Loading ...From the Enquirer:
Mackanin thinks a September call-up can do a lot of good – even for a player like Jay Bruce who is not likely to get a lot of playing time.
But Mackanin also made it sound as if Bruce might not be in the Reds’ September plans.
“I think there’s always a benefit for anybody to get that experience,” he said. “However, there’s reasons why he may not be called up. There’s a lot more that goes into it than that. I think it’s a great experience for anybody to be up here – see the type of game that’s played, get used to the bright lights. But, perhaps in the case of Jay Bruce, it may not happen.”
Bruce, the 20-year-old who was the Reds’ first pick in the 2005 draft, is not on the 40-man roster, so the Reds would have to make a move to get him there. Bringing him up would start the arbitration clock.
I’ve been told that Jay was hoping for a September callup. As much as I’d like to see him get some ML ABs, I don’t think this is a real huge deal.
As I mentioned in the comments the other day, who do you bench to play Bruce? Dunn, Griffey or Hamilton? Is it worth starting his arbitration clock if he’s not going to play much?
If he makes the club out of ST next year, it should be as a starter, which means either:
A) Griffey or Dunn is no longer with the club (or one has been moved to 1B and Votto has been traded).
B) Someone (probably Griffey or Hamilton) is hurt.
I’m saying this assuming that he won’t have to be added to the 40 man roster next season. If he has to be added for the 2008 season, you’re not saving much by not bringing him up this September (and there are plenty of guys that could be cut off the 40 man roster) and it’d be a nice “thanks for a great season” reward for Bruce.
I agree – not a huge deal for Bruce, it can hardly be expected after already playing in three levels in 5 months.
I was under the impression that a September callup did not “start the clock” on service time for arbitration, because the player is not on the 25-man roster. Anyone know for sure?
Before i get jumped because of this statement this applies to the younger players. The organization doesn’t want to start anyone’s clock. As evidenced by the recent non call ups of Votto, Bruce, et. al. The prefer the Jason Ellisons, Chad Moellers, Mike Stantons et. al of the the baseball world. I keep watching other organizations bringing up their stars of tomorrow in pennant races to get them some experience and see how the react the ML environment and we won’t bring up our stars of tomorrow in a losing season. We prefer the Ellisons, Cormiers, Moellers, Stantons, Mays, et. al because younger players make actually cost money some day.
I had the same impression as DA re: September call-ups not counting toward service time. The Bruce situation doesn’t bother me; Votto does.
DA – I thought that as well, but now I’m thinking just the move to the 40 man roster might start some kind of clock. Perhaps someone later today can shed some light on the rules.
I think, though, that Bruce not being on the September roster is an outrage, because the guy has definitely earned it.
I know this isn’t proof of anything, but when I saw Bruce in Richmond a few weeks ago, I told him that I couldn’t wait until he was wearing a Cincy uniform, and when he said “Me neither,” his eyes lit up with genuine excitement.
Like it was said, one month is not a big deal, and quite honestly, the Reds should not be sending the signal at this point that they do not want to invest in Bruce, that they are going to be cheap and won’t give him the money he deserves when the time comes. Call him up now and treat him right. This guy is a can’t miss, and the Reds would be missing a good chance to show Bruce how much he means to the organization, which could earn them some loyalty points when it comes time to sign him to a long term contract.
I don’t get this logic of ‘who do you sit’? Outside of Hamilton, none of our outfielders need or deserve meaningless at bats the last two weeks of a meaningless season. And frankly, I doubt you’d hear any griping from Griff or Dunn. They’ve made their stats for the year, it’s time to put the organization first. Plus it’s critical that Bailey and Votto get some PT this season.
Name one team that benches All-Star caliber players in September, even if they’re out of it, to give ABs to a kid called up in September.
I sure can’t think of one.
Probably because teams are either fighting for the playoffs or the manager is fighting for his job.
I am with Bill on this one. I completely agree that Jay Bruce deserves and has earned a shot to play for the Reds in September, but I don’t think that shot should come at the expense of Hamilton, Griffey or Dunn, all of whom have an OPS over .900 currently. Jay Bruce is the absolute future, but I don’t see him making his debut until next season unless someone gets injured this season in that outfield.
Per Fay, September call-ups do start the arb clock.
It doesn’t start the arb clock. The only risk is that it puts him on the 40-man roster next year, and if he didn’t start the season in the majors, the team would use an option to send him to the minors. Then, the risk of using options is that a player has options for 3 years? Then he would be out of options in 2011? If he’s the stud everyone expects him to be – complete non-issue.
Bring him up in Sept, rest each of Griffey, Hamilton, Dunn once per week. Bruce available to PH other 3 games. Doug even suggested giving Dunn a game or two a week at first.
Need a 40-man roster spot? Goodbye Ellison. Any time Mac would have considered starting Ellsion – start Bruce instead. I don’t care if he bats left or right. Let him have some Sept fun in the majors.
Greg that was my point, if Ellison and Hopper and Keppinger can earn starts in the outfield there is absolutely no reason for Bruce to not have them come Sept 1. The option situation shouldn’t be a great deal of concern as mentioned earlier if he is as good as projected and he’s shown he probably is than he like every other star in the majors will still have options left 10 years from now