Autumn Dreamin

I think it's very silly and in some contexts a bit dishonest to pretend that 40 man roster management consists of just writing down your 40 best players and walking away. Many (most?) teams don’t have full 40’s right now, and it’s not because every org only has ~37 valuable players and regards all of their eligible but unrostered prospects as org detritus. Plenty of players who don't get taken in the Rule 5 would absolutely get snapped up if available in a trade or on waivers where they don't come with Rule 5 restrictions. Part of the reason they don't get protected is to reduce the risk of needing to waive/option them or someone else later. The question for Rule 5 protection isn't simply "is this a good enough player to keep in my org?" There's a finite number of 40 man spots, everyone in the league knows exactly how many there are, and using one for Rule 5 protection early in the offseason involves a long list of competing considerations. What is the risk of another team committing a season-long roster spot to this player (as you said, very low) historically? In contrast, what is the chance that protecting them forces a riskier move when managing my roster later? Is Player A more or less likely to be claimed in the Rule 5 (where they can't be optioned) than Player B (who can be optioned) is on waivers? With my current 40 man balance, do I need rostered depth more in some places than others? Is this player's route to my opening day 26 more likely to be blocked, forcing an option year on my end that lowers their future control/value? And so on. Most means of player acquisition are about value mismatches. Improving the Sox roster will inherently require acquiring players that have more value here than where they are coming from, but a player's value on your roster compared to their value on another is influenced by all sorts of things other than "they didn't think the player was good enough." Also, sometimes teams are just wrong in their evaluations entirely (and the wrong team isn't always the Sox!) Garrett Whitlock (2.4 WAR last season) pitched in the playoffs for Boston in the same year they picked him up in the Rule 5 draft, and I doubt any fans watching were embarrassed by it. I similarly doubt they were sad about fellow Rule 5 pick Justin Slaten leading their bullpen in ERA in his first year there. Both guys are still rostered, not because Boston has had years of a desolate farm with no depth, but because they successfully found value where those guys' original teams didn't and found money spends just as well. I don't think they (or anyone really) should feel bad for getting "too much" Rule 5 production. If anything, they should get bonus points because it freed them up to spend more capital in other ways, like grabbing Crochet.

Not sure I understand why it should be sad or embarrassing that the Sox found value in their Rule 5 guys last year, when finding value that other teams didn't see or couldn't realize is exactly what they should be doing with their timeline and plethora of available innings/ABs? Basically every avenue of player acquisition other than drafting 1.1 involves your organization committing an amount of roster space, development time, draft position, money, etc. to a player that other orgs didn't think was worth it at the time. Is getting a surprise hit in the mid rounds of the draft "sad" because a player other teams passed on ended up outplaying existing options in your system? Or is it possible that being correctly ahead of the "market" on a player is a good thing actually? Maybe even key for a team in this position? Like sure, I guess in a dream world the Sox just have a rotation of 5 WAR aces with no room for Smith. In a world where the Sox aren't losing 100, he's not their "ace" or all star. But it's odd to talk like he's a bottom 5 SP who would never crack a single other MLB rotation. He was an above replacement level player on a team in dire need of them, so I don't get why we should be using the Brewers' particular 40 man machinations as a demerit against his production. Almost every piece of Rule 5 coverage leading into yesterday hat tipped the Sox for finding two objectively solid pieces last year, but on here nabbing a fine starter for $100k and a versatile reliever for free is a shame for the Sox because...they should have already had better players? Because another team was willing to gamble on leaving them available in a Rule 5 draft where few players get taken and even fewer stick? Improve the roster but also never acquire talent that other teams didn't see first is an awfully tough needle to thread.

BA is high on Alberto. Don't let him gamble. 2. White Sox — Jedixson Paez, RHP, Red Sox What he does well: Paez has arguably the best control of any pitcher available in the Rule 5 draft. He fills the zone and walks no one. Often Rule 5 picks can’t make the team because MLB managers don’t trust them to throw strikes. That should not be an issue for Paez. What he needs to work on: Paez’s stuff is fringy, and when he tried to ramp up the stuff in 2025, he ended up missing much of the season with a calf injury. He has yet to pitch above High-A, so he’s about to face a massive jump in quality of hitters. How he could fit on an MLB roster: Paez’s control gives him a chance to come to White Sox camp as an arm who could start or pitch in the bullpen. But he’ll have to show he isn’t overwhelmed by the significant jump to the big leagues. 13. White Sox — Alexander Alberto, RHP, Rays What he does well: Alberto is the best arm to be taken in the Rule 5 draft. He can throw a 100 mph cut-fastball, offering a minor glimpse of Emmanuel Clase-level stuff. What he needs to work on: Alberto has yet to reach Double-A and has only logged 35 career High-A innings. So while he has MLB-caliber stuff, his experience is far from it. Alberto will need to cram multiple years of development into one spring training. How he could fit on an MLB roster: The White Sox are a perfect fit for Alberto. They should be able to accept some bad outings as he adjusts to the major leagues. If they can be patient, he has high-leverage reliever stuff.

For now, the White Sox look at Paez as a multi-inning reliever a la Vasil, with starting potential down the road, while Alberto is a pure reliever with some leverage ceiling. "We’ve been talking about them for the last couple of weeks," said White Sox GM Chris Getz. "In Paez, for one, multiple weapons. A lot of different pitches. He’s got an arsenal to navigate to both-sided hitters. He obviously hasn’t pitched at the upper levels, but in terms of the command and the amount of pitches he has, our group was really excited about it. Long-term wise, we view him as a real starter for us. In the meantime, obviously navigating a season with a Rule 5, have to have pitchers oftentimes that have some versatility. Mike Vasil comes to mind, where he can really help in a lot of different ways. Paez is very similar in that sense. "Alberto, the guy’s got big-time stuff. It’s a unique pitch with his cutter. Obviously he hasn’t pitched at upper levels. When you’re going through the Rule 5, you look at some of the candidates, there’s always a reason why there’s availability on some of those players. Some of it is just the gap between where they’ve pitched and the big leagues, injury history, what have you. In this sense, we feel like this is a chance worth taking on both of those guys and we’ve proven last year that we were able to navigate with two Rule 5 picks, three at one point. We’re excited to see what these guys can do for us." https://soxmachine.com/2025/12/white-sox-select-jedixson-paez-and-alexander-alberto-in-rule-5-draft

In contrast, Alberto has given up just 1 HR in 80+ stateside innings

Just be happy with your new lefty ace and move on, Boston

I like Petit a lot. It's been going around that Sox like RHP Carter Baumler who played for their area codes team:

This reads like the kind of careful answer you give when you need to pretend he's not already your guy

What a run of 1OA's the city could have had if the NBA didn't have to pay off the Mavs for trading Luka