The Rule 5 Draft Approaches: Who Should the Red Sox Protect?

[moonslav59]

6 minutes ago, notin said:

Seattle gave up last year’s 14th round pick for a 27yo AAA pitcher.  Not sure anyone in this deal is flying anywhere, let alone under the radar…

Nobody mentioned Hoppe being protected, but SEA felt he was worth trading for, since he'd be selected before they could nab him.

You caught that blip on your radar screen?

[notin]

2 hours ago, moonslav59 said:

Nobody mentioned Hoppe being protected, but SEA felt he was worth trading for, since he'd be selected before they could nab him.

You caught that blip on your radar screen?

Hoppe throws hard, so he intrigues some teams with weak pitching in the upper minors.  But in Boston, he was far down on the depth chart, 

Boston had every opportunity to protect him or, at a minimum, not trade him.  They chose not to try to keep him, most likely due to control/command issues…

[moonslav59]

9 hours ago, notin said:

Hoppe throws hard, so he intrigues some teams with weak pitching in the upper minors.  But in Boston, he was far down on the depth chart, 

Boston had every opportunity to protect him or, at a minimum, not trade him.  They chose not to try to keep him, most likely due to control/command issues…

I get that. My point was that his name was never mentioned as a possible selection. Hence the "under the radar" comment.

[drewski6]

19 hours ago, 5GoldGlovesOF,75 said:

I prefer Tolle to bat clean-up, like he did in college. Guy's a beast (well, more beastly than our other current candidates until Mass Attacker returns from the next WBC).

He seems like his lifts weights unlike half our team!

[drewski6]

19 hours ago, moonslav59 said:

Don't run this idea by Drewski.

Too late and now I have this to say, "plenty of arm for third base, bruh"

(speaking on Tolle)

[moonslav59]

Remember the Blaze Jordan for Matz deal, and how some felt Jordan was a very promising prospect?

It's interesting that the "mighty" Cardinals did not protect him from Rule 5 selection.

(He may get picked.)

[drewski6]

19 hours ago, moonslav59 said:

Remember the Blaze Jordan for Matz deal, and how some felt Jordan was a very promising prospect?

It's interesting that the "mighty" Cardinals did not protect him from Rule 5 selection.

(He may get picked.)

Wait now Im all crossed up. Which one is Blaze Jordan and which one is Blaze Alexander.  Also, Blaze would make a great name for a bassett hound.

[notin]

38 minutes ago, drewski6 said:

Wait now Im all crossed up. Which one is Blaze Jordan and which one is Blaze Alexander.  Also, Blaze would make a great name for a bassett hound.

Trick question - Blaze Alexander and Blaze Jordan are the same person wearing different hats.

Also, agree on the basset hound.  Even better than Turbo…

[JoeBrady]

On 11/20/2025 at 3:04 PM, moonslav59 said:

Remember the Blaze Jordan for Matz deal, and how some felt Jordan was a very promising prospect?

It's interesting that the "mighty" Cardinals did not protect him from Rule 5 selection.

(He may get picked.)

It's like this every year.  The same people that think our farm stinks will go apoplectic if we cut someone lose.  Darwinzon and Thad Ward were exposed, there were 200-comment posts on MLB-R.  You'd have thought we had cut Carl Yaz.

[moonslav59]

7 minutes ago, JoeBrady said:

It's like this every year.  The same people that think our farm stinks will go apoplectic if we cut someone lose.  Darwinzon and Thad Ward were exposed, there were 200-comment posts on MLB-R.  You'd have thought we had cut Carl Yaz.

These Rule 5 guys are always borderline players. Maybe one or two turns into anything good, eventually, but so what, right?

As much as I like our 40 man depth and farm, I'm not hung up on any of our worst 40 man players. There are also 2-3 players who are overpaid, and are hanging on by a thread (like Masa & Hicks.)

Our pitching depth on the farm is the envy of almost every MLB team. Our everyday prospect depth is lean, but our 40 man roster is loaded with everyday players under team control for 3+ years. We have 6-7 OF'ers, depending on Masa counting. We have a couple decent catchers. We look weak on infield coverage, but still have Story, Mayer, Casas, Romy, DHam, Sogard, Gray and maybe Eaton, KC and Grissom. If we can add 3 infielders, this winter, we will be more than set for years to come.

[mvp 78]

On 11/20/2025 at 8:58 AM, moonslav59 said:

I get that. My point was that his name was never mentioned as a possible selection. Hence the "under the radar" comment.

He wasn't mentioned as he wasn't going to be protected by the Sox. The SoxProspects guys talked about him in their Rule 5 discussions, but I didn't think there was a significant chance the Sox would hold onto him. They clearly didn't want to hold onto him and dealt him instead.

[mvp 78]

On 11/20/2025 at 3:04 PM, moonslav59 said:

Remember the Blaze Jordan for Matz deal, and how some felt Jordan was a very promising prospect?

It's interesting that the "mighty" Cardinals did not protect him from Rule 5 selection.

(He may get picked.)

Positional players get picked less and less each year. He doesn't have a huge power profile for 1b and is R/R. He also fell off dramatically after being traded. It's more likely he's not taken. If he is taken, he doesn't make it through the season and is returned.

[mvp 78]

16 hours ago, JoeBrady said:

It's like this every year.  The same people that think our farm stinks will go apoplectic if we cut someone lose.  Darwinzon and Thad Ward were exposed, there were 200-comment posts on MLB-R.  You'd have thought we had cut Carl Yaz.

Thad Ward went first overall. It was clearly a bad idea to not trade him for something at the very least. 

[moonslav59]

3 hours ago, mvp 78 said:

He wasn't mentioned as he wasn't going to be protected by the Sox. The SoxProspects guys talked about him in their Rule 5 discussions, but I didn't think there was a significant chance the Sox would hold onto him. They clearly didn't want to hold onto him and dealt him instead.

Yes. I get that.

I'm pretty sure not a single poster listed him, and some of us made some pretty long lists of borderline and even unlikely Rule 5 guys.

After the fact, it's easy to explain it away, but I still think he fits the "under the radar" label for the reasons I mentioned. True, we are talking about borderline 40 man roster players, so notin's point about how barely significant players can be "under the radar" is well-taken.

That being said, we've seen an interesting Rule 5 trade in recent Sox history, with us on the receiving end: Slaten was traded for after being selected in the draft. That's a bit different from this situation.

[JoeBrady]

13 hours ago, mvp 78 said:

Thad Ward went first overall. It was clearly a bad idea to not trade him for something at the very least. 

That assumes that the RS forgot to send out a group text saying Ward was available.

[moonslav59]

Maybe we could have traded him for Penrod.

[Larry Cook]

On 11/19/2025 at 8:19 AM, mvp 78 said:

My complaint was the lack of positional prospects. The Sox have struggled to fill the org with 1B/C prospects for several years. Seems like Craig found a few. The only trade that was surprising to me was the Guerrero one, but maybe Gray will work out like Romy has. We'll see. 

Seems like they have faith in Uberstine. Drohan deserves some run in the bullpen next year but needs to stay healthy for once. 

1.) hang’em Chaim used a lot of draft capital on middle infielders, especially left handed hitting middle infielders 

2.) while bres-slow kept drohan and uberstine, he was willing to part with Mullins???? Curious to know the thinking on this!!!! 

[mvp 78]

8 hours ago, moonslav59 said:

Maybe we could have traded him for Penrod.

Could have traded him for a DSL flier. Would have been better than nothing. 

[mvp 78]

7 hours ago, Larry Cook said:

1.) hang’em Chaim used a lot of draft capital on middle infielders, especially left handed hitting middle infielders 

2.) while bres-slow kept drohan and uberstine, he was willing to part with Mullins???? Curious to know the thinking on this!!!! 

Mullins is a high injury risk and further away than Drohan and Uberstine. The guys protected this season could all contribute early on this season. Mullins still has work to do. Drohan and Uberstine could still be called up for an emergency start, but Mullins is probably a relief profile by the time he gets to MLB. 

Drohan has injury issues too, but has a good k rate and whiff rate. Uberstine is the more clear emergency call up for a starter guy. Mullins is just behind them. 

[moonslav59]

1 hour ago, mvp 78 said:

Could have traded him for a DSL flier. Would have been better than nothing. 

So, every first player taken in Rule 5 could have been traded?

[drewski6]

1 hour ago, mvp 78 said:

Mullins is a high injury risk and further away than Drohan and Uberstine. The guys protected this season could all contribute early on this season. Mullins still has work to do. Drohan and Uberstine could still be called up for an emergency start, but Mullins is probably a relief profile by the time he gets to MLB. 

Drohan has injury issues too, but has a good k rate and whiff rate. Uberstine is the more clear emergency call up for a starter guy. Mullins is just behind them. 

They just wanna use the uberstine had to call an uber line at some point next season, when we need a 9th starter as a one game emergency fill-in in August

[mvp 78]

37 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

So, every first player taken in Rule 5 could have been traded?

Most likely. Ward was in all the reports ahead of the draft as a guy that was going to get selected early on. It was a surprise when he wasn't protected or traded ahead of the deadline. 

[moonslav59]

13 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

Most likely. Ward was in all the reports ahead of the draft as a guy that was going to get selected early on. It was a surprise when he wasn't protected or traded ahead of the deadline. 

Yes, I remember well. I just find it hard to believe the Sox were that dumb to either bet he would not be selected or not try and trade him for the best prospect offered.

There is ample evidence they were that dumb, so maybe I just need to accept this as further evidence in their dumbdomness.

[mvp 78]

18 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

Yes, I remember well. I just find it hard to believe the Sox were that dumb to either bet he would not be selected or not try and trade him for the best prospect offered.

There is ample evidence they were that dumb, so maybe I just need to accept this as further evidence in their dumbdomness.

For all of the great things Bloom did, there were equal and opposite terrible things (not protecting Ward isn't at that level, but it was a curious decision for sure). 

[moonslav59]

4 minutes ago, mvp 78 said:

For all of the great things Bloom did, there were equal and opposite terrible things (not protecting Ward isn't at that level, but it was a curious decision for sure). 

Do you think it's possible he asked what teams would give for Ward and got no offers?

[mvp 78]

44 minutes ago, moonslav59 said:

Do you think it's possible he asked what teams would give for Ward and got no offers?

No.

[moonslav59]

1 minute ago, mvp 78 said:

No.

So....

He didn't ask?

He asked but declined all offers in hopes he would not be selected?