From: Zuke on
On Wed, 9 Dec 2009, HTP wrote:

> On Dec 8, 6:40 am, David Short <David.no.Sh...(a)Spam.Wright.Please.edu>
> wrote:
>> john smith wrote:
>>> What do reds fans have to look forward to here? Maybe bringing Javier
> draft is Dec 10, so it doesnt look like theres any help coming from
> there unless they clear a spot. The Yankees traded Brian Bruney to the

I have a question about the 40 man roster. What makes you keep
Cordero and Traveres on there? Is it a thing where if you don't
have them on the 40 man another team can claim them for the minimum
and you have to eat the rest of the salary?

I guess that's the rule 5 thing where other teams can pick up a
player for 100k and then have to keep them on their major league
roster for one year.

Maybe that's a rule change that could be implemented to help out the
smaller market teams. Nobody would pick up Traveres
at 4 million but at least you are protecting one more guy, probably
a younger guy with at least a future. If I recall the Reds lost a
player to the rule 5 draft last year.




From: David Short on
"Zuke" <me(a)privacy.net> wrote in message
> On Wed, 9 Dec 2009, HTP wrote:
>
> I have a question about the 40 man roster. What makes you keep
> Cordero and Traveres on there? Is it a thing where if you don't
> have them on the 40 man another team can claim them for the minimum
> and you have to eat the rest of the salary?

It would make future negoations with free agents tough in a what goes around
comes around way, but you could live with that if you didn't get burned too
bad.
Putting Cordero off the 40 man roster would make him freely available to
anybody while the reds picked up his salary. You wouldn't do that, but you
might do it with Taverable.

> I guess that's the rule 5 thing where other teams can pick up a
> player for 100k and then have to keep them on their major league
> roster for one year.
That's more for minor leaguers. If a guy has shown enough minor league
promise that another team wants him, but you don't want him on your 40 man
roster...you lose him. It's actually designed to help low budget teams like
the reds.

> Maybe that's a rule change that could be implemented to help out the
> smaller market teams. Nobody would pick up Traveres
> at 4 million but at least you are protecting one more guy, probably
> a younger guy with at least a future. If I recall the Reds lost a player
> to the rule 5 draft last year.

A pitcher went to Washington.

The reds are likely to lose Danny Dorn this year. He's a lefty hitter that
started real slow in AAA and then really came on at the end of the year. I
think he's got a pretty big rule v target on his back. Give him 100 at bats
and if he fails you send him back to the reds at a cost of far less than a
real free agent.

dfs


From: David Short on
David Short wrote:
> The reds are likely to lose Danny Dorn this year. He's a lefty hitter that
> started real slow in AAA and then really came on at the end of the year. I
> think he's got a pretty big rule v target on his back. Give him 100 at bats
> and if he fails you send him back to the reds at a cost of far less than a
> real free agent.

The reds ended up losing Ben Jukich to the cardinals in the rule v draft.

I think it's a reach. Jukich didn't project to help the Reds at all this
year, but then Dave Duncan tends to make gold out of other teams dross.

dfs
From: HTP on
On Dec 8, 6:40 am, David Short <David.no.Sh...(a)Spam.Wright.Please.edu>
wrote:
> john smith wrote:
> > What do reds fans have to look forward to here? Maybe bringing Javier
> > Valentin back or extending the contract of Willy T.? Tongue and cheek of
> > course.
>
> > What rumors have you heard?
>
> Noah Lowrey
> Bobby Crosby
> Jamey Carrol
>

The Dodgers signed Carroll, so we've dodged 2 of these bulletts
(crosby to the bucs). 2 years at 4 mil+