OnlyBucs

634F47404B6C5B4D5D2E0 wrote: Geez, completely forgot about the addition of Vilade.  I thought they acquired him so they could DFA him and hope that he passes through waivers.



My other comment.  These moves - designating some players and adding others is not about the money/payroll.  These are talent evaluation issues.  I sure hope that BC and his staff evaluated well.   




yes, talent evaluation issue is correct. It could be that they think some may be selected but not stick but in my view I would rather keep everyone I thought might be selected. I don't have an issue with leaving Delay and Heinemann off roster. They are fungible and can be replaced after draft.

5677626B536A71627766030 wrote: I too am surprised about not including Nunez on the list of protected players.  I have never seen him play, but he appeared to post good numbers in the minors this year.



I am surprised that BC chose to hang onto Park, who appears to be a redundancy in the organization (middle infielder who doesn't hit all that well and having Newman, Castro, Bae, Marcano, and Cruz available with Peguero and Gonzalez likely not that far away), rather than protecting someone like Nunez, Gorski, and Sabol who appear to have some power.   



Continuing, perhaps Choi will be a good addition, but he appears to have mediocrity stamped on his forehead.  I want to win at the major league level as much as anyone else, but I would rather give a shot to someone like Andujar or Mitchell at first than giving time to a 1 year player with a .730 or so OPS.   Perhaps Choi's spot could have gone to protecting another player. 



And, with Heineman now designated, the Bucs essentially have no catchers with major league experience on the roster.  Looks like lots of roster turn-over yet to come, particularly if the Pirates make a pick in the Rule 5 draft.       


There are several pitchers that seem to be easy subtractions - Ramirez and Underwood being two. And I don't get the addition of Vilade from Colorado. He seems like an easy subtraction (along with Park). The point being if we lose anyone it will seem pretty Littlefield to me. And even losing them for part of the season always seems to hold up their growth.



It's all strategy that I don't completely understand. But honestly, no excuse to take a chance with Nunez - or Thomas or Gorski either.


Utah, I agree that the loss of five players by Littlefield in that one Rule 5 draft looked really bad. In fact, it was embarrassing, especially when he didn’t back that up by selecting anyone himself. But other than Jose Bautista, the players lost amounted to a whole lot of nothing. That never seems to be mentioned when this subject comes up.

2F796F7B746E7E75786F5D7A707C7471337E1D0 wrote:



Utah, I agree that the loss of five players by Littlefield in that one Rule 5 draft looked really bad.  In fact, it was embarrassing, especially when he didn’t back that up by selecting anyone himself.  But other than Jose Bautista, the players lost amounted to a whole lot of nothing.  That never seems to be mentioned when this subject comes up.




Chris Shelton hit 34 homers in the majors in 2005-2006. For the Pirates, Jason Bay hit 67. Jose Castillo was second with 25. So Shelton wouldn't have been a whole lot of nothing to those teams.

6C5F434241497F4259455E594844432D0 wrote:



Utah, I agree that the loss of five players by Littlefield in that one Rule 5 draft looked really bad.  In fact, it was embarrassing, especially when he didn’t back that up by selecting anyone himself.  But other than Jose Bautista, the players lost amounted to a whole lot of nothing.  That never seems to be mentioned when this subject comes up.




Chris Shelton hit 34 homers in the majors in 2005-2006. For the Pirates, Jason Bay hit 67. Jose Castillo was second with 25. So Shelton wouldn't have been a whole lot of nothing to those teams.


If I remember correctly, Chris Shelton was a two week wonder the year after the Tigers selected him. He was sent back to Triple A sometime later in that season and mostly bounced from one team to another, between the minors and majors, over the next few years. Shelton was never missed by any organization.



I’m not sure of your references to Bay and Castillo. Neither were part of that Rule 5 situation of which we were discussing.

1D4B5D49465C4C474A5D6F48424E4643014C2F0 wrote:



Utah, I agree that the loss of five players by Littlefield in that one Rule 5 draft looked really bad.  In fact, it was embarrassing, especially when he didn’t back that up by selecting anyone himself.  But other than Jose Bautista, the players lost amounted to a whole lot of nothing.  That never seems to be mentioned when this subject comes up.




Chris Shelton hit 34 homers in the majors in 2005-2006. For the Pirates, Jason Bay hit 67. Jose Castillo was second with 25. So Shelton wouldn't have been a whole lot of nothing to those teams.


If I remember correctly, Chris Shelton was a two week wonder the year after the Tigers selected him.  He was sent back to Triple A sometime later in that season and mostly bounced from one team to another, between the minors and majors, over the next few years.  Shelton was never missed by any organization.



I’m not sure of your references to Bay and Castillo.  Neither were part of that Rule 5 situation of which we were discussing.


The thing that gets forgotten is how hard it is on a player's growth. Shelton got like 40 ABs with the Tigers his Rule 5 year. He rarely played the field and I think in the end it really hurt his development.



I get that maybe in the end you don't lose a lot of talent that makes a difference, but I think that Rule 5 draft by Littlefield killed a lot of organizational continuity as well as player development.



Another name for this year is Sabol, who just finished a solid AFL season.



And there is so much dead wood on our 40-man, I just don't get taking a chance at all.

1332272E162F34273223460 wrote:



Utah, I agree that the loss of five players by Littlefield in that one Rule 5 draft looked really bad.  In fact, it was embarrassing, especially when he didn’t back that up by selecting anyone himself.  But other than Jose Bautista, the players lost amounted to a whole lot of nothing.  That never seems to be mentioned when this subject comes up.




Chris Shelton hit 34 homers in the majors in 2005-2006. For the Pirates, Jason Bay hit 67. Jose Castillo was second with 25. So Shelton wouldn't have been a whole lot of nothing to those teams.


If I remember correctly, Chris Shelton was a two week wonder the year after the Tigers selected him.  He was sent back to Triple A sometime later in that season and mostly bounced from one team to another, between the minors and majors, over the next few years.  Shelton was never missed by any organization.



I’m not sure of your references to Bay and Castillo.  Neither were part of that Rule 5 situation of which we were discussing.


The thing that gets forgotten is how hard it is on a player's growth. Shelton got like 40 ABs with the Tigers his Rule 5 year. He rarely played the field and I think in the end it really hurt his development.



I get that maybe in the end you don't lose a lot of talent that makes a difference, but I think that Rule 5 draft by Littlefield killed a lot of organizational continuity as well as player development.



Another name for this year is Sabol, who just finished a solid AFL season.



And there is so much dead wood on our 40-man, I just don't get taking a chance at all.




I don’t disagree with any of what you say. Few Rule 5 players ever make an impact the year they’re selected and in the years that follow. That lost developmental year I would think would be a critical reason.



I also agree on your “dead wood” comment. It’s frustrating seeing failed major league players continuing to be signed and get playing time over younger players who aren’t given an opportunity. If a complete rebuild is the plan then do it as fully as possible.

The Choi acquisition makes me ill. It's a flat-out dumpster dive for a below average player whose spot on the roster could better be used to protect a prospect. I'd rather see Nunez get a chance at 1B next year rather than possibly losing him in the draft to go with Choi.

072A27363120377774450 wrote: The Choi acquisition makes me ill. It's a flat-out dumpster dive for a below average player whose spot on the roster could better be used to protect a prospect. I'd rather see Nunez get a chance at 1B next year rather than possibly losing him in the draft to go with Choi.


it's like acquiring him before the draft had an extra cost of a roster spot.  There was no need to rush to acquire him.  Tampa might have released him rather than be willing to pay him. 



Let's hurry up and get somebody's else's trash. 



Not to mention Vilade.  There is nothing in his record the past couple of years that says he deserves a 40 man spot.  Hitting 250 in the Pacific Coast league is probably similar to hitting 220 in the International league.

7F59584F59493A0 wrote: The Choi acquisition makes me ill. It's a flat-out dumpster dive for a below average player whose spot on the roster could better be used to protect a prospect. I'd rather see Nunez get a chance at 1B next year rather than possibly losing him in the draft to go with Choi.


it's like acquiring him before the draft had an extra cost of a roster spot.  There was no need to rush to acquire him.  Tampa might have released him rather than be willing to pay him. 



Let's hurry up and get somebody's else's trash. 



Not to mention Vilade.  There is nothing in his record the past couple of years that says he deserves a 40 man spot.  Hitting 250 in the Pacific Coast league is probably similar to hitting 220 in the International league.
Tampa essentially did release Choi. They were willing to trade him for nothing more than Jack Hartman who is still in low-A at age 23, had a 6.17 ERA there with 22 hits and 16 walks in just 18.2 innings. Even his college stats suggest an inability to throw strikes with 26 walks in 33.3 innings. It's difficult to believe the Rays actually expect Hartman to be a useful addition to the organization.



https://www.baseball-reference.com/regi ... rtma001jac

With the guys protected from Rule 5 now on the 40 man roster, by my count the 40 man is 25 Cherington guys and 15 Huntington guys. The three best players from last year, Reynolds, Hayes, and Cruz are all NH guys. Newman and Castro, both significant contributors last season, are NH guys. Keller, JT Brubaker, and Luis Ortiz are all from the NH regime. Ji Wan Bae is expected to contend for playing time in 2023 and also a NH guy.



Still quite a heavy touch of NH, but a lot of those guys were high pedigree too. As I've said before, Cherington's guys are primarily A-AA with some of his picks finally going to AAA. But it's starting to look like Cherington has made some good trades, Roansey Contreras in the Taillon trade, Suwinski in the Frazier trade, though I think Marcano was supposed to be the big get, but even with Frazier having done nothing after leaving Pittsburgh, Marcano has done less than that. Endy Rodriguez can bring value from the Musgrove trade and if Bednar can get back to his pre-injury form, that trade might be considered a break even, though All Star caliber starting pitchers are hard to top.



Liover Peguero was part of the Marte trade. Brennan Malone was also part of the trade, but 2020 he didn't pitch, 2021 he had blister issues. He made it to A ball last season, remains to be seen if he's assigned to AA or not, he'll be 23 this year. So far, that trade yet to pan out. The Bell trade is so far pretty poor, though Wil Crowe started out like gang busters after being converted to a relief pitcher. Eddy Yean hasn't made it out of A ball, and posted a 6.75 ERA as a relief pitcher in Greensboro, but he's only 21 right now.