Who's Vulnerable in the Rule 5 Draft

by gondeee on Nov 23, 2007 10:27 AM EST in Minor League News

It's always a cloudy picture when it comes to baseball's roster rules, but here is a list to the best of my knowledge of Braves farm hands that are likely vulnerable to the Rule 5 draft, which happens December 6th. According to Mark Bowman, this is what constitutes a vulnerable player:

Unprotected players will include college draftees who have tallied at least four years of professional experience, and high school draftees or free agent signees who have been in the pro ranks for at least five years.

We have several players like that. Keep in mind as you scan this list that the three we elected to protect were Charlie Morton, Zach Schreiber, and Jairo Cuevas.

Brad Nelson, RHP - He had a good showing in the AFL, after playing at three different levels this past year - starting out at high-A and ending at triple-A. Some team could take a flyer on him for their bullpen.

J.C. Holt, IF - Until his 0-fer the last three games he had a great showing in the AFL this year. He's got speed, good defense, the ability to play several infield positions - that may interest some teams.

Van Pope, 3B - Since college Pope has accumulated four years of minor league experience. If he really is available, I could see some team taking a chance on him and using him as a defensive sub next year. They could also take a flyer on him and see how he performs in spring training. This could be a huge loss for the Braves depth at the hot corner.

Diory Hernandez, IF - He had a breakout year at Mississippi this year and he may get some looks from a club or two. He may also have more value than Holt as a utility guy.

Moises Hernandez, RHP - Another guy with a live arm that may interest some clubs.

Carl Loadenthal, OF - We've talked a lot about this guy as a possible center field replacement, but the organization seems to prefer Anderson, Blanco, and obviously Schafer. We'll see if another club thinks more highly of him - likely not.

Dan Smith, LHP - He might be one of the most attractive players available in our system. I can certainly see a team like the Royals or Nats taking a chance on Smith, and putting him in their bullpen as a lefty, with an eye on working him into the rotation if needed.

I'm guessing we'll lose Smith. It obviously depends on who else from other teams is available (and who may be more attractive to teams), but with the amount of former Atlanta execs scattered about the leagues, I have to believe that they will zero in on a system they know well - like Atlanta. I can also see us losing Pope (assuming he is available). His ceiling was at one time pretty high, and he's already a major league defender, but I don't think it will be the Nats or Royals, who are set at the hot corner. A team with an aging or unentrenched third baseman could try and pick up Pope (think Cards, Pads, Stros, or Giants).

The interesting part of the Rule 5 this year is if the Braves will try and pick someone up. The last player we drafted in the Rule 5 we never kept on our roster, instead we drafted and traded Chris Spurling to the Tigers for Matt Coenen (who is also available in the Rule 5 this year - but not likely to be taken). I can see us taking a flier on some hard-throwing "Resop-esque" bullpen type arm, or someone we think can back-up Yuney at short and be a better-than-Pete-Orr, Pete Orr type player.

0 recs | Comment 16 comments

Story-email Email | Print |

Comments

Couple Things

For those who don't know (I'm sure gondee does, just didn't mention it) any player selected has to stick with the MLB club the entire year or else he can be reclaimed by the original team. This limits who a club will pick, as a 25 man spot for the entire year is hard to just throw away on a guy who isn't ready, even if you aren't planning on competing.

Pope almost certainly won't get picked, he didn't hit in AA and doesn't have speed or any other redeeming quality to be put on someone's MLB bench for a year

Smith will most likely get picked, somebody could use him in their bullpen, or at least take a look, not a big loss to our system

Diory would be the second most likely in my opinion, put up good numbers in AA with some pop and can play SS, making him a viable utility guy

If Holt gets picked, it will be because of his speed, but I wouldn't hold my breath on it

Also, didn't Jake Stevens retire?

by abravesfan on Nov 23, 2007 11:20 AM EST 0 recs

Nice catch

It does look like Stevens retired. I've removed him from the list. I think some people might think differently about Pope, and someone might think he's worth giving a shot in spring training. Some scouts think he was too distracted at Mississippi and that's what led to his poor season.

Shame on Smith, I liked him and thought he could be a good contributor.

by gondeee on Nov 23, 2007 12:17 PM EST up 0 recs

Loadenthal?

The guy has excellent speed and clearly uses it well on the basepaths. He plays CF, so he should be able to cover multiple positions in the OF. The guy is also a high OBP hitter who plays a position that does not require power. I could definitely see a team taking a shot on him and using him off the bench as a pinch-runner at the least.

Come check out my blog 52 Card Pick-up and let me know what you think!

by ejruiz on Nov 23, 2007 3:24 PM EST 0 recs

Middle Infielders.

Holt and Diory are fine players, but we're extrememly deep at their positions in our system, so I'm not too worried about losing them. Wish we could keep them and maybe use them in a trade, but I don't see a future for them in Atlanta.

Come check out my blog 52 Card Pick-up and let me know what you think!

by ejruiz on Nov 23, 2007 3:25 PM EST 0 recs

yeah..

Matt Coenen was released out of spring training....
Pope is one of the best defensive third baseman in all of minor league baseball, hands down..but couldnt hit -this year-. He has the ability to be a force at the plate and may need time..When you say he was distracted by being in hometown mississippi, you think there's going to be less distractions in the big leagues?
Why does everyone say the only thing holt does well is run and play a good second base? His best showing as a player is his ability to hit.. Yeah he struggled aittle in arizona this year but you forget to mention he hit 380 last year in az and well above 300 during the season.

by bravos408 on Nov 23, 2007 7:35 PM EST 0 recs

.300 is great and all

but you have to get more than 17 doubles and 5 triples in 385 at bats to have a positive impact with the bat... a singles hitter like that has no starting potential for a decent team

I do think holt would make a good utilty guy, nice speed for pitch run situations, decent defense, and he can get on at a fine clip

He still probably won't be selected. Remember there are only 1-2 spots on an mlb roster for utility infielders, and locking up one of your 5 bench spots with a Rule 5 guy for the year really limits your flexibility. Whereas a guy like Dan Smith is in the mix for one of the 7 or so bullpen spots each team needs to fill, much easier to juggle around that (see Andy Sisco a few years back).

by abravesfan on Nov 23, 2007 10:47 PM EST up 0 recs

i agree

i agree with you, but a leadoff guy isn't out there to knock the ball off the wall, he's there to get on base..which JC does plenty of. I don't see how people take the positives of one player (batting average) but then knock a guy who's actually hitting better than the guy you're building up.. What was pete orr doing in the big leagues? No more than JC,(granted orr was in the big leagues, but orr still had a job). The rule 5 draft isn't meant to steal away superstars, its there to get guys that are good enough or better than a player on a certain team at the major league level. And JC Holt is better than someone's bench player right now. The way i look at it is that jc can play in the bigs. if sammons can be a backup so can holt.. I do agree with you on a lot of things you say though, not just on this thread

by bravos408 on Nov 23, 2007 11:27 PM EST up 0 recs

Holt would be a great backup for the Braves

It just doesn't seem like they want him, and I think its probably more a numbers game than anything else (and the need for a veteran (TM) presence). He could benefit from another half year in the minors, but he would be better than Orr or Woodward or the like. And you are right Holt does fit a on-base mold well, his bat is just a little too light to start for a contender.

I think the real point we disagree on is how many teams are out there looking to fill roster spots, specifically bench spots, through the Rule 5. Most teams have guys they can plug in from in their system for nothing to the backup role, and while some out there won't be as good as Holt should, the $25K price tag plus the loss of a roster spot (in terms of felxibility) for the year doesn't exactly make it easy, especially when there's not much potential for eventual starter material. Very few Rule 5 guys are taken (19 last year) and fewer stick the year (Adam Stern is one Braves position player that did, but only because he spent half the year on Boston's DL).

I'd say Smith is 75% to go, Diory 35%, Holt 30%, Pope 5%, everyone else negligible.

by abravesfan on Nov 23, 2007 11:59 PM EST up 0 recs

yes yes

I had the same impression of the braves when they didn't protect JC. As a former third rounder he obviously was on a priority list, (up until what point?)vand when he goes out and hits like he does it surprises me they didnt protect him, but at the same time it doesnt surprise me. haha something tells me that they want that marcus giles type guy back...I was only frustrated by the talk that he's only fast.. its not fair to the kid. You're right about open roster spots on other teams as well, its definitely harder to stay on the team as a position player. Take for example sean white who was rule 5'd last year. He pitched maybe 3 times in the first 3/4s of the season for the mariners(granted he was hurt) but he was seeing no time. Bench players get more time than that. Also you have to take into account that big league time is important. Unless another team sees jc in the plans for 09, 10, and whatever they can't and wont invest time and money into him..but also keep in mind, if you take a player in the rule 5 draft, you don't HAVE to keep him. You can send him back as quickly as you want

by bravos408 on Nov 24, 2007 10:21 AM EST up 0 recs

yeah..(continued)

I can see how you like loadenthals speed, but who's shoes is he filling? Previous center fielder for the braves didn't hit for power? Most premier center fielders in the game hit for power and a club won't pay a kid 400 grand to ride the pine and run once in a while. If you see a team taking a kid that won't get much playing time the next year it's because there is a lot of potential and the team believes that 400 thousand dollars is gonna be a good deal to have that player down the road.
When a player is taken in the rule 5 draft, the team that drafts has to pay the original club at least 25,000 for the player and if the drafting team doesn't keep him the original club can buy the player back..if not the player is up for free agency..so basically the buying club is paying 25,000 so the kid can have a tryout in spring

by bravos408 on Nov 23, 2007 7:46 PM EST 0 recs

the braves arent losing...

The braves aren't losing anyone they can't afford to lose. Diory Hernandez hits very very well, but his defense is not good.. I'm sorry to any diory fans.. But he's not a utility player either.. Trust me, if the braves could have kept andrus and traded diory they would have.. but...
Dan Smith: Is like chuck james..gets outs without stuff.. Difference, the braves love chuck

by bravos408 on Nov 23, 2007 7:54 PM EST 0 recs

Disparity between James and Smith

There is also the fact that James posted 2.09 ERA, and a 10.54 K/9 vs. a 2.59 BB/9, in 378.3 minor-league IP; on the other hand, Dan Smith has a 2.96 ERA, and a 9.74 K/9 vs. a 4.36 BB/9, in 328.0 minor-league IP. This might explain the priority of James vis-à-vis Smith -- along with James' 4.00 ERA in 286.0 major-league IP, at age 26, coupled with Smith's complete lack of major-league innings.

by jpx7 on Nov 23, 2007 9:47 PM EST up 0 recs

In other words:

If the Braves "love" Chuck, and not Dan Smith, there is a very good reason.

by jpx7 on Nov 23, 2007 9:49 PM EST up 0 recs

Yes

I want to second that.

by BB on Nov 24, 2007 1:47 AM EST up 0 recs

i hear you, but...

the .8 difference in career era and the .8 k's per 9 innings is so small that its not even worth mentioning. Those stats are extremely similar. Beyond the stats though, my statement was that they both get outs without "great stuff".. Dan smith pitched very very well throughout his career.. His first time struggling was this year in aaa.. i'm not making excuses but he was hurt also..(promoted to aaa a month into the season). If you're going to get that picky about stats, why did they protect morton? The reasons dan smith hasn't pitched in the big leagues has little to do with minor league success (of which he's had plenty). There's more going on here than meets the eye

by bravos408 on Nov 23, 2007 11:15 PM EST 0 recs

Smith

James was always than Smith--but I still do not want to lose the latter. What makes me mad is tha we might lose Smith, Hernandez and even Pope (this I really doubt) and chose on hang on to Resop--who sucks....

by Stephen on Nov 24, 2007 4:45 AM EST 0 recs