RSS Twitter Facebook YouTube
Expand Menu

Rule 5

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

Re: Rule 5

Postby TonyIBI » Fri Nov 19, 2010 11:20 am

FYI, as I tweeted last night, it is for certain that Hagadone, Judy and Kluber are rostered. No one else is a sure thing and at best others like Miller/McAllister are 50-50 chances. Get the feeling it will be either or with Miller/McAllister, and that if a 5th guy is rostered it will be a position player. Also, there may be a surprise. All I can say right now.
User avatar
TonyIBI
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 5056
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:03 pm

Re: Rule 5

Postby petes999 » Fri Nov 19, 2010 12:51 pm

I say Miller over McAllister as we have said due to who is a better reliever. And, if there is a surprise position player, I got to go with McBride just due to his power and the lack there of at 1B after LaPorta. Rod isn't really that far from being a surprise. And, if Phelps showed enough at 3B, how many options do we need by adding Goedert?
petes999
Single-A Phenom
 
Posts: 559
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 6:02 pm

Re: Rule 5

Postby Hermie13 » Fri Nov 19, 2010 1:24 pm

petes999 wrote:I say Miller over McAllister as we have said due to who is a better reliever. And, if there is a surprise position player, I got to go with McBride just due to his power and the lack there of at 1B after LaPorta. Rod isn't really that far from being a surprise. And, if Phelps showed enough at 3B, how many options do we need by adding Goedert?


Should be noted that Geodert did play multiple games at 1B in winterball. His power also looked a lot better than McBride's this year....so if you're adding McBride for power at 1B, Goedert still makes more sense.
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7120
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: Rule 5

Postby dazindiansfanuk » Fri Nov 19, 2010 4:50 pm

Goedert, McAllister, Kluber, Judy and Hagadone added.

A little surprised
dazindiansfanuk
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1854
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 12:51 pm

Re: Rule 5

Postby TonyIBI » Fri Nov 19, 2010 5:01 pm

Came down to this scenario for the final two spots:

Spot 1: McAllister or Miller
Spot 2: Goedert or JRod
User avatar
TonyIBI
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 5056
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:03 pm

Re: Rule 5

Postby petes999 » Fri Nov 19, 2010 5:11 pm

Kind of surprised that they aren't protecting Miller ... hope that it doesn't come back to bite them. If the Indians were thinking that he could win a job out of ST if he stays healthy, then why keep around the trash on their 40 man roster and not protect him?

If he was healthy and could pitch, he would be worth keeping on the 40 man for part of the season to find out if he could pitch at some point of the season. If he is injured in ST, you waive him again to get that 40 man slot open.

What is there to lose other than someone plucking him and putting him on their DL with a diagnosis of arm soreness for part of the season until he is ready? Now with that said, usually players are not selected and kept.

But, I wonder, if the Indians are going to put out an injury report showing the scare tissue isn't resolved and there was potentially some issues after the instructional league to scare off teams.

I also wonder why even pitch him in the instructional league and showcase him a bit rather than just down play his ability to pitch again and keep him inside doing individual bating practice until January? Would someone taken a flyer on him early if they hadn't seen him at all and just heard rumors? Maybe later on the draft to a better establish team where he was less likely to stick with than an Arizona/KC type team. Did he gain anything from pitching a few innings in game situation that he couldn't have gotten in ST?
petes999
Single-A Phenom
 
Posts: 559
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 6:02 pm

Re: Rule 5

Postby MadThinker88 » Fri Nov 19, 2010 5:23 pm

Late in draft/ early in draft doesn't really matter. Teams make deals with picks all the time, especially since they can't deal the regular amateur draft selections.

I just can't believe that Miller wasn't added to the roster. There are times to walk out along the ledge and times to stay back from the ledge. This was a case of the latter.

I can see only 3 ways this turns out positive for the Tribe:
1) Miller is exposed but not drafted during the Rule 5
2) Miller is exposed & drafted but isn't healthy or doesn't perform well for the new org.
3) Miller is exposed & drafted & performs well but Tribe doesn't need him as they hit the jackpot will each of Bryson/ Judy/ Putnam/ Pestano and a few of those others outperform Miller over the course of their career
Last edited by MadThinker88 on Sat Nov 20, 2010 12:43 am, edited 1 time in total.
MadThinker88
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1752
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 10:48 am
Location: Eau Claire, Wisconsin

Re: Rule 5

Postby petes999 » Fri Nov 19, 2010 5:28 pm

TonyIPI wrote:Came down to this scenario for the final two spots:

Spot 1: McAllister or Miller
Spot 2: Goedert or JRod


Don't really get the rational with this move on splitting the protection between pitching (starter/relief) and infield (3b-1b/SS-utility). Shouldn't it really be based on (1)the best prospects, (2) likelihood of being picked - where pitchers are usually taken and (3) will they compete next year and be on the 40 man anyways.

McAllister - good prospect - pitcher - less likely to be taken as he isn't quite ready after a bad AAA year and probably will be up at some point next year

Miller - great prospect if healthy - relief pitcher (most prized in Rule 5) -- and will pitch in the bigs if he stays healthy

Goedert - o.k. prospect ... can compete next year but will be 4th in line between Nix, Phelps and Chisenhall ... better luck at 1B behind LaPorta and Brown

Rodriquez -- o.k. prospect but is behind Donald and Valbuena for that utility role.

I thought in this group - Miller was the one you hate to lose if healthy and Goedert was the least likely to be taken. With Phelps, hitting well and playing a decent 3B, could have seen us risking losing Goedert more than Rod. And, long-term, I see Miller as the best shot of being productive over McAllister due to our depth at starting pitching (after next year). And, with Miller being injured so much, would have thought Indians would want to have him in ST for the full time to monitor him instead of risk seeing him being taken and possibly returned at the last minute from a team that pushed him to be ready April 1 and risked injury if he wasn't quite ready.

But, why factor those two slots in this way when they prospects being considered are night and day of each other?
petes999
Single-A Phenom
 
Posts: 559
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 6:02 pm

Re: Rule 5

Postby MadThinker88 » Fri Nov 19, 2010 5:35 pm

Strange "why not" thought - what if the Tribe has worked out a deal with the top drafting club to take Miller and a trade involving Miller (or his R5 drafts) is already worked out??

Strange things happen with the R5. Back in the late eighties/ early nineties the Braves drafted their own player because they didn't realize he was otherwise eligible. Lucky for them they had the top pick in the draft.
MadThinker88
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1752
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 10:48 am
Location: Eau Claire, Wisconsin

Re: Rule 5

Postby petes999 » Fri Nov 19, 2010 5:45 pm

MadThinker88 wrote:Strange "why not" thought - what if the Tribe has worked out a deal with the top drafting club to take Miller and a trade involving Miller (or his R5 drafts) is already worked out??

Strange things happen with the R5. Back in the late eighties/ early nineties the Braves drafted their own player because they didn't realize he was otherwise eligible. Lucky for them they had the top pick in the draft.


Not to bust your bubble here on a creative idea.... but for us to get Miller rule 5 rights back, we will need to open up a 40-man slot by December. Why not do it now by dumping Germano? And, then we wouldn't need to do a trade. I hate the notion that we are keeping Germano only to sign a FA and block someone. If they wanted a FA 3B, then why keep Nix. If they wanted a FA SP, then why roster McAllister (as they won't need that many back-ups in AAA unless the 4th and 5th slots are open for audition).

Braves did it because they realized they made a mistake after the roster was finalized and were lucky enough to cover it up.
petes999
Single-A Phenom
 
Posts: 559
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 6:02 pm

Re: Rule 5

Postby GeronimoSon » Fri Nov 19, 2010 7:30 pm

...Goedert, McAllister, Kluber, Judy and Hagadone added...
Interesting additions. The last three were pretty much "givens". Keeping the first two guys, Goedert & McAllister are question marks that may have some other intangible factors that we are unaware of:

Goedert 3B: The Indians are clearly unsure if this spot on the MLB roster has been "fixed".. i.e. it's an area that has yet to be resolved. It says that the front office's plan to open Spring Training with Jason Nix as the starter may not be quite as solid as we have been led to believe... The free agent market is thin.. making non-tenders or trades the only options. Those won't be known for a couple of weeks. Goedert as a fall back position may not be the best, but it is with a guy the Indians know and may be able to "survive with" for a short time.. Of all the guys on the 40 man.. none should be considered a permanent "fix" for this spot..

Z-Mac: Over Miller? maybe. It would be a HUGE stretch to believe another MLB club would make a HUGE sacrifice with a spot on their 25 man roster for a guy with his history. He's the kind of prospect that seems more valuable to his current team.. than how he's viewed by the rest of the league, i.e an injury riddled former high upside prospect that has little or no chance to become what was originally projected and still has the same medical issues as an ongoing problem..
GeronimoSon
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 3948
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 6:17 pm

Re: Rule 5

Postby dazindiansfanuk » Fri Nov 19, 2010 7:39 pm

There are two factors only that I think should be used to determine if a guy is protected or not: -

1. Prospect status/potential

2. Likelihood to be picked in Rule 5

Using both of those factors, Goedert is a major stretch in my eyes to have been added.

As always, I'm not going to blow a gasket until after the Rule 5 draft - the Indians message board archives are littered with moaning over non-protection of players who never get picked (see Brown, Jordan!) - but, if Adam Miller ends up getting picked up I might just explode.

If he's picked, he's gone for good I feel. The only way he wouldn't stick with the picking team is if he gets hurt again, so they can manipulate the Rule 5 roster stipulations. Now, granted, if he does get hurt again there's a solid argument that the Tribe were right not to protect him, but I still won't be happy if he's selected.
dazindiansfanuk
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1854
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 12:51 pm

Re: Rule 5

Postby petes999 » Fri Nov 19, 2010 8:19 pm

Tony,

Maybe a good question for A. Miller's agent is how much interest did he get from other teams regarding Miller being a minor league FA? Or, did he resign so early before other teams were allowed to inquire?

Just asking because maybe if he didn't get any other calls, Indians are rolling the dice that he won't garner much interest in Rule 5 either.
petes999
Single-A Phenom
 
Posts: 559
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 6:02 pm

Re: Rule 5

Postby GhostofTedCox » Fri Nov 19, 2010 8:36 pm

TonyIPI wrote:Came down to this scenario for the final two spots:

Spot 1: McAllister or Miller
Spot 2: Goedert or JRod


How in the world could McAllister be considered a good prospect? There is no question Miller will be taken. Classic low-risk, high reward move.
User avatar
GhostofTedCox
Single-A Phenom
 
Posts: 729
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 11:24 pm

Re: Rule 5

Postby criznit2009 » Fri Nov 19, 2010 9:57 pm

Well they didn't add Miller.
As a fan I'm disgruntled.
Now perhaps his health is a bigger question mark than we know (or would like to admit) and that is the reason he wasn't rostered. That better be it. March is a long ways off, really don't see why any team doesn't take a chance on this guy. Don't know if there is a ranking out there for the best players available in the rule V draft..yet.. Wonder where adam would land on that list.
Someone will take him.
Can we?

I think Im too befuddled to be mad right now... Really hate this move....imagine seeing him next year pitching at progressive...... In an angels or royals or yankess(lol) uniform!!!!! wrong!
criznit2009
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1191
Joined: Tue May 12, 2009 9:27 pm
Location: Portland, OR

Re: Rule 5

Postby MadThinker88 » Sat Nov 20, 2010 12:44 am

petes999 wrote:Tony,

Maybe a good question for A. Miller's agent is how much interest did he get from other teams regarding Miller being a minor league FA? Or, did he resign so early before other teams were allowed to inquire?

Just asking because maybe if he didn't get any other calls, Indians are rolling the dice that he won't garner much interest in Rule 5 either.


This is a very good question to ask. Nice thinking Pete :good:
MadThinker88
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1752
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 10:48 am
Location: Eau Claire, Wisconsin

Re: Rule 5

Postby martyinnewyork » Sat Nov 20, 2010 7:04 am

I predict Miller is the first pick in the draft.
martyinnewyork
Single-A Phenom
 
Posts: 661
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 8:16 pm

Re: Rule 5

Postby TonyIBI » Sat Nov 20, 2010 8:29 am

TonyIPI wrote:Came down to this scenario for the final two spots:

Spot 1: McAllister or Miller
Spot 2: Goedert or JRod


Correction.

Goedert was supposedly on all the way and JRod not seriously considered. It really just came down to the final spot and if they would not roster a 5th player or if they would (McAllister). Miller got some consideration, but it they clearly went with McAllister.

One thing to note here, is if the Indians truly felt he was healthy and will stay healthy and is a legit option for next year there is absolutely no doubt he is rostered. To me not rostering him is an indictment that they have no faith in his health. Yes, he is surely "in the mix" next year, but hardly a sure thing to pitch ever again. I've also heard now that there is some questionable recent medical, and maybe this is something they bank on scaring other teams away potentially.

Yeah, it only costs $50K to draft a guy....but if they keep him on the DL all year that goes up to a $450K gamble since he is paid ML wage on the DL. Not as much of a slam dunk he gets picked.

I will say though, he's a "name" and a low-risk high reward guy, so teams may still take him. I have already been contacted by two scouts for two different teams asking some stuff about him.

That's another key too....teams consider recent scouting information vital, and considering scouts have not seen him pitch since May of 2008....I am not sure how much interest a team may have on him. The first thing they will do is consult the medical, and for a lot of teams it may scare them away.

We'll see I guess. I personally would have rostered Miller....I just don't want to risk that kick in the nuts it would be to see him picked and thrive elsewhere. But that's making an emotional decision with the heart.
User avatar
TonyIBI
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 5056
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:03 pm

Re: Rule 5

Postby Hermie13 » Mon Nov 22, 2010 1:23 pm

dazindiansfanuk wrote:Goedert, McAllister, Kluber, Judy and Hagadone added.

A little surprised


Like the picks. If Miller gets drafted so be it. Guy won't last through spring training let alone a whole year. Would be a bigger loss to lose Bryson than Miller IMO.
Hermie13
MLB All Star
 
Posts: 7120
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 11:34 am
Location: Cleveland, OH

Re: Rule 5

Postby davidkey » Tue Nov 23, 2010 4:38 pm

In a separate thread a compelling argument is made that A Miller will not get taken.

For fun, let's think about another guy who was not protected and who may/may not get taken. Josh Rodriguez.

If I'm a National League team, eg a crappy one like the Pirates, I might take a chance on a young guy like him with some tools and versatility. He doesn't do any one thing tremendously, but he does a lot of things serviceably, at least so far on the minor league level.

As a big leaguer, he could pinch hit (a little pop from the right side), can run pretty well, and can 'man' (if not 'play') multiple positions. Potentially a very useful guy in the NL where there are double switches, pinch hitters and pinch runners all the time.
davidkey
Undrafted Free Agent
 
Posts: 97
Joined: Tue Nov 23, 2010 4:32 pm

Re: Rule 5

Postby TonyIBI » Tue Nov 23, 2010 5:16 pm

It's a very short list of potentials we lose in the ML portion of the Rule 5. I actually anticipate we lose a couple guys in the AAA and AA portions of the draft because of how deep we are in that we can't protect everyone on the reserve lists.

But as for guys we may lose in ML portion...yeah, JRod and Miller are two who may be lost. McBride may get some interest too. Outside of that, I don't see much else. Even if we lose any of Miller, McBride, and JRod, I get the feeling the org is not too worried about it.
User avatar
TonyIBI
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 5056
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:03 pm

Re: Rule 5

Postby Edible14 » Wed Nov 24, 2010 1:19 am

TonyIPI wrote:It's a very short list of potentials we lose in the ML portion of the Rule 5. I actually anticipate we lose a couple guys in the AAA and AA portions of the draft because of how deep we are in that we can't protect everyone on the reserve lists.

But as for guys we may lose in ML portion...yeah, JRod and Miller are two who may be lost. McBride may get some interest too. Outside of that, I don't see much else. Even if we lose any of Miller, McBride, and JRod, I get the feeling the org is not too worried about it.


The only way I can see McBride being taken is if some team is convinced he can play catcher. I'd doubt that anyone thinks that he can play the position serviceably at the MLB level since he hasn't done it for a couple of years, though.

I kinda doubt that Miller is taken. The guy hasn't thrown much at all the last 2-3 years. His velo is down, his health is questionable to just about every team, and he'll likely need some time to get a feel for pitching again, his mechanics to come back, and for him to be anywhere near accurate. I don't see how a team can justify putting a guy like that on the 25 man roster, where he would eventually have to see SOME playing time when the rest of the bullpen gets worn out. I don't think he's a guy you'd want to have to rely on next year.


JRod I can see an argument for. And to be honest, he'd hurt the most. The Indians aren't deep at middle IF. Imagine if ACab goes down next year. You have Donald at SS, Valbuena at 2B, and Nix and Goedert at 3B/backup IF. And nobody behind them on the 40 man roster that can play 2B, SS or 3B. That's poor offensively AND defensively.

And, if JRod gets taken, who plays SS at AAA? Do you play Phelps there just to get him some ABs? Valbuena if he's not on the 25 man roster? Some 4A guy like Bixler?
User avatar
Edible14
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1083
Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 11:49 am

Re: Rule 5

Postby tribefan611 » Wed Nov 24, 2010 11:34 am

Edible14 wrote:
TonyIPI wrote:It's a very short list of potentials we lose in the ML portion of the Rule 5. I actually anticipate we lose a couple guys in the AAA and AA portions of the draft because of how deep we are in that we can't protect everyone on the reserve lists.

But as for guys we may lose in ML portion...yeah, JRod and Miller are two who may be lost. McBride may get some interest too. Outside of that, I don't see much else. Even if we lose any of Miller, McBride, and JRod, I get the feeling the org is not too worried about it.


The only way I can see McBride being taken is if some team is convinced he can play catcher. I'd doubt that anyone thinks that he can play the position serviceably at the MLB level since he hasn't done it for a couple of years, though.

I kinda doubt that Miller is taken. The guy hasn't thrown much at all the last 2-3 years. His velo is down, his health is questionable to just about every team, and he'll likely need some time to get a feel for pitching again, his mechanics to come back, and for him to be anywhere near accurate. I don't see how a team can justify putting a guy like that on the 25 man roster, where he would eventually have to see SOME playing time when the rest of the bullpen gets worn out. I don't think he's a guy you'd want to have to rely on next year.

JRod I can see an argument for. And to be honest, he'd hurt the most. The Indians aren't deep at middle IF. Imagine if ACab goes down next year. You have Donald at SS, Valbuena at 2B, and Nix and Goedert at 3B/backup IF. And nobody behind them on the 40 man roster that can play 2B, SS or 3B. That's poor offensively AND defensively.

And, if JRod gets taken, who plays SS at AAA? Do you play Phelps there just to get him some ABs? Valbuena if he's not on the 25 man roster? Some 4A guy like Bixler?


They wouldn't need to play him at all, just have him on the DL all year, correct?
User avatar
tribefan611
Single-A Phenom
 
Posts: 761
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2010 11:39 am

Re: Rule 5

Postby Edible14 » Wed Nov 24, 2010 6:33 pm

tribefan611 wrote:They wouldn't need to play him at all, just have him on the DL all year, correct?


They could, but I doubt it. You're talking about tacking on an additional league minimum salary to the payroll, all on the hope that a guy with a completely reconstructed pulley system in his finger might some day be... a decent reliever? He's certainly never going to start again. I don't know off the top of my head, but do teams really EVER draft a guy that they know is going to be on the DL all year? If he's taking a spot on the bullpen, at least you can argue that 400k of that is a sunk cost of having any guy on the roster, but if he's just on the DL... that 400k IS an additional cost to just the 50k to take him (not to mention the health insurance, medical costs, etc.). I don't think a scout is going to suggest taking a half a million dollar flier on a guy that you have almost no medical info about.
User avatar
Edible14
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1083
Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 11:49 am

Re: Rule 5

Postby dazindiansfanuk » Wed Nov 24, 2010 6:40 pm

Rule 5 rules dictate, I believe, that even if a player spends all year on the DL he would still need to remain on the active (25-man) roster for 90 days the following year to remain property of the team selecting him.
dazindiansfanuk
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1854
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 12:51 pm

Re: Rule 5

Postby jellis » Sat Nov 27, 2010 7:27 pm

dazindiansfanuk wrote:Rule 5 rules dictate, I believe, that even if a player spends all year on the DL he would still need to remain on the active (25-man) roster for 90 days the following year to remain property of the team selecting him.



you are correct
jellis
Triple-A Stud
 
Posts: 3016
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 5:34 pm

Re: Rule 5

Postby GeronimoSon » Wed Dec 08, 2010 10:59 pm

Time for the Indians to take a chance?

http://www.baseball-reference.com/minor ... mire001elv

Could be the only guy worth taking for the Indians tomorrow..however unlikely...
GeronimoSon
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 3948
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 6:17 pm

Re: Rule 5

Postby TonyIBI » Thu Dec 09, 2010 12:32 am

From what I understand, though they may end up doing something don't expect the Indians to make a pick tomorrow.

As for Miller, getting some last minute info from sources that their clubs are greatly intrigued by him. Still not a sure thing at all he is picked, but I know one NL club that is VERY interested in him. Their biggest hangup is the lack of medical info and any recent scouting info. Miller has gone from unlikely to now possible as far as a Rule 5 pick goes.
User avatar
TonyIBI
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 5056
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:03 pm

Re: Rule 5

Postby GoTribe028 » Thu Dec 09, 2010 9:41 am

Just reading that J-Rod is expected to be picked up by the Pirates....we'll see I guess.
Follow me on Twitter @GoTribe028 for useless and random tweets.
GoTribe028
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1165
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2009 5:44 pm

Re: Rule 5

Postby GeronimoSon » Thu Dec 09, 2010 10:04 am

Steve Vogt, Aneurys Rodriguez and Taylor Green along with Elvin Ramirez could be in the mix when it comes time for the Indians to pick...
GeronimoSon
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 3948
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 6:17 pm

Re: Rule 5

Postby GoTribe028 » Thu Dec 09, 2010 10:05 am

GeronimoSon wrote:Steve Vogt, Aneurys Rodriguez and Taylor Green along with Elvin Ramirez could be in the mix when it comes time for the Indians to pick...


Cant pick, full 40 man roster, not able to pick
Follow me on Twitter @GoTribe028 for useless and random tweets.
GoTribe028
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1165
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2009 5:44 pm

Re: Rule 5

Postby npc29 » Thu Dec 09, 2010 10:06 am

There goes J-Rod.. To the Pirates..

And Jose Flores goes a pick after him..
npc29
Single-A Phenom
 
Posts: 625
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 4:59 pm
Location: Kent, OH

Re: Rule 5

Postby dazindiansfanuk » Thu Dec 09, 2010 10:09 am

Man, Flores is a stretch.

From Low-A to MLB? Big ask
dazindiansfanuk
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1854
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 12:51 pm

Re: Rule 5

Postby dazindiansfanuk » Thu Dec 09, 2010 10:16 am

ML phase done..... just J-Rod and Flores lost.

Miller not selected.
dazindiansfanuk
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1854
Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 12:51 pm

Re: Rule 5

Postby GeronimoSon » Thu Dec 09, 2010 10:26 am

J-Rod is probably lost for good... good luck to him... Jose Flores will be back...
GeronimoSon
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 3948
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 6:17 pm

Re: Rule 5

Postby TonyIBI » Thu Dec 09, 2010 10:54 am

GeronimoSon wrote:J-Rod is probably lost for good... good luck to him... Jose Flores will be back...


Yes on both.

JRod went to the one team that he had the best opp to stick. I must admit I never thought about Huntington and the Pirates at #1, but didn't think our guys were attractive enough for #1 overall. I got a text at 7:40am this morning from a source that Pirates were in play for an Indians guy, hence my tweet earlier this morning.

Flores is a reach of all reaches. This may be a case of an org getting one look at a guy and seeing something worth taking a shot on. Seattle front office was at Midwest League Champ series and saw him pitch....but I will say that he struggled in the championship series with command, so they REALLY must have seen something.
User avatar
TonyIBI
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 5056
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:03 pm

Re: Rule 5

Postby toledobuck » Thu Dec 09, 2010 11:06 am

Did the Tribe lose or gain anybody in the minor league portion of the rule 5?
toledobuck
Rookie Baller
 
Posts: 253
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 11:07 am

Re: Rule 5

Postby TonyIBI » Thu Dec 09, 2010 11:10 am

toledobuck wrote:Did the Tribe lose or gain anybody in the minor league portion of the rule 5?


Still confirming, but no.

Definitely not the Double-A phase, and the Indians person I have been texting says he is pretty sure they didn't lose anyone in AAA phase. Tough to know as it went so fast (all phases are already over!) that unless you were there to hear them it will be a short bit before a full listing is provided.
User avatar
TonyIBI
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 5056
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:03 pm

Re: Rule 5

Postby Edible14 » Thu Dec 09, 2010 11:19 am

As I said before, losing JRod kinda hurts. I don't know who gets to play SS at Columbus next year, and I'm a bit curious who gets the nod at Cleveland if ACab goes down. Valbuena and Donald are options, but I think it means that trading Valbuena is even less likely now.

I can see the Indians having some minor league free agent fill the void for the first half of the year, then perhaps calling up Diaz if he's doing well at Akron. Similar to how we had Brian Buscher at Columbus last year until Chiz was called up.
User avatar
Edible14
Double-A Hot Shot
 
Posts: 1083
Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2010 11:49 am

Re: Rule 5

Postby TonyIBI » Thu Dec 09, 2010 11:40 am

Edible14 wrote:As I said before, losing JRod kinda hurts. I don't know who gets to play SS at Columbus next year, and I'm a bit curious who gets the nod at Cleveland if ACab goes down. Valbuena and Donald are options, but I think it means that trading Valbuena is even less likely now.

I can see the Indians having some minor league free agent fill the void for the first half of the year, then perhaps calling up Diaz if he's doing well at Akron. Similar to how we had Brian Buscher at Columbus last year until Chiz was called up.


Whether JRod was here or not, Donald is the #2 shortstop if Cabrera goes down as things currently stand with the roster.

Will be interesting to see who they get to man SS at Columbus. Indians just lost their SS at Columbus and Akron (Rivero).
User avatar
TonyIBI
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 5056
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:03 pm

Re: Rule 5

Postby theshow » Thu Dec 09, 2010 11:48 am

Edible14 wrote:As I said before, losing JRod kinda hurts. I don't know who gets to play SS at Columbus next year, and I'm a bit curious who gets the nod at Cleveland if ACab goes down. Valbuena and Donald are options, but I think it means that trading Valbuena is even less likely now.


This is moderately dissapointing, as I think Edible hit the nail on the head and this is dissapointing on 3 fronts:

1. I have 0 faith that Valbuena will ever be anything. He frustrates me more than anyone, and I have written him off entirely. It was so excited to hear the Mariners might take that awful player, but now we are probably going to be stuck holding onto him for depth.

2. We have worthless 40-man players who we could have taken off and prevented this. Germano is a dime a dozen, and had we just removed him and put JROD on. We could have found space for JROD and Adam Miller easily if we really wanted to.

3. I don't want Adam Everritt, and Nick Punto might be more bearable, but I don't even want him. Now with one more guy out of the mix, we might sign one of these 2 stiffs. I always remember watching Twins games and thinking the Twins would be so much better if they just got that stiff Punto out of their lineup. Now that guy who I always thought sucked might be coming here.
theshow
Rookie Baller
 
Posts: 372
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2009 12:00 am

Re: Rule 5

Postby GhostofTedCox » Thu Dec 09, 2010 11:57 am

The Indians made a fast $100K today in the Rule 5 draft. Now they will have the money to sign Punto.
I don't think people realize the dire situation the Indians are in financially. Last in MLB attendance in 2010, they will be last again in 2011.
User avatar
GhostofTedCox
Single-A Phenom
 
Posts: 729
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 11:24 pm

Re: Rule 5

Postby TonyIBI » Thu Dec 09, 2010 12:19 pm

Indians were correct in not rostering Miller. Even with the "talk" by teams having interest in Miller, it was just name only and in the end no one even wanted to spend the $50K on him to see his medical situation for themselves.

The J-Rod situation is different as there are a few questions that rise and make you wonder. Is he any worse than Valbuena? Is Valbuena even a better fit long term?

From what I know, there were some in the front office who really wanted JRod on the 40-man. Some who did not. A split camp on whether to roster Goedert or JRod, and they in the end decided on on Goedert.

Question: Who would you guys have rather rostered, Goedert or JRod?
User avatar
TonyIBI
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 5056
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:03 pm

Re: Rule 5

Postby toledobuck » Thu Dec 09, 2010 12:41 pm

I think it is a pretty easy decision. You roster Goedert as 3B is a much blacker hole than SS right now. Cabrera is a good starter @ SS. We have nobody at 3B.

TonyIPI wrote:Indians were correct in not rostering Miller. Even with the "talk" by teams having interest in Miller, it was just name only and in the end no one even wanted to spend the $50K on him to see his medical situation for themselves.

The J-Rod situation is different as there are a few questions that rise and make you wonder. Is he any worse than Valbuena? Is Valbuena even a better fit long term?

From what I know, there were some in the front office who really wanted JRod on the 40-man. Some who did not. A split camp on whether to roster Goedert or JRod, and they in the end decided on on Goedert.

Question: Who would you guys have rather rostered, Goedert or JRod?
toledobuck
Rookie Baller
 
Posts: 253
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 11:07 am

Re: Rule 5

Postby TonyIBI » Thu Dec 09, 2010 12:54 pm

toledobuck wrote:I think it is a pretty easy decision. You roster Goedert as 3B is a much blacker hole than SS right now. Cabrera is a good starter @ SS. We have nobody at 3B.


Agree that SS is in much better shape at ML level.

In the minors though the biggest black hole in the org is clearly shortstop. Now a FA at Columbus, Diaz at Akron, Frawley at Kinston, and Wolters at Lake County. At High-A and above they have no real prospects. Wolters is gonna have to come through huge, and Cabrera/Donald will need to be our guys the next few years.
User avatar
TonyIBI
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 5056
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:03 pm

Re: Rule 5

Postby petes999 » Thu Dec 09, 2010 1:06 pm

toledobuck wrote:I think it is a pretty easy decision. You roster Goedert as 3B is a much blacker hole than SS right now. Cabrera is a good starter @ SS. We have nobody at 3B.

TonyIPI wrote:Question: Who would you guys have rather rostered, Goedert or JRod?


Hindsight is always 20/20 and I would have thought to do Miller, Rod before Goedert ... but Toledo ... I would almost have the opposite rationale than you. 3B is stronger than ss. Yes, at the beginning of the season we have an issue with Nix and Phelps as the only two serious contenders. But, by mid-season or September that spot goes to Chisenhall with Bellows and Urshela a few years behind to replace Chisenhall if he bombs (which I doubt is the case). Yet, with SS, we have Cabrera and Donald then nothing now unless Diaz comes up with a bat before Wolters pushes him out of the way in 3-5 years.

Now, Rod. is a utility guy at best. So, it isn't much of a loss. But, he could fill in at SS. And, a utility guy like him was more likely to be selected before Goedert. And, I almost say Goedert is blocked in our system unless he becomes our next OF/1b utility because there isn't a gap for him to break out at 3b. For Rod, I could have seen him be an injury replacement for the next 2 years before a Diaz, Sanchez or someone else is ready. But, you can pick up a utility guy off the scrap heap. So, that is why I would have gone with Miller first before Tony's bleak picture of if he is even healthy.
petes999
Single-A Phenom
 
Posts: 559
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 6:02 pm

Re: Rule 5

Postby GeronimoSon » Thu Dec 09, 2010 1:07 pm

Valbuena, Bellows, Urshela, Chisenhall, Donald, Phelps, Nix, Goedert, Kipnis, & Asdrubal could all be part of the group that covers SS/2B/3B.. not horrible, but, clearly very young...
GeronimoSon
MLB Rookie
 
Posts: 3948
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 6:17 pm

Re: Rule 5

Postby danh8 » Thu Dec 09, 2010 1:09 pm

TonyIPI wrote:
GeronimoSon wrote:J-Rod is probably lost for good... good luck to him... Jose Flores will be back...


Yes on both.

JRod went to the one team that he had the best opp to stick. I must admit I never thought about Huntington and the Pirates at #1, but didn't think our guys were attractive enough for #1 overall. I got a text at 7:40am this morning from a source that Pirates were in play for an Indians guy, hence my tweet earlier this morning.

Flores is a reach of all reaches. This may be a case of an org getting one look at a guy and seeing something worth taking a shot on. Seattle front office was at Midwest League Champ series and saw him pitch....but I will say that he struggled in the championship series with command, so they REALLY must have seen something.


The Pirates scout that is a golf buddy of mine, pretty much called this to me last week. He was the guy that said that Adam Miller was best to stay with the Indians, both for the player and organization point of view. He thinks highly of JROD going back to when he was drafted. This guy used to be with the Indians as well..

From the Indians perspective, they did right by Josh here. He clearly wasn't going to be getting the opportunity he's earned in this organization with so many bodies of high standing ahead of him, and younger. But, I think he's started to figure some key things out in terms of personal discipline, and fundamental adjustments in the past year and low side, will be a sound utility IF, and really don't count out his chances of someday landing a starting gig in a venue like the Pirates.
danh8
Rookie Baller
 
Posts: 320
Joined: Wed May 05, 2010 12:49 am

Re: Rule 5

Postby danh8 » Thu Dec 09, 2010 1:16 pm

petes999 wrote:
toledobuck wrote:I think it is a pretty easy decision. You roster Goedert as 3B is a much blacker hole than SS right now. Cabrera is a good starter @ SS. We have nobody at 3B.

TonyIPI wrote:Question: Who would you guys have rather rostered, Goedert or JRod?


Hindsight is always 20/20 and I would have thought to do Miller, Rod before Goedert ... but Toledo ... I would almost have the opposite rationale than you. 3B is stronger than ss. Yes, at the beginning of the season we have an issue with Nix and Phelps as the only two serious contenders. But, by mid-season or September that spot goes to Chisenhall with Bellows and Urshela a few years behind to replace Chisenhall if he bombs (which I doubt is the case). Yet, with SS, we have Cabrera and Donald then nothing now unless Diaz comes up with a bat before Wolters pushes him out of the way in 3-5 years.

Now, Rod. is a utility guy at best. So, it isn't much of a loss. But, he could fill in at SS. And, a utility guy like him was more likely to be selected before Goedert. And, I almost say Goedert is blocked in our system unless he becomes our next OF/1b utility because there isn't a gap for him to break out at 3b. For Rod, I could have seen him be an injury replacement for the next 2 years before a Diaz, Sanchez or someone else is ready. But, you can pick up a utility guy off the scrap heap. So, that is why I would have gone with Miller first before Tony's bleak picture of if he is even healthy.


From a pure talent standpoint I can see protecting Josh and exposing Goedert, but the kicker was organizational depth and needs, in my opinion. Plus, just doing what was best for the given player, that being JRod.
danh8
Rookie Baller
 
Posts: 320
Joined: Wed May 05, 2010 12:49 am

Re: Rule 5

Postby petes999 » Thu Dec 09, 2010 1:26 pm

GeronimoSon wrote:Valbuena, Bellows, Urshela, Chisenhall, Donald, Phelps, Nix, Goedert, Kipnis, & Asdrubal could all be part of the group that covers SS/2B/3B.. not horrible, but, clearly very young...


Strong group at 2nd/3rd .... that is why I would have waited on Goedert a bit. But, in there were are the SS's - Asdrubal ... Donald and maybe Valbuena. That is weak unless Diaz comes on with a bat this year. Let's hope as his glove is said to be ML ready (or atleast best in system next to astrubal) ... but we have heard that before with Rivero.

Also Tony ... can you give any clue why Flores went so high after

"Jose Flores (RHP): No chance as he is a low end prospect who pitched at Low-A last season, although he may be lost in the Triple-A or Double-A phase if he is not protected on one of those lists (the Triple-A and Double-A reserve lists are unknown)."
petes999
Single-A Phenom
 
Posts: 559
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 6:02 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Indians Prospect Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

cron