Rule 5 Draft Considerations - Winter Roster Additions

[Austinfan]

I think they tried, but no one offered enough to make it worthwhile relative to compensation if they offered a QO, or his value for one year as a stopgap for a young pitching staff.

[allentown]

I think they tried, but no one offered enough to make it worthwhile relative to compensation if they offered a QO, or his value for one year as a stopgap for a young pitching staff.

Hard to believe there wouldn't have been fairly serious interest in Hellickson among the playoff teams. He was good enough to make perhaps half of the team's playoff rotation. The Phillies may well want him next year on a QO, which isn't unreasonable, but it would be luck if they got a draft pick comp who developed into an average major leaguer.

[zambonir]

I think they tried, but no one offered enough to make it worthwhile relative to compensation if they offered a QO, or his value for one year as a stopgap for a young pitching staff.

Hard to believe there wouldn't have been fairly serious interest in Hellickson among the playoff teams. He was good enough to make perhaps half of the team's playoff rotation. The Phillies may well want him next year on a QO, which isn't unreasonable, but it would be luck if they got a draft pick comp who developed into an average major leaguer.

Well, we watched it play out. We all heard the supposed asking price (a Top 5 prospect). We know the scouts were watching him. And we know they couldn't make a non-waiver deal either. Supposedly the Marlins lowballed on the one hand and demanded a second starting pitcher (Velasquez?) on the other.

But it would also be luck if one of the two players they might have gotten for him developed into an average major leaguer.

If other GMs thought the Phillies' demands were insane, or there was a money issue, I think someone would have squawked. And obviously the Phillies also put some value on Hellickson's presence for the rest of the season, and not unreasonably given how the rotation started toppling post-deadline.

Anyway, we're off-topic. But if the Phillies are willing to pay Hellickson $17.5 million - and use a 40-man roster space on him - next season then I think in theory they might look for a way to buy out Harrison, and if they don't, it won't be because they can't afford it. And generally speaking, fan paranoia about losing players in the Rule V is a lot higher than the reality a front office has on their whiteboard.

The toughest call might be not protecting one last player so the Phillies can take one.

[Austinfan]

I don't think the Phillies want to waste a roster spot on another Goeddel this coming season, because with all the players at Lehigh they would want the last player or two on the 25 man roster to be expendable, someone they can send down and not care if they lose him on waivers to clear a spot for a kid tearing up the International league.

[Philsmania]

I don't think the Phillies want to waste a roster spot on another Goeddel this coming season, because with all the players at Lehigh they would want the last player or two on the 25 man roster to be expendable, someone they can send down and not care if they lose him on waivers to clear a spot for a kid tearing up the International league.

That's an interesting point. It seems that more often that not, the Phillies take someone in the Rule V draft. I wonder if they'll punt on doing so this year with the 40 man roster being tight.

And, on the question of why Hellickson wasn't flipped, I think he was flippable and I am not sure the market for him was soft. It seemed clear to me that Klentak made clear to everyone that he viewed a potential Hellickson trade not as a trade of Hellickson but as a trade of a potential first round sandwich pick and demanded value accordingly as opposed to demanding value that would be accorded for Hellickson. Once it became clear that Klentak wasn't bluffing on that, GM's stayed away since they weren't willing to trade on those terms or, in other words, they wanted to trade for Hellickson's value, not the potential pick's. I disagreed with his strategy but we'll see if he turns out to be right in the end. Meanwhile, Cashner was the hottest starting pitcher property at the deadline and he has flopped for the Marlins.

[Purduke]

I don't think the Phillies want to waste a roster spot on another Goeddel this coming season, because with all the players at Lehigh they would want the last player or two on the 25 man roster to be expendable, someone they can send down and not care if they lose him on waivers to clear a spot for a kid tearing up the International league.

...... And, on the question of why Hellickson wasn't flipped, I think he was flippable and I am not sure the market for him was soft. It seemed clear to me that Klentak made clear to everyone that he viewed a potential Hellickson trade not as a trade of Hellickson but as a trade of a potential first round sandwich pick and demanded value accordingly as opposed to demanding value that would be accorded for Hellickson. Once it became clear that Klentak wasn't bluffing on that, GM's stayed away since they weren't willing to trade on those terms or, in other words, they wanted to trade for Hellickson's value, not the potential pick's. ** I disagreed with his strategy.....**

I'm not sure how you could disagree with "his strategy." It represented his probable floor value and I can't imagine any GM ignoring that reality. I don't think that was just a "Klentak problem." Can you imagine if he had traded Hellickson for Joey Curletta and a PTBNL. The first comment from every poster would have been "we were just about ensured a sandwich pick if we kept him, how could this idiot trade him for less value than that?" And they would have been right. The objective of a Hellickson trade wasn't to just flip him, it was to add value. Above what his immutable value already was.

[Philsmania]

I don't think the Phillies want to waste a roster spot on another Goeddel this coming season, because with all the players at Lehigh they would want the last player or two on the 25 man roster to be expendable, someone they can send down and not care if they lose him on waivers to clear a spot for a kid tearing up the International league.

...... And, on the question of why Hellickson wasn't flipped, I think he was flippable and I am not sure the market for him was soft. It seemed clear to me that Klentak made clear to everyone that he viewed a potential Hellickson trade not as a trade of Hellickson but as a trade of a potential first round sandwich pick and demanded value accordingly as opposed to demanding value that would be accorded for Hellickson. Once it became clear that Klentak wasn't bluffing on that, GM's stayed away since they weren't willing to trade on those terms or, in other words, they wanted to trade for Hellickson's value, not the potential pick's. ** I disagreed with his strategy.....**

I'm not sure how you could disagree with "his strategy." It represented his probable floor value and I can't imagine any GM ignoring that reality. I don't think that was just a "Klentak problem." Can you imagine if he had traded Hellickson for Joey Curletta and a PTBNL. The first comment from every poster would have been "we were just about ensured a sandwich pick if we kept him, how could this idiot trade him for less value than that?" And they would have been right. The objective of a Hellickson trade wasn't to just flip him, it was to add value. Above what his immutable value already was.

I disagreed to the point that there's no guarantee we'll get that pick. And, I never said trade him for slop. I'm sure we could have something decent for him, if not what Klentak was asking for. He could take the QO and go back to being below average next year meaning all we would get out of him is this year's good season. Bird in hand vs. bird in bush, I guess.

[julio]

Obviously a Tirado is worth that now (or in the future) but honestly I don't think he is on the bubble ( I hope not). Relief pitchers are the most dangerous to not protect as that are the easiest to "hide" on a ML roster, especially for a non-competitive team.

Who's on the bubble is a function of how much roster space they can clear out.

I spent some time this morning looking at the roster, and the list of Rule 5-eligible prospects. Depending on how many relief pitchers they're willing to just outright, they can protect everybody they probably need to, but only if they're willing to outright a large portion of their current reliever corps. It looks like the last roster decisions will involve pitching prospects: Elniery Garcia, Jesen Therrien, Ricardo Pinto, Alberto Tirado.

How did I get there? Looking at the current roster, and considering that they'll need to build a 25-man roster in March/April (and assuming no additions due to trade or FA signing - obviously, this subject to change!).

Twelve starting pitchers: Asher, Eflin, Eickhoff, Harrison, Hellickson, Morgan, Nola, Thompson, Velasquez, plus add Appel, Lively, Pivetta. Five of these guys are in the April rotation, six are in AAA (if all are healthy); this will be very interesting in the spring. Matt Harrison is DL'ed. Also, this assumes Hellickson accepts a QO; if he doesn't, that would open a roster spot. Outrighted: Buchanan (he's out of options, and about tenth in line among the starting candidates; might as well outright him now as in the spring).

Eight relief pitchers: Seven on the Active roster in April (five RH - Garcia, Gomez, Gonzalez, Neris, Ramos; two LH - Rodriguez, Araujo); one optioned to AAA - Cordero. Outrighted: Herrmann, Hinojosa, Klein, Mariot, Murray, Schuster.

Three catchers: Rupp, Alfaro, Knapp - one optioned to AAA (or two if they pick up a veteran at some point - but that consumes another roster spot).

Five infielders (Joseph, Hernandez, Galvis, Franco, plus a backup - Burriss/somebody else)

Nine outfielders: Five active (Altherr, Asche, Herrera, Paredes, Ruf - or likely somebody else replacing Paredes/Ruf, neither of whom has options remaining); four optioned to AAA (Cozens, Goeddel, Quinn, Williams).

That's 37.

So you've got three slots, and four vulnerable pitchers (Garcia, Pinto, Therrien in AA, Tirado in A-ball). They could lose a slot if they decide to sign a veteran catcher to pair with Rupp. They could gain a slot if Hellickson leaves. They could gain a slot if they're planning to promote an outfielder (Quinn?) directly to the 25-man roster. They could gain (buy) a slot by releasing Matt Harrison.

So they can make this work.

They would be exposing a bunch of AAA and AA players to the draft:

Featherston, Moore, Mora, Perkins, Stassi, Sweeney, Valentin from AAA;

Canelo, Curletta, Hollands, Leiter, Lino, Milner, Martinez, Nunez, Pullin, Walding, Windle from AA.

(And yes, Carlos Tocci, among others, from A+.)

They could be more aggressive at purging mediocrities - they could outright Asche, Burriss, Paredes, or Ruf, for instance. But this doesn't really help them; it could free up a roster spot in late November for a prospect...but they'd only have to add a player in the same role in December-March, and when they did, they'd have to waive one of the prospects they protected in November. It's easier to keep a prospect claimed off outright waivers than a Rule 5 pickup - the waived player can be optioned. Better to take the risk in the Rule 5 draft.

[Austinfan]

There's an information aspect you skip, in March you get a month to see the players before making the decision who to waive to make room for a ST "surprise," or even to engineer a 2 or 3 for 1 trade.

[Purduke]

I disagreed to the point that there's no guarantee we'll get that pick. And, I never said trade him for slop. I'm sure we could have something decent for him, if not what Klentak was asking for. He could take the QO and go back to being below average next year meaning all we would get out of him is this year's good season. Bird in hand vs. bird in bush, I guess.

Well we both agree we wouldn't expect Klentak to accept slop. But I still would have wanted Klentak to approach this decision exactly the way he did. In the end this is an investment decision, and everybody who gets to make that decision understands that they can not control the future or predict anything with absolute certainty. Hellickson accepting the QO and stinking the place up next year for $17 million has a certain probability, as would Klentak accepting a pretty good prospect who then blows his arm out or suffers another career ending injury. Uncontrollables. But what is controllable in building the decision matrix is the branch that says "Accept trade value below what we consider a sandwich pick value is" and assign it a value that above the acceptable hurdle return. What I am saying is that is not an acceptable branch of the tree in my opinion.

[Purduke]

Obviously a Tirado is worth that now (or in the future) but honestly I don't think he is on the bubble ( I hope not). Relief pitchers are the most dangerous to not protect as that are the easiest to "hide" on a ML roster, especially for a non-competitive team.

Who's on the bubble is a function of how much roster space they can clear out.

I spent some time this morning looking at the roster, and the list of Rule 5-eligible prospects. Depending on how many relief pitchers they're willing to just outright, they can protect everybody they probably need to, but only if they're willing to outright a large portion of their current reliever corps. It looks like the last roster decisions will involve pitching prospects: Elniery Garcia, Jesen Therrien, Ricardo Pinto, Alberto Tirado.

How did I get there? Looking at the current roster, and considering that they'll need to build a 25-man roster in March/April (and assuming no additions due to trade or FA signing - obviously, this subject to change!).

Twelve starting pitchers: Asher, Eflin, Eickhoff, Harrison, Hellickson, Morgan, Nola, Thompson, Velasquez, plus add Appel, Lively, Pivetta. Five of these guys are in the April rotation, six are in AAA (if all are healthy); this will be very interesting in the spring. Matt Harrison is DL'ed. Also, this assumes Hellickson accepts a QO; if he doesn't, that would open a roster spot. Outrighted: Buchanan (he's out of options, and about tenth in line among the starting candidates; might as well outright him now as in the spring).

Eight relief pitchers: Seven on the Active roster in April (five RH - Garcia, Gomez, Gonzalez, Neris, Ramos; two LH - Rodriguez, Araujo); one optioned to AAA - Cordero. Outrighted: Herrmann, Hinojosa, Klein, Mariot, Murray, Schuster.

Three catchers: Rupp, Alfaro, Knapp - one optioned to AAA (or two if they pick up a veteran at some point - but that consumes another roster spot).

Five infielders (Joseph, Hernandez, Galvis, Franco, plus a backup - Burriss/somebody else)

Nine outfielders: Five active (Altherr, Asche, Herrera, Paredes, Ruf - or likely somebody else replacing Paredes/Ruf, neither of whom has options remaining); four optioned to AAA (Cozens, Goeddel, Quinn, Williams).

That's 37.

So you've got three slots, and four vulnerable pitchers (Garcia, Pinto, Therrien in AA, Tirado in A-ball). They could lose a slot if they decide to sign a veteran catcher to pair with Rupp. They could gain a slot if Hellickson leaves. They could gain a slot if they're planning to promote an outfielder (Quinn?) directly to the 25-man roster. They could gain (buy) a slot by releasing Matt Harrison.

So they can make this work.

They would be exposing a bunch of AAA and AA players to the draft:

Featherston, Moore, Mora, Perkins, Stassi, Sweeney, Valentin from AAA;

Canelo, Curletta, Hollands, Leiter, Lino, Milner, Martinez, Nunez, Pullin, Walding, Windle from AA.

(And yes, Carlos Tocci, among others, from A+.)

They could be more aggressive at purging mediocrities - they could outright Asche, Burriss, Paredes, or Ruf, for instance. But this doesn't really help them; it could free up a roster spot in late November for a prospect...but they'd only have to add a player in the same role in December-March, and when they did, they'd have to waive one of the prospects they protected in November. It's easier to keep a prospect claimed off outright waivers than a Rule 5 pickup - the waived player can be optioned. Better to take the risk in the Rule 5 draft.

Your analysis, and the first one in this post, make me think two things.

First, I don't think this is turning out to be as hard a process as I expected it would be back in May and June. When the decision comes down to having guys like Asche, Paredes and Ruf protected in your Top 37, or wondering if you should hold a spot open for a Rule 5 pick, or protect Cam Perkins, it is actually not as stressing as I expected.

Second, if it is getting say $10M and protecting Harrison or releasing him, I am ok if the Phils take the money. When I saw Harrison on the 40 in the original analysis because he had a guarantee for 2017, I had the exact same reaction you did about releasing him. But if Perkins is say #40, I can see leaving him exposed.

Personally, with the 37 man roster you presented, I would let one of Paredes or Ruf go (only because Williams now looks delayed at best, and I think Quinn should validate in AAA for at least a couple months). Using the four slots would be Tirado, Pinto, Pullin and Tocci (even though I don't see Tocci being claimed this year either). I would swap Burriss for Valentin, too.

If Hellickson goes ( I hope so, but am OK if he stays), I also wouldn't mind if the Phils bring Ellis back for a year with that spot. And Harrison for Perkins? as I said, I'd understand if they took the money.

[julio]

There's an information aspect you skip, in March you get a month to see the players before making the decision who to waive to make room for a ST "surprise," or even to engineer a 2 or 3 for 1 trade.

O...kay. What you say isn't wrong, per se...but I honestly cannot see what point you're trying to make, with regard to the Winter Roster which will be set in November, and which will define who is, and is not exposed to the Rule 5 draft. Maybe I'm obtuse; maybe you need to be clearer?

[julio]

Your analysis, and the first one in this post, make me think two things.

First, I don't think this is turning out to be as hard a process as I expected it would be back in May and June. When the decision comes down to having guys like Asche, Paredes and Ruf protected in your Top 37, or wondering if you should hold a spot open for a Rule 5 pick, or protect Cam Perkins, it is actually not as stressing as I expected.

Second, if it is getting say $10M and protecting Harrison or releasing him, I am ok if the Phils take the money. When I saw Harrison on the 40 in the original analysis because he had a guarantee for 2017, I had the exact same reaction you did about releasing him. But if Perkins is say #40, I can see leaving him exposed.

Personally, with the 37 man roster you presented, I would let one of Paredes or Ruf go (only because Williams now looks delayed at best, and I think Quinn should validate in AAA for at least a couple months). Using the four slots would be Tirado, Pinto, Pullin and Tocci (even though I don't see Tocci being claimed this year either). I would swap Burriss for Valentin, too.

If Hellickson goes ( I hope so, but am OK if he stays), I also wouldn't mind if the Phils bring Ellis back for a year with that spot. And Harrison for Perkins? as I said, I'd understand if they took the money.

You would replace one of the bench outfielders with Andrew Pullin (either Paredes or Ruf) - not just on the 40-man roster, but also on the 25-man roster? You would promote Jes Valentin as the backup middle infielder - not just on the 40-man, but on the 25-man roster? OK. I'm not at all sure it's an improvement, but OK...keeping in mind that if the Phils subsequently acquire a "real" outfielder (without trading somebody from the projected 25-man roster), they would then have to waive a prospect.

I included Burriss, and the corps of Asche, Paredes, Ruf on the roster basically as space-holders. I would be happy to see better options in those 25-man roster slots. I'm not convinced that Jes Valentin or Andrew Pullin (or Stassi, or Perkins, etc.) are those "better options." I agree with you that Quinn, Williams, Cozens - who are, or will be, better options - need time in AAA. But if you're concerned about losing a Valentin or a Pullin, yes, you could add them to the roster.

Caveat: IF the Phils deferred adding a "real" outfielder, or a different backup infielder (Andres Blanco) until after about February 15th, they could use the 60-day DL as a way of "expanding" the 40-man roster. Harrison will go there; if one of Nola or Eflin is clearly not ready to go, he could also go there. But that option isn't available until February (the date pitchers and catchers report).

[Austinfan]

There's an information aspect you skip, in March you get a month to see the players before making the decision who to waive to make room for a ST "surprise," or even to engineer a 2 or 3 for 1 trade.

O...kay. What you say isn't wrong, per se...but I honestly cannot see what point you're trying to make, with regard to the Winter Roster which will be set in November, and which will define who is, and is not exposed to the Rule 5 draft. Maybe I'm obtuse; maybe you need to be clearer?

"They could be more aggressive at purging mediocrities - they could outright Asche, Burriss, Paredes, or Ruf, for instance. But this doesn't really help them; it could free up a roster spot in late November for a prospect...but they'd only have to add a player in the same role in December-March, and when they did, they'd have to waive one of the prospects they protected in November. It's easier to keep a prospect claimed off outright waivers than a Rule 5 pickup - the waived player can be optioned. Better to take the risk in the Rule 5 draft."

You add the player in December, but you only have to waive him in March if someone steps up and takes a job on the 25 man roster and has to be added to the 40 man roster. Now if you sign a FA you have to waive someone before March, but otherwise you have four months to free up that spot on the 40 man roster and all March to decide who you want to keep.

The other issue is when do players go on the DL and free up 40 man spots - because the first eligible day you put Harrison on DL.

[julio]

There's an information aspect you skip, in March you get a month to see the players before making the decision who to waive to make room for a ST "surprise," or even to engineer a 2 or 3 for 1 trade.

O...kay. What you say isn't wrong, per se...but I honestly cannot see what point you're trying to make, with regard to the Winter Roster which will be set in November, and which will define who is, and is not exposed to the Rule 5 draft. Maybe I'm obtuse; maybe you need to be clearer?

[quote="julio"]"They could be more aggressive at purging mediocrities - they could outright Asche, Burriss, Paredes, or Ruf, for instance. But this doesn't really help them; it could free up a roster spot in late November for a prospect...but they'd only have to add a player in the same role in December-March, and when they did, they'd have to waive one of the prospects they protected in November.[/quote]

It's easier to keep a prospect claimed off outright waivers than a Rule 5 pickup - the waived player can be optioned. Better to take the risk in the Rule 5 draft."

You add the player in December, but you only have to waive him in March if someone steps up and takes a job on the 25 man roster and has to be added to the 40 man roster. Now if you sign a FA you have to waive someone before March, but otherwise you have four months to free up that spot on the 40 man roster and all March to decide who you want to keep.

The other issue is when do players go on the DL and free up 40 man spots - because the first eligible day you put Harrison on DL.

So, you're agreeing with what I said? Or not? Keep in mind - if they move a place-holder outfielder in November to make room for a prospect, they will have to add an outfielder at some point later - they're not opening the season with a four-man outfield corps, two of whom are drawn from Asche/Paredes/Ruf. They need another starting outfielder. Now, get rid of two of those three, and add a real left fielder? That would work - but my exercise didn't anticipate FA signings or trades - that's too open-ended for any kind of "analysis" - it's guesswork.

As for your last sentence...If you add a veteran on March 30th, you've had "all of March" to evaluate the prospects you protected in November...that's if you consider four weeks of spring training a sufficient evaluation. And of course, that's only if you add the veteran on the eve of Opening Day; if you add the veteran sooner than that, you're waiving a prospect that you protected in November, with little or no additional information about him - and you're increasing the chance of losing him, since it's harder to keep a Rule 5 pickup than to just claim a kid on waivers in March, and option him to AAA. It seems to me to make more sense to just not add that "on the cusp" player in November, if you're probably going to expose him to waivers in February or March.

[Austinfan]

Well, if you wait until the end of March, you can determine if you want to keep that player, and other teams are less likely to claim a player they can't see through their ST.

However, the other issue is the injury/DL issue, when can you take players off the 40 man roster and put them on the DL, when the season starts or in ST?

[zambonir]

I would agree the Phillies are much less likely to keep a Rule V player this year (and if they do it will probably be a pitcher), but that doesn't mean they won't want the option to draft one.

[andyb]

I would agree the Phillies are much less likely to keep a Rule V player this year (and if they do it will probably be a pitcher), but that doesn't mean they won't want the option to draft one.

We might choose to add a free agent on a major league deal after the draft anyway, so might as well go to the draft with a spot free.

[zambonir]

I would agree the Phillies are much less likely to keep a Rule V player this year (and if they do it will probably be a pitcher), but that doesn't mean they won't want the option to draft one.

We might choose to add a free agent on a major league deal after the draft anyway, so might as well go to the draft with a spot free.

Last year the Phillies added two key (loosely defined) players before the draft: Bourjos on waivers & David Hernandez as a FA. They also claimed and protected two relievers (Otero and Achter) before the Rule V deadline, and dumped both soon after the draft. They also protected Jesse Biddle (who will presumably go untaken in this year's Rule V, but who knows, maybe the Braves can spare the spot).

Different roster situation this year, but I have no doubt some of these same things will happen.

[andyb]

The bottom of the 40 will have more prospects and fewer spare parts (Otero, Aschter, etc.) than last year. I expect less churn this time. I am guessing we will assume at least 1 or 2 of the final bullpen or utility spots go to non roster players as after Spring Training we get back the Harrison spot and likely have a 60-day DL move or two.

Last year we really only had about 35-36 players we cared about on the 40. This year closer to 40 - though we will probably risk letting some prospects go unprotected simply because we want to extend their 3 years of options. That is the argument on a guy like Tirado. If we protect him he likely needs 2-3 years in the minors before he can contribute. At that point our options are almost used up. Of course I want everything to click with Tirado next year and have him ready in 2018, but chances are that will not happen.