JaxReds initial 40 Man roster moves

[JaxRed]

1 C Barnhart
2 1B Votto
3 2B VanMeter
4 SS Galvis
5 3B Suarez
6 OF Winker*
7 OF Senzel*
8 OF Aquino*
9 C2 Casali
10 OF2 Ervin
11 IF 2 Peraza
12 Util Blandino
13 Util Farmer
14 SP1 Castillo
15 SP2 Gray
16 SP3 Bauer
17 SP4 Gausman
18 SP5 Disco
19 RP1 (closer) Iglesias
20 RP2 Garrett (L)
21 RP3 Reed (L)
22 RP4 Kuhnel
23 RP5 Lorenzen
24 RP6 Sims
25 RP7 Stephenson
26 RP8 Alaniz

Here's my tentative 26 man roster. I've included Galvis and Gausman because they are on the roster. In reality when push comes to shove I would sign Iglesias. And assuming Reds go after a Moustakas or Starlin Castro for more offense, I would release Galvis.

I work on the assumption that Reds will not get a CF, so Senzel will be penciled in there.

So that leaves the following 12 guys on the 40.
27 Siri*
28 Schebler
29 Mahle*
30 Herget*
31 Bowman *
32 Colon
33 Mella
34 Romano
35 Stepehens
36 Dietrich
37 O'Grady*
38 Smith
39
40.

Leaning heavily on Kinsm's roster info, in my mind there are 2 absolute no doubt adds to the 40 from the minors to protect from Rule 5. They are Tyler Stephenson and Santillan.

The one 6 year FA I keep is Alex Powers who dominated at AA and AAA in relief. BTW I don't think the Reds make this move. I think they lose Powers. I was tempted by Tromp and his recent hitting prowess. But decided not to add him.

Guys I would cut would be Colon, and Stephens. I would cut Mella. Mella is out of options and just has never got the job done.

The other two guys I am tempted by are Ryan Hendrix who is hard thrower at AA. He was out a lot this year but when he was healthy he's real good. I would keep him and outright Romano, Herget or Smith. (in that order). I expect the Reds to NOT protect him.

And the second is Friedl. I would take a chance on losing him because he does everything pretty well but nothing outstanding. In my mind, he's been passed on the CF depth chart by Fairchild. However I expect the Reds to protect him. The one thing in my mind that makes me hesitant is because he hits lefty.

I think the Reds have to maximize their offense this year so I think that means lots of platoons. In my mind LF is Winker/Ervin. But you tentatively have 2 righties in CF and RF in Senzel and Aquino. I think you have to be prepared to have a lefty platoon partner for one or both of them. Therefore I would keep Schebler. He's been a LH 30 HR guy that plays CF before. I don't think we can let him walk without seeing what he's got. He's still dirt cheap for 2020.

[mth123]

Thanks for this thread. I'd non tender Peraza, Dietrich and Gausman and deny the option on Galvis. Collectively, that's about $20 Million. I might try to bring Gausman and Galvis back on much cheaper deals than they are in line for by keeping them, but if somebody else pays more than a couple million for either, I'd let them walk.

[Kc61]

10/31 - Tomorrow players can begin to declare free agency.
11/4 - Options must be exercised/declined. QOs extended.
11/14 - QOs must be accepted/declined.
11/20 - Players must be protected from Rule 5 draft
12/2 - Arbitration non-tender date.

This appears to be the schedule for roster decisions leading up to the Winter Meetings which are scheduled for December 8-12.

PS - I got these dates from an article, I’ve seen some other articles today that are slightly different, please forgive any slight discrepancy.

[Bourgeois Zee]

I'd nontender Peraza, Gausman, and Dietrich.

I'd let Galvis go too.

That gets me down to 34 players before I have to add anyone.

When push comes to shove, I'd be fine with jettisoning:

Colon
Stephens
Mella
Romano
O'Grady

That gets me down to 29 roster spots, I think.

I'd add Hendrix (assuming health), Friedl, T. Stephenson, and Santillan.

That gives me 7 spots to add talent.

I'd be okay with moving Siri, Herget, Bowman, Hendrix, and Alaniz in my next level if I could find a treasure trove of guys interested in the I-75 Express.

[Kc61]

If I were guessing, the Reds will exercise the Galvis option. He’s an insurance policy in middle infield. His $5.5 million price tag is ok.

If they don’t exercise, that’s a clear signal that Senzel is moving to the infield. I don’t think the Reds will enter the off-season with both second base and shortstop uncovered. They have too many needs to go shopping for an entirely new middle infield.

[TheBigLebowski]

I'm very, very pro-Galvis.

[REDREAD]

Yea, I am not confident that the Reds will find a better SS than Galvis. If the Reds would rather retain Inglesis instead, I am ok with that too. I am not comfortable cutting both of them loose until a replacement is required. I agree with KC that Galvis' salary is low enough that he could be a backup player. He might even be a candidate to flip at the deadline if the Reds are out of it.. naturally, he would not bring much, but he could bring something.

In regards to Jax's orginal post, I probably protect Friedl and if necessary let one of the bad relievers (Herget, Romano, Mella, Bowman, etc) be unprotected instead.
Other than that, I pretty much agree with his post.

[Mitri]

I'm very, very pro-Galvis.

Curious as to why? When he first came over to the Reds I was cautiously optimistic they'd found a guy who could be molded into an average bat/slick glove stopgap. After 30+ games I was unimpressed. I guess he's a bird in the hand, and we're already $1MM deep into keeping him, but there are two free agents who are better fits (Didi and Iglesias) and any number of trade options. And Galvis doesn't really work as an everyday 2B. Too expensive for backup MI, in my view.

I'd rather spend the money on Peraza and use him as the contingency plan at SS, with the hope that he's pushed to the bench with Senzel at 2B and a new SS signed or traded for.

[DocRed]

If I were guessing, the Reds will exercise the Galvis option. He’s an insurance policy in middle infield. His $5.5 million price tag is ok.

If they don’t exercise, I think that’s a clear signal that Senzel is moving to the infield. I don’t think the Reds will enter the off-season with both second base and shortstop uncovered. They have too many needs to go shopping for an entirely new middle infield.

I agree its too risky not having a SS on this team and banking on signing or trading for a SS. Plus they have to pay him $1M anyways, so its really only a $4.5M decision.

[Kinsm]

I'm very, very pro-Galvis.

Why?

[Kinsm]

Three teams have gotten rid of Galvis in the past 3 seasons, the Reds should be the 4th.

If they go into 2020 with a 30 year old player with a career .291 OBP being a regular then they are going to suck regardless, so insurance be damned at this point.

[Kc61]

Reds need to add two serious bats. It hampers that search if they also must fill both middle infield spots from outside.

Galvis is a starting caliber player at both second and short. He provides flexibility. He has good power and would help the offense hitting lower in the batting order.

He starts at second or short, or possibly plays part time, or maybe is traded if other great options fall in Reds’ lap.

IMO It would be shortsighted to give him up now. It adds another degree of difficulty to this off-season. Already the Reds have a big task ahead finding bats for the top and middle of the order.

[TheBigLebowski]

Curious as to why? When he first came over to the Reds I was cautiously optimistic they'd found a guy who could be molded into an average bat/slick glove stopgap. After 30+ games I was unimpressed. I guess he's a bird in the hand, and we're already $1MM deep into keeping him, but there are two free agents who are better fits (Didi and Iglesias) and any number of trade options. And Galvis doesn't really work as an everyday 2B. Too expensive for backup MI, in my view.

I'd rather spend the money on Peraza and use him as the contingency plan at SS, with the hope that he's pushed to the bench with Senzel at 2B and a new SS signed or traded for.

He's better than Peraza in my estimation and can play multiple positions. Not overly expensive and a good bench bat.

[REDREAD]

Three teams have gotten rid of Galvis in the past 3 seasons, the Reds should be the 4th.

If they go into 2020 with a 30 year old player with a career .291 OBP being a regular then they are going to suck regardless, so insurance be damned at this point.

SS is an opportunity to improve, but I think they need to secure an upgrade to Galvis before cutting him loose. If you cut Galvis loose now, the SS is Peraza (285 OBP and less power).
And then if Peraza gets hurt or has to play another position due to another injury, who's left to play SS? Bladino? Senzel? Not enough depth to cut Galvis loose (unless the Reds want to resign Inglesis).

I really don't care if Galvis is 30, he's only here one more year.. if he's 30 or 31 next year, that's really not that old.

[Kinsm]

SS is an opportunity to improve, but I think they need to secure an upgrade to Galvis before cutting him loose. If you cut Galvis loose now, the SS is Peraza (285 OBP and less power).
And then if Peraza gets hurt or has to play another position due to another injury, who's left to play SS? Bladino? Senzel? Not enough depth to cut Galvis loose (unless the Reds want to resign Inglesis).

I really don't care if Galvis is 30, he's only here one more year.. if he's 30 or 31 next year, that's really not that old.

The Reds have 4 months to find depth at SS, they don't need to waste 4.5M$ right now.

And I wasn't calling Galvis old (though he sort of is in baseball terms), I was stating that by age 30 he is what he is - no reason to expect his OBP to get better.