SSTN Mailbag: College to MLB, 40-Man, And Skubal or Skenes!

The World Series starts today. I didn't think I'd have any interest, but I admit that I will be watching Game 1 tonight. It hurts a bit to know that the Yankees aren't there, but I'm looking forward to a good series. I don't like either team playing for a variety of reasons, but I decided pretty quickly that I'm rooting for the Blue Jays. Why? Quite simply, as a guy born in the late-80s, I can't help but root for Donnie Baseball to get his ring. For me, that single pursuit trumps any other storyline heading into the World Series.

However, another sports storyline has far more of my attention at the moment: the sports betting and gambling scandal that's ripping pro basketball apart. I won't get into the particulars, but the details are both damning and entirely predictable. If you've read this blog for even a few months, you'll know that multiple writers here (Paul, Ed, myself, and others) have written again and again about the deal that professional sports leagues (and the Supreme Court) have made with the devil that is gambling. When the scandal involving Shohei Ohtani's handler/translator shocked baseball (though not nearly to the extent it could have), we all said that this won't be the last or the worst instance. Unfortunately, we weren't wrong, and what's even scarier is that I still don't think we've hit the worst of it.

But it's okay; professional sports organizations are raking in dollars from both legal and illegal forms of sports betting and gambling, so nothing will change...yet. It is becoming very difficult to remain a sports fan in this country when one considers the ethical quagmire within which all professional sports leagues operate.

As always, thanks for the great questions and keep them coming to SSTNReadermail@gmail.com. In this week's SSTN Mailbag, we'll talk about managerial candidates jumping from major college programs to the pros, the 40-man roster, and choose between a trade for Skubal or Skenes! Let's get at it:

Robert M. asks: See https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/46641299/tennessee-vitello-favorite-land-giants-job Whether or not Tony Vitello gets the Giants' job, what do you think about MLB hiring out of the college coaching ranks?

I am fascinated by this hiring (since Robert asked this question, the Giants and Tony Vitello did, in fact, come to agreement on a contract for Vitello to manage the Giants), and frankly I'm surprised that it has taken this long to happen. In part, I'm sure some teams are trying to copy what the Brewers have done under Pat Murphy, who was a long time college coach before managing the Brewers, but he had more than a decade of experience in a variety of pro roles before managing in a big league dugout, so it is far from an apples-to-apples comparison. In fact, in the limited research I've performed, I can't find any real historical comparisons for a managerial signing like this in baseball. I can find it for specific coaching tasks on the pitching and hitting side, but not for a manager.

I really have no idea what to expect in terms of how the job of a college head coach will translate to leading an MLB dugout. A college head coach's primary duties are so different from that of a Major League manager. A college head coach must prioritize the following above all else:

• Recruiting

• Player Development

• Mentoring

• Motivate a room of people who are loyal to themselves before the team

• Win At All Costs

Some, but not all, of these objectives really gel with what is expected of a big league manager. One interesting aspect of being a major college head coach is the cult of personality that brings people to their program and motivates those players to play hard. Major League Baseball has largely watched managers with a similar cult of personality fade away into the past, so to see a team try to bring it back is fascinating.

I will make a few cautionary observations, though. College head coaches are asked to motivate players over a very, very short season. Riling up a group of guys to run through a brick wall works for 3-4 months, but what about when you need to do it for 8 months (assuming the team makes the playoffs)? I wonder if that attitude would grate at veterans over the long haul, particularly during the dog days of summer. I also would highlight the idea that college teams are supposed to win at all costs without regard for the long-term health of their players. Need your pitcher to go on short rest 4 times during the College World Series? No problem - you'll have a new crop next year. That attitude is pervasive in major college baseball, and that doesn't work at MLB, where you are trying to build teams that have consistency for 5+ years (if you're doing it right). Lastly, I think one of the things that college head coaches are best at is player recruitment. That ability isn't used hardly at all in the pros.

However, there are multiple reasons why this could work. College head coaches are capable of getting a group of guys whose backgrounds are vastly different and whose goals are often separate from that of the team. That skillset might just work at the big league level with some tweaking, and it's a critical skill as the most important aspect of a big league manager's job happens behind the scenes. For a team with a young roster, a college manager who is used to helping players develop might be a huge aid in the dugout and behind the scenes. Lastly, as they have experience managing the game, in-game strategy should be a strength of college head coaches, so that's a positive as well.

I don't know that I'd want to try this experiment myself with a mature team like the Yankees, but for a team looking to take the next step like the Giants, I think this is a very, very interesting move.

Alan B. asks: A two partner here. Who would you DFA or non tender from the current 40 man roster, and besides Spencer Jones, Carlos Lagrange, Chase Hampton, & Elmer Rodriguez-Cruz, who else would you add to the 40 man roster from the system?

I would not necessarily immediately DFA or non-tender anyone from the current 40-man in October/November - we all know there is plenty of expendable pieces on the back half of the current 40-man that can be DFA'd in the event of a signing. The Yankees also have 7+ pieces leaving the 40-man due to expiring contracts anyway, so there's no need to make preemptive moves on that front.

As for the 40-man additions, I agree with your list above save for Lagrange, who doesn't need to be added this offseason; if he forces his way into the rotation or bullpen conversation in 2026, again, there is plenty of room to DFA someone like Cousins, Slater, Shewmake, Vivas, Winans, etc. down the road.

The only players I see with an argument for Rule 5 protection are the following:

• Jace Avina, OF

• Brendan Beck, SP

• Bailey Dees, RP

• Brock Selvidge, SP

• Henry Lalane, SP

Avina has one tool that a team could take a chance on: raw power. Avina has plus raw power, he just doesn't access it enough due to swing decisions and plate discipline (though all are improving). Avina only just got to AA, and I don't think he'd stick, so I wouldn't protect him.

Brendan Beck was both healthy and started to turn a performance corner at AAA. Right now, he would serve as critical depth at the big league level, even if he returned to AAA to begin the year. I think Beck needs to be added to the 40-man.

Dees finally converted to the bullpen, and looked better back there. His fastball, with below-average velocity but some life due to its spin profile, paired with a change-up with good horizontal movement, might be useful in a big league bullpen. Again, I'm on the fence about him, but I could see the argument for adding him to the 40-man, even if he doesn't keep that spot.

Selvidge and Lalane would be real stretches to stick if they were picked in the Rule 5 draft. Both have stuff that would tick up out of the bullpen, and I'm skeptical about either sticking in the rotation. It wouldn't shock me if a rebuilding team like the Pirates were to pick one of those two and stash them in the back of the bullpen for a year before finishing off their development. Of the two, I think the Yankees would choose to protect Lalane.

Brian S. asks: Okay, you're the GM, and you can only pick one move: who do you trade for between Skubal or Skenes and what are you willing to trade away to make it happen?

This is an easy one for me. As good as Skubal is, Skenes has years of team control and is the better pitcher. I'd go for Skenes in a heartbeat, and it's not close.

Almost nothing is off-limits if Skenes is on offer. Dominguez, Lombard, Jones, Will Warren, Carlos Lagrange, etc. are all on the table. The Pirates just need talent, period, so I'd offer the best the Yankees have to offer, including big league pieces. I think other teams can beat what the Yankees can offer, but I'd start here:

Dominguez, Lombard, Warren, Lagrange, and Lalane for Skenes. I think I'm light, and they'd want more, and I'm not sure the Pirates would be wrong. I'd be tempted to go for it.