Rule 5 Draft Discussion Thread
by Al Yellon on Dec 11, 2008 9:02 AM CST
Email
PrintUse this post for Rule 5 discussion today.
Baseballamerica.com says that there's less buzz around the Rule 5 draft because of rule changes:
The rules changes prior to last year, adding an extra year of protection for teams to keep players. Under the old rules, 2005 high school draft picks and 2006 college picks would have had to be protected (and most international players signed in ‘04 as well). Prep pitchers such as Sean West (Marlins), Chaz Roe (Rockies), Brandon Erbe (Orioles) and Will Inman (Padres) would have to be protected but are not on 40-man rosters. That leaves more room to protect fringy players who otherwise might not have made the cut.
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of SB Nation or Al Yellon, managing editor (unless it's a FanPost posted by Al). FanPost opinions are valued expressions of opinion by passionate and knowledgeable baseball fans.
113 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Whoever they take, dont trade him to Cincy
Okay, just so I understand it... in your wildest fantasy, you are in hell. And you are co-running a bed and breakfast with the devil.
Let's not resurrect this myth again.
Teams do this all the time — draft players on request of another team as a courtesy.
Josh Hamilton could NEVER have been a Cub. The Reds were the ONLY team he would have or could have gone to, because they had someone there who could watch over Hamilton.
Can we drop this issue now? This wasn’t a “mistake”, it was never even a possibility.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
I was being somewhat facetious
It wouldnt have been an issue had he not exploded the way he did
Okay, just so I understand it... in your wildest fantasy, you are in hell. And you are co-running a bed and breakfast with the devil.
That was a pre-arranged deal
betw Cincy and the Cubs. It wasn’t a “Cubs mistake”.
Sweet Lou for Mayor in '11.
by blackhawk24 on Dec 11, 2008 10:28 AM CST up reply actions
I would advocate drafting J. Brent Cox
He’s coming off of Tommy John surgery in mid-2007 and only pitched 30 innings last year. He’s got a strong arm, but the Cubs could stash him on the DL/extended spring training and bring him up in May or so, after a rehab stint in the minors.
Plus, with 4 40-man spots open, the Cubs can afford to make a pick.
I love to play baseball. I'm a baseball player. I've always been a baseball player. I'm still a baseball player. That's who I am. - Ryne Sandberg
I suspect they WILL make a pick...
… otherwise why leave the 40-man spots open?
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
No idea
It would be nice if Veal emerges unpicked, so the Cubs could test him out as a LOOGY in spring training, but I have a suspicion he’ll get chosen.
I love to play baseball. I'm a baseball player. I've always been a baseball player. I'm still a baseball player. That's who I am. - Ryne Sandberg
He might, but...
… I can’t see him being kept on someone’s 25-man roster all year, can you?
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
He might be one of those guys that gets taken
and then after a team realizes he won’t be able to stay with the club all season gets offered back to the Cubs.
That seems possible.
That way, someone else can test him as a LOOGY; the Cubs will send scouts to watch him.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
On a team that already has a LOOGY
he could be the last man in the bullpen. Plus, all you need is a minor injury and you can hide them on the DL for an extended period of time, too.
I love to play baseball. I'm a baseball player. I've always been a baseball player. I'm still a baseball player. That's who I am. - Ryne Sandberg
Right
But he could go on the 15-day DL, then go on a rehab assignment (30 days is the maximum), which eats at a minimum 45 days of the calendar.
I love to play baseball. I'm a baseball player. I've always been a baseball player. I'm still a baseball player. That's who I am. - Ryne Sandberg
Any player drafted
must be on the active roster for 90 days. If they were on the roster for less than that, then they must make up the remaining time in the following season.
I love to play baseball. I'm a baseball player. I've always been a baseball player. I'm still a baseball player. That's who I am. - Ryne Sandberg
by Bill Potter on Dec 11, 2008 10:21 AM CST up reply actions
He'll definitely make the year as a Pirate.
Do you think that Pittsburgh really cares who plays the LOOGY role in the bullpen?
Hendry can be absolutely infuriating sometimes. Was no one paying attention? Can no one in the organization count to 40?
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
To lose Donnie Veal for absolutely no reason?
In all honesty, does Hendry understand how the 40-man roster and Rule 5 draft work?
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
Giving Veal a taste of the big leagues
and letting him see how far he is may help his long-term development. The Cubs may have felt they weren’t going to be able to take him to the next level without him getting a different perspective. I don’t know.
The author of this post is not a certified scout, doctor, agent, statistician, manager, or journalist, nor was he ever a very good player, though he tried very hard to be like Ryne Sandberg and was about as scrappy as it gets (in T-ball). Any opinion expressed above should in no way be confused with fact, truth, or reality and is hereby qualified in the following ways: 1) The author does not know as much about baseball as Lou Piniella. 2) The author does not know as much about baseball as Jim Hendry. 3) The author does not know as much about baseball as either Dusty or Darren Baker.
That doesn't help the Cubs at all.
It would have cost the Cubs absolutely nothing to protect Veal.
Hendry, for whatever reason, opted against it. There was no downside to keeping him, and no upside to leaving him unprotected.
Veal will get his taste of the major leagues, all right – at the end of the PIT bullpen for a year, then back in the PIT minor league system, or, if he plays well in limited time this year, as a Pirate going forward.
This seems completely illogical to me. He’s not a giant prospect anymore, but he once was, and could still figure it out.
Hendry seems intent on ridding the entire system of useful arms for absolutely no return.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
Ex-Cub sightings on the list
include Rocky Cherry, Freddie Bynum, Justin Jones, Bobby Brownlie, Brian Dopriak, Sergio Mitre, Tim Lahay.
Winner of the head-scratcher award is under the NY Mets:
Galarraga, Andres 1B 47
What is he doing on the list? Is he really under some contract with the Mets?
That is a head-scratcher, all right.
The age matches the age of the former Expo and Rockie, who hasn’t played in four years.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
Maybe he is some how still under contract
Didn’t the Mets also have Mo Vaughn under contract long after he was done?
"Pounding sand since 1982...."
Strange thing though
is he never played for the Mets. I don’t see any recent minor league activity either. I thought maybe he was trying some strange comeback. Who knows?
He did....
Again without a team, the New York Mets invited Galarraga to spring training, not knowing if the 43-year-old would be fit for their roster. Galarraga showed that he had some gas left in the tank offensively by socking 3 home runs, but appeared very tentative on the defensive end. Galarraga eventually retired during spring training on March 29, 2005, saying it was “the right time to give a younger guy a chance to play.”
Whoever said you can't mix business with pleasure never owned a PuttPutt course---Andy Bernard
by carmen_fanzone on Dec 11, 2008 9:55 AM CST up reply actions
So he retired more than three years ago.
Wonder why he’s still on a list like that?
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
probably depends on the official transaction
I know that years after Albert Belle retired he was still on the Orioles 40-man roster, but on the DL. For him I believe it was so that he could still collect his salary and the Orioles could collect insurance money.
Not the same situation for Galaraga but there is probably a transaction explanation of some sort.
That's like an Iowa Cubs All Star Team from 2005!
Proud recipient of a hot dog shot from the Iowa Cubs hot dog gun.
Why Are There...
… only 24 teams in the Major League Phase?
My 2008 Christmas wish list includes this jersey. In Hendry We Trust!
Teams that already have 40 on their 40-man roster
are excluded, IIRC…
Brian McRae's 5 o'clock shadow
by PurpleLineToWrigley on Dec 11, 2008 11:05 AM CST up reply actions
veal was taken
- The Pirates took Donald Veal from the Cubs. The Orioles took Lou Palmisano from the Brewers and made trade him to the Astros. The Giants took Luis Perdomo.
- Reds take David Patton, Tigers take Kyle Bloom, R
I Doubt He...
… lasts a full season on a 25-man roster.
My 2008 Christmas wish list includes this jersey. In Hendry We Trust!
He might on the Pirates roster
Their pitching is pretty bad
"I am not ashamed to say I love Greg Maddux" - Jim Hendry
by Doggie Stalker on Dec 11, 2008 11:55 AM CST up reply actions
A team like the Pirates have that "luxury"
That’s exactly how the Twins got and kept Santana.
They were rebuilding and stashed him in the bullpen for the season.
Hey, it's a new century!
by cowsarecool220 on Dec 11, 2008 12:00 PM CST up reply actions
Right, but...
Santana was 20 years old at the time
Veal’s 24. I don’t think we have another Santana on our hands here.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
Veal
He needs to pitch. Sticking him in a slot as the 13th man on a pitching staff and giving him time in mop-up duty will probably only further thwart his development.
The thing is...
… the Pirates bullpen is so bad, that he’s got a real chance to make the team as a setup man or LOOGY if he has a good spring.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
Sean Burnett and John Grabow
are ahead of Veal, theoretically, as LHPs in the bullpen, but Grabow could be traded and Burnett is still looking for those homeruns Reed Johnson and Soriano hit in August.
So Veal’s got a chance. If for some reason he gets sent to Indianapolis (rehab, trade or otherwise), I’ll let you know how he looks.
I love to play baseball. I'm a baseball player. I've always been a baseball player. I'm still a baseball player. That's who I am. - Ryne Sandberg
by Bill Potter on Dec 11, 2008 12:15 PM CST up reply actions
Burnett is awful.
If Veal can’t beat him out, he doesn’t deserve to be in the major leagues.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
Exactly.
Which is why I think he’s got a shot to stick.
I love to play baseball. I'm a baseball player. I've always been a baseball player. I'm still a baseball player. That's who I am. - Ryne Sandberg
by Bill Potter on Dec 11, 2008 12:28 PM CST up reply actions
Except Veal has never been a relief pitcher
If the Pirates want to keep him they may send some minor leaguer to the Cubs and make it a trade.
I believe he was used as a reliever
in the Arizona Fall League.
Hey, it's a new century!
by cowsarecool220 on Dec 11, 2008 1:10 PM CST up reply actions
they have some guess hack outfielder
named mclouth. maybe him. jk
Why would the Pirates care?
Much like Andy Sisco with KC, the Pirates have nothing to lose.
Remarkably, the Cubs also had nothing to lose by protecting Veal. At a minimum, he could have been a trading chip. Why leave him unprotected and 3 40-man roster spots open?!
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
Sisco may be a good comp.
A lot of us were upset when the Cubs lost Sisco.
Where, exactly, is he now?
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
He was pretty great in his Rule 5 year.
No one is claiming that Veal is a sure-fire MLB player.
We can say, with 100% certainty, that the Cubs have given away whatever potential and value he had – and it is an amount greater than zero – for absoutely nothing.
It would have cost the Cubs absolutely nothing to keep Veal for 2009 – all they had to do was check a box. No cost in terms of dollars, no opportunity cost in agonizing over who to expose/protect for the draft – there was literally no downside to keeping him. We had open roster spots.
I sometimes wonder if Hendry forgets the Rule 5 deadline. To leave spots open on your 40-man on Rule 5 deadline day is just…. silly. Wasteful. Counterproductive. Borderline negligent.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
He was pretty bad in the Arizona Fall League.
Maybe if he’d been better there — against genuine ML prospects — he’d have been kept.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
Does that really matter?
If we went into Rule 5 deadline day with multiple open roster spots, why not keep him regardless?
Even if we had no intention of keeping him and thought less of him than we do of the assorted flotsam and jetsam on our 40-man roster, he obviously had some trade value. Pittsburgh was shocked that he fell to #4 in the Rule 5 draft.
Honestly, he seems to have stalled out in AA ball. I don’t think he’s going to make it as a starter. He could have potential as a LOOGY, but even that’s a bit of a long-shot, and big deal if he does become a legit MLB LOOGY.
It’s still a waste of a player who had positive value to the organization, at a minimum, as a throw-in to a trade.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
The last part is true...
… since someone wanted him, he did have some value. I think you’re overstating it, though.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
Now Joe's nephew
can hang around with Gary Gaetti’s son on the Sacramento River Cats.
Yusuf is no loss.
by Josh Timmers on Dec 11, 2008 12:26 PM CST up reply actions
All these selections
and the cash that comes back to us may give us enough room in the budget to get that LH thumper!
The author of this post is not a certified scout, doctor, agent, statistician, manager, or journalist, nor was he ever a very good player, though he tried very hard to be like Ryne Sandberg and was about as scrappy as it gets (in T-ball). Any opinion expressed above should in no way be confused with fact, truth, or reality and is hereby qualified in the following ways: 1) The author does not know as much about baseball as Lou Piniella. 2) The author does not know as much about baseball as Jim Hendry. 3) The author does not know as much about baseball as either Dusty or Darren Baker.
Interesting selection.
He might make their team.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
He got banged around
in AAA last season, but I like Holliman’s chances to make it this time. I’ll miss him in the MLW.
Good pick by the Brewers. Holliman actually has a chance to be a major leaguer. Not a very good one, but at least roster fodder.
by Josh Timmers on Dec 11, 2008 12:29 PM CST up reply actions
Exciting AAA Rd 1
haha.
Brian McRae's 5 o'clock shadow
by PurpleLineToWrigley on Dec 11, 2008 11:31 AM CST reply actions
He has to be on the active roster for at least 90 days
I could see that happening.
I love to play baseball. I'm a baseball player. I've always been a baseball player. I'm still a baseball player. That's who I am. - Ryne Sandberg
by Bill Potter on Dec 11, 2008 12:31 PM CST up reply actions
He have to spend 90 days
and then they’d have to come up with some injury for the rest of the season—one that the Cubs wouldn’t file a protest over. I don’t see it happening. Now maybe Pittsburgh tosses us a minor prospect so they can keep him. Veal is probably a lost cause though.
by Josh Timmers on Dec 11, 2008 12:36 PM CST up reply actions
Your scenario is plausible.
This happens all the time — teams wind up making a minor trade so that someone can keep a Rule 5 guy. I thought this was going to happen last year with Tim Lahey.
Who, incidentally, was available again this year. Did anyone take him?
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
Not seeing him listed
But then again, I don’t see any of the AAA and AA picks listed.
by Josh Timmers on Dec 11, 2008 1:09 PM CST up reply actions
That's what I see happening
though I have no idea whom in the Pirates’ organization the Cubs would want.
I love to play baseball. I'm a baseball player. I've always been a baseball player. I'm still a baseball player. That's who I am. - Ryne Sandberg
by Bill Potter on Dec 11, 2008 12:44 PM CST up reply actions
It's the Pirates.
They are perfectly willing to go an entire season with a 24-man roster in order to steal a “top” prospect. They do not care.
Why didn’t we protect Veal – we had open roster spots (and a ton of dead weight), didn’t we?
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
Since when is Veal
a “top” prospect? In 2006?
OK, I put him at #15 i in our system, but that was more an acknowledgment of our weak system and Veal’s raw tools than anything else.
by Josh Timmers on Dec 11, 2008 2:19 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Then why do we even care
if the Pirates have him if he’s only “ironically” good?
by Josh Timmers on Dec 11, 2008 2:55 PM CST up reply actions
Because he clearly had value that was greater than zero.
The Cubs let an asset get away for absolutely nothing.
I don’t care precisely how valuable the asset may have been, or how valuable it turns out to be in retrospect — the Cubs shouldn’t be in the business of giving players to Pittsburgh (or anyone else, for that matter) for free, with no benefit to themselves.
Hendry is obviously working the phones all day trying to make deals and improve the team — why give up one of your minor league trading pieces for no reason?
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
Because
he clearly had a trade value, if not nothing, of next to nothing.
And here’s something you’re missing. The Cubs have a reputation among amateur players as an organization that will treat you fairly. They’ll let you go to another organization if you don’t have a future in Chicago—they won’t stash you and prevent you from having a major league career with another team.
This means something to amateur players who get drafted after round six or seven. They know that the Cubs aren’t an organization that is going to pull crap like you suggest, so they sign rather than going back to college.
The long-term reputation of the organization is worth a lot more than trying to wring a C or D level prospect out of another organization for Donnie Veal.
by Josh Timmers on Dec 11, 2008 3:29 PM CST up reply actions
I don't think that Veal would have minded making the 40-man roster.
That’s a positive thing, not a negative thing.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
But then he's got no trade value
Because you’ve got to burn an option to get him off. And what happens when the Cubs sign Milton Bradley and Randy Johnson (or whomever). Then off the 40-man goes Donnie Veal.
by Josh Timmers on Dec 11, 2008 3:37 PM CST up reply actions
I don't follow that.
Correct me if I’m wrong, here, but the Cubs could put Veal on the 40-man, send him on optional assignment to Iowa or Tennessee or whereever, and would have 3 full option years to bounce him between the major and minor league squads.
If, for some reason, he absolutely had to be removed from the 40-man, then they could put him on revocable waivers and outright him to the minors.
That being said, the Cubs aren’t exactly in a 40-man roster crunch. They have 36 or 37 players on the roster right now, and a lot of those people seem to be on the 40-man as placeholders.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
If the Cubs signed Bradley + Johnson,
the roster crunch would be with the 25-man, not the 40-man. No one is advocating putting Veal on the 25-man roster.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
Bradley and Johnson
would have to go on the 40 man too. And to be honest, I’m really not following how many people we’ve currently got on the 40 man, so I may be wrong there. But clearly Hendry is keeping spots open for signings and trades.
But the bottom line is that we’re all putting way too much discussion in what is a failed prospect whom we could have gotten, maybe, an organizational soldier for in trade. Instead, the Cubs let him go to an organization that wants him and he might get a fresh start with. But he’s likely to be back anyway.
And honestly, if we were protecting people on the 40 man, the mistake was not protecting Nate Spears, not Donnie Veal. That Veal got taken and not Spears was luck. So even if we had room on the 40 man, Veal shouldn’t have gone on it, Spears should have.
by Josh Timmers on Dec 11, 2008 4:11 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
What do you think they would get for Veal?
Veal might get the Cubs another Sam Fuld. Who cares? 90% of a team’s minor league system never amount to anything and are interchangeable with another organization’s 90%.
Treating every player as some valuable piece is not the way teams look at the minors. If these minor leaguers are so valuable why do most teams pass in the Rule 5 AAA and AA rounds? They just have to keep the players on a minor league team for a season. If everyone was so valuable why doesn’t every team hoard them?
Why do some teams pass or waste their bottom draft picks on the GM’s son?
All that said, I am a bit surprised that the Cubs didn’t protect Veal but they must know something. I’m surely not going to criticize Hendry for not trading him for some other minor league fodder.
I doubt
we could have gotten someone even as good as Sam Fuld for him. More like Doug Deeds.
by Josh Timmers on Dec 11, 2008 4:13 PM CST up reply actions
Excellent news!
I would expect him to be added to the 40-man roster soon. Right? I assume that can still be done.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
Is it over already?
any link to the results?
Okay, just so I understand it... in your wildest fantasy, you are in hell. And you are co-running a bed and breakfast with the devil.
Cubs are getting
RHP David Patton, the Reds selection in the Major League Phase. He was traded to the Cubs for Cash in a pre-arranged deal (ala Hamilton 2 years ago). Patton has great K Numbers, but got hit a lot in A+. Hard imagining him sticking in any MLB ’pen all year.
Find me on MySpace- http://www.myspace.com/mixfmkyle
Worth a gamble though.
Hey, it's a new century!
by cowsarecool220 on Dec 11, 2008 1:12 PM CST up reply actions
Can't be a worse than signing...
Chad Fox
Proud recipient of a hot dog shot from the Iowa Cubs hot dog gun.
Nice prospect
but it seems unlikely he can stick on our roster all season long.
He repeated Modesto this year and showed some improvement. Not enough for the Rockies, apparently.
I like him, but I don’t think he’ll stick with us.
by Josh Timmers on Dec 11, 2008 1:25 PM CST up reply actions
This makes absolutely no sense.
There’s almost no chance that the Cubs are going to tote David Patton around in their bullpen all year.
There’s a very, very good chance that the Pirates will stash Donald Veal on their 40-man roster all year. He’s left-handed, and 25-man spots are less valuable to lousy teams who don’t care about winning.
We didn’t have to keep Veal on the 25-man… just the 40-man. And the back end of the Cubs 40-man is filled with empty spots and dead weight.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
I just don't think Veal is that good.
While what you say is true, I don’t think it’s that big a loss.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
What Veal is - is talented physically.
What he wasn’t – was progressing in the Cubs system. I think it’s possible to recognize that the Cubs lost something in Veal, but that they also made the decision that it was better for him long-term to get a different look from a different team. That experience may not pay off for the Cubs. Then again, if he’s returned and grows from the experience, it may.
We lost something in Veal today. We may have lost it anyway eventually had he never progressed under Cub coaching.
The author of this post is not a certified scout, doctor, agent, statistician, manager, or journalist, nor was he ever a very good player, though he tried very hard to be like Ryne Sandberg and was about as scrappy as it gets (in T-ball). Any opinion expressed above should in no way be confused with fact, truth, or reality and is hereby qualified in the following ways: 1) The author does not know as much about baseball as Lou Piniella. 2) The author does not know as much about baseball as Jim Hendry. 3) The author does not know as much about baseball as either Dusty or Darren Baker.
He's had some personal problems
Both of his parents have died in the past four years and he seems to take it onto the field. But what’s more troubling is that when he makes a bad pitch or a player makes an error behind him, he seems to take that into the next batter too.
Last year we lost Randy Wells (yeah, I know. Big Whoop.) and we got him back in April after he threw one inning for the Blue Jays. I expect that Veal will be back in March or April too.
You may be right though. He might need a change of scenery and he’ll never be any good for us.
by Josh Timmers on Dec 11, 2008 2:59 PM CST up reply actions
Well, the Cubs left him unprotected on purpose.
They had to know someone would take him. I figure they had good reason.
The author of this post is not a certified scout, doctor, agent, statistician, manager, or journalist, nor was he ever a very good player, though he tried very hard to be like Ryne Sandberg and was about as scrappy as it gets (in T-ball). Any opinion expressed above should in no way be confused with fact, truth, or reality and is hereby qualified in the following ways: 1) The author does not know as much about baseball as Lou Piniella. 2) The author does not know as much about baseball as Jim Hendry. 3) The author does not know as much about baseball as either Dusty or Darren Baker.
I don't like him very much.
I just think that – regardless of what they’re saying today – someone in the Cubs organization made a rather stupid error, and very possibly missed a roster deadline.
Absolutely nothing good can come from empty roster spots on Rule 5 deadline day.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
I find it hard to believe
that when the Cubs got other players on their 40-man, they made an error in not getting Veal on. There are other explanations.
The author of this post is not a certified scout, doctor, agent, statistician, manager, or journalist, nor was he ever a very good player, though he tried very hard to be like Ryne Sandberg and was about as scrappy as it gets (in T-ball). Any opinion expressed above should in no way be confused with fact, truth, or reality and is hereby qualified in the following ways: 1) The author does not know as much about baseball as Lou Piniella. 2) The author does not know as much about baseball as Jim Hendry. 3) The author does not know as much about baseball as either Dusty or Darren Baker.
Did the roster ever make it to 40 players?
If so, then I can understand leaving Veal out. I had understood that we have had 37 or 38 players on the 40-man at pretty much all times over the last several weeks.
MLBMilestone.com - following the numbers to Cooperstown
The Cubs added 2 or 3 guys
and did not add Veal. They didn’t get up to 40, but they did choose to protect some guys.
The author of this post is not a certified scout, doctor, agent, statistician, manager, or journalist, nor was he ever a very good player, though he tried very hard to be like Ryne Sandberg and was about as scrappy as it gets (in T-ball). Any opinion expressed above should in no way be confused with fact, truth, or reality and is hereby qualified in the following ways: 1) The author does not know as much about baseball as Lou Piniella. 2) The author does not know as much about baseball as Jim Hendry. 3) The author does not know as much about baseball as either Dusty or Darren Baker.
Not true in all cases
If the Cubs acquire additional players and need to add them to their 40 man roster then someone else must be removed and likely passed through waivers. Now, the Cubs have other easily disposable parts on the 40 man like Sam Fuld if they wanted to keep Veal.
For whatever reason, they had no interest in Veal. I’m not worrying about it.
I wouldn't put it "no interest in Veal."
They chose to leave him vulnerable to being chosen. They could have done that on purpose for any number of reasons without surrendering interest in Veal.
The author of this post is not a certified scout, doctor, agent, statistician, manager, or journalist, nor was he ever a very good player, though he tried very hard to be like Ryne Sandberg and was about as scrappy as it gets (in T-ball). Any opinion expressed above should in no way be confused with fact, truth, or reality and is hereby qualified in the following ways: 1) The author does not know as much about baseball as Lou Piniella. 2) The author does not know as much about baseball as Jim Hendry. 3) The author does not know as much about baseball as either Dusty or Darren Baker.
I should have said
“no interest in protecting Veal” as they obviously had the space if they wanted it.
I nit-picked
but I think putting a fine point on this is worthwhile given all the discussion that has gone on here. Letting Veal be vulnerable to Rule Ving was something the Cubs did on purpose and it may be because they’ve tired of him. It may also be an experience they think will help him develop.
The author of this post is not a certified scout, doctor, agent, statistician, manager, or journalist, nor was he ever a very good player, though he tried very hard to be like Ryne Sandberg and was about as scrappy as it gets (in T-ball). Any opinion expressed above should in no way be confused with fact, truth, or reality and is hereby qualified in the following ways: 1) The author does not know as much about baseball as Lou Piniella. 2) The author does not know as much about baseball as Jim Hendry. 3) The author does not know as much about baseball as either Dusty or Darren Baker.
Here's what the Pirates saw in Veal
From Neal Huntington (via the Post-Gazette):
Veal was one of three names the Pirates had on their list, and they were “surprised” he fell to fourth. … Veal will be a reliever in spring training, and it is no lock that he will be kept on the roster. He has to show better control, and the team’s pitching coach and minor league pitching coordinator will work closely with him. “It speaks to our faith in Joe Kerrigan and Troy Buckley in what we can be able to do in spring training,” Huntington said. “If it works, we’ll have a very interesting left-hander. If not, nothing ventured, nothing gained.” … Asked if the lack of control was a concern, Huntington said: “Absolutely. That’s why he’s on a triple-A roster. He had a hard time throwing the ball over the plate. A year ago, this was one of the better left-handed prospects in the game. He went through some adversity this year, and we feel that influenced his performance. We do feel there’s arm strength and a breaking ball.” … The Pirates clocked Veal’s fastball at 95 mph in the past, but just 88-93 this past season.
I love to play baseball. I'm a baseball player. I've always been a baseball player. I'm still a baseball player. That's who I am. - Ryne Sandberg
I thought it was interesting
Huntington sounded pretty nonchalant about it with the “nothing ventured, nothing gained” comment.
I think that the Pirates will send money or a player for Veal – that’s what they did last year with Evan Meek.
I love to play baseball. I'm a baseball player. I've always been a baseball player. I'm still a baseball player. That's who I am. - Ryne Sandberg
Here's to hoping,
honestly, that Veal gets it worked out this year with either team. I’d rather he work it out with us, but if it’s with the Pirates, at least he won’t be coming back to haunt us any season soon.
The author of this post is not a certified scout, doctor, agent, statistician, manager, or journalist, nor was he ever a very good player, though he tried very hard to be like Ryne Sandberg and was about as scrappy as it gets (in T-ball). Any opinion expressed above should in no way be confused with fact, truth, or reality and is hereby qualified in the following ways: 1) The author does not know as much about baseball as Lou Piniella. 2) The author does not know as much about baseball as Jim Hendry. 3) The author does not know as much about baseball as either Dusty or Darren Baker.
Remember,
if the Pirates want to keep Veal and send him down, they can’t make a deal with the Cubs until he passes through waivers. And those waivers aren’t “gentlemen’s agreement” waivers — players do get claimed.
"I've never complained about it. I'm thankful to have a jersey." Mark DeRosa, 22 Aug 2007
As was the case with Tim Lahey last year.
"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
Cubs By The Numbers
Cubs By The Numbers is a history of the ballclub by uniform number, but the biographies help trace the history of our beloved team in a new way. For everyone who's a Cubs fan, anyone who ever wore the uniform is like family. Cubs By The Numbers reintroduces readers to some of their long-lost ancestors, even ones they think they already know.
Click here to order your copy, available now!
Recent Stories in Chicago Cubs Game Threads
Recent Stories in Ticket Exchanges
Baseball Nation Recent Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
- Benches clear at Fenway as Red Sox-Rays rivalry heats up
- Keeping good company: Albert Pujols becomes fourth-youngest player to hit 450 home runs
- Giancarlo Stanton misses cutoff man, and Logan Morrison is thankful he did (Video)
- Snoop Dogg delivers memorable first pitch at U.S. Cellular Field
