RSS Twitter Facebook YouTube
Expand Menu

2008 Indians Rule 5 Eligibles

Talk shop about the various prospects and teams that make up the Cleveland Indians organization.

Re: 2008 Indians Rule 5 Eligibles

Postby Hermie13 » Tue Nov 11, 2008 2:13 pm

Makes sense I guess.
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7120
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: 2008 Indians Rule 5 Eligibles

Postby TonyIBI » Tue Nov 11, 2008 4:38 pm

petes999 wrote:I think the issue with De La Cruz not being eligible for Rule 5 draft is that he was signed a few days before that year's rule 5 draft (after the season ended), thus buying him an extra year. Rondon and Santana were signed during the season and thus eligible to play (even though they didn't).


I'm pretty sure now that no matter what, De La is not eligible. It is the guys like Rondon, Santana, Herrmann, and Wagner who signed in August 2004 or August 2005 during the season and if their future dated contracts are still considered so.
User avatar
TonyIBI
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 5056
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:03 pm

Re: 2008 Indians Rule 5 Eligibles

Postby Hermie13 » Tue Nov 11, 2008 4:42 pm

ugh, my head hurts, lol
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7120
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: 2008 Indians Rule 5 Eligibles

Postby jellis » Tue Nov 11, 2008 4:53 pm

Hermie13 wrote:ugh, my head hurts, lol


I agree

Tony your level of patience for thisis amazing
jellis
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 3016
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 5:34 pm

Re: 2008 Indians Rule 5 Eligibles

Postby MadThinker88 » Tue Nov 11, 2008 5:00 pm

To: Hermie13 and Jellis and all others that feel ying yanged all over the place on this item

:s_empathy
We will get thru this. In time Tony's sources will provide the final, accurate data.
Until then....... it's :s_gamer or its :s_music or watching Lebron on the court :s_omg or following the Browns :s_hang
MadThinker88
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1752
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 10:48 am
Location: Eau Claire, Wisconsin

Re: 2008 Indians Rule 5 Eligibles

Postby TonyIBI » Wed Nov 12, 2008 12:19 am

I believe we finally have this all figured out:

http://www.indiansprospectinsider.com/2 ... ation.html

It was right under my nose all this time.

Good news is De La is not eligible....bad new is Santana, Rondon, Herrmann, and Wagner are.
User avatar
TonyIBI
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 5056
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:03 pm

Re: 2008 Indians Rule 5 Eligibles

Postby Jake Taylor » Wed Nov 12, 2008 2:20 am

Well, in about eight days we'll have this whole ordeal figured out. Glad to know we don't have to protect De La Cruz, but it still looks as if we're going to have 4-5 players who other teams might be interested enough in to give a chance. I'm expecting to probably lose two players to this Rule 5 Draft, just don't know which two yet.

Thanks for all the hard work to try to figure this out Tony, I know it's been a major pain.
Jake Taylor
Rookie Baller
 
Posts: 326
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 5:19 pm

Re: 2008 Indians Rule 5 Eligibles

Postby MadThinker88 » Wed Nov 12, 2008 7:52 pm

Nice work on figuring out the puzzle Tony.
Assuming De la Cruz isn't eligible (forgive me if I continue to hold my breath just in case) do you think he will spend the whole season in Kinston or might the Tribe bounce him up to Akron late in the season if he is performing well??
MadThinker88
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1752
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 10:48 am
Location: Eau Claire, Wisconsin

Re: 2008 Indians Rule 5 Eligibles

Postby dnosco » Wed Nov 12, 2008 11:00 pm

I quote from my Rule 5, Schmule 5 article that ran on website last year:

"1. WHEN IS A PLAYER CONSIDERED TO HAVE STARTED HIS CAREER?

Under the current Collective Bargaining Agreement playing a season with a team is defined by when a player signs a contract with that team. If he signs during the minor league season of that team’s minor league affiliates he is considered to have played that season. That would mean, in most cases, signing before Sept. 15th and most likely before Sept. 1st of any given year would constituted playing that season. This is true even if a player never players a game that season. Any players signed AFTER the minor league season, according to an official at Major League Baseball that I talked to, are deemed to have signed for the next year even if they attend the fall instructional league the year they sign. In case you are confused because you had followed this process in previous years, the process now is different than it was under the previous Collective Bargaining Agreement. Under that agreement a player could be signed at any time to a contract that only started the next season….as long as that player didn’t play in a minor league game the year he signed the contract. Under the new CBA all players drafted in the Rule 4 draft who sign are deemed to have signed that year since the signing deadline for the Rule 4 is August 15th. Undrafted players (including graduated HS seniors, college players and eligible international free agents) can sign at any time as long as they don’t go to (or back to) school."

Did all the digging last year and in years before that and came up with the same answer....the same answer I poted above.
dnosco
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2448
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 2:10 pm

Re: 2008 Indians Rule 5 Eligibles

Postby endlesssleeper » Thu Nov 13, 2008 12:12 am

Would you like a cookie for that?? We get it, you were right. Move on.
endlesssleeper
Draft Prospect
 
Posts: 133
Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 5:37 pm

Re: 2008 Indians Rule 5 Eligibles

Postby Hermie13 » Thu Nov 13, 2008 9:27 am

MadThinker88 wrote:Nice work on figuring out the puzzle Tony.
Assuming De la Cruz isn't eligible (forgive me if I continue to hold my breath just in case) do you think he will spend the whole season in Kinston or might the Tribe bounce him up to Akron late in the season if he is performing well??


I think they'd bump him up to Akron if he's doing well. They bumped him up to Kinston from Lake County this year because he was so dominate down there. Don't see why they'd change their handling of him in 2009. they seem to always move pitchers pretty quickly through the system compared to hitters....at least it seems that way to me...
Last edited by Hermie13 on Thu Nov 13, 2008 10:15 am, edited 1 time in total.
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7120
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: 2008 Indians Rule 5 Eligibles

Postby TonyIBI » Thu Nov 13, 2008 9:38 am

I believe De La will spend at least half the season in Kinston, and then they reassess from there.
User avatar
TonyIBI
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 5056
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:03 pm

Re: 2008 Indians Rule 5 Eligibles

Postby Duane Kuiper » Thu Nov 13, 2008 1:09 pm

Quote:Under the new CBA all players drafted in the Rule 4 draft who sign are deemed to have signed that year since the signing deadline for the Rule 4 is August 15th.
----------
There is one exception. College seniors don't have to sign by August 15th. They can sign later.
Duane Kuiper
Draft Prospect
 
Posts: 195
Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2008 9:51 am

Re: 2008 Indians Rule 5 Eligibles

Postby carnegie44115 » Thu Nov 13, 2008 1:16 pm

Duane Kuiper wrote:Quote:Under the new CBA all players drafted in the Rule 4 draft who sign are deemed to have signed that year since the signing deadline for the Rule 4 is August 15th.
----------
There is one exception. College seniors don't have to sign by August 15th. They can sign later.



So could Herrman be an exception as he was a senior that year if he signed after the season?
carnegie44115
Rookie Baller
 
Posts: 265
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 9:12 pm

Re: 2008 Indians Rule 5 Eligibles

Postby Duane Kuiper » Thu Nov 13, 2008 1:23 pm

Herrmann was signed before the new CBA, which started Dec 2006.
Duane Kuiper
Draft Prospect
 
Posts: 195
Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2008 9:51 am

Re: 2008 Indians Rule 5 Eligibles

Postby MadThinker88 » Sun Nov 16, 2008 7:48 pm

Tony,
You and a few others seem to have a good feel of how the Tribe generally sets up the 40 man.

Assuming the Tribe protects 6 and 5 of the 6 are Stevens, Crowe, Santana, Rondon and Jordan Brown, who has the inside track for the 6th spot?

Protecting a Martin, Lofgren, Herrmann, Wagner or Edell means 21 pitchers on the 40 man.
Protecting Giminez means 5 catchers on the 40 man.
Protecting Head means protecting 5 players that are primarily 1B when in the field (Hafner, Garko, Aubrey, Brown, Head) and VMart is a 6th 1B on the roster.

Am I overlooking a player that has a realistic protection chance due to ROSTER needs??
MadThinker88
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1752
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 10:48 am
Location: Eau Claire, Wisconsin

Re: 2008 Indians Rule 5 Eligibles

Postby jellis » Sun Nov 16, 2008 7:54 pm

MadThinker88 wrote:Tony,
You and a few others seem to have a good feel of how the Tribe generally sets up the 40 man.

Assuming the Tribe protects 6 and 5 of the 6 are Stevens, Crowe, Santana, Rondon and Jordan Brown, who has the inside track for the 6th spot?

Protecting a Martin, Lofgren, Herrmann, Wagner or Edell means 21 pitchers on the 40 man.
Protecting Giminez means 5 catchers on the 40 man.
Protecting Head means protecting 5 players that are primarily 1B when in the field (Hafner, Garko, Aubrey, Brown, Head) and VMart is a 6th 1B on the roster.

Am I overlooking a player that has a realistic protection chance due to ROSTER needs??


I think they only protect 5 guys and the 6th guy is some one they sign or trade for
jellis
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 3016
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 5:34 pm

Re: 2008 Indians Rule 5 Eligibles

Postby MadThinker88 » Sun Nov 16, 2008 9:06 pm

I disagree with you on that point jellis. I figure any free agent signing will be accompanied with a move of a 'M' player (Mujica, Mastny or Marte) off the roster.
MadThinker88
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1752
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 10:48 am
Location: Eau Claire, Wisconsin

Re: 2008 Indians Rule 5 Eligibles

Postby TonyIBI » Mon Nov 17, 2008 12:02 am

Indians may not necessarily fill all 6 open 40-man spots. The Indians only rostered five guys last year which brought the roster to 39....and then between the deadline and the Rule 5 they signed Kobayashi and he filled the roster at 40.

May see the same thing this year.

Also, as an FYI, the Indians started the year with 21 pitchers on the 40-man in 2008...only 19 in 2007.
User avatar
TonyIBI
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 5056
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:03 pm

Re: 2008 Indians Rule 5 Eligibles

Postby indianinkslinger » Mon Nov 17, 2008 8:38 am

Consigliere wrote:Indians may not necessarily fill all 6 open 40-man spots. The Indians only rostered five guys last year which brought the roster to 39....and then between the deadline and the Rule 5 they signed Kobayashi and he filled the roster at 40.

May see the same thing this year.

Also, as an FYI, the Indians started the year with 21 pitchers on the 40-man in 2008...only 19 in 2007.


You might be right but my heart hopes we keep Lofgren. Maybe he won't be selected but I think some team will take the chance and it may screw him up even more. :s_drinks
indianinkslinger
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2493
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2008 12:11 pm

Re: 2008 Indians Rule 5 Eligibles

Postby TonyIBI » Mon Nov 17, 2008 9:25 am

indianinkslinger wrote:You might be right but my heart hopes we keep Lofgren. Maybe he won't be selected but I think some team will take the chance and it may screw him up even more. :s_drinks


Oh, I hope so too. But, just trying to rationalized how the Indians will approach it (and not what I would do).
User avatar
TonyIBI
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 5056
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:03 pm

Re: 2008 Indians Rule 5 Eligibles

Postby TonyIBI » Wed Nov 19, 2008 9:51 am

Okay, roster additions should be announced today per my post on the front page. And, I think it will be just five guys. Here are my final predictions: 1B Jordan Brown, OF Trevor Crowe, C Carlos Santana, RHP Hector Rondon, and RHP Jeff Stevens.

Gimenez, Lofgren and Head would be the top candidates if a sixth guy is rostered, which I think is unlikely given the Indians past history. All three of these guys along with Herrmann and Wagner would probably be the top five guys available in Rule 5 from the Indians.
User avatar
TonyIBI
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 5056
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:03 pm

Re: 2008 Indians Rule 5 Eligibles

Postby dnosco » Wed Nov 19, 2008 10:43 am

The MO for teams selecting in the Rule 5 is:

1) Versatile position players who can serve a cheap backup role and not effect the team's performance (see Luna (twice) and Barton, the former being a utility infielder/outfielder and the latter being capable of playing all OF positions and who can run a little). Situational lefties and righties out of a team's bullpen fall in this category, as well.

2) Strong armed pitchers, even if they are in A-ball (e.g., Santana, Soria)

3) Guys who were top prospects but whom have fallen for some reason (Whitney, Josh Hamilton)

Guys who DO NOT fit the Rule 5 draftee profile are usually lumbering DHs, starting pitchers with fringe stuff who don't profile well in the bullpen and, believe it or not, catchers, even though teams have been known to carry 3 on their 25 man roster during the season.

Obviously it is individual team preference as to what guys fit their roster and whether they think they can pry the guy they draft away from his original team even if the guy isn't good enough to play in the majors then. That is why this draft is so fluid and so hard to predict.

All that being said any of Gimenez (category 1), Head (category 1) or Lofgren (category 3) would be prime candidates to be drafted. Still, however, I would look at Tony's list of eligibles and look at guys who might be relief pitchers (e.g., lefty Ryan Edell) or even righties Neil Wagner or, much less likely, Scott Roehl if he is not protected on the Buffalo roster. Teams might even take a flyer on Randy Newsom as he has had success at every level although he doesn't throw hard or even Carlton Smith who has a good arm and seems to be effective against righties.

BTW, Buffalo is allowed, as I understand it, to protect 38 guys on their roster meaning the next 38 eligibles could be rostered there. The advantage is that guys rostered lower than AAA this off-season who ARE eligible for the Rule 5 can be selected in the minor league portion and then don't have to be returned to the Indians under any circumstances (see Lee Gronkiewicz from a few years ago who subsequently pitched for the Blue Jays). I could see guys like Jason Denham not being protected on Buffalo's roster and then being lost although there aren't even 38 guys on the Indians' eligible list so we may have no one lost in the minor league portion.

BTW, I agree with Tony's list of guys who will be protected and that we will leave at least one roster spot available. That is Shapiro's MO in this situaton over the years.
dnosco
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2448
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 2:10 pm

Re: 2008 Indians Rule 5 Eligibles

Postby TonyIBI » Wed Nov 19, 2008 11:03 am

Going by what I said....I still think somehow someway the Indians will find a way to put Gimenez on there. 3B is his best position, and we have a ML need there. He also is extremely versatile where he plays C, LF and 1B. Very good pop and a nice approach, and most importantly (ha) he is a grinder and excellent teammate. ;)
User avatar
TonyIBI
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 5056
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:03 pm

Re: 2008 Indians Rule 5 Eligibles

Postby artgold » Wed Nov 19, 2008 11:42 am

I think exposing Gimenez is a significant risk. He plays multiple positions (kind of a Casey Blake who can also catch in an emergency) and has a remarkable BB/AB rate. Considering his ability to put some ooommmpphhh into the ball, I suspect he would be pretty attractive to a few teams. As someone who also follows the Phillies pretty closely, I can tell you he would be a great fit for the needs of that club.
Last edited by artgold on Wed Nov 19, 2008 12:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
artgold
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1101
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 1:00 am

Re: 2008 Indians Rule 5 Eligibles

Postby Hermie13 » Wed Nov 19, 2008 11:50 am

The Phillies already have a Gimenez on there team.....his name is Chris Coste, who I'm still pissed that the Indians never brought up when he was with us....but that's another story, lol
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7120
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: 2008 Indians Rule 5 Eligibles

Postby endlesssleeper » Wed Nov 19, 2008 12:11 pm

Consigliere wrote:Going by what I said....I still think somehow someway the Indians will find a way to put Gimenez on there. 3B is his best position, and we have a ML need there. He also is extremely versatile where he plays C, LF and 1B. Very good pop and a nice approach, and most importantly (ha) he is a grinder and excellent teammate. ;)


A "grinder" eh? Eric Wedge will have him protected at all costs then.
endlesssleeper
Draft Prospect
 
Posts: 133
Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 5:37 pm

Re: 2008 Indians Rule 5 Eligibles

Postby dnosco » Thu Nov 20, 2008 10:47 pm

I am thinking that Lofgren will be drafted if left exposed. I mean, it is a $25,000 gamble if you have to return him. Isn't that what CC will get for each batter he faces next year? I think any team that had open roster space would be crazy not to take a gamble on a top prospect like Lofgren...but, as you all know, it is hard to figure out the Rule 5. Nevertheless, usually very prominent guys get drafted, even if most of the guys we think should get drafted don't.
dnosco
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2448
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 2:10 pm

Re: 2008 Indians Rule 5 Eligibles

Postby jellis » Thu Nov 20, 2008 11:02 pm

dnosco wrote:I am thinking that Lofgren will be drafted if left exposed. I mean, it is a $25,000 gamble if you have to return him. Isn't that what CC will get for each batter he faces next year? I think any team that had open roster space would be crazy not to take a gamble on a top prospect like Lofgren...but, as you all know, it is hard to figure out the Rule 5. Nevertheless, usually very prominent guys get drafted, even if most of the guys we think should get drafted don't.



Hes a good prospect but by your standards would he count as a top prospect I mean he wasn't one of the top 100 last year was he, which would mean hes not a top prospect by your arguments ion this boards
jellis
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 3016
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 5:34 pm

Re: 2008 Indians Rule 5 Eligibles

Postby MickS » Thu Nov 20, 2008 11:04 pm

Santana, Stevens, Gimenez, Rondon, Crowe rostered.
MickS
Draft Prospect
 
Posts: 168
Joined: Thu Oct 09, 2008 10:18 am

Re: 2008 Indians Rule 5 Eligibles

Postby MadThinker88 » Thu Nov 20, 2008 11:09 pm

Per Tony's on-line show the announcement has been made. 5 players protected.
Crowe, Santana, Stevens, Gimenez and Rondon.

One open roster spot.
We still have Moo, DD, Marte and Mastny.
Unprotected: Herrmann, Wagner, Jordan Brown, and others
MadThinker88
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1752
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 10:48 am
Location: Eau Claire, Wisconsin

Re: 2008 Indians Rule 5 Eligibles

Postby jellis » Thu Nov 20, 2008 11:18 pm

Pretty much what I expected and it really makes me think shoppach will be gone very soon. I know Gimenez is more utility but it is still a ton of catchers
jellis
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 3016
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 5:34 pm

Re: 2008 Indians Rule 5 Eligibles

Postby MadThinker88 » Thu Nov 20, 2008 11:24 pm

Do not forget that the Tribe could (if it wanted to and it had space on the 40 man) draft one of its own players like Lofgren, or Jordan Brown.

This move has been done before by Atlanta when they didn't realize a particular player was eligible to be taken. IIRC they ended up spending the 1st pick of the Rule 5 on their own player.
MadThinker88
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1752
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 10:48 am
Location: Eau Claire, Wisconsin

Re: 2008 Indians Rule 5 Eligibles

Postby GhostofTedCox » Thu Nov 20, 2008 11:34 pm

MadThinker88 wrote:Do not forget that the Tribe could (if it wanted to and it had space on the 40 man) draft one of its own players like Lofgren, or Jordan Brown.

This move has been done before by Atlanta when they didn't realize a particular player was eligible to be taken. IIRC they ended up spending the 1st pick of the Rule 5 on their own player.



But then they would have to keep him on the roster, or else offer him back to the Indians.
User avatar
GhostofTedCox
Single-A Phenom
 
Posts: 727
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 11:24 pm

Re: 2008 Indians Rule 5 Eligibles

Postby MadThinker88 » Thu Nov 20, 2008 11:36 pm

Think through what you just wrote Ghost.... Tribe has to offer him back to the Tribe. Not a big deal at all.
MadThinker88
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1752
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 10:48 am
Location: Eau Claire, Wisconsin

Re: 2008 Indians Rule 5 Eligibles

Postby jellis » Thu Nov 20, 2008 11:37 pm

GhostofTedCox wrote:
MadThinker88 wrote:Do not forget that the Tribe could (if it wanted to and it had space on the 40 man) draft one of its own players like Lofgren, or Jordan Brown.

This move has been done before by Atlanta when they didn't realize a particular player was eligible to be taken. IIRC they ended up spending the 1st pick of the Rule 5 on their own player.



But then they would have to keep him on the roster, or else offer him back to the Indians.



dont worry I got the joke at least
jellis
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 3016
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 5:34 pm

Re: 2008 Indians Rule 5 Eligibles

Postby GhostofTedCox » Thu Nov 20, 2008 11:50 pm

I'm sure Brown will get drafted, (probably by a NL team). He seems to be a fine player, but the facts are that in this organization there were too many people in front of him at 1B. I also think that LaPorta will also move to 1B this season. This would keep a OF of Choo, Sizemore, Brantley, Francisco and Crowe. Good luck to Jordan.
User avatar
GhostofTedCox
Single-A Phenom
 
Posts: 727
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 11:24 pm

Re: 2008 Indians Rule 5 Eligibles

Postby TonyIBI » Thu Nov 20, 2008 11:58 pm

I think it is 50/50 with Lofgren. He is better off if he is not selected as he just needs a normal offseason and spring training whereas a Rule 5 seletion and all the pressure he will add to himself trying to make a big league roster could be devastating to him during a very important and fragile spring training that looms for him. IMO.

By the way, Brown has to be really down. I'd hate to lose him, and I think he will get taken by someone.....could Huntington and his Pirates swipe him?

Gotta say, I dump Dellucci, Mujica, or Aubrey. Brown is the more valuable player than all of them, especially Aubrey.
User avatar
TonyIBI
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 5056
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:03 pm

Re: 2008 Indians Rule 5 Eligibles

Postby jellis » Fri Nov 21, 2008 12:00 am

I agree why the hell is aubrey still around that is the real head scratcher to me rather have brown any day of the week better hitter and more EB potential. Brown can play a little OF and is a better defender than Aubrey
jellis
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 3016
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 5:34 pm

Re: 2008 Indians Rule 5 Eligibles

Postby TonyIBI » Fri Nov 21, 2008 12:25 am

FYI, players were informed around 6pm EST (about 4 hours before the press release) they were being rostered. I know some people were wondering when they find out, so there you go. They are pretty much strung along just like everyone else and don't have an idea what is going on.
User avatar
TonyIBI
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 5056
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:03 pm

Re: 2008 Indians Rule 5 Eligibles

Postby npc29 » Fri Nov 21, 2008 12:35 am

I can't see how a player like Mujica is of any value to a team with a lot of young relief pitchers, most who have options, and a talented positional player needing a roster spot..

But, hey.. Their funeral. Jordan Brown may have never put on an Indian's uniform.. But he would at least have trade value. Mujica has none.
npc29
Single-A Phenom
 
Posts: 625
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 4:59 pm
Location: Kent, OH

Re: 2008 Indians Rule 5 Eligibles

Postby TonyIBI » Fri Nov 21, 2008 12:45 am

What incredible timing. Brown will be on our show next week to address all this stuff!

With Thanksgiving on Thurs, Paul and I will be airing the show 8-9pm on Tues the 25th.

Anyway, Brown has had that lingering knee issue all year he battled through, and also played with most of 2007. Then, he hurt his foot just before going to the DR about 6 weeks ago. Can't say how it happened, I'll leave it up to him to explain if he wants. In any case, he doesn't think it is serious but the Indians and DR officials thought it serious enough to shut him down and send him home. This could possibly work to the Indians advantage with the foot and knee injury.

I still could see Huntington swooping in and taking him though.
User avatar
TonyIBI
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 5056
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:03 pm

Re: 2008 Indians Rule 5 Eligibles

Postby toledobuck » Fri Nov 21, 2008 12:56 am

What is the thinking of leaving an open spot with a very good prospect in Brown potentially open for the taking? Are they leaving a spot open for an acquisition coming soon? Do they intend to pick someone of another player's roster that was not put on the 40? I would bet pretty good money that the Tribe either makes a trade or signs a FA before the rule 5 draft in December to get their roster to 40.
toledobuck
Rookie Baller
 
Posts: 252
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 11:07 am

Re: 2008 Indians Rule 5 Eligibles

Postby dnosco » Fri Nov 21, 2008 1:00 am

jellis wrote:
dnosco wrote:I am thinking that Lofgren will be drafted if left exposed. I mean, it is a $25,000 gamble if you have to return him. Isn't that what CC will get for each batter he faces next year? I think any team that had open roster space would be crazy not to take a gamble on a top prospect like Lofgren...but, as you all know, it is hard to figure out the Rule 5. Nevertheless, usually very prominent guys get drafted, even if most of the guys we think should get drafted don't.



Hes a good prospect but by your standards would he count as a top prospect I mean he wasn't one of the top 100 last year was he, which would mean hes not a top prospect by your arguments ion this boards


I think he falls into two categories: top prospect who has fallen AND possibly a situational lefty or long man. Hey, I would clearly take a chance on him.

Now, Jordan Brown, this might surprise many but I don't know if he will be selected. He is a firstbaseman with questionable power. That is hard to hide on a roster for an entire year. Barton and Luna, very easy to hide. Jordan Brown, with no ML experience and no pop off the bench and limited to a power position? I am thinking not. That being said, if you DID select him you have a great chance of seeing twice the player in 2009 that you saw in 2008 and, in fact, a major league ready player. Don't think teams will gamble the $25,000 but, as I said last year, I have as much predictive power in the Rule 5 draft as does a lamp post.

Unfortunately the Indians' FO has this opinion that they understand the Rule 5 and the difference in risk between passing guys (like Mujica) through waivers and getting them through the Rule 5 and, frankly, I don't know that they do. Certainly they underestimated the risk with Barton and others in the recent past and, in so doing, kept really useless guys on the roster who never panned out and, in fact, Barton is similar to Brown in that he had recent injury issues that, according to reports, made the Indians think Barton, at least, was less likely to be selected. On the contrary it was predicted for a long time that he might go as the top pick.

Time will tell but as I say about cutting John Mirabelli slack, you cut slack to people who have proven themselves in the past. The Indians have not proven themselves savvy in Rule 5-related matters, not at all.
dnosco
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 2448
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 2:10 pm

Re: 2008 Indians Rule 5 Eligibles

Postby toledobuck » Fri Nov 21, 2008 1:09 am

Barton was not a big loss IMHO. They had duplicate OF talent already on the roster (ie Francisco, Gutz, Choo, etc). He would not really ever get much opportunity with the Tribe because they already had other similar players rostered that had more potential. I actually think The Tribe has maneuvered past rule 5 drafts quite well. I do not think we have lost anybody of any impact at all. We have enough 3rd, 4th, & 5th OF's on the roster. Why roster another OF of lesser talent in Barton? The Tribe will be fine even if they unfortunately lose Brown this season. I was a big fan of his and think he has a decent celing of a S. Casey type player in the bigs. However, the Tribe currently has too many 1B / OF type players on the roster and at lower levels in the system that rate as higher ceiling players that evidently made Brown expendable this year.
toledobuck
Rookie Baller
 
Posts: 252
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 11:07 am

Re: 2008 Indians Rule 5 Eligibles

Postby lofgren09 » Fri Nov 21, 2008 1:57 am

I think Stephen Head could get drafted as well. He is a solid player. Can play infield and outfield. Hits for average and has some pop. I'm surpried no one is talking about him. I can see he might be a poor man's jordan brown but still this kid has a lot of talent.
User avatar
lofgren09
Undrafted Free Agent
 
Posts: 46
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2008 2:59 pm

Re: 2008 Indians Rule 5 Eligibles

Postby petes999 » Fri Nov 21, 2008 7:48 am

I am wondering a bit here why we hate to lose Head and Brown, yet we are writing off Barton so quickly after a year. Note, I hated to lose Barton and will hate to see either Head or Brown go. Yet, it is not the end of the world.

If we look at stats, Barton hit .326, .323, .305 with 7,19 and 10 HRs.

Brown was .290, .333 and .281 with 15,11 and 7 HRs. Yes, he was the minor league player of the year twice. Yet, how much of that was that he was consistent and there the whole year versus other top prospects being a mid-year call up?

Head had a breakout year with .290 with 13 HRs after two bad years and a first year of .308 and 10 HRs, mostly at Kinston. I almost want to protect Head as much as Brown (more than Delucci or Mastny)

Trying to figure out what Shapiro did .... He may have protected Giminez factoring in that Shoppach would be traded. Thus, he wanted 2 back-up catchers competing in spring training. And, Giminez gives us another option at 3B to fill in part-time behind Marte, Carroll and Hodges (our weakest position).

He may have let Head and Brown unprotected factoring in a 50/50 shot of losing either. Thus, he may lose one and get one back. Yet, how many of/1B do we need?

OF - Sizemore, Choo (locks)
3rd OF - Gut, Francisco and Crowe
5th OF - Dellucci (yeah I rather have Head or Brown)
1st Shot - LaPorta and Brantley
Reserve - Brown or Head - whoever is returned (hard to get a shot with Weglarz coming up quickly)

Yet, one thing that this is telling me is that Gut and Francisco may not be traded as it will leave us possibly light if neither Brown or Head is returned. Shapiro would have factored this in.

As for 1B, we have plenty of options

1B - Garko, Aubrey (yeah ... I doubt Aubrey will beat Garko yet didn't we just get a 4th option year to be a call-up in case of injury)

Option - Brown/Head - whoever is returned
In the wings - Mills/Hodges/LaPorta even Brantley

Thus, if we cut Aubrey, he would have been lost. So now, we have a better shot at having 2 of Aubrey, Head and Brown (factoring in only one will probably lost and not returned) waiting in reserve versus one of Brown or Head (factoring in we would probably lose the other in Rule 5 and lost Aubrey).

Brown and Head will be a good reserve like Barton. Yet, would they be a good reserve for Cleveland? Not with how we are loaded up in 2 years or so with better prospects.

As for trade value, let's be real. How high was Brown and Head in people's top 20? I had them in 18-25 range. There isn't that much of value there ... a throw in for a trade. Usually, the value of prospects need to be in the top 15 to be of value (look at Bryson who was #11 and was the 3rd prospect in the CC trade). There is some value, yet not significantly more than a Mastny or Mujica who would all get a low A rated player at best in a stand alone trade.

And, I am sure Shapiro tried to trade them, yet he was behind the 8-ball as other GMs knew they would not be protected and be open for the taking without giving up anyone.

The one that I worry about is Lofgren, due to his potential upside. Yet, he wrote himself his own ticket with a terrible AFL. I wanted to protect him due to his upside. Yet, after AFL season, it is doubtful that a GM would protect him for a whole year ... even a Washington or Pitts. They know that after one bad season and another year sitting on the pine, they are writing him a death sentence to go out once every two weeks and get shelled in the big leagues. I just hope no one takes him so he can relax in ST and get his mechanics down.

Now, I would have rather cut a Barfield, Mastny, Mujica or Dellucci and give someone else a chance. Yet, if we lose someone (other than Lofgren), it may hurt a bit (like Church), yet not like losing a Sizemore.
petes999
Single-A Phenom
 
Posts: 559
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 6:02 pm

Re: 2008 Indians Rule 5 Eligibles

Postby dazindiansfanuk » Fri Nov 21, 2008 8:19 am

To be honest, when Aubrey was given the 4th option year I was kind of expecting Brown not to be rostered. Both are very similar players, as is Gimenez, but Gimenez has more versatility and Aubrey is already on the roster.

As a result, it goes back to the old arguement of "it's better to leave a guy unprotected than to have to DFA someone". Some may not agree with that argument, and I too feel that Brown is more valuable than Aubrey, but the arguement is based on if you DFA Aubrey the chances are you lose him for good, but if you just leave Brown unprotected you might lose him, but there's a chance you get him back.

I don't know how serious Browns foot injury is, but that coupled with his lack of versatility (bad knees limiting him to 1B) makes the chances of him sticking elsewhere slim-ish in my view.
dazindiansfanuk
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1854
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 12:51 pm

Re: 2008 Indians Rule 5 Eligibles

Postby TonyIBI » Fri Nov 21, 2008 9:23 am

lofgren09 wrote:I think Stephen Head could get drafted as well. He is a solid player. Can play infield and outfield. Hits for average and has some pop. I'm surpried no one is talking about him. I can see he might be a poor man's jordan brown but still this kid has a lot of talent.


In an upcoming Rule 5 Draft preview I will do, Head will certainly be one of the top five guys I think has a chance of being selected. He may in fact have the best chance because of his versatility to play OF and 1B and the exceptional defense he provides at both. He is more athletic, healthy, has more pop, is more versatile, and plays better defense than Brown. The difference with Brown is he has a year of Triple-A under his belt and is a superior contact hitter.

Anyway, the fact the Indians rostered Gimenez to me SCREAMS that Shoppach is dealt this offseason. Or, in a more minor move, that Toregas (or Gimenez) are traded. There is no way they open the season with 5 catchers on the 40-man.
User avatar
TonyIBI
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 5056
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:03 pm

Re: 2008 Indians Rule 5 Eligibles

Postby npc29 » Fri Nov 21, 2008 9:39 am

petes999 wrote:Now, I would have rather cut a Barfield, Mastny, Mujica or Dellucci and give someone else a chance. Yet, if we lose someone (other than Lofgren), it may hurt a bit (like Church), yet not like losing a Sizemore.


Too early to cut Barfield. He's actually proven he can play at the Major League level, unlike Mujica. Plus Barfield has an option.
npc29
Single-A Phenom
 
Posts: 625
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 4:59 pm
Location: Kent, OH

PreviousNext

Return to Indians Prospect Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests