What Are "Trade Assignment Waivers"?

 

The deadline for "non-waiver" (unrestricted) trades is 4 PM (Eastern) on July 31st. No trades can be made between 4 PM and 5 PM (Eastern) on July 31st, and then beginning at 5 PM (Eastern) on July 31st and extending through to the conclusion of the MLB regular season, Trade Assignment Waivers must be secured before players on MLB 40-man rosters can be traded. (Waivers are never required to trade a player on a minor league reserve list).


If a player is placed on Trade Assignment Waivers and is not claimed, waivers are said to be "secured" and the player can be traded to any MLB club at any time, just like prior to the non-waiver trade deadline.

Trade Assignment Waivers are revocable the first time they are requested on a given player in a waiver period, so if a player is claimed, the player's club has the option to either withdraw the waiver request and retain the player, or allow the waiver claim to stand. The player's club has 48 hours to make this decision, and during this "window" the club has the right to trade the player to the claiming club (but ONLY to the claiming club). If the player is not traded to the claiming club before the window closes, and the player's club chooses not to withdraw the waiver request, the player is automatically assigned to the claiming club for the $20,000 waiver price ($25,000 for Draft-Excluded and Rule 5 players) and the claiming club assumes 100% of the player's contract. (A player with a "no trade" right can refuse both a waiver claim and a trade assignment, however).

If a player is claimed but not traded and the waiver request is subsequently withdrawn, the player cannot be placed on Trade Assignment Waivers again for at least 30 days from the date the waiver request is withdrawn, and if the player is placed on Trade Assignment Waivers again before the end of the season, the waivers become irrevocable and cannot be withdrawn. A player who has a "no trade" right (full or partial) cannot be placed on Trade Assignment Waivers a second time before the end of the season unless the player first waives his "no trade" right.

Trade Assignment Waivers secured on a player on Optional Assignment to the minors or on an MLB Disabled List expire after 72 hours.

If a player on an MLB Disabled List is placed on Trade Assignment Waivers, he must be eligible to be reinstated from the DL and healthy enough to play. If waivers are secured, the player must be reinstated from the DL within 72 hours. If the player is claimed and the waiver request is subsequently withdrawn, the player must be reinstated from the DL immedialtely.

There are two types of waivers (release waivers and assignment waivers), and while there is only one type of release waiver (Outright Release), there are three different types of assignment waivers (Trade Assignment, Optional Assignment, and Outright Assignment). Each type of waivers has a special set of rules that apply.

The MLB waiver list is transmitted at 2 PM (Eastern) every business day. Every day is an MLB business day during Spring Training and the MLB Regular Season, but Saturday, Sunday, and national holidays (Veterans Day, Thanksgiving Day, Christmas Day, New Year's Day, and Dr. Martin Luther King's Birthday) are not considered MLB business days during the off-season, so the MLB waiver list is transmitted at 2 PM (Eastern) Monday through Friday only (not including national holidays that fall on a weekday) during the off-season.

If a club requests a waiver prior to the 2 PM (Eastern) deadline, the waiver request is transmitted that day. If the waiver is requested after 2 PM (Eastern), the waiver request will not be transmitted until the next business day. Any of the other 29 MLB clubs can make a claim while the player is on waivers, and then at 1 PM (Eastern) on the second business day after the waivers are requested the MLB office determines if any claims were made, and if so, which club is awarded the claim.The procedure for awarding waiver claims is different depending on the type of waivers and the time of the year.

PROCEDURE FOR AWARDING OF WAIVER CLAIMS (TYPE OF WAIVERS):


1. For Optional Assignment Waivers, Outright Assignment Waivers, and Outright Release Waivers (but NOT for Trade Assignment Waivers): If a player is claimed by only one club, that club is awarded the claim. If more than one club makes a claim, the club with the lowest winning percentage (regardless of league) on the day the player clears waivers is awarded the claim. If two clubs with the same winning percentage make a claim, the club in the player's own league is awarded the claim. If two clubs from the same league make a claim and they are tied in the standings, the club with the lowest winning percentage from the previous season is awarded the claim. If the clubs are still tied, standings from two years back (or three years back, four years back, etc) are used to break the tie.

2. For Trade Assignment Waivers (only): If a player is claimed by more than one club, the club in the player's own league with the lowest winning percentage is awarded the claim, even if that club has a higher winning percentage than the club or clubs making a claim from the other league. So a player placed on Trade Assignment Waivers must first be "waived out of his own league" before he can be assigned to a club in the other league.

PROCEDURE FOR AWARDING OF WAIVER CLAIMS (TIME OF THE YEAR)

1. During the off-season and up through the first 30 days of he MLB regular season, the previous season's MLB standings are used to determine waiver claim priority. 

2. Beginning on the 31st day of the MLB regular season through the conclusion of the MLB regular season, the MLB standings as of the date the player clears waivers are used to determine waiver claim priority, with the previous season's MLB standings only used to break ties.

RESTRICTIONS ON WAIVER REQUESTS
:

1. A club can place no more than seven players on waivers per day, and a club can make a maximum of 50 waiver claims per week.

2. A player on a Disabled List cannot be placed on assignment waivers during Spring Training, and a player on a Disabled List cannot be placed on assignment waivers during the MLB regular season until he is both eligible to be reinstated from the DL and healthy enough to play.

3. Neither assignment waivers nor release waivers can be requested on a player while he is on the Bereavement List, Military List, Suspended List, Disqualified List, or Ineligible List.

4. Outright Release Waivers (but NOT assignment waivers) may be requested on a player while he is on the Voluntary Retired List.

5. A player cannot be traded while he is on waivers.

6. A player can be on only one type of waivers at any one time.  

RESTRICTION ON MAKING WAIVER CLAIMS:

A club is not permitted to make a waiver claim and then trade the player to another club if the purpose of the claim was to prevent a third club from being awarded the waiver claim. (A waiver claim that is judged by the MLB Commissioner to have been made for this purpose will be revoked).

 

Return to Homepage

Comments

Phil, do you know anything about Paul Blackburn? MWL transactions say he was sent to Extended Spring Training and since there is no EXTS going on in AZ, any insight? He was 8-4, 3.19 ERA but maybe 96 IP was his limit for 2014???

GEORGE A: The Cubs are supposedly planning to shut-down several of their starting pitchers at Kane County for a period of time over the next few weeks to limit their innings and keep them available for the MWL playoffs. 

Since Blackburn is not injured, he was technically assigned to "Extended Spring Training" (which is the AZL Cubs Inactive List) until he is ready to return to the Kane County starting rotation. The Cubs also did this with several of their 2014 draft picks (Stinnett, Sands, and Steele) who were not injured but also were not yet ready for game action, although Sands and Steele were subsequently activated.  

Only players with less than three years of Minor League service time can be assigned to "Extended Spring Training" (the AZL Cubs Inactive List) after the start of the AZL season in June. Players who have accrued three or more years of Minor League service time can be assigned to Boise (if there is a slot open on the Boise roster(, although the player doesn't actually physically report to Boise. This was done recently with Steve Perakslis and Yao-Lin Wang when their roster slots were needed at Daytona, and with Yoanner Negrin when his roster slot was needed at Iowa.   

Knew there had to be a reason.....thanks, Phil!

There are 33 rookie position players accruing stats this year in the majors.

All but FOUR are averaging over 3 AB per game and the more elite prospects are averaging 3.5-3.8 AB per game. As you can probably imagine Olt is one of the four, and he averaged about 2.5 AB per game prior to being sent to AAA. What does this indicate? Well it indicates that he was spending an abnormal amount of time sitting out and getting a pinch hit appearance for a rookie. And he was pulled from games early, despite being a great defender. This is all even more absurd considering he plays on a last place rebuilding team without a true third baseman.

(The others are Campbell, Medica and Choice). The remaining 88% of rookies ALL average over 3 AB per game and Olt wasn't even close.

This is just further evidence of how rare it is for a rookie to be platooned and sat as often as Olt had been. Needless to say his 12 HR and 30 RBI rank far above most rookies (he's still 1st in HR in NL and third in MLB behind Abreu and Springer.) and remember Olt was platooned from opening day despite no evidence that he was a LEFTY KILLER etc.

Olt another double and RBI so far tonight. Batting .350 and protecting Soler (who is a man on a mission).

I'm glad he didn't go down there and hit .150 with 5 homers. He's likely to get called up one more time - but Capt Happy won't play him with Valbuena around unless he is under strict orders to do so. So if he comes up and rides the pine again, to me that's on TheoCorp.

Agreed. I am REALLY sick of Valbuena (and Sureouts). I am excited about Caghlan, thrilled by Rizzo, slightly concerned about Castro but in general love seeing him every day, Ruggiano should have been dealt - maybe there were no takers. Lake should go. Loving the young pitchers.

I just feel like as fans being forced to watch Sureoutz until the trade deadline was painful but made sense. Now it's pitiful and he also looks defeated - which makes it doubly hard to watch.

Valbuena just represents idiocy in the chain of command and seeing him trot out there every day just pisses me off. Again I LIKE Valbuena, but at this point I don't like him on the Cubs where captain asswhipe treats him like he's some kind of essential god. Disappointed Theo didn't force Ricky's hand by dumping him at deadline.

Well, Valbuena could be very valuable as a supersub but yeah, Capt Happy doesn't treat him like a supersub, he treats him like he's Adrian Beltre.

I don't know why everyone craps on Valbuena so much. He has a .771 OPS. There are 19 qualified third basemen in MLB and that puts hims 9th in baseball (about 20 points ahead of Casey McGehee):

http://espn.go.com/mlb/stats/batting/_/position/3b...

He'd be starting for about a dozen teams.

Castro's OWAR is 1.9. Valbuena is 1.7.

He's making just 1.7 million and is under club control for 2 more years.

He's the least of the Cubs worries.

It's not about Valbuena. There have been enough posts about this topic that I don't think it should be necessary to say, "read the posts".

Valbuena is having a career year. His previous high OPS was .714. His current RISP is .216. Compare that with Aramis Ramirez.

He's a great utility guy. He shouldn't be blocking Olt. The window on Olt to see what he can do is tiny. Playing a guy like Valbuena over Olt is pointless for a team going nowhere unless you actually somehow think Valbuena is the third baseman of the future. Do you?

Exactly. I like Valbuena.

I don't like Valbuena + Ricky + Cubs 2014 + 3B - Olt + Bryant + Baez + Castro + Alcantara

There have been enough posts about Olt's playing time and the manager too, it's old, we get the point.

But not so old that you didn't feel a need to defend America's favorite journeyman.

Well, in that case, I feel vindicated: all of America is on my side.

The trade deadline just passed which is why I'm pissed again. To state it succinctly.

This guy, Baseball America's 2012 #22 prospect in all of baseball, the 49th overall pick in the 2010 draft, currently leading the NL in HR for a rookie (batting .341 in AAA) and a competent 3B defensively, cannot get a look at 3B for a month or two over Luis Valbuena, with Bryant, Baez, Alcantara all arriving next year to join Castro in the infield:

http://www.fangraphs.com/fantasy/caution-on-mike-o...

In what universe is this possible for one of the 3 or so worst teams in baseball?

he should have been sent down months ago...not even weeks ago...months.

everyone knows he can play MLB 3rd, but if the cubs seem dead set to use him as a part time player then send him to AAA and let him play 3rd/1st/LF/RF...find him places to play rather than coming off the bench or being replaced in the 5th/6th inning for a pinch hitter that can't hit his weight, but has a opposing side look at the pitcher.

he's a high-K, low average, low ob% guy at best...that's a given. he can field his position and has a lot of power, though...and he's a kid under a lot of club control. given how much time he had to take off in recent seasons past to deal with injuries/weirdness he could use some regular playing time.

I hadn't considered that they want him to be a sub, but you make a very good point assuming they do. Let's say he's a corner infield super sub PH - well yes they should start training him for that rhythm in AAA.

I personally think this should be the lineup they try by end of 2015 - not this batting order of course:

P
C - Castillo
1B - Rizzo
2B - Castro
3B - Olt
SS - Baez
LF - Bryant
CF - Alcantara
RF - Soler

If Bryant is a keeper at 3B then Olt should he dealt. Russell could complicate this equation very quickly.

Two thoughts:

1.) Cubs might still be trying to pass Valbuena and Ruggiano through waivers as we speak and exploring those avenues.

2.) Theo et al are very shrewd, they might KNOW they are not bringing Baez and Bryant up until mid 2015 for service time contract purposes. They may be still trying to build Valbuena, Sureouts, value for offseason trade possibilities, knowing they can try out Olt for first half of 2015 before bringing up Baez and Bryant. Again I think if the BRASS didn't like Olt they would have tried to capitalize on his power this year, played him more and traded him.

Arizona Phil, does this second scenario make any sense with regard to Baez/Bryant mid 2015 for future contract reasons?

valbuena and ruggs wouldn't last 10 minutes on waivers because of their value and club control.

they could probably trade valbuena for something interesting if they wanted to part with him. he's good 3rd and good enough 2nd...guy could easily hit 30+ doubles, 15-20 HR and play decent D to boot.

heck, there's a few teams out there trying to make the playoffs who could insert him at 3rd and it's an immediate upgrade.

Valbuena, Coghlan, and Ruggiano are all under club control through the 2016 season (each are arbitration-eligible post-2014 and post-2015), and none of the three will probably ever make a lot of money, so I doubt that whatever A-ball "lottery player" the Cubs would get back in a trade for Valbuena, Coghlan, or Ruggiano would exceed the value they have to the Cubs as useful, veteran, and relatively cheap role players over the next 2+ years. And if they cease to have value at some point, they can easily be released or non-tendered, and if the Cubs are out of contention at the trade deadline in 2016, they can be traded then. No need to trade them now.

CARLITO: The only scenario where Mike Olt would project as an everyday player with the Cubs post-2015 is if the Cubs trade Starlin Castro or Javy Baez, and move Kris Bryant to a corner OF spot. That would leave 3B open for Olt (or Christian Villanueva). Or if the N. L. adopts the DH in 2017. Otherwise Olt is either a future 3B-1B-PH guy for the Cubs, or a trading chip. 

Addison Russell already with a HR in his first at bat tonight.

Soler with 3 run HR, Vitters (who he?) a 2 run HR; 5-0 I-Cubs in the 4th

Caratini hasn't done shit for us yet. Schwarber woulda hit for the cycle by now.

/slacker
/lazy ass

Ibb first inning?

"we need to speed up the game."

"hey, let's have manager challenges and remote site play review!"

"brilliant!"

there's been 2 more challenges/reviews since i last wrote that.

this game has had like 15+ minutes of this...in the bottom of the 6th.

Small sample size for me, but the value I have seen in challenges is that the umpires overall are pretty damn good at what they do. Maybe next year they should reserve challenges for the playoffs - maybe even just scoring plays. Part of the charm of baseball is getting mad at umps, who do pretty well. Their blown calls get a lot of press because they are so few. The biggest problem with umping is balls and strikes, but even that adds to the game. Rizzo is a good example. He is finally starting to get the benefit of the doubt from umps, whereas at the beginning of the year the opposite was happening. This human element makes things more interesting to me, even if I do get a bit aggravated when my guy doesn't get the call I think he should have.

i kind of agree. It's a little weird knowing that the play isn't over at times. Takes a bit of drama out of it . . . reviewing everything is weird. Last night was just ridiculous and both teams were clumsy. Except for Hendricks who throws lollipops and is somehow in total control. I've never seen anything like it. The kid is weird.

Let's see how he does the second time around the league. John Baker threw lollipops, too, and kept hitters off balance that way, but I don't think he fits in the rotation too well. Some of Hendricks' pitches fell off the table and he seems to hit the zone all the time. If he stays in the strike zone he may be an effective pitcher. If he gets even a mild form of Steve Blass disease on us though, he's toast.

"Maybe next year they should reserve challenges for the playoffs"

100% agree.

there's delays when a manager comes out to argue rather than the whole slow replay process, but it generally keeps the audience (both home and at the park) engaged into what's happening (and what may potentially happen) when they're out there.

beyond the actual time of the replay there's so much other delay going into it...the slow walk out by the manager while a coach gets on the phone to ask his people whether he should signal to the manager to ask for a replay...the crew coming out to headset the umps...the wait for the actual result...and then getting set up to play again.

it's rather easy to have a "1-2 minute challenge" actually be a 3-4 minute thing once all the motions have been run. there's a bit of "hidden" time wasted aside from the actual length of the challenges.

I like challenges, but I really hope they do away with the manager slow-walk next year. Instant motherfucking challenge, bitches.

Really, I'd prefer for the remote umps to control all challenges and do away with the manager gameshow shit.

"Instant motherfucking challenge, bitches."

I think they should call it that, too. Manager presses a button, and the TV screen lights up with that. It'll drive up the ratings more than 20 new Mike Trouts ever will.

the challenge on the field is overturned...

...MULTI-BALL! MULTI-BALL! MULTI-BALL!

I approve of all this.

Bryant adds a homer (along with Soler and Russell).

Hendricks with more smoke and mirrors so far tonight. I don't know how he does it ...

It's ridiculous how surprising/disappointing it is when the [core four, fab five, whatever the fuck it is these days] aren't hitting homeruns.

the dodgers are playing some really crappy baseball tonight...some really embarrassing D.

I haven't seen a team (Dodgers tonight) look this bad in years - and that's saying a lot.

They looked like the Chicago Cubs circa 2009-2014.

baseball prospectus...

Hitter of the Night: Javier Baez, 2B, Cubs (Iowa, AAA): 3-5, R, HR, K.
Baez (has) his flaws, as does just about every hitter not named Mike Trout, but he’s officially out of whatever slump was slowing him down in April. We’re going to have to put up with some low OBPs, but we do it for Adam Jones, and no one seems to mind. No one seems too mad at Yoenis Cespedes, either. And neither of them is playing second base, where power is scarce.

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?arti...

more BP, transaction analysis from Atlanta-Cubs dealings. Carrot-top, Boni/Russell and commentary on Olt, Fuji and Baez

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?arti...

Would you be willing to summarize briefly for those of us not subscribed to BP?

Emilio Bonifacio

The move from the Cubs to the Braves adds some value for him as he’ll likely score runs at a higher rate than he did with Chicago. The offense has more pop throughout so he’ll have his chances. El Boni got off to a scorching start in April before settling into the type of production he’s provided throughout his entire career. He’s still adventurous on the base-paths which has resulted in a few TOOTBLAN this year. At the end of the day, he’s still Emilio Bonifacio.

James Russell

With the Cubs there was at least the faintest hope that Russell could eventually close out games post deadline. That’s all gone with a move to Atlanta, where he will be the LOOGY and sit behind Craig Kimbrel. Good luck getting that job.

Acquired C/3B-S Victor Catarini from the Braves in exchange for LHP James Russell and UTL-S Emilio Bonifacio. [7/31]

A 2013 second-round pick out of Miami-Dade College, Caratini is intriguing prospect due to an offensive profile that presents limited risk as he climbs the minor-league ladder. The 20-year-old has a smooth stroke from both sides of the plate with a gap-to-gap approach. He utilizes a short swing, particularly from the left side, and can barrel up balls in all quadrants of the zone, projecting to be an above-average hitter who could post batting averages in the .275 range. Though he'll accumulate his fair share of line-drive doubles to the gaps, his over-the-fence power will be limited by a linear stroke that produces abundant topspin. He's a well-below-average runner and doesn't project to be an asset on the bases. Caratini has spent time behind the plate and at the hot corner this season but has settled in as a full-time catcher of late. His receiving and blocking skills have improved over the course of the season, and while he'll never be an above-average defender, this area of his game does not project to be a major liability to a team. His arm is fringy at best due to a slow release, however, and this is an issue that will likely be exploited as he moves through the upper levels. Overall, the solid offensive profile will drive Caratini through the minors, but his average-at-best work behind the dish and weak arm will limit his potential impact at the highest level. The best-case scenario is that he becomes a versatile bat off the bench who can hit for decent averages from both sides of the plate and fill in at catcher and on the infield corners when necessary.

"Best-case" is that he'll be a bench player? The fuck?

mlbtr commentary on the Cub transactions (excerpt)...

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2014/08/july-trade-r...

For where the Cubs are in their rebuilding process, it’s hard to see their July moves as anything less than a big win for the Cubs front office, turning four short-term veterans in Hammel, Bonifacio (both under contract only through 2014), Samardzija and Russell (through 2015) into four promising young players who combine for over two decades’ worth of controllable years. Some more moves could be coming in August, as outfielders Justin Ruggiano, Nate Schierholtz and Ryan Sweeney would all likely not have much trouble passing through waivers.

Arrietta and Hendricks,
then pray for rain.

Phil, there are a lot of things floating around sports radio as to when the clock would start running on either Baez or Bryant. On one talk show yesterday they said if they are brought up 9-1 and kept till the end of the year that would not count as time in the majors. I think I read one of your comments that stated the clock starts when you go on the 25 man active roster.

This may all be a non issue because I have to believe the Cubs would be wiser to keep them off the 40 man roster till after the rule 5 draft, to protect two more players. I know you had a article on this possibly you could refer me to that article or just state what you believe would be the date next year when they arrive to eliminate super two possibilities.

ROGERS: Time spent on an MLB Active List in September does apply toward MLB Service Time, just like time spent on an MLB Active List any other time of the season. Other than the Active List roster limit being expanded from 25 to 40 players on 9/1, September is no different than any other month during the MLB regular season. 

The MLB "Championship Season" (AKA "regular season") is 183 days in length, but 172 days on an MLB 40-man roster constitutes a "full season" as far as MLB Service Time is concerned. That's why the Cubs would want to wait at least 12 days to call up Kris Bryant and/or Javy Baez in 2015 (183 - 12 = 171) so that they can't accrue a full season next year, and so the Cubs can retain club control through the 2021 season even if Bryant and/or Baez become an MLB Article XX-B FA at first opportunity. I believe the MLB regular season begins on Sunday April 5th next season, so waiting to call up Bryant and/or Baez until at least April 17th would give the Cubs an extra year of control over both players (through 2021 instead of through 2020).  

Waiting to call up Bryant and Baez until next season would also mean a minor league option would not be spent if the player does not open the 2015 season on the MLB 25-man roster, and it would also mean that  two slots on the Cubs MLB 40-man roster will be available for other players who actually do need tio be added to 40-man roster after the conclusion of the 2014 season, either because they are eligible to be a minor league 6YFA, or because they are eligible for selection in the December 2014 Rule 5 Draft (Bryant and Baez are not eligible). 

However, if a player is already on the 40-man roster (like Arismendy Alcantara or Jorge Soler, for example), the player accrues a full season only if he spends fewer than 20 days on Optional Assignment to the minors in a given season. (Alcantara spent 101 days on Optional Assignment in 2014 prior to being recalled and Soler has been on Optional Assignment all year, so neither can accrue a "full sesaon" in 2014).

Since the Cubs called-up Alcantara on Juily 9th (and he is likely to remain with the big club through to the end of the season), he will accrue 82 days of MLB Service Time in 2014. The new "Super Two" cut-off for arbitration is right around 2+120 MLB Service Time (two years plus 120 days), so calling him up this season and having him remain on the MLB Active List won't impact future "Super Two" status for Alcantara. Even if he doesn't spend another day in the minor leagues the rest of his career, Alcantara will not be eligible for salary arbitration until post-2017, and the Cubs would retain club control over him (even if he becomes an Article XX-B FA at first opportunity) through the 2020 season. 

If the Cubs want to gain an extra year of club control over Alcantara, they could option him to Iowa out of Spring Training next season (ostensibly to "learn" to play CF) and then wait at least 89 days to recall him (which would be around July 4th in 2015). 

There are no real payroll, service time (arbitration or free-agency), or 40-man roster slot issues involved with bringing Jorge Soler up to Chicago this season, since he's already on the 40-man roster and is signed to a nine-year major league contract (runs through 2020, with "club control" extending through the 2021 season).  

Soler does have a player option to "opt out" of his contract if and when he is eligible for salary arbitration (likely post-2018, and that's whether or not he gets called up in September), but that only would mean he can file for salary arbitration once he opts out, not that he would become a free-agent. So even if Soler opts out post-2018, the Cubs would still retain "club control" through the 2021 season.  

No matter what happens one way or the other, Soler will be out of minor league options in 2016 (he gets a 4th minor league option next season), and so any time he can spend on the field getting reps would be a positive thing, including a call-up to Chicago once the AAA PCL season ends, and a stint in the AFL in October-November and/or winter ball in Mexico, Venezuela, Puerto Rico, or the Dominican Republic after that.

So unless he pulls another hamstring, I would say it's very possible that Soler will get a September call-up. 

Service time shouldn't be a major issue with potential stars like Baez or Bryant. Alcantara I can see measuring service time on since, although he may become a star, it doesn't seem quite as sure a thing by any means. These days, guys like Bryant and Baez get locked into contracts as soon as possible, ala Rizzo, Castro, Longoria, etc. If the Cubs are waiting to call up a guy like Baez based on only service time, they're being stupid. However, I give TheoCorp the benefit of the doubt here and assume they are waiting for the strikeout numbers to drop a bit more.

That makes no sense. Even those contracts are based on buying out free agent years and the more you have to buy out the more you will have to pay. Waiting a few dozen games to save yourself a year makes sense in virtually all circumstances.

I'm pretty sure this is how theo thinks about it too. Also Bryant is a Boras client so he won't be an easy sign I don't think.

It makes plenty of sense. If you wait until April 17th to call Baez up just to save a year on a free agent contract then you're losing time that could be spent on the field with the major league team. I'm thinking more Baez than Bryant, who as Carlito points out is a Boras client and won't get called up anyway this September, most likely. But if Baez is called up in September, he should just stay up with the big club from that point on. Sending him down for a couple weeks at the start of next season is an obvious ploy and isn't going to be looked at very fondly by either his agent or by the player. If TheoCorp thinks the team can be competitive next year, and they better, then they should bring Baez up in September and get him some at bats and playing time in the infield with Castro and Rizzo. Turning around and sending him down to Iowa at the beginning of next year after that would be bush, and the player knows it.

"then you're losing time that could be spent on the field with the major league team"

NO, you are likely gaining time because the player will be under club control longer and will be cheaper and thus will spend MORE years with the big league team overall than if you do something stupid now and call him up just so fans like you can get to see him a few weeks sooner.

You're missing my point completely. By missing time I mean missing time playing with the team as a unit. In terms of overall time spent, what difference does it make if he has an extra year in 2020 as opposed to 2021? If you lock him up early, that extra year is meaningless if the team has been contending every year. The idea is to get to a winning state soon, because yes, we fans are hungry and deserve to see a winning team. Playing him in September this year, getting out the kinks, letting him make his adjustments now, is a lot better than bringing him in during late April and making those adjustments then. It's stupid baseball that you are proposing, all to save some time in the future for a player you don't even know will still be playing baseball then.

Your proposal = rookies called up right away, team finishes at about .500 next year, core plays together through 2020

Epstein/Hoyer/Me/Most everyone else = rookies called up a few weeks into next season, team finished at about .500 anyway, core plays together through 2021

It's stupid baseball that you are proposing.

Phil, thank you for the information. Your knowledge of the contracts relating to the player and owner are fascinating. It's obvious to me that Baez should play out the season and come up to the Cubs in late April or earlier May of 2015. It's not a matter of being a bad guy with either of these players, but rather following the contract to your (management's) maximum advantage.

Soler appears to be out of lineup on a planned rest night?

Baez at 2B tonight!

Caratini with a hit and RBI in his first AB for KC.
Caratini with a hit and RBI in his second AB for KC.

and the Cougars get a nice 5 IP start (1 run) from Jonathan Martinez.

Jonathan Martinez was named an MWL Pitcher of the Week a couple of months ago, so he has had some success in the MWL this season prior to the trade.

Only problem is, he was there last year, too. He really needs to move up to Daytona. 

He seems to get rested frequently. Is he still bothered by hammies some?

I think it's totally preventative and they adjusted some of his training to suit his injury history. I'll tell you I really thought he was a bust with all the injuries but it's looking like he and the Cubs are really stepping it up. I'm excited about him.

Man crush excited? Or just excited?

Both!!!!

Monkey never cramps.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LdGai72Tt8Y

My new favorite person in the world.

3 bananas! That guy is a genius ...

C. J. Edwards was reinstated from DL and started for AA Tennessee tonight. Threw 3.1 IP (61 pitches) and struck out five. He went 3.2 IP (62 pitches) with 6 K in his last rehab start with AZL Cubs last Monday, so very similar results.   

Daytona Cubs were no hit tonight and lost 10-0. It was called (rain) after 5-1/2 innings, however.

Cubs-Dodgers game is currently on MLB TV with the dodgers broadcast/Vin Scully.

One thing that got lost for me in the July transaction shuffle was that Brian Roberts got designated for assignment. Cubs fans are that much closer to the dream, finally, after all these years.

X
  • Sign in with Twitter