southsider2k5 Posted October 5, 2017 Share Posted October 5, 2017 QUOTE (Dam8610 @ Oct 5, 2017 -> 12:15 PM) Utility infielder who will be in his age 25 season and has hit well at every level of the minor leagues. Seems like the perfect Rule 5 candidate to me if left unprotected. A 25 year old who couldn't even get time with this historically awful White Sox team. Teams are looking for star potential and big tools in the rule 5, not utility players. They can find those all over the place for pretty cheap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted October 5, 2017 Share Posted October 5, 2017 (edited) QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 5, 2017 -> 12:22 PM) A 25 year old who couldn't even get time with this historically awful White Sox team. Teams are looking for star potential and big tools in the rule 5, not utility players. They can find those all over the place for pretty cheap. Yeah, like when we took Angel Sanchez in the Rule 5 draft like 4 years ago. (Sanchez was a 29-year old backup IF) Edited October 5, 2017 by soxfan2014 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted October 5, 2017 Share Posted October 5, 2017 QUOTE (Jose Abreu @ Oct 5, 2017 -> 12:18 PM) I'd be willing to bet Saladino is cut and Peter is on the MLB roster for us on Opening Day. Yeah I could see that. Especially if they end up going with a 3-man bench again. Those guys who can play both IF and OF are key on the bench. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jose Abreu Posted October 5, 2017 Share Posted October 5, 2017 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 5, 2017 -> 12:22 PM) A 25 year old who couldn't even get time with this historically awful White Sox team. Teams are looking for star potential and big tools in the rule 5, not utility players. They can find those all over the place for pretty cheap. He was a 24 year old who didn't get time with us because we had Moncada, Anderson, Sanchez, Davidson, and Saladino in his spots. With Saaldino likely gone, he'll be here next year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted October 5, 2017 Share Posted October 5, 2017 QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Oct 5, 2017 -> 12:24 PM) Yeah, like when we took Angel Sanchez in the Rule 5 draft like 4 years ago. (Sanchez was a 29-year old backup IF) That is actually a great example of why they don't do it. It was actually notable because NO ONE thought it would happen, and it shocked everyone to the point where no one had a bio prepped on him. Plus there is also the point of how well that worked out that needs mentioning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted October 5, 2017 Share Posted October 5, 2017 QUOTE (Jose Abreu @ Oct 5, 2017 -> 12:27 PM) He was a 24 year old who didn't get time with us because we had Moncada, Anderson, Sanchez, Davidson, and Saladino in his spots. With Saaldino likely gone, he'll be here next year. A 24 year old who couldn't take time away from the same Tyler Saladino coming off of a back injury. Great point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiSox59 Posted October 5, 2017 Share Posted October 5, 2017 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 5, 2017 -> 12:31 PM) A 24 year old who couldn't take time away from the same Tyler Saladino coming off of a back injury. Great point. The Sox weren't going to cut Saladino last year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted October 5, 2017 Share Posted October 5, 2017 QUOTE (ChiSox59 @ Oct 5, 2017 -> 12:34 PM) The Sox weren't going to cut Saladino last year. They could have sent him down at any point this year, but didn't. It also doesn't mean that he won't rebound next year, and he will be given the chance to do so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Sacamano Posted October 5, 2017 Share Posted October 5, 2017 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 5, 2017 -> 12:30 PM) That is actually a great example of why they don't do it. It was actually notable because NO ONE thought it would happen, and it shocked everyone to the point where no one had a bio prepped on him. Plus there is also the point of how well that worked out that needs mentioning. I would think a 25-year old who has hit good in the minors and plays more positions would be different than a 29-year old actually. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiSox59 Posted October 5, 2017 Share Posted October 5, 2017 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 5, 2017 -> 12:35 PM) They could have sent him down at any point this year, but didn't. It also doesn't mean that he won't rebound next year, and he will be given the chance to do so. I agree, but the point remains. Towards the end of the year, Tyler was one of the "vets" on this team. They weren't optioning him for Jake Peter. I wouldn't be surprised to see them give him another chance, and I also wouldn't be surprised to see them give it to Peter. What I think happens is Peter is added to 40 man, and Tyler gets one more chance. Peter is likely gone if he's not protected - probably not a top 10 rule 5 pick, but someone will nab him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted October 5, 2017 Share Posted October 5, 2017 QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Oct 5, 2017 -> 12:38 PM) I would think a 25-year old who has hit good in the minors and plays more positions would be different than a 29-year old actually. Let me put it this way. Do you think the White Sox will find a better player in the Rule 5 draft than Jake Peter? I absolutely do. I also think they see other players they would rather protect on a team that is deep in infielders and specifically guys that profile as utility guys. I also don't see what team out there is going to hold a 25 man roster spot all year for Jake Peter. I could see a much better argument for guys like Adolfo and Guerrero because at least you are talking about way higher demanded skills (huge power, lefty starter). Judging by how slowly he has been brought through the minors, and how they completely ignored him in a season that saw the White Sox dip further into the majors than they ever have before, I really don't think they look at him as a piece that matters going forward. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted October 5, 2017 Share Posted October 5, 2017 QUOTE (ChiSox59 @ Oct 5, 2017 -> 12:45 PM) I agree, but the point remains. Towards the end of the year, Tyler was one of the "vets" on this team. They weren't optioning him for Jake Peter. I wouldn't be surprised to see them give him another chance, and I also wouldn't be surprised to see them give it to Peter. What I think happens is Peter is added to 40 man, and Tyler gets one more chance. Peter is likely gone if he's not protected - probably not a top 10 rule 5 pick, but someone will nab him. If the White Sox didn't see Tyler Saladino as a part of the team this year (as in 18), he would already have been gone. They didn't hesitate to dump other guys in September and in October, why would Saladino be different? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chitownsportsfan Posted October 5, 2017 Share Posted October 5, 2017 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 5, 2017 -> 01:54 PM) If the White Sox didn't see Tyler Saladino as a part of the team this year (as in 18), he would already have been gone. They didn't hesitate to dump other guys in September and in October, why would Saladino be different? I'm not sure why he hasn't already been cut loose. They aren't doing Tyler any favors keeping him around when he's buried behind 2-3 guys for playing time. Maybe they think he has a modicum of trade value if he can prove his back issues are behind him and they can flip him as part of a package next July. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted October 5, 2017 Share Posted October 5, 2017 QUOTE (chitownsportsfan @ Oct 5, 2017 -> 01:02 PM) I'm not sure why he hasn't already been cut loose. They aren't doing Tyler any favors keeping him around when he's buried behind 2-3 guys for playing time. Maybe they think he has a modicum of trade value if he can prove his back issues are behind him and they can flip him as part of a package next July. Tyler got himself 278 plate appearances this year and was such a disappointment that he didn't deserve more. Until there's a true 40 man roster crunch there's no reason to fully dump him, he's not at his arb years yet so he's basically free, but he'll be a guy who could potentially face being DFA'd next summer to clear room for Jiminez or another callup. May as well hold him and see if he can Yolmer it up next year until we need the roster spot. If we need the roster spot and he's still hitting in the .200 range, then I won't complain about cutting him and I also won't be able to say he didn't get a fair shot. If your'e a 27 year old fighting for a roster spot you can't put up a sub-.500 OPS and expect someone to owe you another shot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dam8610 Posted October 5, 2017 Share Posted October 5, 2017 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 5, 2017 -> 04:58 PM) Tyler got himself 278 plate appearances this year and was such a disappointment that he didn't deserve more. Until there's a true 40 man roster crunch there's no reason to fully dump him, he's not at his arb years yet so he's basically free, but he'll be a guy who could potentially face being DFA'd next summer to clear room for Jiminez or another callup. May as well hold him and see if he can Yolmer it up next year until we need the roster spot. If we need the roster spot and he's still hitting in the .200 range, then I won't complain about cutting him and I also won't be able to say he didn't get a fair shot. If your'e a 27 year old fighting for a roster spot you can't put up a sub-.500 OPS and expect someone to owe you another shot. So why hold the roster spot for him over Peter, who is probably at least the same player, and offers the potential to become a better player? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 QUOTE (Dam8610 @ Oct 5, 2017 -> 05:50 PM) So why hold the roster spot for him over Peter, who is probably at least the same player, and offers the potential to become a better player? Because Saladino probably has a higher ceiling. Don't overweight a bad year this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dam8610 Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 5, 2017 -> 07:52 PM) Because Saladino probably has a higher ceiling. Don't overweight a bad year this year. Based on what? Saladino is entering his age 28 (maybe 29 depending on how you want to count it since his birthday is July 20) season, has back issues, just posted a whopping 33 wRC+, has never posted a full or partial season wRC+ of 100, and did not show as well defensively as in prior years. Jake Peter, on the other hand, is entering his age 25 season and has done nothing but hit and offer positional versatility on his steady climb through the White Sox organization. He's not likely to be a star, but I'd bet on him providing more value than -1.2 WAR if he's on the White Sox for most or all of the season next year. Saladino probably would as well, but I think Peter is the more likely player to be above 0.0 WAR if he's on the 25 man roster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jose Abreu Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 5, 2017 -> 07:52 PM) Because Saladino probably has a higher ceiling. Don't overweight a bad year this year. It's not even all about his year (which was worse than just bad, and more like one of the worst statistical seasons an athlete could possibly have). It's also about his back, which will likely prevent him from ever being who he was in 2016. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 QUOTE (Dam8610 @ Oct 5, 2017 -> 08:08 PM) Based on what? Saladino is entering his age 28 (maybe 29 depending on how you want to count it since his birthday is July 20) season, has back issues, just posted a whopping 33 wRC+, has never posted a full or partial season wRC+ of 100, and did not show as well defensively as in prior years. Jake Peter, on the other hand, is entering his age 25 season and has done nothing but hit and offer positional versatility on his steady climb through the White Sox organization. He's not likely to be a star, but I'd bet on him providing more value than -1.2 WAR if he's on the White Sox for most or all of the season next year. Saladino probably would as well, but I think Peter is the more likely player to be above 0.0 WAR if he's on the 25 man roster. I think you missed the "don't overweight this year" part. He obviously had a bad year, we get it. But it is also pretty obvious the White Sox still believe in him as they kept him on the roster and gave him ABs all of the way through the end of the season. They sure didn't do that for the players they were done with. Think of guys like Brad Goldberg they were on the roster, but they still never called back. Then they dropped him completely. If the Sox were done with Tyler, he would be gone. On top of it, it isn't like Peter is even doing big things in the minors that screams call up. He has so many guys ahead of him it isn't even funny. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dam8610 Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 5, 2017 -> 10:54 PM) I think you missed the "don't overweight this year" part. He obviously had a bad year, we get it. But it is also pretty obvious the White Sox still believe in him as they kept him on the roster and gave him ABs all of the way through the end of the season. They sure didn't do that for the players they were done with. Think of guys like Brad Goldberg they were on the roster, but they still never called back. Then they dropped him completely. If the Sox were done with Tyler, he would be gone. On top of it, it isn't like Peter is even doing big things in the minors that screams call up. He has so many guys ahead of him it isn't even funny. I think you missed the "back issues" and "age 29 season" part. As for Peter, he ended his age 24 season hitting nearly .300 with an over .850 OPS playing while playing 5 different positions for the Knights. He's also performed better than Saladino at each level of the minor leagues at a younger age. I don't see the case for Saladino over Peter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 QUOTE (Dam8610 @ Oct 6, 2017 -> 01:30 AM) I think you missed the "back issues" and "age 29 season" part. As for Peter, he ended his age 24 season hitting nearly .300 with an over .850 OPS playing while playing 5 different positions for the Knights. He's also performed better than Saladino at each level of the minor leagues at a younger age. I don't see the case for Saladino over Peter. in 194 ABs. You are talking about a minor league career of .741 OPS for the rest of his time. A guy who hasn't been good enough to be an everyday starter at one position in the minors. The position he plays most of all is 2B, which is covered is covered by some guy named Moncada. He is not passing up all of the legitimate major leaguers in our system, including Tyler Saladino this off season. You might not see the case for Tyler, but the White Sox have already made it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dam8610 Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 6, 2017 -> 07:14 AM) in 194 ABs. You are talking about a minor league career of .741 OPS for the rest of his time. A guy who hasn't been good enough to be an everyday starter at one position in the minors. The position he plays most of all is 2B, which is covered is covered by some guy named Moncada. He is not passing up all of the legitimate major leaguers in our system, including Tyler Saladino this off season. You might not see the case for Tyler, but the White Sox have already made it. What does Moncada have to do with any of this? I don't think that Peter should start next year, but I do think he's a better option than Saladino to come off the bench and get 250-400 PAs next year to see if he can be a valuable bench piece. The White Sox could disagree with that, but they would be at odds with every piece of available information in doing so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 (edited) Saladino sucked, but until a roster crunch actually happens, there is no need to do anything with him. Who knows what trades will be made, and as of now, there is plenty of room on the 40 man roster. How much of his performance can be attributed to his back, and what is the prognosis? If his back injury isn't going to get better, and is the reason he sucked, sure waive him. But right now, why? Who knows what next year brings? . A healthy Saladino, and who knows if he ever will be healthy again, still may be better than a couple of guys who jumped ahead of him this year. It doesn't look good for him, but until the moment comes where a decision has to be made, why make the decision? There are still a couple on the Sox 40 man I would get rid of before him. Edited October 6, 2017 by Dick Allen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 QUOTE (Dam8610 @ Oct 6, 2017 -> 08:38 AM) What does Moncada have to do with any of this? I don't think that Peter should start next year, but I do think he's a better option than Saladino to come off the bench and get 250-400 PAs next year to see if he can be a valuable bench piece. The White Sox could disagree with that, but they would be at odds with every piece of available information in doing so. I don't get the Jake Peter thing at all. Another great example of what the Sox think of him, despite not playing everyday, they didn't send him to AFL. I am going to go back to my original statement and say that Peter isn't protected, nor is he selected in the draft, and leave it at that. Jake Peter isn't worth the posts that have already been made about him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 I'm rooting for jake peter because he's kept producing, but last offseason I thought Peter was our preferred upcoming utility man. Out of spring training they sent him to AA after being in AAA the year before. He hit his way out and was smoking AAA...they didn't call him up in Sept. SS2k5 is right, there is something there the sox aren't that interested in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.