant K rate, awful walk rate.

[craig]

Aardsma (seems pretty limited).

 

I thought Aardsma was supposed to be prjected as a quality BP arm. I'm I wrong?

 

Back a few years Aardsma was discussed as having a big-time fastball. I get the impression from his work at WTenn that his fastball is unexceptional, both in terms of velocity, movement, and command. And that his breaking stuff isn't above average, in terms of movement and command. Seems like fairly average fastball with fairly average slider and somewhat below-average control. Guys can improve, and I hope he does; but at present he looks pretty average and somewhat limited to me.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Other possibilities, IMO, could be Fontenot (hasn't been improving, no power, not notable defensively, pretty expendable...)

 

I think Fontenot should be on the MLB bench next year. The guy's got an 800+ OPS as a second baseman, and a .158 IsoP, which isn't bad at all for an infielder. I really haven't heard anything either way defensively, other than that he plays 2B and 3B. Plus he takes a ton of walks and his OPS is more OBP driven than most. I think he's pretty valuable all in all, and will be very upset if he gets removed.

[burnt out cubbie fan]

Aardsma (seems pretty limited).

 

I thought Aardsma was supposed to be prjected as a quality BP arm. I'm I wrong?

 

That was the story at the time of the trade, however, his numbers in West Tenn did not impress me:

 

33 G

50.6 IP

43 K

32 BB

.259 AVG against

3.91 ERA

 

Not a dominant K rate, awful walk rate.

His numbers were much, much better than that but he has some pretty bad outtings in the last month to month and a half of the season.

Edited September 20, 2005 by burnt out cubbie fan

[brinoch]

I definitely wouldn't bother protecting Billy Petrick as he comes back from his labrum surgery. I wouldn't protect Hagerty or Blasko. I definitely would protect Marmol, Marshall, Nolasco, Pie and Sing this offseason, haven't thought much about Craig but he'd come after those first 5.

 

Forgot about Petrick's injury... no need to put him on there, then. Upon reflection, it makes sense to not protect him. Hagerty, as well, I might protect, I might not. It depends on his injury. In terms of the bullpen, I really think we need to cut it down to 6 pitchers next year and look for something like:

 

1. BJ Ryan

2. Ryan Dempster

3. Will Ohman

4. Mike Wuertz

5. Glendon Rusch

6. Roberto Novoa

 

Admittedly, this is dropping/trading Wellemeyer, Leicester and Mitre since they are out of options. But, with Prior, Zambrano, Maddux, and Wood presumably in the picture as well as Rusch, Williams, Hill, and Mitre in competition for the 5th spot, I can't see how Sergio makes the cut unless Williams and Hill are traded.

 

I could see Mitre and Williams traded in some form of a package to someone like Texas, Washington or Tampa for an OF like Mench, Huff or Wilkerson.

[burnt out cubbie fan]

I'm not a fan of having Novoa in the bullpen next year...

[CaliforniaRaisin]

Aardsma (seems pretty limited).

 

I thought Aardsma was supposed to be prjected as a quality BP arm. I'm I wrong?

 

Back a few years Aardsma was discussed as having a big-time fastball. I get the impression from his work at WTenn that his fastball is unexceptional, both in terms of velocity, movement, and command. And that his breaking stuff isn't above average, in terms of movement and command. Seems like fairly average fastball with fairly average slider and somewhat below-average control. Guys can improve, and I hope he does; but at present he looks pretty average and somewhat limited to me.

 

He's been pumping them up in around 95, so the fastball velocity is there. Not sure about his offspeed stuff at all. Burnt has it right, he really fell apart with some bad outings in the regular season in August and September, he was doing much better when he first got to the Jaxx.

 

Forgot about Petrick's injury... no need to put him on there, then. Upon reflection, it makes sense to not protect him. Hagerty, as well, I might protect, I might not. It depends on his injury.

 

I see no reason to protect Luke at all. Take a look at his stats at Boise (lowlights include a 30-4 BB-K ratio and a 31.05 ERA). Either he's still bothered by injuries to do that bad at short-season A-ball or he has completely lost it.

 

Craig, I'd definitely protect Sing. If the Cubs don't protect him, another team could easily take him and try to start him in the OF.

 

He batted everywhere from 3 to 6 for the Jaxx last season, when he started to slump in early August he was dropped to the 6-spot. When he got back on track, he remained in that spot, it's not like he was a 6-hitter all season.

[biittner77]

I wonder if other teams would overlook Marmol due to his lack of pitching experience.

[don_kessinger_was_good]

I've made the point before that recent history suggests the best strategy for Rule 5 drafts is to take a chance on a high-ceiling pitcher, but take a pass on a possibly high ceiling positional player (unless VERY close to the bigs). Rule 5 claims that have stuck seem to bear that strategy out.

 

So if I'm Jim Hendry/Oneri Fleita, my strategy is to protect my pitchers that might be able to stick, and take a chance with the positional guys, leaving them unprotected. Pie and Sing would be my only two exceptions.

 

So in updating the list, I would protect: Guzman, Nolasco, Ryu, Pinto, Marshall, Marmol, Aardsma and, Pie and Sing.

 

I leave off pitchers coming off serious injuries like Blasko, Hagerty (who might be finished) and Petrick. I leave off pitchers that show no sign of making serious progress to the bigs, like Brownlie, Mitre, Wellemeyer and Koronka. Dopirak and Lewis played themselves off the list; none of the utility players need be on the list (Theriot, Fontenot, Greenberg, Soto, McClain). Guys like Craig and Scott Moore and Jon Connolly are interesting, but just too marginal of a prospect to merit protection.

 

Of my list, Hendry would be insane not to protect Guzman, Nolasco, Pinto, Marmol or Pie, and I don't think he's insane. :-) So the interesting thing to observe will be what he and the organization think about Ryu, Marshall, Aardsma and Sing. I hope the brass thinks they're valuable, because all of them look like they have a major league future to me. Having said that, if push came to shove, Aardsma and Sing would be the first two I threw overboard.

[Tim]

Chris Shelton begs to differ with your argument.

[biittner77]

In general terms, I'd say AL teams could easily afford to carry a position player that didn't look to play much, especially if he was good defensively or had speed.

 

Bacon seems like he could be easily hidden on a roster. The question is whether he's worth the risk, upside wise.

[wvcbxl]

Can somebody refresh my memory as to what obligations a team has that picks up a guy off waivers during the derostering process?

It means he doesn't have to be on the 25 man roster all season, but what else?

[NCCubFan]

Can somebody refresh my memory as to what obligations a team has that picks up a guy off waivers during the derostering process?

It means he doesn't have to be on the 25 man roster all season, but what else?

All that I know of is that if the player is under contract, the claiming team is responsible for all of the remaining salary. There may be more than that.

 

Where's Mark Peel when we need him? :(

[biittner77]

Of my list, Hendry would be insane not to protect Guzman, Nolasco, Pinto, Marmol or Pie, and I don't think he's insane. :-) So the interesting thing to observe will be what he and the organization think about Ryu, Marshall, Aardsma and Sing. I hope the brass thinks they're valuable, because all of them look like they have a major league future to me. Having said that, if push came to shove, Aardsma and Sing would be the first two I threw overboard.

 

The AFL is a small sample but the results tend to support your instinct here. =D>

 

It seems like Leicester is expendable. He could perhaps clear waivers. Wellemeyer and Mitre won't and I expect to see one or both traded in the next couple days. Not claiming any inside info but Hendry can't sit on these guys until the winter meetings. The only problem is that the GM meetings don't usually end with many significant trades.

 

Do the Orioles still owe the Cubs compensation for what his names retirement from the Sosa trade? Perhaps Wellemeyer for Gibbons and they call it even.

[jaxxradio]

Here is the rule on the Rule 5 draft.. After a player has been in the minors for three seasons (four seasons for those who were eighteen years old or younger on June 5th preceding the signing of their first contract), they must be placed on the forty man roster or offered in the Rule 5 draft.

 

It'll be interesting to see who the Cubs protect. I wouldn't be a bit surprised if they leave Sing off the 40-man roster and expose him to the draft.

[Radar3454]

When is the rule 5 draft this year?

[Radar3454]

found the answer - 120805

 

http://mlb.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/mlb/schedule/important_dates.jsp

[WrigleyField 22]

Being that I already gave up on this year I'm curious about next years rule 5...

 

Based on my limited knowledge, I think the following players might be first time eligible:

Patterson

Johnson

Harvey

Reed

Gallagher?

Fuld

I'm i correct?

Any other noticables?

The possibility of losing Gallagher scares me the most.

[craig]

None of Johnson, Fuld, Patterson, Gallagher, or Reed will be eligible. Grant/Eric/Fuld will need to have three seasons, but will have only two. Gallagher and Reed would need to have played in 4 seasons, but will have only three.

 

Basically the new American eligibles will be college players who both signed and played already in 2004 from the Johnson draft (Shaver, Layden), and HS players from the Harvey draft (Harvey, Darrin Downs, and Matt Weber).

 

Basically Harvey is the only drafted player who will be eligible for the first time and will demand protection. (Unless Layden goes nuts this year...)

 

Any other guys demanding protection will be from guys who are either:

- first-time Latin eligibles (I'm unaware of of anybody very interesting who qualifies)

- trade pickups who will be newly eligible (NATE SPEARS and Justin Berg)

- guys who have been eligible before but weren't valued enough to protect (or to be taken). Maybe Mateo if returned, Randy Wells, Sing, Richie, Fox, Petrick, Brownlie, Blasko, Connolly, Greenberg might emerge? But unless Blasko or Petrick show up healthy and throwing 95, I don't expect any of these guys are real excitining guys to worry much about losing. It appears there will be amost zero pressure on the 40-man roster next winter.