Jump to content





Bleacher Nation is on Facebook, and you should totally "Like" us:
 


Bleacher Nation is also on Twitter, and you should totally follow us:




Upcoming Calendar Events

There are no forthcoming calendar events

Today's birthdays

No members are celebrating a birthday today

Photo

Rule 5 Stuff


  • Please log in to reply
10 replies to this topic

#1 Rated Rookie

Rated Rookie

    Bleacher Bum

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 171 posts
  • Twitter:@Frankieaaron

Posted 09 October 2012 - 11:16 AM

Any talk on this yet? Havn't found a thread.

Jeffry Antigua, LHP
Justin Bour, 1B
Michael Brenly, C
Michael Burgess, OF
David Cales, RHP
Esmailin Caridad, RHP
Matt Cerda, INF
Evan Crawford, OF
Willengton Cruz, LHP
Antonio Encarnacion, RHP
Eduardo Figueroa, RHP
Luis Flores, C
Ramon Garcia, RHP
Gregori Gonzalez, IF-OF
Marcus Hatley, RHP
Ty’Relle Harris, RHP
Graham Hicks, LHP
Brett Jackson, OF
Jay Jackson, RHP
Alvido Jimenez, RHP
Richard Jones, 1B
Austin Kirk, LHP
Luis Liria, RHP
Jeff Lorick, LHP
David Macias, IF-OF (player-coach)
Nate Maldonado, C (player-coach)
Trey McNutt, RHP
Pedro Medina, RHP (ex-OF)
Jose Montesino, INF
A. J. Morris, RHP
Enyelberth Pena, RHP
Felix Pena, RHP
Starling Peralta, RHP
Nelson Perez, OF
Roderik Pichardo, RHP
Brooks Raley, LHP
Dae-Eun Rhee, RHP
Rebel Ridling, 1B-OF
Greg Rohan, IF-OF
Melvin Rosa, RHP
Jose Rosario, RHP
Zac Rosscup, LHP
Chris Rusin, LHP
Julio Sanchez, RHP
Brian Schlitter, RHP
Ryan Searle, RHP
Matt Spencer, LHP (ex-OF)
Nick Struck, RHP
Larry Suarez, RHP-pretty sure he's been released.
Charles Thomas, RHP (ex-3B)
Francisco Turbi, RHP
Brett Wallach, RHP
Logan Watkins, INF
Casey Weathers, RHP
Rob Whitenack, RHP
Ty Wright, OF

This list is a few months old, and those already rostered have been crossed off.

ANyway, the guys that I'd definitely roster are:
Mcnutt-still plenty of hope, and someone could claim him and stick him in the pen
Struck: looking over some of the space takers on our roster, I'd much rather give him a look than risk losing him.
Hatley: seems like a sure thing to be rostered. Great minor league season. Nice stuff. Better than some of what inhabits out current 40 man as far as relievers.

Others worth rostering:
Whitenack/Peralta/Rosario: It's hard to imagine someone claiming any of them and managing to keep him on a big league roster all season, but I'd just as soon not risk it.
Watkins: I could see someone claiming him and stashing him on the bench for a year. The question is, would we miss him enough to give a roster spot? Rather give it to him than sign a comparable FA like Baker, which is what Hendry would have done.
Antigua: I've always liked him, and not quite sure he was mysteriously demoted from Tenn. all the way to Peoria and never made his way back. Could be disciplinary. If so, perhaps they're willing to part ways. Too bad. Good stuff.

That's about it. There are several guys I could see taken that I can't imagine us missing, that may or may not bounce back to us. If so, more power to them:

Jay Jackson: had a decent conversion to the pen, but he was available last year in the Rule 5 and nobody took him.
Dae Eun Rhee: He's only 23, I think, but looking more and more like depth at best. Fall League should determine his fate.

Searle, Weathers, Harris, and Caridad could prove flier-worthy to teams looking for help in the pen.
Bour, Rohan, Burgess, Cerda, and Ridling could be the same to teams looking for spare role players or potential power.

The great thing about the Rule 5 is that you lose nothing by selecting someone. It's basically an audition. Not sure why some teams pass.

#2 TWC

TWC

    Hippie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4,064 posts
  • Twitter:@thomaswconroy
  • LocationHMB, CA

Posted 09 October 2012 - 11:29 AM

The great thing about the Rule 5 is that you lose nothing by selecting someone. It's basically an audition. Not sure why some teams pass.

Well, yeah, you do lose a spot on the active roster... I think it would be much more palatable if you could stash them in the minors. Thank YOU, David Patton.

#3 Brett

Brett

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • 3,646 posts
  • Twitter:BleacherNation
  • Facebook:BleacherNation

Posted 09 October 2012 - 01:26 PM


The great thing about the Rule 5 is that you lose nothing by selecting someone. It's basically an audition. Not sure why some teams pass.

Well, yeah, you do lose a spot on the active roster... I think it would be much more palatable if you could stash them in the minors. Thank YOU, David Patton.

Not if you cut them in Spring Training because it looks like they aren't going to hack it. Then it only cost you $25k for the try-out ($50k to select him, and you get $25k back if the other team wants him back).

#4 TWC

TWC

    Hippie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4,064 posts
  • Twitter:@thomaswconroy
  • LocationHMB, CA

Posted 09 October 2012 - 01:35 PM



The great thing about the Rule 5 is that you lose nothing by selecting someone. It's basically an audition. Not sure why some teams pass.

Well, yeah, you do lose a spot on the active roster... I think it would be much more palatable if you could stash them in the minors. Thank YOU, David Patton.

Not if you cut them in Spring Training because it looks like they aren't going to hack it. Then it only cost you $25k for the try-out ($50k to select him, and you get $25k back if the other team wants him back).

Oh, well, yeah, duh. If that's what RR meant, I completely agree.

#5 Rated Rookie

Rated Rookie

    Bleacher Bum

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 171 posts
  • Twitter:@Frankieaaron

Posted 09 October 2012 - 01:55 PM



The great thing about the Rule 5 is that you lose nothing by selecting someone. It's basically an audition. Not sure why some teams pass.

Well, yeah, you do lose a spot on the active roster... I think it would be much more palatable if you could stash them in the minors. Thank YOU, David Patton.

Not if you cut them in Spring Training because it looks like they aren't going to hack it. Then it only cost you $25k for the try-out ($50k to select him, and you get $25k back if the other team wants him back).


Exactly. 25K and a Spring Training invite is the only guaranteed cost. Even then, there's also the option of a DL stint for a phantom injury or working out a deal with the other team in which you can keep them without keeping them on the roster all season.

#6 Cubsin

Cubsin

    Bleacher Bum

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 78 posts
  • LocationO'Fallon, IL 62269

Posted 09 October 2012 - 04:46 PM

Some teams pass because they'd rather protect their own players, and have a full 40-man roster. Others pass because they don't like any of the remaining candidates when it's their turn to draft.

I think the Cubs need to protect McNutt, Villanueva and Watkins. They also need to create room for Ben Wells (probably), free agents and their 2012 Rule 5 pick(s).

#7 Rated Rookie

Rated Rookie

    Bleacher Bum

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 171 posts
  • Twitter:@Frankieaaron

Posted 09 October 2012 - 09:27 PM

Ben Wells? He just turned 20, and barely missed TJS, a decision which I strongly hope he, and more importantly the Cubs don't end up regretting. There's no way he'll be in the big leagues before 2015. I'm not sure when he would be Rule 5 eligible, but that's likely when he'll be rostered for the first time.

#8 Cubsin

Cubsin

    Bleacher Bum

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 78 posts
  • LocationO'Fallon, IL 62269

Posted 09 October 2012 - 11:02 PM

Wells isn't subject to the Rule 5 draft this Winter, but his original contract with the Cubs requires that he be on the 40-man roster and invited to Spring Training next year. He doesn't need to be on the roster before the Rule 5 draft, but he'll need a spot, and it's less risky to expose another prospect to the Rule 5 draft than release him later, and expose him to all 29 other teams without requiring them to keep him on the 25-man roster.

#9 Brett

Brett

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • 3,646 posts
  • Twitter:BleacherNation
  • Facebook:BleacherNation

Posted 10 October 2012 - 06:03 PM

Wells isn't subject to the Rule 5 draft this Winter, but his original contract with the Cubs requires that he be on the 40-man roster and invited to Spring Training next year.

Where did you hear this? That's news to me.

#10 Cubsin

Cubsin

    Bleacher Bum

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 78 posts
  • LocationO'Fallon, IL 62269

Posted 10 October 2012 - 07:11 PM

Source: http://www.bryantdai...all.aspx?page=5

Relevant part:

Wells, who will turn 18 on Sept. 10, was the seventh-round pick of the Cubs. He signed Monday evening for $530,000. As is standard with Major League contracts for players coming right after high school, the contract includes a commitment by the Cubs to pay for four years of college. But it also includes an unusual provision that guarantees that in 2013, Wells will be included on the Cubs’ 40-man roster. That means he’ll go to spring training with the Major League club that spring with a chance to make the 25-man roster.
Arizona Phil says this is correct.

#11 Rated Rookie

Rated Rookie

    Bleacher Bum

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 171 posts
  • Twitter:@Frankieaaron

Posted 11 October 2012 - 07:46 AM

So basically, we owe Wells, Soler, and Szczur who are a few years away from the big leagues as well as Concepcion, who may never be close to big league ready each a 40 man roster spot. Alrighty then.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Bleacher Nation is not affiliated in any way with Major League Baseball or the Chicago National League Ballclub (that's the Cubs).