Matt Purke?

[Number5]

The White Sox just DFA LHP Matt Purke.

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2016/12/white-sox-designate-matt-purke.html

LH batters hit .105 against him in AAA last year, and .167 in the majors.  Worth a claim if the White Sox can't trade him within the next 10 days and have to put him thru waivers?  Seems like a good candidate to be a loogy that can ride the shuttle between Baltimore and Norfolk.  I'm guessing Bridwell would pass thru waivers for us to make room on the 40-man.

Thoughts?

[waroriole]

Worth a claim. Control issues last year, but they were an outlier. Not a big deal if we don't get him, but doesn't hurt to look.

[TheBee]

I have never seen him pitch.  Former 3rd round pick who has just been moved to relief.  Low 90s fastball.  Struggled with control as Waroriole said.  Struck out a large percentage of lefties (small sample size).  Solid GB% during his stint in the majors as a reliever.  Ok.

[Legend_Of_Joey]

Worth a shot.

I could be wrong on the numbers, but I don't think anyone would have to be taken off the 40 right now. I think they are up to 39.

[Larry18]

36 minutes ago, TheBee said:

I have never seen him pitch.  Former 3rd round pick who has just been moved to relief.  Low 90s fastball.  Struggled with control as Waroriole said.  Struck out a large percentage of lefties (small sample size).  Solid GB% during his stint in the majors as a reliever.  Ok.

Former 1st round pick. The Rangers were under MLB stewardship and wouldn't meet his price. He went to TCU where he developed shoulder problems.

 

 

[bobmc]

30 minutes ago, Legend_Of_Joey said:

Worth a shot.

I could be wrong on the numbers, but I don't think anyone would have to be taken off the 40 right now. I think they are up to 39.

 

[Legend_Of_Joey]

39 minutes ago, bobmc said:

 

Thanks, wasn't sure.

I'm still up for this signing.

[TheBee]

2 hours ago, Larry18 said:

Former 1st round pick. The Rangers were under MLB stewardship and wouldn't meet his price. He went to TCU where he developed shoulder problems.

 

 

Thanks for correcting that.  I only saw that the Nats later took him with the sixth pick in the 3rd round (96th overall) in the 2011 draft.

[Larry18]

4 minutes ago, TheBee said:

Thanks for correcting that.  I only saw that the Nats later took him with the sixth pick in the 3rd round (96th overall) in the 2011 draft.

It wasn't meant as a criticism but to shed some more light on Purke. He's one of my favorite "What if" players.

[TheBee]

48 minutes ago, Larry18 said:

It wasn't meant as a criticism but to shed some more light on Purke. He's one of my favorite "What if" players.

No worries.  I didn't take it as a criticism.  It actually helped inform me that obviously the kid was a one of the top high school prospects in the country who went to a very good collegiate program and got drafted in the top 100 by the Nats despite the shoulder issues.  Like I said earlier, I haven't seen him pitch.  

[sportsfan8703]

The guy has a career 7.28 ERA in AA.  There's guys out there floating around with better track records and stuff than him that are signing on milb deals.  Guys like CJ Rifenhauser.  Norfolk's Andy Oliver is way better than this guy.

Our 40 man roster already has 2 rule 5 guys, 3 C's with no options.  We don't have room for 2 LOOGYS.  Hart is good enough.  We're not above claiming guys off waivers but we're better that this guy.  

[Number5]

4 minutes ago, sportsfan8703 said:

The guy has a career 7.28 ERA in AA.  There's guys out there floating around with better track records and stuff than him that are signing on milb deals.  Guys like CJ Rifenhauser.  Norfolk's Andy Oliver is way better than this guy.

Our 40 man roster already has 2 rule 5 guys, 3 C's with no options.  We don't have room for 2 LOOGYS.  Hart is good enough.  We're not above claiming guys off waivers but we're better that this guy.  

We are in disagreement here.  His stuff has always been highly thought of by scouts, and I don't think cherry-picking his poorest 55 innings is necessarily the best way to judge a player's prospects.  It appears to me that his struggles as a starter relate to his results vs. RH batters.  Indications are that he can have success as a situational guy.  You really don't think we can make room for him?  There are several guys on our 40-man I would have no problem with risking DFA if we were to win a waiver claim on Purke.  They would be highly likely to pass thru waivers so that we could reassign them to Norfolk.  The cost/risk of a waiver claim here is very low, IMO.  Actually, it looks very much like a DD-type move to me.

[sportsfan8703]

39 minutes ago, Number5 said:

We are in disagreement here.  His stuff has always been highly thought of by scouts, and I don't think cherry-picking his poorest 55 innings is necessarily the best way to judge a player's prospects.  It appears to me that his struggles as a starter relate to his results vs. RH batters.  Indications are that he can have success as a situational guy.  You really don't think we can make room for him?  There are several guys on our 40-man I would have no problem with risking DFA if we were to win a waiver claim on Purke.  They would be highly likely to pass thru waivers so that we could reassign them to Norfolk.  The cost/risk of a waiver claim here is very low, IMO.  Actually, it looks very much like a DD-type move to me.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/register/player.cgi?id=purke-001mat

Please cherry pick from Matt Purke's results.  He's just a guy that was good enough to once get drafted in the 1st round and then got hurt.  

I did jinx Andy Oliver away.  He just signed a milb deal with the Brewers.  

http://www.baseball-reference.com/register/player.cgi?id=oliver001and

Way better than Purke.  Plus he was a former 2nd rd pick and top 100 prospect.  We could have kept him just by adding him to the 40 man.  I don't see us adding Purke to the 40 man and then also having to DFA someone to do so.  

It's ok.  There will be moves like this made.  Just of the milb contract variety wise.