Orioles' 40 Man Roster 2009/2010 OffSeason Discussion

[Crazysilver03]

The reason Fio shouldn't be selected is this. He has no options left so he has to make the team next year or you risk losing him anyway. He's certainly no guarantee to make the team either.

This is the same scenario as a Rule 5 pick. They either make the team or they get offered back to the original team they were claimed from.

On Perrault, I'm confused. Sending him to the AFL is a signal that the O's like him and might protect him. However, they didn't call him up which sends the opposite signal. I'm admittedly confused on that one.

Maybe for the same reason Snyder and Bell weren't called up, because they are going to the AFL in a month so they wanted them to rest for a while.

BTW, if I haven't said it before, I love this thread and I"m thankful for all of the work and expertise that CrazySilver has put into it.

Thank You! When I made the post I wanted it to be as detailed as possible and to make sure all of the possibilities were out there!

[wildcard]

I like your posts but sorry, you have everyone being selected in the rule 5 draft. That's a 50/50 in Fio's case. Probably less than 50/50. There are a lot more Fio's around than you think. The reason Fio shouldn't be selected is this. He has no options left so he has to make the team next year or you risk losing him anyway. He's certainly no guarantee to make the team either.

I read in earlier posts that some people thin Ryan Adams might or should be protected. I put that possibility at 0%. First of all, he's just not that highly regarded. Second of all, with this defense, his only value to another team at this point is in his bat which hardly terrorized opponents in high A ball. Do you know of any team that would actually think of stashing Ryan Adams on their bench (especially with the limited number of bench players) just for the purpose of sending him back to the minors in 2010 and hoping he blossoms into a really good hitter? He offers ZERO to a ML team in 2010 without much promise of a payoff down the road. The chances of losing Ryan Adams is ZERO. Florimon, I think might be protected. I think it's a longshot that he'd be taken in the Rule 5 but I'd put the possibility at greater than zero. Given the dearth of legitimate SS prospects for the O's they might not want to risk even the minute chance that he's lost.

On Perrault, I'm confused. Sending him to the AFL is a signal that the O's like him and might protect him. However, they didn't call him up which sends the opposite signal. I'm admittedly confused on that one.

I think the O's will keep Albers. I hope the O's cut ties with Bass & Sarfate but I think it's 50/50 on their futures. If the O's think Sarfate can regain his mid 90's heat, they might gamble a spot on him. I'd bet against it though.

BTW, if I haven't said it before, I love this thread and I"m thankful for all of the work and expertise that CrazySilver has put into it.

Fio -I think you are underestimating what Fio has accomplished. As a 3rd round draft choice he will draw a look from some GMs. At 26 he will have 84 days or about half a year of experience in the majors at the end of this season. That is not that far off a prospects track.

He ranks 6th in the International league in OPS with 896. However only two of the guys ahead of him will be under 30 by the end of the season. Those guys are Cleveland's LaPorta who is a touted prospect and Yankee's Jordan Brown. Fio's 312/387/510/896 with 13 stolen bases and good defensive ability will draw interest this fall.

I think the O's protect him and trade him. I wouldn't mind seeing the O's trade him to the Jays for SS Angel Sanchez. I think Sanchez offers a glove and a bat at SS, something the O's could use as a backup to Izturis.

Adams -This has been on on-going discussion and I don't think anyone has been touting Adams since the O's sent him home.

Florimon - Good point. He is only 22. He could be protected. I had not really considered him up till now. I will have to think about that one.

Perrault - I agree with Crazy. None of the prospects that are going to the AFL are being called up. I think he gets protected.

Albers - is back throwing pretty well again. I think he gets protected.

Bass - The team has improved over last year and he has not. He is unprotected IMO.

Sarfate - Did well in relief last year but is caught between injuries and a roster crunch. I think the O's DFA him, tell him to look around and if he does not find anything at the major league level they would like to have him come back and work the kinks out at AAA. I think they would give him a ST invite.

[wildcard]

Here is one for CrazySilver.

I do not think that Florimon is eligible for the Rule 5 draft. He has played 6 years but only 4 full years and he signed when he was 17. Born Dec 10 1986. Signed pro contract June 18, 2004.

The part that is sticky is he played the first two years in the Domincan League. That is a short season league and I don't think it counts. If that is true he has only played 4 seasons that count.

Rule 5 Draft

After 4 or 5 years as a professional, a player must be added to his club’s 40-man roster or exposed to the 29 other clubs in the Rule 5 draft. (Under the new CBA, a club has 5 years to evaluate a player who signs his first pro contract at 18 years old or younger, but only 4 years to decide on a player who signs at age 19.) For purposes of calculating years as a pro, the counting begins the day a player signs his first pro contract, not the season he begins to play.

Born: http://www.thebaseballcube.com/players/F/Pedro-Florimon.shtml

Signed: http://www.minorleaguebaseball.com/milb/stats/stats.jsp?pos=&sid=milb&t=p_pbp&pid=465753

Under options it describes what constitutes a year:

A full season is defined as being on an active pro roster for at least 90 days in a season. (If a player is put on the disabled list after earning 60 or more days of service in a single season, his time on the DL is counted.) The 90-day requirement means short-season leagues (New-York Penn, Northwest, Pioneer, Appalachian, Gulf Coast, Arizona Rookie, Dominican and Venezuelan Summer Leagues) do not count as full seasons for the purposes of determining eligibility for a fourth option.

The question is does that same definition apply to Rule 5 eligibility?

(definitions from Cots Baseball Contracts)

If this definition applies its is a major deal. It applies to Erbe, Snyder and Josh Bell also. They all played in short season leagues their first year.

[Crazysilver03]

Here is one for CrazySilver.

I do not think that Florimon is eligible for the Rule 5 draft. He has played 6 years but only 4 full years and he signed when he was 17. Born Dec 10 1986. Signed pro contract June 18, 2004.

The part that is sticky is he played the first two years in the Domincan League. That is a short season league and I don't think it counts. If that is true he has only played 4 seasons that count.

Rule 5 Draft

After 4 or 5 years as a professional, a player must be added to his club’s 40-man roster or exposed to the 29 other clubs in the Rule 5 draft. (Under the new CBA, a club has 5 years to evaluate a player who signs his first pro contract at 18 years old or younger, but only 4 years to decide on a player who signs at age 19.) For purposes of calculating years as a pro, the counting begins the day a player signs his first pro contract, not the season he begins to play.

Born: http://www.thebaseballcube.com/players/F/Pedro-Florimon.shtml

Signed: http://www.minorleaguebaseball.com/milb/stats/stats.jsp?pos=&sid=milb&t=p_pbp&pid=465753

Under options it describes what constitutes a year:

A full season is defined as being on an active pro roster for at least 90 days in a season. (If a player is put on the disabled list after earning 60 or more days of service in a single season, his time on the DL is counted.) The 90-day requirement means short-season leagues (New-York Penn, Northwest, Pioneer, Appalachian, Gulf Coast, Arizona Rookie, Dominican and Venezuelan Summer Leagues) do not count as full seasons for the purposes of determining eligibility for a fourth option.

The question is does that same definition apply to Rule 5 eligibility?

(definitions from Cots Baseball Cots)

You could just be correct, since I didn't see the signed by date and saw that he had played 4 years in the minors at the age of 19 on, so that is where I thought he would be eligible.

Roch has reported that Florimon is eligible for selection, though I don't know if he got it from this thread or not.

You got me, I don't know the answer to this.

[wildcard]

You could just be correct, since I didn't see the signed by date and saw that he had played 4 years in the minors at the age of 19 on, so that is where I thought he would be eligible.

Roch has reported that Florimon is eligible for selection, though I don't know if he got it from this thread or not.

You got me, I don't know the answer to this.

I just added a comment: It applies to Erbe, Snyder and Josh Bell if it is true.

[Crazysilver03]

I just added a comment: It applies to Erbe, Snyder and Josh Bell if it is true.

Well, here is the part that is key:

After 4 or 5 years as a professional, a player must be added to his club’s 40-man roster or exposed to the 29 other clubs in the Rule 5 draft. (Under the new CBA, a club has 5 years to evaluate a player who signs his first pro contract at 18 years old or younger, but only 4 years to decide on a player who signs at age 19.) For purposes of calculating years as a pro, the counting begins the day a player signs his first pro contract, not the season he begins to play.

So all 4 players are eligible for the Rule 5 draft.

The calculation of professional years comes into play for minor league free agency.

I knew I had it figured out somewhere.

[wildcard]

Never mind. It doesn't work that way. I just looked at Bergesen and Hernandez who had to be added last year and the short season leagues did count.

[wildcard]

RZNJ is right. Florimon has to be protected and Liz is probably the one to drop.

Will consider if Moeller’s option should to picked up after the season. Hughes is the most likely to be dropped if that happens.

40 man roster projection

Starters

1. Bergy – 24

2. Matusz - 23

3. Tillman - 21/22

4. Guthrie – 31

5. Hernandez – 24

Relievers

6. J Johnson - 26

7. Mickolio - 25 - has options

8. Castillo -34 – has options

9. Uehara - 35

10. Hendrickson - 35 - re-signed

11. Albers - 27

12. Berken - 26 - has options

Additional pitchers

13. Lambert - 27 - has options

14. Ray -28 – has options

15. Meredith -26 - has options

16. Erbe - 22 - has options

17. Perrault - 27 - has options

18. S Johnson - 22 - has options

19. Thall -24 - has options

20. Lebron -25 – has option

21. Perez - 25 - has options

22. Spoone - 24 - has options

23. Patton - 24 - has option

Catchers

24. Wieters - 23

Outfielders

25. Markakis - 26

26. Jones - 24

27. Reimold - 26

28. Pie - 25

29. Montanez - 28 - has options

30. Fiorentino - 27 - Could be good in trade for a minor leaguer with options

1B

31. Scott – 31

32. Snyder - 23 - has options

33. Hughes - 26 -has options

2B

34. Roberts- 32

35. Turner - 25 - has options

SS

36. Izturis - 30

37. Andino - 25/26

38. Florimon – 23 – has options

3B

39. Wigginton - 32

40. Bell - 22 - has options

Exposed

Bass -28

Pauley - 26

Miller - 27/28

McCrory - 27

Waters - 29

Mora - 38 - FA

Moeller - 35

Baez - 32 - FA

Simon - 28

Hill - 30

Aubrey – 27/28

Sarfate – 29

Liz - 26

Does not need to be protected

Arrieta - 24 - has options

Britton - 22 - has options

Waring - 24 - has options

Ages as of April 2010

[Anonymous]

RZNJ is right. Florimon has to be protected and Liz is probably the one to drop.

Will consider if Moeller’s option should to picked up after the season. Hughes is the most likely to be dropped if that happens.

40 man roster projection

Starters

1. Bergy – 24

2. Matusz - 23

3. Tillman - 21/22

4. Guthrie – 31

5. Hernandez – 24

Relievers

6. J Johnson - 26

7. Mickolio - 25 - has options

8. Castillo -34 – has options

9. Uehara - 35

10. Hendrickson - 35 - re-signed

11. Albers - 27

12. Berken - 26 - has options

Additional pitchers

13. Lambert - 27 - has options

14. Ray -28 – has options

15. Meredith -26 - has options

16. Erbe - 22 - has options

17. Perrault - 27 - has options

18. S Johnson - 22 - has options

19. Thall -24 - has options

20. Lebron -25 – has option

21. Perez - 25 - has options

22. Spoone - 24 - has options

23. Patton - 24 - has option

Catchers

24. Wieters - 23

Outfielders

25. Markakis - 26

26. Jones - 24

27. Reimold - 26

28. Pie - 25

29. Montanez - 28 - has options

30. Fiorentino - 27 - Could be good in trade for a minor leaguer with options

1B

31. Scott – 31

32. Snyder - 23 - has options

33. Hughes - 26 -has options

2B

34. Roberts- 32

35. Turner - 25 - has options

SS

36. Izturis - 30

37. Andino - 25/26

38. Florimon – 23 – has options

3B

39. Wigginton - 32

40. Bell - 22 - has options

Exposed

Bass -28

Pauley - 26

Miller - 27/28

McCrory - 27

Waters - 29

Mora - 38 - FA

Moeller - 35

Baez - 32 - FA

Simon - 28

Hill - 30

Aubrey – 27/28

Sarfate – 29

Liz - 26

Does not need to be protected

Arrieta - 24 - has options

Britton - 22 - has options

Waring - 24 - has options

Ages as of April 2010

You and Crazysilver continually boggle my mind with your knowledge base on these kinds of roster issues. I have some questions for you and/or others, as well as a comment.

Question # 1: I'm surprised to see Florimon on the list. Is his defense so good as to warrant a spot?

Question # 2: If the team decides that they like Moeller for the backup catcher slot next year, as they are reportedly considering, can they afford NOT to keep him on the 40 man?

http://baltimore.orioles.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20090913&content_id=6935624&vkey=news_bal&fext=.jsp&c_id=bal

Comment: When selecting for the Rule 5, it always seems like a good idea to search for an injured player who can be stashed on IR for the year, as that gives the acquiring team an opportunity to work with the guy for an extended period of time with zero near-term roster risk. In looking over your list of exposed players, the obvious candidate for this type of treatment is Rich Hill. While I agree that he won't and shouldn't be protected, he's an interesting case not only because he DOES have an injury that might keep him on the shelf for all of 2010, but also because of the possibility that precisely that same injury could conceivably be explanatory of his recent suckitude pitching (I believe that's the technically correct term). To the extent that it is, he could still emerge as a fine pitcher two years hence.

[wildcard]

You and Crazysilver continually boggle my mind with your knowledge base on these kinds of roster issues. I have some questions for you and/or others, as well as a comment.

Question # 1: I'm surprised to see Florimon on the list. Is his defense so good as to warrant a spot?

Question # 2: If the team decides that they like Moeller for the backup catcher slot next year, as they are reportedly considering, can they afford NOT to keep him on the 40 man?

http://baltimore.orioles.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20090913&content_id=6935624&vkey=news_bal&fext=.jsp&c_id=bal

Comment: When selecting for the Rule 5, it always seems like a good idea to search for an injured player who can be stashed on IR for the year, as that gives the acquiring team an opportunity to work with the guy for an extended period of time with zero near-term roster risk. In looking over your list of exposed players, the obvious candidate for this type of treatment is Rich Hill. While I agree that he won't and shouldn't be protected, he's an interesting case not only because he DOES have an injury that might keep him on the shelf for all of 2010, but also because of the possibility that precisely that same injury could conceivably be explanatory of his recent suckitude pitching (I believe that's the technically correct term). To the extent that it is, he could still emerge as a fine pitcher two years hence.

There are several factors that make me (and I think probably MacPhail) choose to protect Florimon.

1) He he is only 22 and has the chance to improve in all areas.

2) He has shown offensive ability for a middle infielder.

3) SS that have high error rate either improve at SS or become 2B.

A team looking for a high ceiling middle infielder could select Flormin as their utility infielder if they currently have a strong SS. I think losing Florimon would hurt the O's minor league system more because he is a middle infielder which is a position of need for the O's than losing Liz who will be 26 trying to convert to being a middle reliever. Liz has gone as far as he can in trying to be a major league starter and he has failed. If he has a future in the majors it will be as a reliever and he has many guys ahead of him in the O's system. That is why I chose Florimon over Liz.

I have not made a decision on Moeller. He definitely has the inside track on being the O's backup catcher next year. The question of whether he is put on the 40 man roster involves other factors.

1) Can the O's slip him through the Rule 5 draft and sign him to a AAA contract until opening day? This is a function of two things. One, does he have a high average at the end of year that will draw attention to him. Two, is the O's relationship with him good enough to trust this to happen.

2) Its a matter of money. Moeller's extension is for $850K. What will it cost the O's to get him to the AAA roster? Do they have to increase it to $1M to get him to agree? Is it worth $150K versus just picking up his option and keep it a $850M?

3) Who would the O's be exposing to the draft instead and how damaging is it to lose that player. I think Hughes is the next one to go. Hughes is probably a DH in the majors. His defense at 1B at age 25 has not been good enough to trust the position to him to be more then a backup. Snyder's age and the time he has for development places him ahead of Hughes at 1st base. The O's seem committed to acquiring Delgado, LaRoche or Nick Johnson this off season. That lowers Hughes value to the O's. Wiggy is ahead of Hughes. Scott is ahead of Hughes. There is no need to keep Hughes to DH with Reimold and Scott on the team. This makes Moeller more valuable than Hughes.

I will waiting to see what Moeller offensive numbers are at the end of year before making this call. That determines his attractiveness to other teams and the cost of keeping him.

Hill - With the number and quality of starters the O's have coming through the system, the fact that Hill is out for a year with injury, and the roster crunch the O's are in, all make Hill less valuable to the O's then other pitchers that need to be kept.

Could Hill, Hughes, Liz, Bass, Sarfate, Miller, McCrory be chosen in the Rule 5 draft? Sure. But in building the O's system and looking at who is protected the important question to me is 'Who has the best chance to help the O's in the future?" If those players are protected then the O's have done all they can. Losing players to other systems that are not as deep is just a consequence of the O's system getting better. And not all of these players will be taken. Some will end up the O's AAA roster.

Every team has the same problem. A roster crunch to some degree. Each team is looking at the players available and saying are they better for my system then the players I have?

I have my eye on one player to see if he is protected. Angel Sanchez of the Blue Jays. I rate him better than Robert Andino. If he is available I would take him and DFA Andino. However, I expect the Jays to protect him which means I would have to try to trade for him. I would do Fio for Sanchez. But that is just me.

[Crazysilver03]

Comment: When selecting for the Rule 5, it always seems like a good idea to search for an injured player who can be stashed on IR for the year, as that gives the acquiring team an opportunity to work with the guy for an extended period of time with zero near-term roster risk. In looking over your list of exposed players, the obvious candidate for this type of treatment is Rich Hill. While I agree that he won't and shouldn't be protected, he's an interesting case not only because he DOES have an injury that might keep him on the shelf for all of 2010, but also because of the possibility that precisely that same injury could conceivably be explanatory of his recent suckitude pitching (I believe that's the technically correct term). To the extent that it is, he could still emerge as a fine pitcher two years hence.

Eventually, on the disabled list or not, the Rule 5 selectee has to spend 90 days on the active roster, even if it entails dipping into a 2nd season.

If a team really wanted Hill, they could just claim him off of waivers when he is DFA'ed.

[wildcard]

Isn't Moeller a FA after the season? He won't be on the 40 man unless the O's resign him before that.

Now there is a good question. I don't know is my answer.

Moeller signed for 1 year with and option on 2010. However they DFA'd him when he was sent to the minors. That may have voided the option, but that is between the O's and Moeller. I don't think we know if the option is still in affect.

For all I know when Moeller went to the minors the O's agreed to pay him his major league salary to keep him in the system and held the option as well. Or not.

[Agent0]

There are several factors that make me (and I think probably MacPhail) choose to protect Florimon.

1) He he is only 22 and has the chance to improve in all areas.

2) He has shown offensive ability for a middle infielder.

3) SS that have high error rate either improve at SS or become 2B.

A team looking for a high ceiling middle infielder could select Flormin as their utility infielder if they currently have a strong SS. I think losing Florimon would hurt the O's minor league system more because he is a middle infielder which is a position of need for the O's than losing Liz who will be 26 trying to convert to being a middle reliever. Liz has gone as far as he can in trying to be a major league starter and he has failed. If he has a future in the majors it will be as a reliever and he has many guys ahead of him in the O's system. That is why I chose Florimon over Liz.

I have not made a decision on Moeller. He definitely has the inside track on being the O's backup catcher next year. The question of whether he is put on the 40 man roster involves other factors.

1) Can the O's slip him through the Rule 5 draft and sign him to a AAA contract until opening day? This is a function of two things. One, does he have a high average at the end of year that will draw attention to him. Two, is the O's relationship with him good enough to trust this to happen.

2) Its a matter of money. Moeller's extension is for $850K. What will it cost the O's to get him to the AAA roster? Do they have to increase it to $1M to get him to agree? Is it worth $150K versus just picking up his option and keep it a $850M?

3) Who would the O's be exposing to the draft instead and how damaging is it to lose that player. I think Hughes is the next one to go. Hughes is probably a DH in the majors. His defense at 1B at age 25 has not been good enough to trust the position to him to be more then a backup. Snyder's age and the time he has for development places him ahead of Hughes at 1st base. The O's seem committed to acquiring Delgado, LaRoche or Nick Johnson this off season. That lowers Hughes value to the O's. Wiggy is ahead of Hughes. Scott is ahead of Hughes. There is no need to keep Hughes to DH with Reimold and Scott on the team. This makes Moeller more valuable than Hughes.

I will waiting to see what Moeller offensive numbers are at the end of year before making this call. That determines his attractiveness to other teams and the cost of keeping him.

Hill - With the number and quality of starters the O's have coming through the system, the fact that Hill is out for a year with injury, and the roster crunch the O's are in, all make Hill less valuable to the O's then other pitchers that need to be kept.

Could Hill, Hughes, Liz, Bass, Sarfate, Miller, McCrory be chosen in the Rule 5 draft? Sure. But in building the O's system and looking at who is protected the important question to me is 'Who has the best chance to help the O's in the future?" If those players are protected then the O's have done all they can. Losing players to other systems that are not as deep is just a consequence of the O's system getting better. And not all of these players will be taken. Some will end up the O's AAA roster.

Every team has the same problem. A roster crunch to some degree. Each team is looking at the players available and saying are they better for my system then the players I have?

I have my eye on one player to see if he is protected. Angel Sanchez of the Blue Jays. I rate him better than Robert Andino. If he is available I would take him and DFA Andino. However, I expect the Jays to protect him which means I would have to try to trade for him. I would do Fio for Sanchez. But that is just me.

I think there's very little chance of Moeller being on the 40 man before the winter meetings. No one will claim him and he'd just be taking up a spot for a prospect here. The O's will probably tell him that he has a spot here if he wants it and it'll be up to him to join us after the WM.

Again, if anyone wants the guys who we outright, it would be better to get them off of waivers and not the Rule V. The claim fee is cheaper and they can always outright them again later. It's been stated that we should outright guys and see if they slip through the Rule V....but the Rule V is not the hard part....it's getting them through waivers. Maybe the timing of the Rule V works better for the decision making process of some teams, but if we pass a guy through waivers, he's probably getting through the Rule V as well.

I do want to give Hill one more chance, but the fact that he's injured means that I doubt anyone will put a wiaver claim on him. I'd outright him, without question.

[Fan4Life]

This may become even more complicated if we sign a FA starting pitcher or stop-gap 1b.

[wildcard]

Are you sure you aren't confusing Moeller with Zaun? I believe Zaun had an option for 2010. I don't recall Moeller having an option and this site doesn't mention it either.

http://mlbcontracts.blogspot.com/2005/01/baltimore-orioles_112321768568552760.html

I think he just signed a 1 year contract. However, I do believe the O's want him back and I'd expect them to resign him. I'm just not sure of the timing and whether he'll need to be on the 40 man.

Yes, I am sure. Its right there in the link you gave.

Chad Moeller c

1 year/$0.8M (2009)

1 year/$0.8M (2009)

signed by Baltimore as a free agent 1/09 (minor-league contract)

09:$0.8M, 10:$0.85M club option ($50,000 buyout)

contract purchased by Baltimore 4/5/09

DFA by Baltimore 5/29/09, sent outright to AAA 6/3/09

contract purchased by Baltimore 8/7/09

The option was in the contract he signed but when he was DFA'd it really depends on what arrangements were made for him for 2010. This does not tell us what the current arrangements are.