Photo

BSL: Selection of Richie Martin Highlights Rule 5 Draft for Orioles


  • Please log in to reply
73 replies to this topic

#61 BSLRobShields

BSLRobShields

    BSL Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 82,653 posts
  • LocationBaltimore

Posted 14 December 2018 - 07:54 PM

The good teams with stacked 40 man rosters don't mess with these type of dregs.  They absolutely don't.

The good teams with stacked 40 man rosters don't mess with these type of dregs.  They absolutely don't.


Actually, I said all teams do this (and they do) and your response was the above post.

You said good teams don’t do this.

You were shown to be wrong..multiple times.
@BSLRobShields

#62 CA-ORIOLE

CA-ORIOLE

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,323 posts
  • LocationSOCAL

Posted 14 December 2018 - 08:00 PM

I think it's fair to say that DD was more pro-active in the rule 5 in both obtaining and retaining them on the ML roster, especially in the context of trying to field a "competitive" team. I thought McFarland and Flaherty ended up being decent contributors. I thought Garcia? and  Santander were good selections. I don't think any of these guys really hurt the team/roster. Last years rule 5 strategy was idiotic though. Then again, I'm not really sure who was in charge of last years strategy (not selling, giving Cobb that contract etc.), but I assume DD influenced the rule 5's.


  • BSLRobShields and DJ MC like this

#63 Crouseman

Crouseman

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,752 posts

Posted 14 December 2018 - 08:02 PM

Actually, I said all teams do this (and they do) and your response was the above post.

You said good teams don’t do this.

You were shown to be wrong..multiple times.

Oh geez so were going to play semantics.  All teams don't do the rule 5 and waiver claim add to the 40 man every year. And when I said this it was together no separate transactions.  Like did Boston , LA and Houston do any rule 5 and waiver claims this off season???



#64 DJ MC

DJ MC

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,911 posts
  • LocationBeautiful Bel Air, MD

Posted 14 December 2018 - 08:04 PM

Oh geez so were going to play semantics.  All teams don't do the rule 5 and waiver claim add to the 40 man every year. And when I said this it was together no separate transactions.  Like did Boston , LA and Houston do any rule 5 and waiver claims this off season???

 

Is it April already? Seems too cold out to me.


@DJ_McCann

#65 Crouseman

Crouseman

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,752 posts

Posted 14 December 2018 - 08:06 PM

Actually, I said all teams do this (and they do) and your response was the above post.

You said good teams don’t do this.

You were shown to be wrong..multiple times.

 

I think we may be on different pages here.  I'm talking year to year basis and you may be talking overall big picture.  



#66 mdrunning

mdrunning

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 752 posts

Posted 14 December 2018 - 08:18 PM

The Rule 5 isn't a treasure trove, but that's due to changes in the rule governing it over the years.

 

The amateur draft, expansion and free agency have taken some of the luster off the Rule 5 over the years, as have rules regarding eligibility. In 2006, the new CBA mandated that players had to be at least four or five years away from when they originally signed. All of the above factors combined to shrink the available pool of talent.

 

Whether a team participates in the Rule 5 isn't so much indicative of their overall standing, but the overall stability of their roster. Contending teams may indeed have less fluid rosters and therefore, few or even zero openings on their 40-man rosters to be able participate fully or at all in the Rule 5. Their rosters are more set than those of lesser teams, and the better-heeled teams can fill needds with free agent signings. The Red Sox, for example, only had one opening on their 40-man roster before this year's Rule 5, which they filled in they filled in the second round of the Triple A phase.

 

For what it's worth, both Hack Wilson and Roberto Clemente were Rule 5 selections.



#67 Crouseman

Crouseman

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,752 posts

Posted 14 December 2018 - 08:55 PM

The Rule 5 isn't a treasure trove, but that's due to changes in the rule governing it over the years.

 

The amateur draft, expansion and free agency have taken some of the luster off the Rule 5 over the years, as have rules regarding eligibility. In 2006, the new CBA mandated that players had to be at least four or five years away from when they originally signed. All of the above factors combined to shrink the available pool of talent.

 

Whether a team participates in the Rule 5 isn't so much indicative of their overall standing, but the overall stability of their roster. Contending teams may indeed have less fluid rosters and therefore, few or even zero openings on their 40-man rosters to be able participate fully or at all in the Rule 5. Their rosters are more set than those of lesser teams, and the better-heeled teams can fill needds with free agent signings. The Red Sox, for example, only had one opening on their 40-man roster before this year's Rule 5, which they filled in they filled in the second round of the Triple A phase.

 

For what it's worth, both Hack Wilson and Roberto Clemente were Rule 5 selections.

Yeah good post.  I think this is where Rob and I were on different pages.  Yes, definitely all teams have an organizational philosophy to use all avenues to acquire talent to include rule 5 and waiver claims.  This is regardless of whether a team is "good" or not.  So I agree with that.  I was looking at it on a year to year basis like this off season where "good" teams like the Astros or Dodgers or whoever with a stacked 40 man roster will have no need for a rule 5 draft or waiver claim..   Now that could change for that team for sure the following year.  Hope that clarifies my position.



#68 JTrea81

JTrea81

    All Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,387 posts

Posted 15 December 2018 - 12:00 AM

I think it's fair to say that DD was more pro-active in the rule 5 in both obtaining and retaining them on the ML roster, especially in the context of trying to field a "competitive" team. I thought McFarland and Flaherty ended up being decent contributors. I thought Garcia? and  Santander were good selections. I don't think any of these guys really hurt the team/roster. Last years rule 5 strategy was idiotic though. Then again, I'm not really sure who was in charge of last years strategy (not selling, giving Cobb that contract etc.), but I assume DD influenced the rule 5's.

 

It wasn't quite as idiotic as it would seem.  Cortes Jr. pitched well with the Yankees in AAA after he was sent back to them and has been lights out in the Dominican Winter League.  I suspect we will see him pitch for the Yankees at some point in 2019. 

 

Jose Mesa Jr. was probably a questionable pick, but there was no harm in evaluating him for $50 K.  He didn't do so well when he was returned to the Yankees.

 

Araujo had a live arm but Buck kept putting him in pressure situations early instead of pitching him as a mop up guy in the bullpen. He could still play a role if fully healthy, and the Orioles will evaluate him once again in Spring Training.

 

Buck absolutely either had no clue how to use these guys properly or deliberately set them up to fail to get them off the roster as soon as he could.  My bet is on the latter.  The way Buck used Cortes especially set him up for failure as instead of using him as a long reliever like McFarland was, he was used as a LOOGY in pressure situations.



#69 CA-ORIOLE

CA-ORIOLE

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,323 posts
  • LocationSOCAL

Posted 15 December 2018 - 12:13 AM

It wasn't quite as idiotic as it would seem.  Cortes Jr. pitched well with the Yankees in AAA after he was sent back to them and has been lights out in the Dominican Winter League.  I suspect we will see him pitch for the Yankees at some point in 2019. 

 

Jose Mesa Jr. was probably a questionable pick, but there was no harm in evaluating him for $50 K.  He didn't do so well when he was returned to the Yankees.

 

Araujo had a live arm but Buck kept putting him in pressure situations early instead of pitching him as a mop up guy in the bullpen. He could still play a role if fully healthy, and the Orioles will evaluate him once again in Spring Training.

 

Buck absolutely either had no clue how to use these guys properly or deliberately set them up to fail to get them off the roster as soon as he could.  My bet is on the latter.  The way Buck used Cortes especially set him up for failure as instead of using him as a long reliever like McFarland was, he was used as a LOOGY in pressure situations.

I'm the last person to defend Buck, but 3 rule 5 players is a handicap for any manager. All 3 were pretty bad. 


  • russsnyder likes this

#70 russsnyder

russsnyder

    All Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,147 posts

Posted 15 December 2018 - 07:29 AM

I'm the last person to defend Buck, but 3 rule 5 players is a handicap for any manager. All 3 were pretty bad.


I get where they had to keep Santander to start 5he season. However, to start the season with two rule 5 pitchers in the pen was obviously not very smart. Especially when you have aspirations of being a playoff team. Oh well, there's a new sheriff in town.

#71 BSLSteveBirrer

BSLSteveBirrer

    Soccer Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,674 posts
  • LocationMS and ID

Posted 16 December 2018 - 09:09 AM

The problem wasn't that DD went after a lot off Rule V guys.  The problem was that he planned on far too many of them to be contributors to a potential playoff teams and he didn't do hardly anything to supplement those potential playoff teams with proven MLB talent.


  • FFH likes this

#72 BSLRobShields

BSLRobShields

    BSL Analyst

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 82,653 posts
  • LocationBaltimore

Posted 16 December 2018 - 09:13 AM

The problem wasn't that DD went after a lot off Rule V guys. The problem was that he planned on far too many of them to be contributors to a potential playoff teams and he didn't do hardly anything to supplement those potential playoff teams with proven MLB talent.


I don’t think he planned on them to be contributors. I think he hoped they could get better as the year went on, that we could hide them as much as possible and that they could end up being a long term asset making no money in an area where people are starting to get paid a lot.

When you see Tommy Hunter get 7M a year, it starts to make you want to have $500k options doing the same thing as what a guy like Hunter gives you.
@BSLRobShields

#73 Ravens2006

Ravens2006
  • Members
  • 273 posts

Posted 16 December 2018 - 11:48 PM

I have no problem with them taking a shot at rule 5 picks, they're like lottery tickets to a millionaire... low cost risks that might pay off.

 

Only the Orioles (I think) have been so willing to keep and use a roster spot on Rule 5 picks all year (and years beyond) THAT DIDN'T REALLY SHOW MUCH worthy of staying on a major league roster period.

 

But when you've built a farm system so devoid of young talent remotely ready...  :(



#74 dude

dude

    HOF

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,262 posts
  • LocationColumbus, GA

Posted 21 December 2018 - 12:50 PM

I asked because, when viewed through the lens that the team can make this addition and still compete, I don't see any difference between this move, and DD's rule 5 additions. Except that DD was universally slammed for adding rule 5 players while also trying to make the post season.  

 

Apologies for bringing this back up, but I haven't posted much lately and I thought this question might need answering.

 

I don't know why anyone would be aligning an internal top10 talent that is developed to take a role on the team against a player from another team that wasn't good enough to make the 40-man roster.

 

Those aren't even remotely close to the same thing.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Partners