Twins Lose Zack Jones in Rule 5

[AKTwins]

I do not get why everyone is all up in arms over Hicks on the 40 man.  I checked the 4 other teams in our division and all the other teams have a 3rd catcher on their 40 man.  In fact, Cleveland currently has 5 catchers on their 40 man and the White Sox have 4. How is this bad roster management by the Twins?

 

I understand the concerns over losing Jones and keeping Dean.  We have plenty of guys that can fill Dean's role (whatever that is).  However, you can never have enough high-power relief arms.

[Platoon]

The Twins were within reach of a postseason berth with three games remaining last season. They should absolutely be in "win now" mode.

"Win now" doesn't mean you have to start trading prospects and mortgaging the future. It can also mean you're prioritizing players you believe will help soon over players you see contributing in the somewhat distant future, if at all.

We semi agree, I am al for prioritizing players. As in straightening out the SP first off. Followed by the BP. There has not been a visible movement in any direction. Unless you call Sano in the OF movement? Addressing the catching situation was good, replacing Hicks with Sano is not. The Park move is odd, on a team with too many DH style guys as is. But as one exec bluntly said to a beat writer, "is it Openimg Day"? So there's time. Btw, to me win now management refers to a team that is just a light tweak away from contending. Regardless of being 3 games out of the second WC, I don't see this team as a slight tweak away from anything of significance as of this posting.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

I like Zach. He's a good guy and a pitcher with some upside. But consider this, how many hard throwing right-handed relievers are ahead of him in the pecking order right now. make a list.

Jepsen, May, Meyer, Chargois, Burdi, Reed, ... And Landa throws harder with better control.

So you named one for sure MLB reliever a year away from free agency, one possible MLB starter, a guy who wasn't worth a September call-up in 2015, a guy the same age/level as Jones, two more guys from the same level last year who aren't on the 40-man roster yet.... and a guy who has yet to pitch at high-A.

 

With question marks on all of them, not sure how you can conclude it was time to give up on Jones, at least not without first finding a better reliever.

[Linus]

Get used to debates like these because more of them are coming and more difficult ones at that. This what happens when you have a farm good farm system.

[Seth Stohs]

 

So you named one for sure MLB reliever a year away from free agency, one possible MLB starter, a guy who wasn't worth a September call-up in 2015, a guy the same age/level as Jones, two more guys from the same level last year who aren't on the 40-man roster yet.... and a guy who has yet to pitch at high-A.

 

With question marks on all of them, not sure how you can conclude it was time to give up on Jones, at least not without first finding a better reliever.

 

I never said it was time to give up on Jones.

[Mike Sixel]

 

I do not get why everyone is all up in arms over Hicks on the 40 man.  I checked the 4 other teams in our division and all the other teams have a 3rd catcher on their 40 man.  In fact, Cleveland currently has 5 catchers on their 40 man and the White Sox have 4. How is this bad roster management by the Twins?

 

I understand the concerns over losing Jones and keeping Dean.  We have plenty of guys that can fill Dean's role (whatever that is).  However, you can never have enough high-power relief arms.

 

By "everyone", you mean 1 person on this thread, right?

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

I never said it was time to give up on Jones.

It was a justification for leaving him unprotected, was it not?  I didn't mean to attribute it to you, reading it again you were probably just trying to justify the team's decision, but in any case, as a justification, it leaves something lacking.

 

After seeing our 2015 bullpen, and the lack of additions to it since the season ended, no one in the organization with any potential should be that far down the pecking order.  Not enough guys have been good enough to establish a clear order, that's sort of the problem with the pen.

[TRex]

 

 

With question marks on all of them, not sure how you can conclude it was time to give up on Jones, at least not without first finding a better reliever.

... did I miss something? Did we DFA Jones? I thought he was taken in the Rule V draft? Does that mean we have also given up on Williams, Michael, Wimmers, Bard, and all the rest?

 

I thought it just meant that the Twins decided he wasn't one of the 40 most important players to protect. Remember that it isn't a popularity or 'Best Player' contest. MLB is not Fantasy Baseball, as the need for utility players and 3rd catchers, and AAAA starters is real. I understand that we can differ in our choices of who would best fill these roles, but they still must be filled.

[Seth Stohs]

 

So you named one for sure MLB reliever a year away from free agency, one possible MLB starter, a guy who wasn't worth a September call-up in 2015, a guy the same age/level as Jones, two more guys from the same level last year who aren't on the 40-man roster yet.... and a guy who has yet to pitch at high-A.

 

With question marks on all of them, not sure how you can conclude it was time to give up on Jones, at least not without first finding a better reliever.

 

I was on my phone, so I didn't give it a whole lot of thought. I could add Tonkin, Pressly, Graham...

 

I'd add that - again, as much as I like Zack - he was demoted from Chattanooga to Ft. Myers in the 2nd half, and unlike Burdi, Reed and Johnson (DJ), he didn't come back for the playoffs. We can't just ignore the walk rate. 

 

At the end of the day, they had to make some 40 man roster choices... unfortunately Zack (And several others) were left off. Zack got taken.

[Twins Twerp]

This is a ridiculous argument we are having.  Without doing any research, I would bet that ALL 30 teams in MLB carry 3 or more catchers on their 40 man.  Heck, we got a top 30 prospect for one of the worst players in the league last year.  It just so happened that he was a catcher.  You have to keep at least 3 on the 40 man.  Otherwise, if a 25 man catcher goes down, you have to make a tough roster decision and risk losing a good player to another teams 40.  It is much easier to stash someone on the 40 than stashing them on the 25 man roster.  Also, we are arguing about a guy who probably doesn't/wouldn't factor into the Twins top 30 prospects this coming year (Jones)

 

Like someone already stated, this isn't fantasy baseball.  You don't keep 30 RP because they have "upside" to someday make the big leagues. 

 

One more thing, Jones was taken in the 2nd round of the draft meaning he every team passed on him once.  The Brewers are highly unlikely to keep 2 rule 5'ers on the roster all year.  

[jimmer]

 

Nunez did his job last year that's why you keep him, Santana did not!

Nunez: .282/.327/.431/.758/ ops+ 104
Santana: .215/.241/.291/.532/ ops+ 44

At this point why would you dump the guy that did his job and replace him with a guy that totally failed?

One is youngish with some upside, the other is, at the very best, an okay utility guy.  One season doesn't make Nunez a keeper, just like 2014 didn't make Danny Santana a stud.

[AKTwins]

 

By "everyone", you mean 1 person on this thread, right?

 Good point, I thought I read at least 2 posts by 2 different people who were upset about the 3rd catcher.

[Pardon My Dinger]

We have a third catcher?

[USAFChief]

 

We have a third catcher?

Yep.  In much the same way as we have too many starters and too many OFers.

[jimmer]

 

Did the Rule 5 losses of Roberto Clemente, Johan Santana and Josh Hamilton "matter one bit"?

So that's 3 examples in how many years?  60 or so?  Here's an article from late 2013 or about Rule 5 picks from '99-'12.  

 

http://www.baseballamerica.com/majors/how-to-make-the-rule-5-draft-matter-again/

 

'To say that players like Santana are Rule 5 outliers, however, would be an understatement.'

 

'teams made 232 selections in the major league Rule 5 draft from 1999-2012, which places the odds of landing an all-star-level talent at four out of 232—or 1.7 percent. Even if we count all 13 players above as smashing successes, the odds of finding another one are long: 5.6 percent, or about one in 20 Rule 5 picks.'

 

 

[amjgt]

Pirates lost former Twins' prospect Deolis Guerra in the Rule 5.

 

Just noting it.

[DaveW]

 

 Good point, I thought I read at least 2 posts by 2 different people who were upset about the 3rd catcher.

Again, I would rather they bring in a guy like Hicks closer to April (when other roster cuts have to be made anyways) but I didn't even realize Dean was on the 40 man roster. So Dean is the one I really have a problem with being on the 40 man over Jones (and some other players as well)

[Seth Stohs]

 

Pirates lost former Twins' prospect Deolis Guerra in the Rule 5.

 

Just noting it.

 

It was cool to see him get called up last year by the Pirates... good for him. Still just 26.

[DaveW]

 

It was cool to see him get called up last year by the Pirates... good for him. Still just 26.

Lots of strikeouts, but lots of home runs in his cup of coffee last year. Hope he catches on somewhere.

[Thrylos]

Numbers game.  Here are the RHRP who the Twins see ahead of Jones.   Above the dotted line are pitchers on the 40 man roster.

 

 

Kevin Jespen (30)
Trevor May (25)
Alex Meyer (25)
Ryan Pressly (26)
JR Graham (25)
Michael Tonkin (25)
JT Chargois (24)
----
Cole Johnson (26)
Jake Reed (22)
Nick Burdi (22)
Brandon Peterson (23)

 

And this does not include LHRP or minor league starters (or even Nolasco) who can be on the Twins' pen

 

Could they had traded him for something last season?  Maybe.  If there is an issue, this should be the one.  Ryan is allergic to trading prospects who he ends up losing...

[Seth Stohs]

I agree with Thrylos (Yikes!)... I think it was a numbers game. There's no way they would have added Cole Johnson ahead of Zack Jones, so I can't agree with a couple of those names, but I do agree that it was numbers. 

[Thrylos]

 

I agree with Thrylos (Yikes!)... I think it was a numbers game. There's no way they would have added Cole Johnson ahead of Zack Jones, so I can't agree with a couple of those names, but I do agree that it was numbers. 

 

Nah.  That's a depth chart.  They would not have added Cole Johnson before Zack Jones, but he is more MLB-ready than Zack Jones...

[DaveW]

I agree with Thrylos (Yikes!)... I think it was a numbers game. There's no way they would have added Cole Johnson ahead of Zack Jones, so I can't agree with a couple of those names, but I do agree that it was numbers.

But again, if that's a numbers game how is Dean not? There also is the chance that Jones could have jumped up that list this year, dean? Not so much IMO.

[Thrylos]

 

But again, if that's a numbers game how is Dean not? There also is the chance that Jones could have jumped up that list this year, dean? Not so much IMO.

 

Dean is not a RHRP.  The Twins have > 10 RHRPs ahead of Zack Jones.  The Twins have maybe 2-3 LHSPs ahead of Dean

[DaveW]

Dean is not a RHRP. The Twins have > 10 RHRPs ahead of Zack Jones. The Twins have maybe 2-3 LHSPs ahead of Dean

When you are as replacement level as Dean is, it doesn't matter if you are a righty or a lefty.

 

Jones on the other hand strikes out 12 per 9, the twins don't have a lot of those and haven't had for quite some time.

[sane09]

 

 

Ultimately, I don't think it matters one bit.

I think the APROPRIATE wording should be "I don't think it will matter".

Roberto Clemente, Johan Santana and Josh Hamilton don't happen often, but as Joaquin Andujar said, " I've got one word for you......'you never know!'"

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I think the APROPRIATE wording should be "I don't think it will matter".

Roberto Clemente, Johan Santana and Josh Hamilton don't happen often, but as Joaquin Andujar said, " I've got one word for you......'you never know!'"

1. Clemente and Santana were taken at very young ages. Hamilton was a former star prospect with a drug problem.

 

2. None of those people were relief pitchers.

[sane09]

 

1. Clemente and Santana were taken at very young ages. Hamilton was a former star prospect with a drug problem.

 

2. None of those people were relief pitchers.

For those reasons, you "don't think it matters one bit'?

You have the right to think or not think whatever you wish.

I'm sure that convincing me is not your goal.

[DaveW]

 

1. Clemente and Santana were taken at very young ages. Hamilton was a former star prospect with a drug problem.

 

2. None of those people were relief pitchers.

They (Ryan) also Jettisoned David Ortiz at age 26. Not the same as the rule 5 draft exposure, but in fact 10x worse at the time, and 100,000x worse currently. That move alone cost us a title.

You think at some point Ryan would try, just once to keep the upside guy (Jones) over the mediocre guy (Dean). And honestly, I don't mind Dean being in the system, I just don't understand why you wouldn't remove him for the 40 (leave him unprotected) and just bring him back after the draft?

[jorgenswest]

Jones almost made it through. Most teams passed rather than take him. He wasn't anyone's first choice. It is very rare for a team to roster two rule 5 guys all year. He will probably be offered back. With only one late pick it seems the Twins did well in selecting their 40. On the other hand, maybe the system isn't that deep.