Early 22 projected roster!

[CATS44]

One thing to consider when putting together your 40 man pre Rule Five...

This org is gonna trade for a bat...maybe two.

The upper tier prospects, all of which can not be protected if we hang on to our fringe guys, have more trade value than any of our fringe players.

Lets look at what may be our top twelve kids that merit consideration for a 40 man spot...

Freeman
Valera
Rocchio
Lavastida
Palacios
Pilkington
Morris
Cantillo
Tena
Benson
O Gonzalez
Noel

All of them have more value in trade than..

Zimmer
Harold
Mercado
Chang

They may have more value than..

Bradley
Mejia
Allen
Hentges

Looking at the first four, all can be replaced with a minor league signing/spring invite guys. There will be literally scores of fringe players available, including the ones we let go.

All of them, except Harold, are out of options, which means that they have to stay on the roster or be cut...which means one less prospect has been left unprotected for no reason.

On the other hand, the prospects we don't protect lose most of their trade value, because they can be grabbed for free in the Rule Five.

If you are the GM of a team looking to contend and need a secondary 26th man type, you can pick up one of them for nearly nothing in late winter.

But if you are a GM with an excess on the MLB roster and need to replenish your farm system or rebuild, our kids look enticing.

What would be best for this org as it looks to make significant upgrades in order to contend next season?

Hang on to our fringe players, or load up the 40 man with ammo to make major additions?

 

[sportscoach]

One thing to consider when putting together your 40 man pre Rule Five...

This org is gonna trade for a bat...maybe two.

The upper tier prospects, all of which can not be protected if we hang on to our fringe guys, have more trade value than any of our fringe players.

Lets look at what may be our top twelve kids that merit consideration for a 40 man spot...

Freeman
Valera
Rocchio
Lavastida
Palacios
Pilkington
Morris
Cantillo
Tena
Benson
O Gonzalez
Noel

All of them have more value in trade than..

Zimmer
Harold
Mercado
Chang

They may have more value than..

Bradley
Mejia
Allen
Hentges

Looking at the first four, all can be replaced with a minor league signing/spring invite guys. There will be literally scores of fringe players available, including the ones we let go.

All of them, except Harold, are out of options, which means that they have to stay on the roster or be cut...which means one less prospect has been left unprotected for no reason.

On the other hand, the prospects we don't protect lose most of their trade value, because they can be grabbed for free in the Rule Five.

If you are the GM of a team looking to contend and need a secondary 26th man type, you can pick up one of them for nearly nothing in late winter.

But if you are a GM with an excess on the MLB roster and need to replenish your farm system or rebuild, our kids look enticing.

What would be best for this org as it looks to make significant upgrades in order to contend next season?

Hang on to our fringe players, or load up the 40 man with ammo to make major additions?

Sorry to make your number 13, but I think Kwan should be on the list as well... He's a plus defender in the OF and he has been showing solid contact numbers and whatnot the entire time in the minors. I think he will be taken if left off the 40 man roster as a 4th OF by someone.

I am definitely for trading some prospects for a legit MLB player with years of control... The FO sneakily got Straw and I am thinking with the talent of prospects we have, it's not if we can get a Reynolds type, it's if we wanna pay for a Reynolds type...

 

[petes999]

Agreed - we will trade for LF/RF/1B bat or two so these lists are somewhat pointless (me who pointed this crunch out before season saying this).

How I think about it is 13 pitchers and 13 hitters for 26 and 7 - minor pitchers and 7 minor hitters for 40 man. The problem is in the 7 minor hitters that some are able come up in April and/or May in case of injuries (Rocchio, Valera, Tena, Lavastida ... are not there yet).

5 - Starters
Bieber, Civale, Quantrill, Plesac, TMac

8 - Relievers
Kar, Clase, Sandlin, Perez, Stephan, Mejia, Hentges, Allen (Gone are Shaw, Parker and Wittgren -- to get our current 23 down to 20)
Allen, Hentges and Mejia of course can be traded or cut. Allen is the most likely as Hentges and Mejia were at least called up too early to be cut this soon.

7 - Minors
(4) Morris, Cantillo, Morgan, Vargas
( 3 of) Garza, Nelson, Pilkinton, Moss, Young, Hill (Young, Hill on my cut list ahead of Hentges and Mejia to add Morris and Cantillo). The question for me is if Pilkinton is added over a cut of Moss, Nelson or Allen.


13/20 - hitters (2/3- catchers, 1/1 - DH, 6/10 - Infield. 4/6 - Outfield)

DH (1/1) - Reyes

Catchers (2/3) - Perez (or other vet), Hedges, Lavastida (with hitting at AA and catching, no way he makes it through - plus with Diaz trade we can't afford to lose him or Naylor next year)

Infield (6/10) - Ramirez, Gimenez, Bradley, Miller, Jones , Clement (or Rosario if not traded) (6) Arias, Freeman. Palacios, Tena (Chang cut - Clement DFA if Rosario is not traded)

Outfield (4/6) - Straw, Naylor, Trade/FA, Zimmer (as rover) (4) Valera, Gonzalez .... (Mercado, H Ramirez -- Gone of course can sub in Mercado for Zimmer )....

This is where it gets interesting because you have to figure who can go on day 1. It is not Benson nor Kwan (who have stayed at AA for more seasoning). Jones or Gonzalez (maybe Palacios - OF work needs time in AAA though) could start on our MLB roster to fill in for injury. Gonzalez may not be best OF but he may not make it through Rule 5 if NL needs to find some DH bats (on cheap). Benson just falls out of that gap of producing early in season to help MLB roster versus long-term potential of Tena/Valera.

 

[CATS44]

If you throw in Adam Scott, we are now at 14 that need to be protected, or possibly/probably be lost...and there is no way any team is gonna have over one third of its 40 man be first time additions.

Almost everybody said that the 40 man for Rule Five was not gonna be a problem. Now, all of a sudden almost everybody has an unwieldy list of prospects that need to be added....but few wanted to trade away prospects for legit MLB players.

It would have been better to overpay than to let them go for nothing.

I didnt understand why the FO didn't trade some before the season. I didn't understand why they didn't at the deadline. I dont understand it now.

Meanwhile, we have backed ourselves into a corner, by holding onto previously highly thought of prospects until they are out of options and lost all of their trade value...and we still don't know what we have in them. And we've been doing it for years.

I dont mind that we didn't play a kid like Aguilar or Haase. There were legitimate reasons not to. I do mind that we didn't trade them when they had some value as younger prospects, instead of letting them go because we no longer had room for them and they had lost their value.

Funny thing...actually not funny...is that many of the kids we let go for nothing have then become as productive, or more so, than the high end prospects we actually did trade away for big time return.

Fourteen...fourteen kids that are at the very least marginally good enough to be considered for protection from Rule Five. We could have literally packaged half of them in trades that would have made the 2022 Guardians a real force offensively to go with our pitching.

We wouldn't have to be debating the relative merits of fringe players like what we have now...we wouldn't have to be wishing and hoping that a slew of never-have-beens will suddenly become major pieces of a contending team.

 

[petes999]

If you throw in Adam Scott, we are now at 14 that need to be protected, or possibly/probably be lost...and there is no way any team is gonna have over one third of its 40 man be first time additions.

Almost everybody said that the 40 man for Rule Five was not gonna be a problem. Now, all of a sudden almost everybody has an unwieldy list of prospects that need to be added....but few wanted to trade away prospects for legit MLB players.

It would have been better to overpay than to let them go for nothing.

I didnt understand why the FO didn't trade some before the season. I didn't understand why they didn't at the deadline. I dont understand it now.

Meanwhile, we have backed ourselves into a corner, by holding onto previously highly thought of prospects until they are out of options and lost all of their trade value...and we still don't know what we have in them. And we've been doing it for years.

I dont mind that we didn't play a kid like Aguilar or Haase. There were legitimate reasons not to. I do mind that we didn't trade them when they had some value as younger prospects, instead of letting them go because we no longer had room for them and they had lost their value.

Funny thing...actually not funny...is that many of the kids we let go for nothing have then become as productive, or more so, than the high end prospects we actually did trade away for big time return.

Fourteen...fourteen kids that are at the very least marginally good enough to be considered for protection from Rule Five. We could have literally packaged half of them in trades that would have made the 2022 Guardians a real force offensively to go with our pitching.

We wouldn't have to be debating the relative merits of fringe players like what we have now...we wouldn't have to be wishing and hoping that a slew of never-have-beens will suddenly become major pieces of a contending team.

I get the angst with Indians holding onto their assets. However, this Spring, their prospects were under valued due to being hidden from scouts for a year ... so would have sold at 75% of actual value. At deadline, the 3 to 4 year controllable players that we seek were being held at kings ransome for desperate playoff contender. Plus, their value goes down 20% at year end due to 1 less year of control.

I expect 1 or 2 trades come Nov, mainly for corner bat. Yet, for all that dont want to waste Bieber or Ramirez, if they sign for extensions (which is not guarunteed as desire does not equal reality of $$$) - key is 4-5 year horizen vs 1-2 year last push, so be patient. This year's team was too young (no Jones, Freeman or Arias to call up) and too thin at starters (couldn't withstand loss of normal injuries 1-2 let alone 3 we had). Next year, will be stronger 2nd half as rookies start to break through.

 

[CATS44]

A theoretical question with two premises...

1) We do not have the 14 prospects under debate for addition to the 40 man.

No Freeman
Valera
Rocchio
Lavastida
Palacios
Pilkington
Morris
Cantillo
Benson
Gonzalez
Tena
Noel
Scott
Kwan

They aren't in our system in our system.

2) But we do have Bryan Reynolds and Cedric Mullens.

Is the org better situated? Is the team better off over the next three or four years?

Its a two part question, and I will make the argument for...second part first.

No doubt that the team is better off for several years. Having both Reynolds and Mullins makes this a powerful team...probably the fav in the A L Central, and among the few elite teams in baseball.

Now, is the org in a better situation?

We would have an outstanding OF under control for four years with an outstanding very good rotation under control for at least four years, with the exception of Bieber, who has three years of control left.

Our payroll would be less than it is this year. The total cost of our three OFs would be about $3 mil less than we paid Eddie...and we'd still have the likely $10 mil payroll increase to spend.

We would still have 5 MLB ready MIFs in Amed, Gimenez, Arias, Miller, and Clement...all but Amed under control for at least four years. Two of them would be in Columbus.

The Columbus rotation would probably be Moss, Morgan, Battenfield, Allen Jr, and a filler like McCarty, Stephans, or even Peacock.

The Akron rotation would be something like Espino, Burns, Gaddis, Curry, filler.

Vargas, Hankins, Torres, and Casetta-Stubbs will be worked in somewhere when they are ready.

We still have Jones, Martinez, and Bo Naylor among position prospects. We don't have a close to ready OF prospect, but we won't need one for years.

Zimmer and/or Mercado would look a lot better as backup OFs on this team than they do as part of the wishing and hoping gang.

With the present cost savings and projectable payroll for at least three years, the org is in better position to make extension offers to Jose, Biebs, and Franmil.

We have three possibilities for 1B in Bradley, Naylor, and Jones. Every position is covered. The only real organizational weakness is a lack of catching prospects beyond Bo Naylor.

The pen still has its core of Clase, Karinchak, Sandlin...and IMO Wittgren. It also has Mejia-Allen-Hentges, who are now relieved of having to work as starters, and we can keep Francisco Perez. We also have payroll space to add a vet or two.

Wed also have money to add a significant piece at the deadline.


Now, this is all theoretical. It didn't happen, and it won't happen.

But if we had made a vast overpay...fourteen for two...we would be in better shape to contend, without killing the future. A future with Jose extended and this outfield would look a lot better than with the 14 prospects, esp since we are probably gonna lose half of them anyway, either to Rule Five or normal prospect attrition.

 

[petes999]

I am working on a piece on which teams may take what in Rule 5 (just using FG info updated for trade deadline moves). But, the quick story is NL teams may have some room to add except Pittsburgh (reason I am starting to lean to protect Oscar from a possible DH need in NL rosters this winter). However, many AL teams are fully loaded that are under 500 (able to hold Rule 5 absent pennant chase).

It is easy to say that we can trade for Mullins or Reynolds with our excess of talent. However, you also need to look at what they need (starting pitching) and ask are we willing to give up a Plesac for one of them because that is what it will take. They do not want our Rule 5 extras because they are in the same boat as we are ....

From FG ... Pittsburgh is in worse Rule 5 shape than we are (10 must adds and 7 fringe guys) ...

Current 40-man Count: 42 (38 + four 60-day IL players)
Pending Free Agents: 2 (Trevor Cahill and Chasen Shreve), plus Gregory Polanco’s club option.
Must-Add Prospects: Travis Swaggerty, Hoy Park, Mason Martin, Diego Castillo, Canaan Smith-Njigba, Cal Mitchell, Omar Cruz, Cody Bolton, Liover Peguero, Tahnaj Thomas
Current 40-man Fringe: John Nogowski, Michael Perez, Wilmer Difo, Phillip Evans, Duane Underwood Jr., Sam Howard, Ka’ai Tom, Erik González
Prospects on the Fringe: Jack Suwinski, Steven Jennings, Travis MacGregor, Yerry De Los Santos, Eddy Yean

And, this was before their trade deadline maneuvers

Baltimore was not listed as a possible roster crunch per FG and I think I overlooked them earlier. But, they have 42 on their roster and 2 free agents at year end (Harvey and Franco).
Top-30 Rule 5 eligible DL Hall(3), Vavra(9), Bradish (10), A Hall (17)
So, not that hard to find a few spots but they probably don't want 2-3 guys we have that need spots. Maybe a reason they were quiet at the deadline other than adding Burch who is Dec 22 rule 5 eligible.

The Orioles face a looming 40-man roster crunch this offseason

With a slew of prospects to protect, and a few tough arbitration decisions to make, the Orioles are in for a busy offseason.

www.camdenchat.com

 

[Criznit]

I am working on a piece on which teams may take what in Rule 5 (just using FG info updated for trade deadline moves). But, the quick story is NL teams may have some room to add except Pittsburgh (reason I am starting to lean to protect Oscar from a possible DH need in NL rosters this winter). However, many AL teams are fully loaded that are under 500 (able to hold Rule 5 absent pennant chase).

It is easy to say that we can trade for Mullins or Reynolds with our excess of talent. However, you also need to look at what they need (starting pitching) and ask are we willing to give up a Plesac for one of them because that is what it will take. They do not want our Rule 5 extras because they are in the same boat as we are ....

From FG ... Pittsburgh is in worse Rule 5 shape than we are (10 must adds and 7 fringe guys) ...

Current 40-man Count: 42 (38 + four 60-day IL players)
Pending Free Agents: 2 (Trevor Cahill and Chasen Shreve), plus Gregory Polanco’s club option.
Must-Add Prospects: Travis Swaggerty, Hoy Park, Mason Martin, Diego Castillo, Canaan Smith-Njigba, Cal Mitchell, Omar Cruz, Cody Bolton, Liover Peguero, Tahnaj Thomas
Current 40-man Fringe: John Nogowski, Michael Perez, Wilmer Difo, Phillip Evans, Duane Underwood Jr., Sam Howard, Ka’ai Tom, Erik González
Prospects on the Fringe: Jack Suwinski, Steven Jennings, Travis MacGregor, Yerry De Los Santos, Eddy Yean

And, this was before their trade deadline maneuvers

Baltimore was not listed as a possible roster crunch per FG and I think I overlooked them earlier. But, they have 42 on their roster and 2 free agents at year end (Harvey and Franco).
Top-30 Rule 5 eligible DL Hall(3), Vavra(9), Bradish (10), A Hall (17)
So, not that hard to find a few spots but they probably don't want 2-3 guys we have that need spots. Maybe a reason they were quiet at the deadline other than adding Burch who is Dec 22 rule 5 eligible.

The Orioles face a looming 40-man roster crunch this offseason

With a slew of prospects to protect, and a few tough arbitration decisions to make, the Orioles are in for a busy offseason.

www.camdenchat.com

EGonz was recently DFA'd by the pirates.

 

[CATS44]

I am not saying to trade for Reynolds or Mullins, just using them as examples.

However, if somebody offers three or four of their top prospects, esp those that fit Pittsburgh's time line, Reynolds will be traded, 40 man be damned.

Offering the pick of three or four of those fourteen we need to protect will get us about anybody we want. Putting all fourteen on the block would get us two of just anybody we wanted.

As for Pittsburgh, who does have a boatload of kids that need added, they also have a bigger boatload of 40 man players who aren't worth keeping.

 

[CATS44]

Anyway, the point is that this team and org would have been, or still could be, better off if we unloaded a bunch of these 'untouchables' for productive young MLB talent. But it has to be done before rosters are set for the Rule Five.

 

[Gson]

Anyway, the point is that this team and org would have been, or still could be, better off if we unloaded a bunch of these 'untouchables' for productive young MLB talent. But it has to be done before rosters are set for the Rule Five.

Up to and until this "young MLB talent" is identified by name.. it's just smoke in the wind.. The proverbial "we'll send quantity for your quality" deal is a good one.. or maybe not.. who can tell?..

 

[petes999]

I am not saying to trade for Reynolds or Mullins, just using them as examples.

However, if somebody offers three or four of their top prospects, esp those that fit Pittsburgh's time line, Reynolds will be traded, 40 man be damned.

Offering the pick of three or four of those fourteen we need to protect will get us about anybody we want. Putting all fourteen on the block would get us two of just anybody we wanted.

As for Pittsburgh, who does have a boatload of kids that need added, they also have a bigger boatload of 40 man players who aren't worth keeping.

I get you CATS. Just like I said about a possible Jose trade before the season and possible extension discussions (maybe), ... if you are going make a trade, go for top Tier talent and make the other team overpay, not just the poo-poo platter we usually end up settling for. And, if we want to go all in, the tables are just turned where we need to overpay for top talent.

And, just like with possible Jose contract talks, being willing to make a trade or offer up a decent contract, doesn't mean the other side will accept. Just pointing out how easy it is for us to say make it happen, but harder for it to happen as Gson just said as I was typing it all out too.

I am pointing out Pittsburgh and Reynolds as that is what has taken up so much time on this board, Pittsburgh has a bunch of young talent. It will take a lot to entice them. They may have more cuts in their 40 (as FG projected -- like 8 of people such as Erik G and Kaai Tom) ... but the people that they need to add are no slouches either. Thus, to add a few more for 1 player, you got to go BIG.... (FV per FG) for them to want to leave one of these players unprotected. Remember 42 man roster (pre deadline) 2-3 FAs with 10 must adds and 8 40 man possible/likely cuts.

Must-Add Prospects: Travis Swaggerty (FV 50), Hoy Park (FV 40), Mason Martin (FV 40+), Diego Castillo (FV 40+), Canaan Smith-Njigba (FV 40+), Cal Mitchell (FV 40+), Omar Cruz (FV 50), Cody Bolton (FV 45), Liover Peguero (FV 50), Tahnaj Thomas(FV 50)

 

[CATS44]

Up to and until this "young MLB talent" is identified by name.. it's just smoke in the wind.. The proverbial "we'll send quantity for your quality" deal is a good one.. or maybe not.. who can tell?..

A couple thoughts.

According to most on this board, we are not discussing quantity for quality. We are talking about the most coveted asset in baseball...high end prospects...several of whom are already on top 100 lists.

And the names don't really matter, unless you think that there are NO available players of that type available for a boatload of high end prospects.

Just a hint...Gallo with a year left was traded to the Yankees for a pretty fair haul, but nothing close to what we could have offered eight months ago...and Texas knew they were going nowhere back then.

A few more...

In addition to Baltimore and Pittsburgh, the Diamondbacks are going nowhere soon, and have a very interesting player under control for a long time.

The Mets have excess that fit our profile, and a thin farm system.

The Jays, Mariners, and Angels all have excess that fits our profile...and we have upper level prospects they all could use.

 

[Gson]

A couple thoughts.

According to most on this board, we are not discussing quantity for quality. We are talking about the most coveted asset in baseball...high end prospects...several of whom are already on top 100 lists.

And the names don't really matter, unless you think that there are NO available players of that type available for a boatload of high end prospects.

Just a hint...Gallo with a year left was traded to the Yankees for a pretty fair haul, but nothing close to what we could have offered eight months ago...and Texas knew they were going nowhere back then.

A few more...

In addition to Baltimore and Pittsburgh, the Diamondbacks are going nowhere soon, and have a very interesting player under control for a long time.

The Mets have excess that fit our profile, and a thin farm system.

The Jays, Mariners, and Angels all have excess that fits our profile...and we have upper level prospects they all could use.

This is a pretty good response.. save for:

-by definition.. if we send away guys who are vulnerable to rule v: they are typically not good enough (to this point) to make an affirmative entry onto the ML club.. it doesn't mean they can't.. it's just that they haven't. The acquisitioning team would need more than one "can't make the ML club" guy for their ML guy.. or quantity for quality..

-It needs to be stated: without names...who really knows.. Guessing who is a pig in a poke.. what can be done is naming projected needs by position and matching names to that..

-There are no boatloads of high end anything.. this is a scarce resource.. otherwise.. NO TRADES would occur..

-As far as Joey Gallo is concerned.. HARD PASS.. his numbers aren't even bloated from that short porch in RF at YS.. if anything, he's declining and declining rapidly.. He's a windmill that can provide three true outcomes.. and the strike out is THEE most dominant.. Having him in April instead of at the end of July would be the same.. HARD PASS for a guy who strikes out 40 % of the time..

-Dealing with the Orioles.. only in the off season.. and then.. not. The Orioles are "persona non grata" as a trade partner. They don't treat players or confidential information about players with the respect the players or the teams they chose to deal with are concerned..

The Angels have a very limited number of guys that fit our needs.. but should be negotiated with.. I really like both the Mariners and the Jays.. they have both an abundance and a need for what we have to offer. Both teams have shown a degree of comfort dealing with our front office.. so.. either team works very well..

Not so much the mets at this time.. Who would you like from either or?..

 

[CATS44]

Teams on a youth movement dont need merely MLB ready prospects. They need a vault full of talent.

If you look at the list of 14 that are under debate, a dozen of them will be MLB ready by mid 2023. All are statistically more likely to click than the proverbial 19 yr old lottery pick.

Joey Gallo has put up almost as much fWAR as JRam, and could have filled any of four spots on our team this year. Two years of him would have been a huge boost. With him, had Biebs and Civale not been hurt, we would likely be leading the division.

Ketel Marte, Mitch Haniger, Dominic Smith, Bryan Reynolds, Cedric Mullens, Trey Mancini, Teoscar Hernandez. There are others.

Pick two, any two...and this team suddenly becomes quite formidable.