JeffH

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.

Let's not forget that this is the same organization that erected a statue to Ernie Banks and left the apostrophe out of "Let's Play Two".

Yes.

http://www.purplerow.com/2009/3/26/809925/mlb-transactions-part-seve http://www.bizofbaseball.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=661:rule-5-draft&catid=44:business-of-baseball-glossary&Itemid=75 These are old, but that particular part of the rules hasn't changed.

Jackson, like Rhee and Antigua are virtually untradeable before the Rule 5 but otherwise it would be a good deal. I wonder if they'd consider Casey Coleman or Alberto Cabrera. McNutts out of the question and I'd prefer not move Struck for him. I don't think any of the Rule 5 guys are untradeable prior to the draft. If you select a Rule 5 guy in the draft, you have to save a 40 man roster spot for him and you have to keep him on the 25 man roster all year. However, if you trade for him prior to the draft, you can keep him in the minors, let him develop some more, and have complete control over him. There's a lot of value there. That's what I originally thought, but in another thread somebody said that if a Rule 5 eligible player is traded prior to the draft, the same rules apply and you can't add anyone else to the 40 man before then even if they are traded. Unless I misunderstood. That was me. If teams could do that, it would completely defeat the purpose of the Rule 5 draft. The Rule 5 draft is held each December at the Winter Meetings, and it consists of a Major League portion and a minor league portion. By November 20, each club must set its 40-man roster and submit reserve lists for all major and minor-league levels (See Minor League Rosters). Between November 20 and the Rule 5 draft, a club may add Major League free agents to its 40-man roster but may not add any player from its minor league reserve lists.

Where there's smoke there's fire and it seems Soriano could be on the move so I'd imagine this is the only thing that could prevent a possible deal, and if he does exercise it I'm going to track him down and kick him in the face with a golf shoe. Ndamukong, is that you?

You have to hope that Soriano doesn't decide to exercise his no-trade clause.

"at times" = all the time

Anyone.

The appeal with Hochevar is that he's one of those former golden boys who didn't live up to the hype but a change of scenery and/or coaching could pay off handsomely. Their main need is a front of the rotation pitcher(Garza), not that we dont need one. The difference is, we have the money to go out and get one next year and I doubt they can afford one of the big names if the hit FA. We need a big bat, which hopefully Gordon can be and we get a mid rotation starter in Hochever who could potentially be even better. We'd also get a top pitching prospect in Lamb and they'd fill the outfield hole left by Gordon with Byrd unless they prefer to roll the dice and take Colvin instead. We could also kick them Flaherty, who we likely lose through Rule 5 anyway as a useful supersub with a bit of power. If Flaherty is going to be lost through Rule 5, why would the Royals want him? They may have a space for him that we don't. Flaherty was probably left unprotected because we have enough big league ready utility types on our hands. That's great, but I'm pretty sure they're prohibited from adding anyone else.

The appeal with Hochevar is that he's one of those former golden boys who didn't live up to the hype but a change of scenery and/or coaching could pay off handsomely. Their main need is a front of the rotation pitcher(Garza), not that we dont need one. The difference is, we have the money to go out and get one next year and I doubt they can afford one of the big names if the hit FA. We need a big bat, which hopefully Gordon can be and we get a mid rotation starter in Hochever who could potentially be even better. We'd also get a top pitching prospect in Lamb and they'd fill the outfield hole left by Gordon with Byrd unless they prefer to roll the dice and take Colvin instead. We could also kick them Flaherty, who we likely lose through Rule 5 anyway as a useful supersub with a bit of power. If Flaherty is going to be lost through Rule 5, why would the Royals want him?

And, if they sign a Type A free agent, the pick they will lose will be the lowest ranked of those four.

"This is my cousin, Artie Leh-VEEN." "Leh-VINE." "Yeah, Leh-VINE. And I'm Jerry Cougar Mellencamp."

There's not much reason to remove him before the deadline to tender contracts to your arbitration eligible players. Of course, until he's non-tendered, there's every reason to lose sleep.

There's a lot of value in having a steady stream of those players, though. I don't know how many Flahertys other teams have so that would clearly have an impact if other teams are just teaming with players like him. Namely not paying 4.5 million for Aaron Miles. Of course, one thing is unrelated to the other. Don't get confused by the "Hendry effect".

You might want to just slightly beware of signing to a huge deal a guy who blossomed under the tutelage of Mike Maddux when your own pitching coach is likely to be something south of Mike Maddux.

I don't think it's a certainty he'll get selected and there definitely are many guys who should get taken and are not, I just think it'd be a really good gamble for a cash-strapped team and one that has a pretty good chance of happening. The thing about most horrible teams is that they usually have plenty of decent role players. They just don't have enough stars and difference makers. If the Astros take Flaherty and he turns into Matt Downs, they might be able to trade Downs for someone who might someday become the next Ryan Flaherty.

I don't know when he'd be selected, but I do find it hard to believe that a team that will trade for Mark Teahen would not select Ryan Flaherty. It's certainly possible, I just don't really see much downside for a team like the Royals/Pirates/Astros to grab him and stash him on the roster. Flaherty might get chosen, but there are guys every year for whom that argument fits and they don't get selected.

Soler

Yeah, I'm not getting that one, either. The point is that, as a perennial contender, Boston isn't going to want to add players to their 40-man roster until they're very, very close to being able to contribute. If they can "steal" an extra year before a player has to be rostered, that has value.

While not the highest upside of the unprotected guys, I think Flaherty is the most likely to be taken. His upside is as a utility infielder and he's basically major league ready right now. I can see Flaherty not getting chosen - at a minimum, not sticking. The consensus seems to be that he doesn't profile well defensively in the middle infield. If he's limited to corner infield and corner outfield, his struggles in AAA all of a sudden are a lot more bothersome. I can easily see teams not having much interest in going out of their way to take up a 25-man roster spot with a corner guy who's not very likely to be a big offensive contributor anytime soon.

The minor leagues are filled with guys with mediocre stuff and poor results. I'll be surprised if Jackson gets selected.

that doesn't make any sense. So you risk losing someone so you can trade them? wtf Rhee is a legitimate starting pitching prospect who pitched very well last year. You risk losing him so you might be able to trade him? Very unlikely to make it through the rule 5 draft. I guess we'll see. I find it hard to believe that a team would take Rhee - a guy who, more than anything, needs to pitch both to develop arm strength and improve his pitching skills - and stash him at the back of a major league bullpen and give him 30 or 40 innings. It's not like he's super young, either, and can afford to essentially waste a year of development.

This could suggest that these "surprise" omissions - Flaherty, Rhee, Antigua - are guys being discussed as Theo compensation. The Red Sox might like them, but not enough to want them rostered now. If they don't get selected in the Rule 5 draft, one or more of them get sent to Boston. If they do get selected, Epstein and Cherington turn to other names.