BA Rule V Preview

[corkedbat]

Adding SS Diory Hernandez from the Braves could:

a) add depth as a second INF reserve
b) make it easier for the the Reds to trade EdE or Gonzalez and plug Keppinger in their spot
c) make it easier to deal Freel
d) make Janish hit his way onto the roster as a reserve INF
e) allow WK go to the Twins with Castro and say, "OK, your turn!"

[AmarilloRed]

No. Its Thursday. That is Dec 6th.

My mistake. I thought I saw it listed as Dec.10 somewhere.

[HokieRed]

These may not seem important, but I think they are pretty real considerations about "downside" in taking a rule 5 guy. Assuming in the Reds' case we're talking about a reliever, it means in Spring training you've got to give the guy enough innings to determine if he can stick on the 25 man roster. Those come away from other guys you are trying to evaluate and from guys trying to prepare for the season. Consider that on the Reds we are already going to be trying, presumably, to evaluate at least Coffey, Majewski, Bray, Coutlangus, Salmon, McBeth, Pelland, Roenicke, maybe Viola, Stanton, Gardner, maybe EZ, Shearn, and possibly 3 or 4 non-roster invitees plus the starters with a chance to make the roster--Cueto, Maloney. This is just a list of the guys you're trying out. Now you've got to add to that the ones you're trying to get ready. Also there are only so many meaningful innings in spring training ball--innings in which your Rule 5 guy faces a solid 3-6 major league hitters in a row. It doesn't tell you anything if he goes out and blows away some other team's Double A hopefuls. Remember, then, those meaningful innings are precious to your guys who are trying to make their case. What all this means is that it doesn't make a lot of sense to take a rule 5 reliever unless you are either 1. A club on which it doesn't matter much who the 12th pitcher is (hopefully this no longer describes the Reds) or 2. You are pretty sure going in that the guy is better than a lot of what you have and will stick--e.g. Burton last year.

[*BaseClogger*]

These may not seem important, but I think they are pretty real considerations about "downside" in taking a rule 5 guy. Assuming in the Reds' case we're talking about a reliever, it means in Spring training you've got to give the guy enough innings to determine if he can stick on the 25 man roster. Those come away from other guys you are trying to evaluate and from guys trying to prepare for the season. Consider that on the Reds we are already going to be trying, presumably, to evaluate at least Coffey, Majewski, Bray, Coutlangus, Salmon, McBeth, Pelland, Roenicke, maybe Viola, Stanton, Gardner, maybe EZ, Shearn, and possibly 3 or 4 non-roster invitees plus the starters with a chance to make the roster--Cueto, Maloney. This is just a list of the guys you're trying out. Now you've got to add to that the ones you're trying to get ready. Also there are only so many meaningful innings in spring training ball--innings in which your Rule 5 guy faces a solid 3-6 major league hitters in a row. It doesn't tell you anything if he goes out and blows away some other team's Double A hopefuls. Remember, then, those meaningful innings are precious to your guys who are trying to make their case. What all this means is that it doesn't make a lot of sense to take a rule 5 reliever unless you are either 1. A club on which it doesn't matter much who the 12th pitcher is (hopefully this no longer describes the Reds) or 2. You are pretty sure going in that the guy is better than a lot of what you have and will stick--e.g. Burton last year.

good point. I would say Bierd sounds better than Mike Stanton though...

[HokieRed]

Believe me, I hope Mike Stanton does not make the ballclub. But the $ owed him says he does.

[redsmetz]

Believe me, I hope Mike Stanton does not make the ballclub. But the $ owed him says he does.

I'll say it again - Stanton will be on this club for this year unless we trade his contract. We will not want to allow someone else following a DFA to kick in his guarantee. If we trade the contract, it's someone else's issue.

[Vada Pinson Fan]

Thanks for the post Mario. Great info!

It would be great if Stanton was NOT on the Reds in '08, but I agree, money says otherwise. Krivsky aquisitions seem to be, for the most part, a big hit or a big waste.
Here's hoping for a very fruitful winter meeting for the Reds and their GM!