or Lofgren

I also don’t think De La Cruz gets rostered because of the injury issues, he just seems too far away. Rivero should be rostered as well if leaving him off exposes him to Rule V.

If I’m picking a flier guy, I’m going with Lofgren.

We’re not rostering Weglarz’s legs.

I think Rodriguez is the exact type of guy who gets taken. He’s got a decent glove on both sides of the bag up the middle and he’ll take a walk. Whether he sticks—it’s unlikely, just by the nature of the whole thing.

my opinion, in particular order:

1. Weglarz
2. Donald
3. Gomez
4. Pino
5. Brown
6. Rivero
7. KLDC
8. Rodriguez

Ouch. Rule 5 is a tax on the poor to support the rich.

Any credence to the idea that the Indians could ADD in the Rule 5 instead of just worrying (usually unnecessarily) about possibly losing someone?

Generally the players that are available and that get selected are guys who project as no more than utility IF (we probably need one of those) and bullpen projects (keep ‘em coming). I’m not going to pretend to know anything about those Rule 5 eligible guys, but I’d be more interested in seeing if we could fill the role of Futility IF or try to catch lightning in a bottle with a bullpen arm in the Rule 5 before FA is considered.

that sounds like Mangini: “I have no use for this guy but Belichick would pick him up. He stays.”

That actually is pretty close to how the Indians look at it, based on past statements, but they have a different view on what players will get taken.

Brown, Weglarz, Donald locks. Gomez essential lock. thinks they should protect KLDC. mentions Carlton Smith, a name only seen in APV breakdowns until now. Lofgren and Pino mentioned.

then the big list of bubble players. i have never heard of Stiller.

Makes sense to me. The case for rostering McBride is borderline laughable. Yes, he just led the offense-heavy AFL in hitting. But he is about to be a 25-year old 1B/OF who just saw his first AA action in which he managed to put up a .301 OBP. There has been some discussion of moving him back to catcher, but that clearly is not a long-term reality. The last time he was a full-time catcher was 2007 in Lake County, a season in which he allowed 88 stolen bases (against 15 caught stealing), 46 wild pitches, 16 passed balls, and 9 errors. And that was before he had shoulder surgery on his throwing arm.

So no rule 5 pickup?

I think Hodges is my new punching bag.

No Pino? Hrm…Not that he’s anything special, but wouldn’t they want him as a depth option over the prospect of what Anthony Reyes will contribute in 2011?

thanks for stopping by.

it does stink to start KLDC’s option clock now, but he seemed like an upside lefty someone could stash in a pen all year.

i think i like hodges over mcbride for the reasons APV mentions up above.

i like keeping rivero because of his postion.

the thing i keep going back to with lofgren and pino is with regards to sticking in the majors and long term value. right now, they’re depth starters at best. eventually, they’re back end starters, at best, right? so what does a drafting team do with them for 2010? can they hang on as a #5 and if not, do they profile as a useful bullpen piece? i am starting to lean to where even if those guys do get taken, they probably come back (if we want them back).

Tony, love your work, follow you on Twitter, etc etc. But that doesn’t excuse you to use the subject line.

Keep up the good work.

Anyway, let the over-reaction begin on all the players we will lose in Rule 5!;-) I am not so sure we lose anyone or not, but could see 1-2 going.

Second on the thanks for stopping by. With De La, it seems the organization still values his ceiling as something they can’t risk losing. 12 months from now that could very well be different. I’d be interested in what thoughts you have on Pino and how the organization views him.

That’s my take as well, especially after what seems like some flops amongst our starting pitchers that were thought to have lesser “stuff.” The organization might be shifting towards a bit more emphasis on the potential than the numbers in the minors. That said, I still thought Pino would get rostered over Hodges because to me the clear, weakness on the team last year was pitching.

Great to have you chiming in here, Tony — hope you make a habit of it.

The pattern on Pino suggests to me that there’s less here than meets the eye. We were surprised to have acquired him, given his numbers and what we expected to get for Pavano. Now we’re surprised that he’s not protected. What can explain both events? Scouts simply don’t think he’s likely to be a big-leaguer, despite what the numbers say.