Looking for holes on the 40-man
Posted by: Chad Jennings - Posted in Misc on Nov 19, 2011 
Print This Post
| 
Email This Post
After yesterday’s changes, the Yankees 40-man roster stands at 39. That leaves one open spot for any free agent additions the Yankees make this offseason, it also leaves just one open spot for any trade that adds more players than it takes away. In other words: Chances are, the Yankees are going to have to open a few roster spots this winter.
These spots could be vulnerable.
Pedro Feliciano
It looks like this is a lost contract. After having shoulder surgery late last season, it seems Feliciano will not pitch a single inning during his two year deal with the Yankees. The team can’t put him on the 60-day disabled list until spring training, but they could go ahead and DFA him to open a spot on the 40-man. It’s worth noting that they could have done the same with Damaso Marte last winter and chose not to. If there’s the slightest chance Feliciano could pitch this year, the Yankees might hold out hope and hold onto him.
Kevin Whelan
Unless the Yankees are able to swing a trade, there really aren’t many pitchers on the roster who they could easily lose. Dellin Betances is obviously not a DFA candidate, Cory Wade pitched very well last season, George Kontos emerged as a cheap long relief candidate and both David Phelps and D.J. Mitchell were just added. Of the 17 pitchers on the 40-man, Whelan might be the most vulnerable. He had a terrific Triple-A season — a breakout of sorts — but the Yankees didn’t give him a September call-up and quickly sent him back down after his mid-season promotion. Makes you wonder how much of a future they see in him.
Brandon Laird
Let me start by saying that in no way do I believe the Yankees want to DFA Laird, and in no way do I believe he’s at risk of being DFA. That said, the Yankees are now carrying nine infielders on their roster, and five of them — including Eduardo Nunez — are more like utility bench candidates. That’s a lot of spots to devote to such a limited role, especially when you think Eric Chavez is a candidate to return. If the Yankees had to DFA one infielder, who would it be? Nunez has a big league job, David Adams and Corban Joseph were just added and would surely be claimed, Pena is their only real shortstop option after Nunez and Laird is a good bat coming off a so-so year.
Greg Golson or Justin Maxwell
Only because they’re out of options, and the Yankees also have Chris Dickerson as an out-of-options outfielder who could compete for a bench role this spring. Both Golson and Maxwell have some big league time, and Maxwell was having a strong Triple-A season before he got hurt this year, but the Yankees aren’t going to have enough roster spots to keep all three of Golson, Maxwell and Dickerson on the 40-man roster throughout the season. If they had to open a spot, they could prioritize and pick which one(s) they want to truly look at in spring training.
Colin Curtis
As it stands, Curtis is the only Triple-A outfielder who’s on the 40-man and can be shipped to the minors. He’s also a guy who can play all three outfield spots and could certainly play a bench role during the season. There is obvious value in that, but he’s also coming off a lost year, and the Yankees could take their chances on getting Curtis through waivers. Not an ideal situation since the team could lose Dickerson, Golson and Maxwell, but it’s certainly an option. Curtis is playing pretty well in winter ball as we speak. Melky Mesa is a similar situation. He has options — and upside — but he didn’t play like a big leaguer down in Double-A this season.
Let Pedro go. Keep Whelan. Keep Laird. The rest I don’t care.
It is a shame that left handed people are so fragile .
Of the list above, I’d let Golson go, as an OF he has no stick and really no role on this team. I’d let Pedro go if the odds of him pitching are slim, and then if necessary I’d let Whelan go, finally if I need one more spot, I’d bid adios to Dickerson, really don’t know what he offers the team, not a big fan of his game,,, and then if I need a fifth slot, bye to Curtis.
I definitely think they should hold onto Maxwell and Laird. I think Laird has some trade value especially if NY and Chavez agree to another deal. He becomes expendable with the emergence of Joseph and Adams.
They need to find a SS that can hit a little so they can part ways with Pena.
Whelan should go first, then I’d say Golson. If they are pitching rich in the minors, then they can afford to let one go. Godson’s good for depth but its needed at the corners more and that’s what Dickerson is for. Not that it matters much. These guys are for depth and I’ll probably have a hard time even remembering most of them were Yankees…
“As part of the deal, players and owners are agreeing to add an extra wild-card round to the playoffs. The extra round will be one game, winner take all.”
======
I know that I’m a couple of days late on this story. Still, I didn’t want t let this story go by without commenting on what a remarkably crappy idea this extra 1-game playoff game will be. I thought that the wild card turned out to be a good idea that made the late stages of the season as interesting and exciting as the early stages as the early stages of the season. However, this extra wild card game takes a good idea to a ridiculous extreme. Winning the division crown just got a whole lot more important than it used to be. In would say that winning the divisional crown is now absolutely crucial for a serious contender’s chances at winning the WS.
“. Winning the division crown just got a whole lot more important than it used to be”
What’s wrong with that
I know im in the minority probably but I like the additional two teams better than the current system……its not perfect but at least winning the division will mean something again and the better teams should have at least some advantage. It’ll.also keep more teams in the race longerr which is also good for the game.
I’m against the extra wild card, but I’m thankful it’s just a knock out game. Imagine if it was a full series. It would kill the “bye” team.
I’m thankful because this was inevitable. There was no way a second wild card wouldn’t be added. More revenue for MLB? Find anyone on the inside that would stop that.
Brandon Laird was used as a corner OFer plenty of times in the minors and he is probably gonna get a shot at winning the job to become the backup OF/3B in ST. Neither Chavez nor Nuñez can really play the corner OF(eventhough Eduardo did play some OF but he is a lock to be the backup SS/2B next year), and let’s not forget that Chavez has said many times that he is considering retiring.
Having two wild-card teams also should guarantee good ratings for the one-game playoff. That will keep Uncle Bud happy.
blake November 19th, 2011 at 2:34 pm
“. Winning the division crown just got a whole lot more important than it used to be”
What’s wrong with that
=============
Nothing necessarily. However, I think that it sucks for the first wild card team that they will be subjected to a one-game playoff, when the entire season is predicated on playing series. The difference between the first and second wild card teams could be significant(say, five or more games), but it would be decided on the vicissitudes of one baseball game: If your starter has a bad game, the entire season is flushed down the toilet. This strikes me as fundamentally unfair, putting the better teams at a potential competitive disadvantage with a weaker team. Oftentimes, a weak team might be able to take a game from a superior club, but winning a series is not at all likely, even in a short 3-game series. I could see a situation in which a fairly crappy team could be favored in a one-game series against a vastly superior club, e.g., the Mariners, with Felix on the mound, against the Yanks.
Moreover, a team in a strong division with a wild card card contender on its heels will have to push hard until the division crown is locked up, because losing the division crown would mean opening up themselves to a one-game playoff. Meanwhile, the teams in the weaker divisions will get a chance to coast, and set up their pitching staffs for the offseason.
About the extra WC added, IMO it’s a good idea. Cause it would add the one game playoff atmosphere(like the one we had this year) and it doesn’t have to be two teams tied for the 1 WC spot, also it would seem more fair cause in plenty of years you had some teams who had a great record and didn’t make it(I remember the Blue Jays having a 90+ win season and not making to the playoffs because they are in a tough division, while some teams won their division with a 80-72 record :/ ). With the 2nd WC added it would only be more fair for teams in a tougher division(like the Rays in the AL East for example).
But I’m against moving the Astros now, the commissioner has to wait for an expansion in the future(that way we have two leagues with 16 teams each) OR two teams getting cut for a reason or another(then it would be 14 teams per league), I’m not a fan of having the interleague series all year long. It would just bring too much chaos and bad habits because of the DH/non DH rule that would effect how managers plan their 25 players roster. Again I’m saying that cause I assume there is no movement towards a full adoption of the DH in both leagues or to the contrary the AL removing the DH rule, cause if that’s the case it’s a different subject.
RadioKev November 19th, 2011 at 2:41 pm
I’m against the extra wild card, but I’m thankful it’s just a knock out game. Imagine if it was a full series. It would kill the “bye” team.
I’m thankful because this was inevitable. There was no way a second wild card wouldn’t be added. More revenue for MLB? Find anyone on the inside that would stop that.
============
I think that the idea will prove unworkable in the end. However, if the objective was extra revenue, then why not shorten spring training a bit, and add 2 or four more games to the season? Surely, 30 to 60 more games across the league would result in more revenues than 2 playoff games?
ShinobiNYC November 19th, 2011 at 3:00 pm
….With the 2nd WC added it would only be more fair for teams in a tougher division(like the Rays in the AL East for example).
===============
This is a good example of why the second wild card is a poor idea. The second wild card would have defused a lot of the drama in the race between the Rays and the Sox, because the marginal playoff spot would no longer be in jeopardy, as both would be assured spots. Moreover, the Rays, having made a brilliant charge to catch and pass the Red Sox, would then have to face the Sox in a one-game playoff. Finishing with the better record is rendered moot, because one game would be used to decide the entire season….
@Ghostwariter IMO I rather see a team with a great record making it(see a team that gets 90+ wins but couldn’t get a WC berth because of their rivals in the division) then have the problem of figuring out how to plan a 1 game sudden death game. The manager of a team with a good lead in the WC race will have plenty of time(assuming they have a 3+ games lead in the WC like u mentioned) to plan the WC playoffs game(rest some players, have their ace ready for that game,…etc). This 2nd WC berth is also good for more teams to be involved in the playoffs chase(I love how it is now don’t get me wrong but it’s still too bad to see so many good teams out of it a bit too early, see the Angels or the Giants in 2011 for example).
ShinobiNYC November 19th, 2011 at 3:10 pm
@Ghostwariter IMO I rather see a team with a great record making it(see a team that gets 90+ wins but couldn’t get a WC berth….
=====================
I would be wiliing to bet that the team with the fifth best record in each of the leagues averaged less than 90 wins, since the realignment and advent of the wild card. In large part, my concern is that a team with 85 wins, or so, could go on a run, and win the WS. Or worse still, they could oust a legitimate contender, and get trounced in the next round of divisional series. This kind of an outcome would cheapen the rest of the regular season, and reduce the quality of play in the postseason.
New CBA includes HGH blood test. A pretty big concession by the players association:
http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_.....ng-sources
Bud has been pretty up front about his reasons for this additional wild card.
It’s about entertainment, money, and keeping more fan bases attentive in September.
Fairness, integrity of the postseason, etc. were not really factors considered but rather consequences.
As someone who watches baseball for entertainment, I think it’s great.
m November 19th, 2011 at 3:45 pm
New CBA includes HGH blood test. A pretty big concession by the players association:
http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_…..ng-sources
==============
I wonder if there are any unfortunate, unintended consequences to testing for HGH.
It’s hard to believe that it has been 17 years since the last strike/stoppage. Baseball has been on a pretty nice run since the strike of ’94 resulted in cancelling the WS. The players’ union and the owners deserve a lot of credit for that…
They can move both Whelen and Kontos out of pitching slots through trades and from the offensive/defensive side, move Pena, Dickerson and Golson. Maxwell has more upside, all are the same age and Maxwell plays all three outfield spots well.
If Chavez wants to return, give him a raise over last year, contingent on opening an extra slot on the roster, giving Cashman time to swing a couple of deals to move the excess.
m -
Wow.
****
I think fans of the good teams are going to have to look at the season/playoffs in a new way. There is the 162-game season, where your won-lost record, especially if you win the division it is a good indication whether your team has played well. Then there is basically a second season, which has not necessarily set up so that the best team has the best chance of winning.
It’s the only sane approach for me.
The audience they’re looking for is a different one than the one that tunes in during the whole season. They’re looking to add new viewers, and the lure of a one-game play-in may be enticing enough to get those viewers, and then I guess the hope is they’re going to stick around for the next 3 rounds. Frankly, I don’t see it, but I’ll do whatever I have to mind-game wise to make it make sense to me.
A link to latest CBA news.
http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/
Baseball’s owners and players have agreed to a new collective bargaining agreement that should be announced early next week. Yesterday we learned about potential restrictions on draft spending and a tax for teams that don’t spend enough on their Major League roster. We’ll keep track of all the day’s CBA news right here…
Axisa’s double dipping on RAB and MLTR.
Basically, MLB doesn’t care if the WS winner was not the best team over the course of the season. The deeper down you go to get that WC, the more likely that that team was slightly above average if that. And because of the nature of playoffs, a mediocre to slightly above average team can walk away with the trophy.
I’m really not sure what that says. I like the excitement of playoffs when the teams are well-matched. But I really don’t want to see the situation of the two “worst” teams playing for that trophy. I would prefer to see the two best. Again. It’s two seasons. A long one and a short one. So I have to take some satisfaction when my team “wins” the long season in its league (prior to the playoffs).
But, this past WS was pretty exciting (once I got used to idea it didn’t include the Yankees)
“With Crimson in triumph flashing,
Among the strains of Victory…”
To me…..the new system will benefit the better teams which in general are the divisional winners.
The current system offers no advantage to those teams that won their division…..I don’t like that.
Jmo, but I find something fundamentally wrong with the idea of a team playing a six month long season, then having their entire season riding on one game. It’s a given that the team with the best record in the game can lose to the team with the worst record on any given day. I don’t mind the idea of more playoff teams, but I didn’t even like the idea of a best of 5! At a minimum, it should be 2 of 3.
blake says:
November 19, 2011 at 5:02 pm
The current system offers no advantage to those teams that won their division…..I don’t like that.
—–
Agree.
Report: MLB to begin testing for HGH
On another recent note, I love the idea of Bobby V managing the Sox.