squeezeplay Posted March 21, 2006 Share Posted March 21, 2006 I don't mean to inundate y'all with this Fabio Castro info, but the following is probably the most complete, and interesting of what I've read so far... The Newberg Report: March 20th, 2006 By Jamey Newberg www.thenewbergreport.com THE NEWBERG REPORT Francisco Cordero is in, supported by righthanders Akinori Otsuka (who was really dirty Saturday night against Korea) and Joaquin Benoit, and left-handed specialist Brian Shouse. Three spots remain in the bullpen that Texas will run out there on April 3, ideally one more righthander who can pitch the back third of the game, a second southpaw, and a long man who can chew up innings if the starter gets chased early. The righty, barring a trade, stands to be Antonio Alfonseca or Jose Silva, both of whom are off the roster, or Scott Feldman, who has all three of his options remaining. Jon Leicester is out of options but probably needs to pitch lights-out over the next two weeks to win a job. The long man was supposed to be John Wasdin, but a rough spring (eight runs on 14 hits and three walks in 6.1 innings) has opened the door for R.A. Dickey and possibly another candidate or two. More on that in a bit. The second lefthander in the pen is where the real issue is. Outside of the fifth starter, it's probably the most interesting roster decision facing the Rangers. Texas brought seven contestants to camp for left-handed spots in the pen: 40-man roster pitchers Shouse, Erasmo Ramirez, and C.J. Wilson; non-roster invites Kevin Walker, Ron Mahay, and Jesse Carlson; and Rule 5 acquisition Fabio Castro. Carlson has already been reassigned to minor league camp. Ramirez is out of options but hasn't been at his sharpest (four runs on six hits and a walk in 4.2 innings). Mahay has had control issues, issuing walks in five of his six appearances, including the March 1 intrasquad game (overall, five walks to go along with six hits in 7.1 frames). That leaves, as contestants for the second job behind Shouse, three pitchers in different circumstances: Wilson, Walker, and Castro. The decision on what to do with Wilson is interesting. One school of thought is to make him the Rangers' version of White Sox lefty Neal Cotts, a power reliever who can go multiple innings and projects eventually to be a rotation fixture. Another is to option Wilson to Oklahoma and put him on the same schedule as the big club's fifth starter, stretching him out with an eye toward bringing him up at some point to give the rotation its lone lefthander. There remains an outside shot that Wilson could figure in at number five in Texas, too. In three weeks. The 29-year-old Walker, an Irving native and Grand Prairie High School product, has been outstanding all spring (one run on two hits and one walk in seven innings, fanning nine), but chances are he'll be assigned to AAA. And that's because the primary competition for Wilson at this point seems to be Castro, and not because the club believes he's a better bet to get outs right now. It's because the only way the 21-year-old can remain Ranger property into April is to make the Opening Day staff, while Wilson has options. Jon Daniels jumped into the radio booth during yesterday afternoon's game, noting that Castro has shown Texas a plus fastball, a plus change, and flashes (though inconsistent) of a plus curve. The club loves his makeup and poise as much as his ability to change speeds. And with the exception of one awful outing against Kansas City a week and a half ago, his results have been really good. Daniels mentioned that there's been a thought that Castro could be stretched out to see if he could handle the long man role himself. Moments after he said that, Adam Eaton took a second-inning Marquis Grissom line shot off his pitching forearm, and Castro entered the game. He'd go three innings, getting into a second run through an opponent's lineup for the first time, and he was terrific, blanking the Cubs on two hits and no walks, punching out four. All five outs he got aside from the strikeouts came on the ground. Here are the procedural alternatives as far as Castro is concerned: 1. He makes the team. Is it possible that he gets the long man spot that had been earmarked for Wasdin, or that Wilson gets that role, allowing Texas to suit both of them up for the opening series against Boston? 2. He lands on the disabled list. There's a chance that some sort of injury pops up, but Rule 5 dictates that he must be active for at least 90 days during the 2006 season, or else open the 2007 season on the active big league roster and stay there until he's been active for an aggregate of 90 days. 3. He gets traded. Don't rule out the possibility that some other team will trade something to Texas in order to take Castro and assume the Rule 5 constraints. 4. He's lost on waivers. Should the Rangers not find a way to make one of the first three alternatives work, they'll have to run Castro through waivers. If he clears, they must offer him back to the White Sox for $25,000 but can instead try and work out a trade, by which they send Chicago something for the right to keep Castro on the farm. But forget that possibility. Castro won't clear waivers. One thing to keep in mind is that the decision on a Rule 5 pick is not set irreversibly as of Opening Day. Texas can open with Castro on the staff and, if it's not working out, the club can try to run him through waivers during the season, recalling Wilson or Walker or Carlson or whomever at that point. If he has another couple outings like he did yesterday, Castro is going to make this team. Toss out the bad Royals game on March 9 (five runs in two-thirds of an inning), and the 5'7" lefty has thrown 9.1 innings (including an intrasquad frame on February 28), allowing one run on seven hits and five walks, setting 11 down on strikes. His upside is big. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sayitaintso Posted March 23, 2006 Share Posted March 23, 2006 QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Mar 20, 2006 -> 01:54 PM) THE Kevin Walker? Let them have him, we had enough of The Kevin Walker Experiment last season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSH2005 Posted March 23, 2006 Author Share Posted March 23, 2006 (edited) Fabio Castro got knocked around by our Sox today... Castro's line: 2.2 IP, 4 H, 2 ER, 0 BB, 1 K, 6.17 ERA Nice to see. Edited March 23, 2006 by SSH2005 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoodAsGould Posted March 24, 2006 Share Posted March 24, 2006 can we work a deal with the rangers to trade him or does he have to go through waivers and get back to us first? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSH2005 Posted March 24, 2006 Author Share Posted March 24, 2006 can we work a deal with the rangers to trade him or does he have to go through waivers and get back to us first? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I think that the Rangers can try to work a deal with us so they can obtain the rights to send Castro to the minors outright without having him clear waivers. But if the Rangers decide to try to send Castro to the minors and sneak him through waivers at any point during the season, he can still be claimed by other teams. I believe we are last in waiver priority so many teams could take a shot at keeping Castro on their 25-man roster for the entire season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squeezeplay Posted March 24, 2006 Share Posted March 24, 2006 I think it's safe to say that he won't end up with the Sox, even if Texas doesn't keep him. So we probably shouldn't wish that the guy does badly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSH2005 Posted March 24, 2006 Author Share Posted March 24, 2006 (edited) I think it's safe to say that he won't end up with the Sox, even if Texas doesn't keep him. So we probably shouldn't wish that the guy does badly. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Don't be so sure. Just remember, any team that wants Castro will have to keep him on their roster for most of the season. Just hope he gets shellacked, as mean as that may sound. I just saw this... http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dw...ate.f60b5b.html Roster decisions: Showalter said the staff planned to meet Thursday night to continue talks about the opening day roster. If Matthews is on the DL, the Rangers could decide to carry eight pitchers in the bullpen. That might allow them to keep Rule 5 draftee Fabio Castro and at least get a longer look at him before Matthews returns. They also could choose to keep seven bullpen guys and put DH Erubiel Durazo on the roster. "We're looking at different combinations and need to talk about it," Showalter said. Edited March 24, 2006 by SSH2005 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSH2005 Posted March 28, 2006 Author Share Posted March 28, 2006 Bad news on Fabio Castro... http://texas.rangers.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/ne...t=.jsp&c_id=tex SURPRISE, Ariz. -- The Rangers have released first baseman/designated hitter Erubiel Durazo and placed pitcher John Wasdin on waivers, a move that could open a spot on the Opening Day roster for Rule 5 draft pick Fabio Castro. Wasdin was a candidate to be the Rangers' long reliever but had a 10.64 ERA in 11 innings, allowing 23 hits and three walks. With Wasdin out of the picture, the Rangers are strongly leaning toward keeping Castro, a 21-year-old left-hander who has never pitched past Class A, but has impressed with his talent and potential. Castro would have to stay on the Major League roster all season or be offered back to the Chicago White Sox. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted March 28, 2006 Share Posted March 28, 2006 No big surprise there... it was pretty obvious Castro wasn't going to get back to us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSH2005 Posted March 28, 2006 Author Share Posted March 28, 2006 No big surprise there... it was pretty obvious Castro wasn't going to get back to us. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Well, if he gets shellacked during the season and the Rangers have some injuries... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squeezeplay Posted March 28, 2006 Share Posted March 28, 2006 QUOTE(SSH2005 @ Mar 28, 2006 -> 12:50 PM) Well, if he gets shellacked during the season and the Rangers have some injuries... Could you use the word "shellacked" a few more times??? Personally, I wish the guy nothing but the best whatever team he plays for. The Sox should have protected him, but they didn't, so deal with it. Now he has a great opportunity to prove himself. Good for Fabio, and good for the Rangers for giving him the chance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T R U Posted March 28, 2006 Share Posted March 28, 2006 QUOTE(squeezeplay @ Mar 28, 2006 -> 01:02 PM) Could you use the word "shellacked" a few more times??? Personally, I wish the guy nothing but the best whatever team he plays for. The Sox should have protected him, but they didn't, so deal with it. Now he has a great opportunity to prove himself. Good for Fabio, and good for the Rangers for giving him the chance. Thats what I was just going to ask.. If Castro is so great and has all this potential why wasnt he protected? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted March 28, 2006 Share Posted March 28, 2006 QUOTE(T R U @ Mar 28, 2006 -> 11:04 AM) Thats what I was just going to ask.. If Castro is so great and has all this potential why wasnt he protected? It was a mistake the White Sox made. A big mistake. The same reason guys like Bobby Jenks got released by the Angels or how Johan Santana got away from the Astros. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T R U Posted March 28, 2006 Share Posted March 28, 2006 QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Mar 28, 2006 -> 01:22 PM) It was a mistake the White Sox made. A big mistake. The same reason guys like Bobby Jenks got released by the Angels or how Johan Santana got away from the Astros. True, I can understand on Bobby Jenks but I doubt at the time anyone knew Santana was going to become what he has today.. How did they let this happen? Just werent payin attention or are what? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoodAsGould Posted March 28, 2006 Share Posted March 28, 2006 But what really doesnt make sense is we had multiple spots open on our 40 man roster.... I have no clue what the WhiteSox organization was thinking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randar68 Posted March 28, 2006 Share Posted March 28, 2006 QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Mar 28, 2006 -> 01:22 PM) It was a mistake the White Sox made. A big mistake. The same reason guys like Bobby Jenks got released by the Angels or how Johan Santana got away from the Astros. A mistake? Come on. The guy is a raw kid in A ball and you don't hand out 40-man roster spots to kids like that who aren't the top prospects. Jenks wasn't a mistake. The Angels knew exactly what they were doing. The Sox were the recipients of the luck of the dice in that move and the Angels just wanted to wash their hands of him. Santana I will give you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squeezeplay Posted March 28, 2006 Share Posted March 28, 2006 QUOTE(Randar68 @ Mar 28, 2006 -> 01:29 PM) A mistake? Come on. The guy is a raw kid in A ball and you don't hand out 40-man roster spots to kids like that who aren't the top prospects. Jenks wasn't a mistake. The Angels knew exactly what they were doing. The Sox were the recipients of the luck of the dice in that move and the Angels just wanted to wash their hands of him. Santana I will give you. You keep lefties with plus stuff when you can. luck of the draw or roll of the dice? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted March 28, 2006 Share Posted March 28, 2006 QUOTE(T R U @ Mar 28, 2006 -> 11:24 AM) True, I can understand on Bobby Jenks but I doubt at the time anyone knew Santana was going to become what he has today.. How did they let this happen? Just werent payin attention or are what? Usually you figure a guy in low A ball isn't going to make the majors or be able to stick so teams will oftne chance keeping that guy off the 40 man while keeping another player that would be eligible (whose at a higher level and more likely to stick for a full season) on the 40 man. Heck just look at Majewski. The Sox lost him once and got him back and than eventually dealt him to the Nats where he panned out. I was dissapointed we didn't protect Castro though. A lefty with his type of stuff (regardless of how young he was and the level he was out) should have been protected. However, at the time we had a much different looking farm system and team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted March 28, 2006 Share Posted March 28, 2006 QUOTE(Randar68 @ Mar 28, 2006 -> 11:29 AM) A mistake? Come on. The guy is a raw kid in A ball and you don't hand out 40-man roster spots to kids like that who aren't the top prospects. Jenks wasn't a mistake. The Angels knew exactly what they were doing. The Sox were the recipients of the luck of the dice in that move and the Angels just wanted to wash their hands of him. Santana I will give you. Any lefty with that type of stuff should be protected, especially considering the lack of depth this system has. I'd much rather have protected him than some of the other bums we ended up putting on the 40. However, I understand trying to sneak him through because you can keep him off your 40 and not start up his clock (I think it starts up when your on the 40, but I may be wrong). I will also admit our system was a lot different looking at the time we had to protect him, but considering some of the guys that we had on the 40, Castro would have been a far wiser choice. Often times these picks don't work out, but no one is going to tell me the org wouldn't want Castro at this point. He's probably a better option than Thornton (well at least the Thornton thats pitching right now). I just wish Thornton had an option left so he could work on the things Coop is teaching him at the minor league level. I don't like the idea of him making adjustments (serious adjustments) at the major league level. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squeezeplay Posted March 28, 2006 Share Posted March 28, 2006 QUOTE(Randar68 @ Mar 28, 2006 -> 01:38 PM) They tried to get another year out of him in the system without having to protect him and a s***ty team with an absolute s***ty farm system and no pitching took a chance on him. Hopefully you're referring to the Kansas City Royals, the team that drafted him, and not the Rangers, the team that traded for him. But either way, both teams have better farm systems than the Sox. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSH2005 Posted March 28, 2006 Author Share Posted March 28, 2006 Were Timo Perez and Willie Harris still on the 40-man roster before the Rule 5 Draft? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoodAsGould Posted March 28, 2006 Share Posted March 28, 2006 The point is we have multiple openings on our 40 man roster and didnt protect him... and everyone knew he would be the 1st pick in the rule 5 draft too. We also knew we had no 2nd lefty at that point so maybe he would of had a shot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flash Tizzle Posted March 28, 2006 Share Posted March 28, 2006 (edited) QUOTE(Randar68 @ Mar 28, 2006 -> 01:59 PM) Better pitching anywhere near MLB-ready? Ummmm... "ok"... I have no idea who the Royals top pitching prospects are, but if they don't have any available which are close to MLB ready that's absolutely pathetic. Especially considering they've been a fixture within the top five in the draft for who knows how long. I often criticize our development of pitchers, but atleast we have an excuse. It's difficult to find your studs drafting 12-18 every year for over a decade. Royals ineptness doesn't really compensate for our lack of pitching depth, though. Even Gonzalez and Haigwood, both regarded as top pitching prospects within our organization, wouldn't have been expected to earn a spot on our clib until 08' at the earliest. Edited March 28, 2006 by Flash Tizzle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteSoxfan1986 Posted March 28, 2006 Share Posted March 28, 2006 QUOTE(Flash Tizzle @ Mar 28, 2006 -> 03:21 PM) I have no idea who the Royals top pitching prospects are, but if they don't have any available which are close to MLB ready that's absolutely pathetic. Especially considering they've been a fixture within the top five in the draft for who knows how long. I often criticize our development of pitchers, but atleast we have an excuse. It's difficult to find your studs drafting 12-18 every year for over a decade. Royals ineptness doesn't really compensate for our lack of pitching depth, though. Even Gonzalez and Haigwood, both regarded as top pitching prospects within our organization, wouldn't have been expected to earn a spot on our clib until 08' at the earliest. The Royals system sucks. They gave a few good infielders with Gordon, Butler, and Huber, but that's pretty much it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Honda Civic Posted March 28, 2006 Share Posted March 28, 2006 QUOTE(SSH2005 @ Mar 28, 2006 -> 01:52 PM) Were Timo Perez and Willie Harris still on the 40-man roster before the Rule 5 Draft? I don't remember who was on the roster, but the Sox had room for Castro. They went into the draft at 37 or 38. 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.