Jump to content
Luke-OH

Luke’s 2018 Rule 5 Draft Preference List

Recommended Posts

On 11/13/2018 at 1:47 PM, atomic said:

I don't think you need to have a 30 win team for a season to be rebuilding.  If you sign a bunch of these Rule 5 guys and don't improve the roster that is where you are headed.  I am not sure what the point of building the worst team in major league history is.  Or having a team of lower quality than AAA even.  

Also Andreoli is already gone and I hope Mike Wright is gone as well.  There are minor league free agents and low salary major league free agents that could improve the club to be at least in the mid 50 win level.  

The only Rule 5 guy who helped the big league team at all was Flaherty and he was replacement level and could easily have been traded for next to nothing.  The rest of the guys are mostly players who stunk up the roster for a year. Went down to the minors the next year and then disappeared from everyone's mind.   Well TJ McFarland was with the team several years being worse than replacement level. 

Joey Rickard was at least Flaherty level, not that I'm changing your argument...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/13/2018 at 6:31 AM, POR said:

How Ben Cherington handled the 2013 Red Sox has zero to do with how he would handle the Orioles. The Orioles were 47-115.  They are rebuilding.   The Red Sox in 2012 underachieved greatly under Bobby Valentine and just made tweaks to compete in 2013.

Carlos Asauje, Allen Coedoba, Javy Guerra, Alex Dickerson, Robbie Erlin, Brett Kennedy, Walter Lockett, Eric Lauer, Bryan Mitchell and Luis Perdomo may be impacted by the Padres tight 40 man roster.  The idea that Chris Paddack would be available because the Padres roster is full is silly.

 

It cannot be overstated how much Bobby Valentine underachieved with that team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, theocean said:

It cannot be overstated how much Bobby Valentine underachieved with that team.

Oh, it probably can.   And perhaps you just did.   

I’m not here to tell you that Valentine did a good job, but he did join a team that had largely been blown up.    Ortiz missed a good chunk of the season and so did Ellsbury.   Youkilis aged poorly and kind’ve fell apart that year.   Put it this way, the 2012 Red Sox weren’t a playoff team no matter who had been managing them.   Could they have done better than 69 wins?    Probably.   

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Oh, it probably can.   And perhaps you just did.   

I’m not here to tell you that Valentine did a good job, but he did join a team that had largely been blown up.    Ortiz missed a good chunk of the season and so did Ellsbury.   Youkilis aged poorly and kind’ve fell apart that year.   Put it this way, the 2012 Red Sox weren’t a playoff team no matter who had been managing them.   Could they have done better than 69 wins?    Probably.   

I remember when Valentine coached the Rangers how badly they were with fundamentals. But the had success with the Mets. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Frobby said:

Oh, it probably can.   And perhaps you just did.   

I’m not here to tell you that Valentine did a good job, but he did join a team that had largely been blown up.    Ortiz missed a good chunk of the season and so did Ellsbury.   Youkilis aged poorly and kind’ve fell apart that year.   Put it this way, the 2012 Red Sox weren’t a playoff team no matter who had been managing them.   Could they have done better than 69 wins?    Probably.   

Come on, Frobby. In 2011 they won 90 games, in 2013 they won the World Series. Ortiz himself said that clubhouse atmosphere Valentine created kept them from winning games:

https://www.nbcsports.com/boston/boston-red-sox/david-ortiz-details-bobby-valentine-season-managing-boston-red-sox-in-book-excerpt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, theocean said:

Come on, Frobby. In 2011 they won 90 games, in 2013 they won the World Series. Ortiz himself said that clubhouse atmosphere Valentine created kept them from winning games:

https://www.nbcsports.com/boston/boston-red-sox/david-ortiz-details-bobby-valentine-season-managing-boston-red-sox-in-book-excerpt

I see 2013 as more of a fluke than 2012 — after all, look what happened in 2014 without Valentine.   As I’ve expressed elsewhere, 2013 was driven by several offseason acquisitions having great years along with a few others.   Valentine was horrible but that 2012 team wasn’t going anywhere regardless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, WarehouseChatter said:

So if the roster stays as is, who do we lose in the draft? Jomar Reyes?  Chris Lee?  Others?

No one? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, weams said:

No one? 

Possibly, but I have to think someone would take a flyer on one of these 2 - especially after Lee performed "okay" in the AFL.  Reyes hasn't developed but a team may try to sneak him onto their roster as a project.  I lean towards your answer - we'll see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay now that we have gotten all those side-bar conversations out of our system and we know who was left unprotected, anyone have a take on who looks interesting? @Luke-OH?

 

Or we could go back to discussing the 2012 Red Sox ;)

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, WarehouseChatter said:

Possibly, but I have to think someone would take a flyer on one of these 2 - especially after Lee performed "okay" in the AFL.  Reyes hasn't developed but a team may try to sneak him onto their roster as a project.  I lean towards your answer - we'll see.

You know, the Rays DFA'd C.J. Cron.  Now he cost 5 million but he had a ops+ of 123 last season. I don't think corner guys infield or outfield are in things right now. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Ven6 said:

Okay now that we have gotten all those side-bar conversations out of our system and we know who was left unprotected, anyone have a take on who looks interesting? @Luke-OH?

 

Or we could go back to discussing the 2012 Red Sox ;)

My initial list got decimated by players getting protected. Even some more under the radar types I liked such as JT Brubacker, Ty France, Patrick Murphy, Brock Burke, and Sam Hentges all got protected.

I still have 30 some names, and I'm going to try to add 15-20 more and whittle them down to a top 30.

20 minutes ago, WarehouseChatter said:

So if the roster stays as is, who do we lose in the draft? Jomar Reyes?  Chris Lee?  Others?

Cervenka is the most likely IMO, backup catcher with some raw pop is a popular rule 5 typecast. Maybe someone thinks they can fix Chris Lee, but if I had to put odds on it, I'd say it's more likely no one gets picked. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Luke-OH said:

My initial list got decimated by players getting protected. Even some more under the radar types I liked such as JT Brubacker, Ty France, Patrick Murphy, Brock Burke, and Sam Hentges all got protected.

I still have 30 some names, and I'm going to try to add 15-20 more and whittle them down to a top 30.

Cervenka is the most likely IMO, backup catcher with some raw pop is a popular rule 5 typecast. Maybe someone thinks they can fix Chris Lee, but if I had to put odds on it, I'd say it's more likely no one gets picked. 

I always look forward to and appreciate your thoughtful work. Thank you in advance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


Orioles Information


Orioles News and Information

Daily Organizational Boxscores

News

Tony's Takes

Orioles Roster Resource

Orioles Prospect Information

2018 End of Season Top 30 Prospects List

Prospect Scouting Reports

Statistics

2019 Orioles Stats

2019 Orioles Minor League Stats

Baseball Savant Stats







  • Posts

    • I'm multitasking.
    • I'm here too, logged in as DJ Stewart's number one fan on the board. I like the guys who don't look like athletes.
    • Here's bad news: I'm watching. 
    • Looks like it's just me and you here, @eddie83
    • So I had a grand theory all ready to explain modern baseball, based on the impact of the information revolution on defense.  According to the theory, better data has allowed teams to better measure individual defense and the contribution of defense to run prevention, which has led to increased emphasis on defensive ability in personnel decisions.  Better data has also led to shifts and other improvements in defensive positioning.  All of these factors have led in theory to improved defensive efficiency--an increase in the percentage of balls in play that are converted into outs.  In turn, this has led to a change in optimal offensive strategies.  If it's harder to get hits on balls in play, then it is less likely that you will be able to score runs by stringing a bunch of singles together, or by using small ball tactics like base stealing, the hit and run and the sacrifice.  Teams thus optimally put more emphasis on power in personnel decisions, because a home run is the one way to score runs that can't be stopped by good defense. Great theory, huh?  Then I looked at the data.  Here are the numbers for aggregate defensive efficiency for MLB since 2001: 2001:  0.691     2002:  0.695   2003:  0.694   2004:  0.691   2005:  0.693   2006:  0.687   2007:  0.686   2008:  0.689 2009:  0.690   2010:  0.691   2011:  0.694    2012:  0.691   2013:  0.692   2014:  0.690    2015:  0.689    2016: 0.688 2017:  0.688    2018:  0.691 So twenty years into the defensive revolution, we have...the same defensive efficiency that we had in 2001.  Teams on the whole are doing no better today at converting balls in play into outs than they were in 2001, despite all of the shifts and all of the zone ratings and other defensive measures that are now available.   So much for my theory.  Some earlier posts suggest another theory--improved pitch design and velocity have made it harder to hit for contact, which increases strikeouts and reduces batting average.  In turn this leads to a greater emphasis on power at the expense of contact, increasing home runs, further increasing strikeouts and further reducing batting average.  That theory may be correct, but it's less obvious to me that the correct strategic response to improved pitch design and velocity is to sacrifice contact for power. It could go the other way--in response to better pitching, it is even more important to hit for contact, to put the ball in play, to sustain an offense.  It would take a model simulation to determine whether the optimal response to power pitching is to emphasize power hitting.   Or it could just be a juiced ball!  
    • Two out walk no damage. I say Orioles win 8-2 tonight.  
    • Holy hell Soler is having himself a season.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...