Prospect Insider - M's to set 40-man

M's to set 40-man

By Jason A. Churchill

By 11-20-2012

With the buzz and rumor mill a bit quiet early this week some of you may be wondering what GMs and their staffs are doing around baseball. One of those tasks is setting the reserve list of their respective clubs.

This means clubs have to make personnel decisions which may include removing players already on the 40-man roster to make room for others. This is about protecting young players from the utterly useless Rule 5 Draft. We'll get to that a little later (scroll down).

The eligibility is determined as follows:

-- Players who signed a pro contract at age 18 or younger that have five or more years of service and are not on the 40-man roster

-- Player who signed a pro contract at age 19 or older that have four years or more years of service and are not on the 40-man roster

A year of service for the purposes of the Rule 5 Draft is any year in which the player competed in the minor league baseball schedule. However, a player can be drafted in June, sign a deal in July and play zero games, but his draft year still counts as his first year of service.

There are times when a draftee signs late -- July 15 now, mid-August in past years -- but inks a contract that begins the next season. In these rarer cases, the player's draft year is not a year of service.

International signings often fall under this category.

The M's, who have 37 spots on the 40-man occupied heading into the deadline day to set the reserve list, will have to add the following players to the 40-man roster or expose them to the Rule 5 Draft: (click link for scouting report)

Note: This is not a full list of eligible players, but below are the names with at least an outside chance to be selected in the major-league portion of the Rule 5 Draft next month in Nashville.

Anthony Fernandez, LHP; Brandon Maurer, RHP; Andrew Carraway, RHP; Danny Farquar, RHP; Joe Dunigan, 1B; Denny Almonte, OF; Brian Moran, LHP; Bobby LaFromboise, LHP; Vinnie Catricala, 3B' Steve Hensley, RHP.

Maurer is a no-brainer, but the rest are not. I expect Moran and LaFromboise to be protected, but if it comes down to one or the other Moran may have an edge, though I prefer LaFromboise by a slight margin.

Fernandez has limited upside, but could be valuable depth and unless there is a major squeeze he likely gets protected, too.

Catricala is likely to be protected, as well, despite a poor showing Triple-A in 2012. Likely, though certainly no guarantee.

Candidates to be removed from the 40-man if additional space is needed include left-hander Mauricio Robles, right-hander D.J. Mitchell, outfielders Carlos Peguero and Trayvon Robinson and infielder Alex Liddi.

The club picked up Scott Cousins a few weeks back and that may lead to Robinson, Peguero or Liddi being removed from the roster. Mike Carp is also be a candidate for minor trade or designation for assignment.

The Mariners are undoubtedly trying to trade Chone Figgins, and if that were to occur prior to the 40-man reserve list deadline, it would create another spot on the roster. If the M's can't trade Figgins, there is a decent enough chance that the veteran is finally released and sent packing with the M's eating the remaining $8 million on his contract.

If the club has to decide between Mitchell and Farquar -- both acquired from the Yankees in exchange for Ichiro -- I'd bet on Farquar getting the nod. He has better stuff and has a better chance to be useful in 2013 and beyond, though he's relegated to bullpen duty.

Outfielder James Jones is Rule 5 eligible, but I'm not sure I see any way a big-league club feels they can afford to stash him on their 25-man roster for a year, so he probably remains unprotected. Almonte may also fall into this category, but is more likely to be chosen than Jones, especially with a year of Double-A ball under his belt and the ability to handle center field.

If there are those wondering about Johermyn Chavez, he's a minor league free agent and is not subject to the reserve list unless and until he signs.

Players such as Nick Franklin will be eligible next year if they aren't added to the 40-man between now and this time next offseason.

Rule 5 Draft is useless
Yes, I said that, and here is why. Sure, there have been some useful players selected in the Rule 5 Draft over the past several years, namely Johan Santana, Josh Hamilton and for the M's, southpaw reliever Lucas Luetge from last winter.

But the purpose of the Rule 5 Draft is to stop clubs from hoarding talent and making that talent available to other clubs. It benefits the player by giving him service time in the big leagues and forcing him onto the 40-man roster of the club that selects him.

It hurts player development, however, and it would help the player more if he were simply granted free agency. Rather than making these players eligible for the Rule 5, grant free agency after four and five years of pro service, rather than six, and abandon the Rule 5 Draft. It's a waste of time and energy and in the end really helps neither the teams or players involved.

In some cases it stunts the player's growth because he's ether rarely used or used in a capacity that restricts his progress as a player -- i.e., a starting pitching prospect being used for 30-50 innings in relief or a position player receiving limited playing time or time at a position at which he may not project best long term.

m\'s-to-set-40-man

Comments
The following 15 comment(s) for this article are shown below:

1. By: jgstecker on 11-20-2012 06:26:48
Farquhar cleared outright waivers once already this season, which would seem to suggest that he'd be overlooked in the Rule 5. Why take a guy in the Rule 5 with the active roster requirements when you could have had him for free with optional assignments remaining a few months ago? His showing in Tacoma may have changed his value some I suppose.

I think we've seen the best of Mitchell, Liddi, and Peguero. I'd probably lean toward keeping Robinson over Cousins, but I think both guys are out of options and shouldn't be on the big league club Opening Day. Carp still may be of some use, but he's out of options too and doesn't look like a fit on the M's roster.

I'd like to give Robles one more year.

2. By: Jason A. Churchill on 11-20-2012 07:14:32
Re: Farquhar

Because not every team has the same roster makeup now as they did then. Certainly not likely that gets taken, but far more of a shot than Mitchell or Robles.

Robles will not be selected in the Rule 5, so the team is safe leaving him unprotected. Can't even get lefties out with any regularity, let alone RHBs. Oh, and he has never thrown strikes with any consistency, even pre-injury.

3. By: jgstecker on 11-20-2012 08:04:25
Robles is already on the 40 man, so removing him would mean any team could simply claim him and option him next year. No big loss, but he's younger than the other expendables on the 40 man.

4. By: eknpdx on 11-20-2012 08:16:00
Jason,

If a Rule 5 draft eligible player is not added to the 40-man roster today, and is traded before the rule 5 draft, can the team that traded for him still protect him?

5. By: Shawnuel on 11-20-2012 11:03:03
Trayvon Robinson just traded to Baltimore for Robert Andino.

6. By: maqman on 11-20-2012 11:19:13
Robinson is gone,traded for Robert Andino. Not a big deal. I'm hoping they keep Carp through spring training. Figgins should be DFA, he's not worth exposing a prospect for. Catricala came on strong in the second half of the AFL and may have figured out his problem. Nate Tenbrink missed much of the first half of Jackson's season but then put up a better OPS (.935) than Franklin and Miller in 152 ABs. I'd like to see what he can do next season.

7. By: Edman on 11-20-2012 11:32:19
Andino trade at least fills the back-up infielder role. As much as I like Trayvon, he wasn't likely to stick in Seattle. Chances are pretty good that a new bat will fill a hole in the outfield.

8. By: Jason A. Churchill on 11-20-2012 12:11:43
ek,

Yes, they can. They'd have to or he'd be exposed.

9. By: Paul Martin on 11-20-2012 18:32:30
Jason,

With Kansas City picking up Gutherie, their 2nd starter this offseason, how does this affect their need to trade one of their hitters for pitching? Also, why don't the M's sign Grienke with their extra $$$$ and trade their top pitching prospects for hitting? I just have a hard time believing Swisher will come here, and don't see a lot of bats in free agency...

I am losing hope that the team will be able to score runs next year or even be interesting to watch....

10. By: Shawnuel on 11-20-2012 20:27:40
Figgins DFA'd. PRAISE GOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!

11. By: qwerty on 11-20-2012 21:06:49
not getting Cabrera is a bad omen for the off season.

12. By: Wishhiker on 11-21-2012 00:42:01
I think kc has put themselves exactly in a position that their biggest need is an ace. While the big 4 may not be aces, there is some chance they get there within a few years. Most seem to like Paxton and Walker as best ceiling of them. There are not many present aces available often. It's possible they find a better option but I think there's still a fit.

13. By: Mekias on 11-21-2012 05:44:43
I'm curious why Julio Morban was put on the 40-man roster. He's not eligible for the Rule 5 Draft, is he? He's not ready for major league playing time. Are there any benefits to this move? Did he have it in his contract or something?

14. By: diderot on 11-21-2012 08:47:17
@ Paul,
I agree with you. I think KC's hitters are now off limits unless an ace is offered...and we're not offering ours.
If they're willing to come up with the money, I think they have a better chance of landing Greinke than we do.
Which would be OK with me...I would happily watch the Angels pitching staff continue to disintegrate.

15. By: maqman on 11-21-2012 11:11:27
I think KC isn't really as good of a potential trade partner as the Twins now.

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!