PDA

View Full Version : Waivers


maurice
08-13-2004, 05:54 PM
Jason Stark (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?columnist=stark_jayson&id=1858619) reports that the following players have cleared waivers:
Darrell "Cy" May
Brian Anderson
Buddy Groom
Justin Speier
Elmer Dessens
Jason Grimsley
Al Levine
Steve Sparks
Gabe White
B.J. Surhoff
Richard Hidalgo
Raul Ibanez
Jose Cruz Jr.
Robert Fick
Ben Grieve
Dmitri Young
John Vander Wal
Kenny Lofton
Carl Everett
Ruben Sierra
Terrence Long
Brian Jordan
Jay Payton
Bret Boone
Tino Martinez
Shea Hillenbrand
Mike Sweeney
Placido Polanco
Geoff Blum
Charles Johnson

He also reports that the following players were claimed and pulled back:
Carlos Beltran
Danny Bautista
Frank Catalanotto
Roger Clemens
Paul Wilson
Ramon Ortiz
Jorge Julio

Mohoney
08-13-2004, 05:57 PM
Jason Stark (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?columnist=stark_jayson&id=1858619) reports that the following players have cleared waivers:
Darrell "Cy" May
Brian Anderson
Buddy Groom
Justin Speier
Elmer Dessens
Jason Grimsley
Al Levine
Steve Sparks
Gabe White
B.J. Surhoff
Richard Hidalgo
Raul Ibanez
Jose Cruz Jr.
Robert Fick
Ben Grieve
Dmitri Young
John Vander Wal
Kenny Lofton
Carl Everett
Ruben Sierra
Terrence Long
Brian Jordan
Jay Payton
Bret Boone
Tino Martinez
Shea Hillenbrand
Mike Sweeney
Placido Polanco
Geoff Blum
Charles Johnson

He also reports that the following players were claimed and pulled back:
Carlos Beltran
Danny Bautista
Frank Catalanotto
Roger Clemens
Paul Wilson
Ramon Ortiz
Jorge Julio


I wonder who claimed Paul Wilson? I wonder who claimed those two studs from Houston?

Huisj
08-13-2004, 06:03 PM
So let me make sure I've got the rules right here--that means that those guys on the first list are basically able to be traded now, right?

Flight #24
08-13-2004, 06:05 PM
The only guys who I can see being even marginally useful to the Sox are:Jason Stark (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?columnist=stark_jayson&id=1858619) reports that the following players have cleared waivers:

Buddy Groom

Steve Sparks


Raul Ibanez
Jose Cruz Jr.
Dmitri Young
Kenny Lofton

Bret Boone
Tino Martinez
Shea Hillenbrand
Mike Sweeney
Placido Polanco
Charles Johnson


Of these, I don't see Young, Lofton, Sweeney being available and Johnson's already refused to waive his no-trade to go to LA. The pickin's, they be slim, which means prices go way up. Even the pitchers are pretty much MR fodder (which is useful).

Jjav829
08-13-2004, 06:09 PM
So let me make sure I've got the rules right here--that means that those guys on the first list are basically able to be traded now, right?
Yes, anyone can trade for the players on the first list.

Gimm
08-13-2004, 06:15 PM
Jason Stark (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?columnist=stark_jayson&id=1858619) reports that the following players have cleared waivers:

Richard Hidalgo
Jose Cruz Jr
Kenny Lofton

Well, what do you know.....:smile:

DickAllen72
08-13-2004, 06:18 PM
Well, what do you know.....:smile:

I'll take any two out of the three right now.

FightingBillini
08-13-2004, 06:33 PM
Why would a team waive a player and then pull him back?
Why would they waive him in the first place if they didnt want to trade him?

Soxzilla
08-13-2004, 06:40 PM
Why would a team waive a player and then pull him back?
Why would they waive him in the first place if they didnt want to trade him?
Doesn't that mean that another team claimed them? Eh?

Gimm
08-13-2004, 06:41 PM
I'll take any two out of the three right now.Hidalgo was absolutely mashing the ball with the Mets (pitcher's park) until his recent slump. He has an absolute gun in RF. Last year he was smoking LHP - which incidentally is our biggest weakness. In short, this guy has a very high ceiling.

Once we got the middle-of-the-line-up slugger, I'll take Lofton's OBP and history of performing down the stretch. Rowand may not like competition for CF job, but until he starts getting on base at a high clip against RHP, tough cookie.

Hidalgo and Lofton. Not sure if the former is signed beyond 2004 or not. Might be a probem.

Soxzilla
08-13-2004, 06:43 PM
Better get them here quick.

Can't hidalgo play 3rd?

Gimm
08-13-2004, 06:53 PM
Hidalgo and Lofton. Not sure if the former is signed beyond 2004 or not. Might be a probem.
Nevermind, he is FA after 2004. Bring him over, Kenny.

Daver
08-13-2004, 06:57 PM
Why would a team waive a player and then pull him back?
Why would they waive him in the first place if they didnt want to trade him?
To test his availability for trade.

The Baltimore Orioles sometime in the nineties, I don't recall the exact year, put their entire 40 man roster on waivers, and pulled back the twelve or so that were claimed, thus freeing them to trade 3/4 of their roster.

hold2dibber
08-13-2004, 07:32 PM
Why would a team waive a player and then pull him back?
Why would they waive him in the first place if they didnt want to trade him?
They waive 'em so they can trade 'em. But if someone claims, they can't trade (the claiming team gets him unless the original team pulls him back). So if you just want to dump a contract and are willing to let the guy go for nothing (pretty rare), you waive and let someone else claim without pulling back. If you want to trade someone but aren't willing to give him up for nothing, you waive him but pull him back if someone claims; if not claimed, you can trade him.

Brian26
08-13-2004, 09:39 PM
Interesting list. No White Sox on the list. I guess anyone could be put on waivers at any time, so it's a work-in-progress.

Daver
08-13-2004, 09:43 PM
Interesting list. No White Sox on the list. I guess anyone could be put on waivers at any time, so it's a work-in-progress.
When did the Sox get rid of Carl Everret?

34rancher
08-13-2004, 10:00 PM
Interesting list. No White Sox on the list. I guess anyone could be put on waivers at any time, so it's a work-in-progress.

I believe Carl Everrett is there.

Brian26
08-13-2004, 10:02 PM
When did the Sox get rid of Carl Everret?
Argh, I missed that. My bad.

Brian26
08-13-2004, 10:02 PM
I believe Carl Everrett is there.
Yeah, yeah, I missed it already. Get off my case! :D:

doublem23
08-13-2004, 10:36 PM
Yeah, yeah, I missed it already. Get off my case! :D:
Did you notice Carl Everett? :tongue:

:)

Brian26
08-13-2004, 10:37 PM
Did you notice Carl Everett? :tongue:

:)
Daver, can I borrow your elephant gun? :D:

Mohoney
08-13-2004, 10:40 PM
They waive 'em so they can trade 'em. But if someone claims, they can't trade (the claiming team gets him unless the original team pulls him back). So if you just want to dump a contract and are willing to let the guy go for nothing (pretty rare), you waive and let someone else claim without pulling back. If you want to trade someone but aren't willing to give him up for nothing, you waive him but pull him back if someone claims; if not claimed, you can trade him.

Can't the team that puts the player on waivers deal the claimed player to the team that claims him?

Does the player have to make it all the way through?

misty60481
08-13-2004, 10:52 PM
Two one run wins in a row, ever notice when we win a close one we come out playing hard next day, when we win a laffer we look flat next day lets keep it up I think JG will throw a good one tomorrow nite

misty60481
08-13-2004, 10:54 PM
Sorry I got this in wrong thread

Daver
08-13-2004, 10:58 PM
Can't the team that puts the player on waivers deal the claimed player to the team that claims him?

Does the player have to make it all the way through?
If a player is claimed he either has to be lost to the claim or recalled, if the claiming team wants to pursue a trade they can do so, but the player still has to clear waivers to allow the trade to happen.

Mohoney
08-13-2004, 11:04 PM
If a player is claimed he either has to be lost to the claim or recalled, if the claiming team wants to pursue a trade they can do so, but the player still has to clear waivers to allow the trade to happen.

So the player would be re-waived, and the pursuing team would just pass?

How did we end up trading for Sullivan when we blocked Kansas City?

losingugly2004
08-13-2004, 11:14 PM
Two one run wins in a row, ever notice when we win a close one we come out playing hard next day, when we win a laffer we look flat next day lets keep it up I think JG will throw a good one tomorrow nite
Yeah, let's hope that Garland has his second quality start in a row, and let's also hope that Schilling gets roughed up like in his last start against the Devil Rays. :rolleyes:

Daver
08-13-2004, 11:28 PM
So the player would be re-waived, and the pursuing team would just pass?

How did we end up trading for Sullivan when we blocked Kansas City?
No, the Sox blocked KC by giving up a player in trade, as opposed to claiming him off waivers.

bigfoot
08-13-2004, 11:37 PM
No, the Sox blocked KC by giving up a player in trade, as opposed to claiming him off waivers.
Daver, Do teams use the waiver process as a barometer for the F/A on the team? An early indicator as to the value in the F/A marketplace.

OEO Magglio
08-13-2004, 11:38 PM
No, the Sox blocked KC by giving up a player in trade, as opposed to claiming him off waivers.:?: You lost me Daver.:redface:

DickAllen72
08-13-2004, 11:46 PM
No, the Sox blocked KC by giving up a player in trade, as opposed to claiming him off waivers.

That doesn't make sense.... I thought a player CAN'T be traded after the deadline unless he clears waivers.

Daver
08-13-2004, 11:48 PM
Daver, Do teams use the waiver process as a barometer for the F/A on the team? An early indicator as to the value in the F/A marketplace.
No, teams waive players to allow them to be traded, it has nothing to do with their value. Waivers are not included in the arbitration process.

The F/A market is what it is, the player is worth what a team is willing to pay him.

Mohoney
08-13-2004, 11:49 PM
I think what Daver meant is that Sullivan already cleared waivers, Kenny Williams found out that the Royals wanted him, and outbid the Royals in a trade to get him.

OEO Magglio
08-13-2004, 11:49 PM
I think what Daver meant is that Sullivan already cleared waivers, Kenny Williams found out that the Royals wanted him, and outbid the Royals in a trade to get him.Ah, ok that make's sense.

Daver
08-13-2004, 11:54 PM
That doesn't make sense.... I thought a player CAN'T be traded after the deadline unless he clears waivers.
KC claimed Sullivan off waivers, the Reds recalled him, KW then traded a career minor leaguer for him, KC could have blocked the deal agian by offering a trade equal to what KW offered, they chose not to.

DickAllen72
08-13-2004, 11:55 PM
I think what Daver meant is that Sullivan already cleared waivers, Kenny Williams found out that the Royals wanted him, and outbid the Royals in a trade to get him.

But if the Royals really wanted him they could have claimed him off waivers. Since he cleared waivers (he had to, or he couldn't have been traded), that meant everyone passed on him, including the Royals. What am I missing here?
:?:

Gimm
08-13-2004, 11:55 PM
Anyway, back to Lofton and Hidalgo.

Coming off this emotionally-draining win, it would be PERFECT time to go after them...as long as their respective teams don't demand top prospects in return, that goes without saying.

The offense needs a big-time boost. The starting pitchers need bigger leads (or leads period, lol) and bullpen needs some rest - if a team is winning 7-3, you can get away with trotting Adkins or Cotts out there and give Marte/Politte/Shingo a night or two off. Not so much if the score is only 3-2.

Hidalgo has about 4 Mill remaining on his contract. Lofton - 900 K plus next year's salary. The team BADLY needs hitting talent. Only 3 games out in the loss column....and it might not stay that way for long if reinforcements aren't brought in and the team has to play cardiac ball every damn game. :mad:

Flight #24
08-13-2004, 11:56 PM
KC claimed Sullivan off waivers, the Reds recalled him, KW then traded a career minor leaguer for him, KC could have blocked the deal agian by offering a trade equal to what KW offered, they chose not to.
So Daver, as I understood post-deadline trades, the player has to have cleared waivers. In your example, it seems as if Sullivan didn't (KC claimed him and he was pulled back). So did the Reds put him on waivers again and KC not claim him? Or is my premise faulty? Seems to me that KC could have claimed him again and the Reds would have been left with either letting him go to KC (on waivers), or keeping him. Where am I off?

Mohoney
08-14-2004, 12:01 AM
Anyway, back to Lofton and Hidalgo.

Coming off this emotionally-draining win, it would be PERFECT time to go after them...as long as their respective teams don't demand top prospects in return, that goes without saying.

The offense needs a big-time boost. The starting pitchers need bigger leads (or leads period, lol) and bullpen needs some rest - if a team is winning 7-3, you can get away with trotting Adkins or Cotts out there and give Marte/Politte/Shingo a night or two off.

Hidalgo has about 4 Mill remaining on his contract. Lofton - 900 K. The team BADLY needs hitting talent. Only 3 games out in the loss column....and it might not stay that way for long if reinforcements aren't brought in and the team has to play cardiac ball every damn game. :mad:

Lofton is a cancer. I SO do not want him. Rowand is our EVERYDAY center fielder.

Hidalgo costs WAY too much money.

Why don't we get a bullpen arm so Neal Cotts and Mike Jackson don't have to come in and hold a lead in the 7th?

We scored 8 runs today, and our bullpen tried their damndest to hold the lead, but ended up making it a 1 run game.

Politte and Marte's arms are going to fall off if this keeps up.

Daver
08-14-2004, 12:04 AM
So Daver, as I understood post-deadline trades, the player has to have cleared waivers. In your example, it seems as if Sullivan didn't (KC claimed him and he was pulled back). So did the Reds put him on waivers again and KC not claim him? Or is my premise faulty? Seems to me that KC could have claimed him again and the Reds would have been left with either letting him go to KC (on waivers), or keeping him. Where am I off?
KC was the only team that claimed him, they have the right to match any offer for the player, if they decline that right he has cleared waivers and joins the team he was traded to.

DickAllen72
08-14-2004, 12:05 AM
Anyway, back to Lofton and Hidalgo.

Coming off this emotionally-draining win, it would be PERFECT time to go after them...as long as their respective teams don't demand top prospects in return, that goes without saying.

The offense needs a big-time boost. The starting pitchers need bigger leads (or leads period, lol) and bullpen needs some rest - if a team is winning 7-3, you can get away with trotting Adkins or Cotts out there and give Marte/Politte/Shingo a night or two off. Not so much if the score is only 3-2.

Hidalgo has about 4 Mill remaining on his contract. Lofton - 900 K plus next year's salary. The team BADLY needs hitting talent. Only 3 games out in the loss column....and it might not stay that way for long if reinforcements aren't brought in and the team has to play cardiac ball every damn game. :mad:


Man, I'm with you! I think if the Sox got Hidalgo and Lofton, they'd win this division for sure. I don't know why they didn't just claim Hidalgo off waivers if it's true that he's a FA after this year. Maybe they knew the Mets would pull him back???

As for Lofton, you know I'd love to have him here, but I'm told KW doesn't like him and he doesn't like playing for the Sox, being a life-long Cub fan. But after the shoddy way he was treated by the Cubs after being the biggest reason they got to the NLCS last year, maybe he wouldn't mind leading the Sox to the ALCS this year. And if that's the case, I'm sure KW would bury the hatchet, seeing as how winning means everything to KW.

DickAllen72
08-14-2004, 12:09 AM
Hidalgo costs WAY too much money.

Why don't we get a bullpen arm so Neal Cotts and Mike Jackson don't have to come in and hold a lead in the 7th?



Isn't Hidalgo an FA after this year? If so, whats a few million bucks for a playoff push?

As to acquiring another good bullpen arm, I'm all for it. Whom do you suggest??

Mohoney
08-14-2004, 12:11 AM
KC was the only team that claimed him, they have the right to match any offer for the player, if they decline that right he has cleared waivers and joins the team he was traded to.

So there still is a possibility that the guys on this list that were claimed and were pulled back can be moved?

If so, then we NEED to find a way to get Paul Wilson.

Gimm
08-14-2004, 12:42 AM
Lofton is a cancerNo, he is not. And even if he were, that matters very little as long as he goes on his typical late-August-September OBP tear. Rowand has noone to blame but himself - his OBP against RHP can't begin to cut it, and without table-setters getting on base, Lee/Konerko/Everett are not that scary.

Hidalgo costs WAY too much money.Is 4 Mill "too much" if you're getting a competent RF with enormous hitting talent, a gamble that may very well save the dying season? The guy was miserable in Houston, but is putting up big numbers with the Mets in a pitcher's park. Last year, he had an awesome season. T he fact that he can crush lefties is a bonus - our team is anemic against LHP and that cannot be allowed to continue.

I supposed you're happy with no-hit, average-field Timo/Borchard platoon that has contributed to so many close losses through-out the season....

Why don't we get a bullpen arm so Neal Cotts and Mike Jackson don't have to come in and hold a lead in the 7th?Why don't we get some major hitting talent infusion, so the team can start blowing people out (instead of losing 1-run games), which would allow the team to use Adkins/Cotts in said blow-outs without getting heart attacks instead?

If you can pick up BJ Ryan, fine I am all for it (too bad Orioles won't just give him away for nothing as there are many suitors for his services I imagine). But Lofton/Hidalgo are a much bigger priority IMO.

Don't underestimate the importance of having a fast, experienced high OBP pest atop the order and a big-time slugging, big-armed RF in the middle of the line-up - the move has the potential to transform the entire offense and propel us into the playoffs, Shannon Stewart/2003 Minnesota Twins-style.

Yes, it can also backfire....but that's a chance I am willing to see Sox take - nothing to lose, everything to gain at this point. As long as Sox don't give up anything of worth for them other than money, people shouldn't get their knickers in a twist.

We scored 8 runs todayYes, and with the way things have gone lately, we might just score 3 runs in the next 2 games.


Politte and Marte's arms are going to fall off if this keeps up
Again, a separate issue altogether. I am all for bringing up Wunsch.

Gimm
08-14-2004, 12:55 AM
Man, I'm with you! I think if the Sox got Hidalgo and Lofton, they'd win this division for sure. .There's no such a thing as "for sure" when it comes to perennial losers White Sox.....But, I agree, it would probably TRIPLE our chances.

Of course, I would rather have Beltran and Vidro, but let's face it, neither is available....and even if they were, Sox simply cannot afford to give up Sweeney/Anderson/MaCarthy/Honel/Cotts/other top talent. The buck stops at Reed and Olivo.

The beauty of Hidalgo and Lofton is that they would cost nothing but money. And as JR recently told us, money is not a problem. :smile: :rolleyes:

Jjav829
08-14-2004, 01:43 AM
I'll try to clear a few things up here to the best of my knowledge. The waiver process after July 31st gets kind of complicated. Many players get placed on waivers. Some teams will throw a large portion of their team on waivers. The idea is that by placing a majority of your team on waivers, you can hide which players you intend to trade. All players go on revocable waivers, meaning that once a player is claimed there are 3 options:1.) The waiving team recalls the player and keeps him 2.) The waiving team allows the player to go to the claiming team for nothing in return, except of course salary relief 3.) The waiving team works out a trade with the claiming team. This is basically the blocking strategy. If Team A doesn't want Team B to claim a player, Team A can claim the player and as long as they have the worse record, they are the only team that can work out a trade for that player. Of course the risk is that if you try to block a player with a big contract, the waiving team might just let the player go and then the claiming team is saddled with the contract. I believe a player can only be placed on revocable waivers once a month, so once a player is claimed, he can't go anywhere during that month except to the team that won the claim.