Prospect Insider - Roster Expansion Candidates

Roster Expansion Candidates

By Jason A. Churchill

By 08-30-2010

Chris Crawford and I have been looking into potential September call-ups for the last several weeks and I have been bouncing suggestions of players to a couple of scouts and an assistant GM.

One thing I added when talking to the talent evaluators is the 40-man roster situation, which tends to mean more than it should for clubs during this process.

I sent this piece to one of the three on Sunday to get his take, and he said after reading it, he felt like he could predict which 4-7 players would be called up, and said "I'd bet a half-rack on it."

Can you decipher the same?

Subscribers can find the wrap-up here.

If you are not yet a subscriber, here is where you fix that.

Reminder: All annual subscribers receive the Prospect Handbook for FREE every winter, as well as the the mid-season Top 30 and will have access to all the trade deadline and draft rumors, and, of course, the December winter meetings where Prospect Insider was the first to alert the world of what the M's were giving up for Cliff Lee.

roster-expansion-candidates

Comments
The following 44 comment(s) for this article are shown below:

1. By: Marco on 08-30-2010 04:03:34
Thus do you believe there's no room in the 40-man roster for Franklin and Poythress ? Especially for Franklin that would mean 2011 is becoming a too unlikely projection to be in Seattle ?

2. By: Jason A. Churchill on 08-30-2010 14:55:31
I don't see Poythress being added this year, and no, it's unlikely that Franklin is added. But the fact that it's not a slam dunk 'No' is the amazing part.

3. By: greymstreet on 08-30-2010 16:44:22
What would the point be of adding Franklin to the 40-man before we're ready to call him up. As I understand it, don't we have a few years left before we need to worry about him being selected in the Rule 5? Is this just a procedural thing you're talking about?

4. By: Marco on 08-30-2010 17:49:42
#3
With regard to Franklin I was just referring to a previous report by JAC, as follows.

"While I have heard conflicting opinions about how soon Franklin could see the majors, it's not out of the realm of possibility that the M's get adventurous and find room on the 40-man roster for him in September. This September."

It seems there's unanymous agreement upon how advanced is that player.

5. By: rjfrik on 08-30-2010 18:28:00
Franklin won't be added until he is called up for good. There is no reason to put any player under 23 years of age on the 40 man roster unless they are in the regular lineup playing everyday. 23 is the cutoff age for the rule 5 draft. So anyone you want to protect from being drafted and is over that age you stash on the the 40 man roster, anyone else that is younger then 23 and in the minor leagues can't be touched by another team so there is literally no reason to waste a spot on the 40 man roster for that person.

Hope this helps

6. By: Jason A. Churchill on 08-30-2010 19:57:01
rj,

That's not true at all. Stop making stuff up.

Evereyone,

Nothing regarding Franklin has anything to do with the rule 5. The rule 5 is such a non-factor these days because it's now 4 and 5 years rather than 3 and 4.

Franklin, by most accounts and the M's included, will be on the 25-man permanently before the 40-man roster/rule 5 issues will come up, barring injuries.

7. By: rjfrik on 08-31-2010 05:29:57
Jason,

I read this a few years back when I was trying to gather information about the Rule 5 draft. Obviously the information I read was false. I would never post anything fictitious as fact unless I truly thought it was fact. Sorry for getting it wrong. My apologies.

So age has no bearing on Rule 5? I was seriously under the impression that it did. It's service time then? By service time I mean how many years you have been with the organization.

8. By: benjamin_davis6 on 08-31-2010 05:30:17
LOL!!(@ 5.) Dude Jason, love the reports on the farm. Please keep'em coming.

Question. I liked Smoak from what I saw when he was up in the bigs here in Seattle and while down in Texas(just moved up from Arlington). Although his stroke looks a little long. Is he working to shorten that up, or are they tinkering with his swing, does it need to be fine tuned? When do you project Justin to be a regular for the M's in the bigs.

Again, thanks for all the information. I look forward to becoming a full time subscriber very very soon. Thank you!

9. By: rjfrik on 08-31-2010 05:33:46
Per Wikipedia:

Players are eligible for selection in the Rule 5 draft who are not on their major league organization's 40-man roster and:
- were signed at age 19 or older and have been in the organization for four years; or
- were signed at age 18 or younger and have been in the organization for five years.

Here it is.

Lesson learned trust Wikipedia vs a random internet blogger.

10. By: roundbridge on 08-31-2010 10:04:17
How does the Rule 5 affect players in the Dominican and Venezuelan Summer Leagues? Some players like Yoervis Medina spend 2-3 years there before emerging into US leagues. Is he a prospect? He did well in a spot start in AAA and looks like doing well in the Midwest League.

m

11. By: dawgncarolina on 08-31-2010 10:57:31
10 - the rules are the same for the IFA's as they are for draftees, the only difference is that most of them fall in the 18 or under when signed category, so they have five years of club control before they have to be added to the 40 man. But the years in the DSL and VSL count toward that five year total.

This is another reason why signing 16 year old IFA's is inherently risky - they have to be on the 40 man by the time they're 21, whereas an 18 year old draftee out of HS has until he's 23 to be added.

12. By: randallball on 08-31-2010 11:25:48
Jason are you hearing any rumblings about any M's possibly being moved today?

13. By: mauricewilliamsiii on 08-31-2010 13:14:19
#11 - Hence the Johermyn Chavez conundrum. Personally I wouldn't risk losing the kid but talk about a tough decision for Jack Z.

14. By: StandinPat on 08-31-2010 14:15:04
Chavez may not be all that big of a conundrum when the time comes. He's obviously posting some real nice numbers, and while I'm not sure exactly how many Rule 5 eligibles they'll have, any or all of Langerhans, Woodward, Lopez, Kotchman, Branyan, Bard, Robo Rob, Wright, White, Sweeney, Seddon, Paredes, Olson and Feierband could be removed to make room, with a certainty that a good handful of those guys are not with the M's next year.

15. By: mauricewilliamsiii on 08-31-2010 15:02:17
I have no doubt there will be plenty of open spots on the 40 man, I mean just look at the current MLB bullpen. My concern is that quite a few intriguing guys need to be put on the 40 man this year and I see at least one or two decent prospects actually being taken from the M's this time.

Here are some guys that I think have to go on;

Pineda
Robles
Peguero
Liddi
Chavez
Mangini
Lawson
Lueke

I might be wrong on some of those but that is quite a list to begin with.

16. By: Marco on 08-31-2010 15:29:54
Perhaps it's off topic but interesting for development of the Italian kid:

http://www.mister-baseball.com/alex-liddi-play-winter-ball-venezuela/

"aseball.it reported on Monday that Italian third baseman Alex Liddi out of the Seattle Mariners organization is going to play winter ball this year. He will join Cardenales de Lara of the Venezuelan Winter League together with his West Tenn Diamond Jaxx teammate Jarrett Grube. The 22-year-old San Remo native is batting .269 (OBP .343/SLG .467) with 14 homeruns, eight triples, 36 doubles, 72 runs and 86 RBI in 127 games this year in the Southern League (Double A). It is his fifth professional season in the Mariners organization. The Venezuelan Winter League begins on October 12."

17. By: StandinPat on 08-31-2010 15:51:55
Maurice,

You can almost immediately cut that list in half. Remember any player claimed has to spend the entire season on a teams 25 man. I really don't see anyone claiming Peguero or Liddi, Chavez was in Hi A, and I'm not sure Mangini is that big of a loss. Robles(If he has to), Pineda, and Lueke are obvious locks and Lawson is atleast interesting.

18. By: roundbridge on 08-31-2010 17:29:33
Re: minor league Rule 5. I presume not of our better young Latin prospects are in danger of being claimed if we place them on a AA Roster? How many of the young kids can be protected. Is there a limit? There must be since most of the players claimed seem to be of the roster filler category.

19. By: Edman on 08-31-2010 18:41:38
Mangini not that big a loss? Let's find out first. Certainly, there are better candidates to DFA to make room for Mangini.

20. By: safecochatter on 08-31-2010 20:05:20
just when ya thought jack was done trading. and maybe he is. but rockies and jose lopez rumors are alive. seems with Ian Stewart hitting the dl the lopez rumors start anew. anyone know exactly when trade waiver season is over. not that means that much these days..

21. By: mauricewilliamsiii on 09-01-2010 00:43:13
Add Nick Hill and Wilhelmson as guys that have to be added to the 40 man or risk being lost.

And don't count out guys like Chavez, Liddi, and Peguero being taken and sticking with a club. It happened for Jose Guillen straight out of A ball back in 99 with the Pirates.

22. By: StandinPat on 09-01-2010 15:14:00
Ed, why all the man-love for Mangini? He's got a decent LH power swing, but poor plate discipline and he can't play defense. So yeah, I'd say a guy whose upside is as a bench bat isn't a big loss. As far as other candidates that could be DFA'd to make room, I named 14.

Maurice, Peguero, Chavez and Liddi all still have huge holes in their games and would get eaten alive at the MLB level, and having to go back 11 years to find an example pretty much proves how unlikely it is one of those guys gets taken.

I'm sure those are all players teams would love to have in their org, but would they actually wanna give them a spot on the 25 man for the entire year? Not likely, especially when you consider atleast 20 teams think they have a shot at making the playoffs to start every year. Does a playoff caliber team have Carlos Peguero on their roster?

23. By: Edman on 09-01-2010 16:34:53
Why Pat? Because the M's need bats. Poor plate discipline? Yeah, he's not great at drawing a walk, but an OBP forty points above his average, is probably close to league average. He's certainly miles ahead of Lopez. He strikeout a bit too much, but he wouldn't be the only baseball player to have that trait.

Yeah, like Seattle couldn't have used a guy like Dobbs for a few years? Those guys have no value......wait, yes Dobbs did have value with the Phillies. I stand corrected.

Not ever "valuable" player has to be a potential starter. At this point, I'd settle for ANYONE who can get a hit. So no, I'm not inclined to cast someone aside, because he "might" only be a bench guy. He "might not" be just a bench guy. In case you missed it, there are more offensive holes on the M's bench, than in the hull of the Titanic.

24. By: mauricewilliamsiii on 09-01-2010 17:38:57
Yes standinpat it is unlikely that Chavez, Liddi or Peguero stick with a team. That doesn't make it unlikely that they get taken. In the case of Chavez especially I could see an NL team taking him and stashing him on the bench as a fifth outfielder all year and four or five years from now the Mariners kicking themselves for losing an all-star player for nothing.

Liddi and Peguero I highly doubt could stick with a team for a whole year but I also never say never. I don't want to risk losing any of them to keep a Garrett Olson, Chris Seddon, Ryan Fierabend, Brian Sweeney, Sean White or David Pauley.

25. By: Edman on 09-01-2010 18:30:29
Actually, maurice, it would be more likely that an AL team would do that, rather than an NL team. Not having a DH makes bench players more valuable. There are more pinch-hitting and pinch-running opportunities.

And calling Chavez an All-Star caliber player is a bit of a stretch. Useful, maybe. But many of the best prospects don't end up All-Stars.

26. By: Edman on 09-01-2010 18:34:31
As an added comment, maurice.....I heard the same arguments made about Wlad Balentein after his good year in the Cali league. Don't let those numbers fool you. Until he gets to AA and produces, the M's don't really know what they have. But, I certainly wouldn't cast him away.

27. By: d2ret on 09-02-2010 00:17:09
I woulda given Chapman 30 m. The guy is filth nasty

28. By: stickball on 09-02-2010 00:48:09
For the position players, I can see the following position players dropped from the 40 man roster next year: Bard, Woodward, Kotchman, Lopez, Josh Wilson, and Langerhans. This provides 5 open spots. They can sign a backup shortstop, which leaves 4 open spots. They could have room for Mangini and Tenebrink.

29. By: stickball on 09-02-2010 00:53:22
Add Liddi as another possibility for the open spots.

30. By: StandinPat on 09-02-2010 15:21:27
"Yeah, like Seattle couldn't have used a guy like Dobbs for a few years? Those guys have no value......wait, yes Dobbs did have value with the Phillies. I stand corrected"

Ed, I've got a million dollars for you if you can find where I said that.

Sure, Mangini might have some value, but just like Dobbs, it would be minimal at best. Part-time, bench bat, whats that get you? Half a win if he's good at it? Not something I'd be worried about protecting, you can find another one of those, Mike Carp for instance is also LH and a better bat.

"Yeah, he's not great at drawing a walk, but an OBP forty points above his average, is probably close to league average. He's certainly miles ahead of Lopez."

Actually the league average OBP+ is 67 point, more than 50% higher than Mangini's AAA rate. I think his monthly high for walks is something like 7, that's just not gonna cut it. But beyond the numbers are the scouting reports, and everything I've read mentions poor discipline and that he chases out of the zone.

And where is this cast aside crap coming from? Again more stuff I never said. I simply said I wouldn't be that concerned if someone picked him. He's a bench bat at best and that's a replaceable piece. But again, if you actually read what I said, and not go off on crap I didn't, you'll also see that I mentioned 14 other players who could be pulled off the 40 man to make room for players such as Mangini...Yeah I guess that's the same as saying he has no value and should just be cast aside.

31. By: dawgncarolina on 09-02-2010 16:13:39
StandinPat, EdRoof reads what he wants to read. Always has always will. Don't waste your time getting frustrated over his lack of reading comprehension. It's not likely to change.

32. By: Edman on 09-02-2010 17:24:04
I wouldn't exactly day that Dobbs' contributions were minimal, after he joined Philly. He's not been great this season, but he played a valuable roll for them from 2007-2009. I doubt that any Phillies fan would agree that his contributions were minimal during those seasons. It's all in what you want to see.

Biggest difference between Mangini and Carp.....he has more ability to become a utility player, than Carp ever will. Seattle doesn't have enough DH-1B type players? He may not be a good defender, but at least he can give you coverage for a few innings. I have seen him play third, and he's certainly not a great defender, but he's not a hack either.

And, since you care to get technical with what I said, where did I say you would cast him aside. I do believe that "I wouldn't" specifies me.

And, all I said was that we should find out what Mangini is, before we conclude what he isn't, and that there were better candidates to remove from the 40 roster. You are the one who commented on my "man-love" for him. On a team lacking of ANYBODY other than Ichiro who can sniff a .300 average, I'm not willing to discard someone who might be able to come close.

I do stand corrected on the OBP comment. Maybe it's still the stinging from last season last season's inability to be patient that still lingers.

And dawg......topic is baseball oriented, try to stick to it.

33. By: slamcactus on 09-03-2010 15:18:07
"Mike Carp for instance is also LH and a better bat."

Carp has hit a few more home runs this year, and has more walks, but Mangini is much better at making consistent hard contact. I don't agree that Carp has the better bat. Better eye, maybe, but much better things happen when Mangini makes contact.

I don't hate the Dobbs comp with Mangini. The value in a guy like that, though, who is limited to 1B/DH and can play 3B in a pinch, is much higher in the NL where the need for pinch-hitters is greater.

Dobbs was also a boyscout - absolutely everyone he's ever played with loved him. That's a huge part of the reason teams let him kick around despite not really showing the skills to be useful in the majors until he was 30. Usually guys with his lack of defensive versatility are written off long before that.

34. By: slamcactus on 09-03-2010 15:23:16
"Chavez was in Hi A"

So was Jesus Flores.

35. By: slamcactus on 09-03-2010 16:09:34
"but an OBP forty points above his average, is probably close to league average. He's certainly miles ahead of Lopez."

Lopez's OBP-BA in Tacoma:
2004 (age 20): .047
2005 (age 21): .036.

Mangini's this year (age 24): .040.

Not exactly miles ahead. And there was a time when it was theoretically possible for Lopez to improve. Mangini may improve too, but he's much older for the level, and from what I've heard about him he doesn't necessarily think he needs to, since he's "succeeding" just fine with his current approach.

36. By: Edman on 09-03-2010 17:02:57
The most frustrating thing about Lopez is that he appears to not try to improve his OBP.

I hope Mangini doesn't feel he has to either.

I think OBP is important, but in practicality, a walk is less valuable than an infield hit. It has value, but depends on where base runners are positioned, in order to move a runner. That doesn't justify not trying to walk, but it isn't necessarily as important as some think.

37. By: slamcactus on 09-03-2010 18:51:08
Actually, via wOBA, we have an amazingly precise idea of the run value of a walk based on run expectancies that have played out over tens of thousands of games. It's worth less than a single, you're right (A BB is worth 0.32 runs on average, while a 1B is worth 0.48). The difference in value between a single and a walk pales in comparison to the difference between a walk and an out though (an out's impact on run expectancy is -0.30 runs).

The bigger point, though, is that OBP isn't just walks. It's all the things that go into being able to avoid making outs. This is why we love Ichiro, even though he doesn't draw many walks. He has other skills that negate that particular area where he's not that strong. The result is an excellent career .376 OBP.

The point isn't walking for walking's sake. It's avoiding bringing your team 1/27th closer to the end of the game. Outs are really bad. Even "productive" ones don't help your team nearly as much as not making an out in the first place (with the exception of the go-ahead sacrifice fly, which is one game situation among thousands). OBP /= walks. OBP = the ability to avoid making outs, and any combination of skills you use to get there is just peachy.

Very few people can post average to above-average on-base percentages, though, unless they develop the ability to draw walks at a decent clip. Ichiro is an exception. Tony Gwynn was, too. Martin Prado may be, as he's sustained his batting averages over the better parts of three seasons at this point (though he walks a lot more than Mangini does).

Matt Mangini, like Jose Lopez, shows no signs of being one of those guys who has the skills to get on base without being able to draw walks. In fact, Lopez is a much, much better contact hitter than Mangini has ever been, which would suggest an ability to sustain a higher batting average.

If Mangini could hit .320 in the bigs consistently, he could be valuable despite only walking 25 times a year. In fact, that's kind of what Fontaine thought he was drafting.
As it is, Mangini is a guy who likely wouldn't crack the .300 OBP line in the majors. That makes his value to a major league team extremely limited, and potentially non-existent, since the only potential value he can provide is with his bat.

38. By: dawgncarolina on 09-03-2010 20:18:24
Fantastic post, slam

39. By: slamcactus on 09-03-2010 20:18:31
Think of it this way, Edman. Every plate appearance will result either in an out (or two, or very rarely three), or a non-out. Yes, a walk is the least valuable non-out, but it's still not an out.

The difference in run value between an out and the least valuable non-out (a BB) is 0.62 runs. That's bigger than the difference in value between a walk and a double, bigger than the difference between a double and a home run, and about exactly equal to the difference between a single and a triple. This isn't theoretical. It's the result of looking at decades of baseball and comparing the resulting runs from each potential outcome thousands of times.

Given those relative values, it should come as no surprise that the single biggest determiner as to whether or not a guy is valuable at the plate is how good he is at avoiding making outs. Given how few guys there have been throughout the game's history who have been able to be above average in that regard without relying on the free pass, you see why stats guys harp on BBs so much.

There are ways to be valuable without taking walks. Truly prodigious power can make a player valuable at the plate despite making an above average number of outs (see 1996 Sammy Sosa, or 1972-1977 Dave Kingman), and as I discussed above an ability to hit for a very high average consistently can give you an above-average OBP even though you can't take a walk. But, walks are pretty crucial to being a valuable hitter for the majority of players who don't have generational power like Sosa or Kingman or a freakish ability to get hits on balls in play like Ichiro and Gwynn.

Ergo, Matt Mangini in his present form sucks.

40. By: Edman on 09-04-2010 11:13:23
I think Mangini has done enough to at least be given a look. Personally, I wouldn't mind a thirdbaseman who can get a single with a runner on second, rather than a pop-out.

I agree with being able to draw a walk. But, with a runner on second, it simply results in runners on first and second. Walks works as long as there is someone who is coming up behind a walk, to get a hit.

I appreciate the value of OBP. But, a hit is more valuable than a walk, in regard to driving in a run. Theoretically, you could have a team with great plate discipline, and still lose. Hits, especially those that allow runners to move up more than one base at a time, have greater value.

I don't know what Mangini is, but hits of any kind have been hard to find this year. Seattle isn't losing because they don't walk enough.

I'd much rather see Mangini than Lopez, even if he isn't a plus defender. Next year, who knows?

41. By: Marco on 09-04-2010 11:23:16
"Walks works as long as there is someone who is coming up behind a walk, to get a hit....Theoretically, you could have a team with great plate discipline, and still lose."

That's walkball indeed, not baseball.

42. By: slamcactus on 09-04-2010 11:36:46
"I appreciate the value of OBP. But, a hit is more valuable than a walk, in regard to driving in a run. Theoretically, you could have a team with great plate discipline, and still lose. Hits, especially those that allow runners to move up more than one base at a time, have greater value."

I feel like you're missing the entire point of what I'm writing. You realize that it's possible to be able to both draw a walk and hit a baseball, right? You want guys who can do both. That's the entire point.

Mangini can only arguably do one of those things. And this year is the first time he's ever even shown any kind of ability to do even that. Since he's a liability with the glove, the overall package is far from exciting.

If you're really excited about a poor man's Jose Lopez without the upside, I guess that's your choice.

43. By: dawgncarolina on 09-04-2010 17:42:03
"Seattle isn't losing because they don't walk enough."

No one says they are. They are losing because they make too many outs.

Mangini is not going to change that.

44. By: slamcactus on 09-05-2010 09:27:40
To be fair, they're losing because they don't really do anything well on offense at the moment.

You are not currently logged in. If you'd like to comment on this report, please log in.
Haven't created a Prospect Insider account yet? Sign up!