Nightengale's Griffey/ Sox update

[JUGGERNAUT]

The mass confusion in this thread is getting ridiculous (every player on every team being put on waivers ).

 

http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/spo/mlbpa/mlbpa_cba.pdf

[JUGGERNAUT]

http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/spo/mlbpa/mlbpa_cba.pdf

 

F. Waivers

Any assignment of a Player contract must conform to the rules regarding

waivers contained in Major League Rule 10.

In addition, each Friday, not later than 3 P.M. E.D.T., the Office of the

Commissioner shall notify the Player's Association, by facsimile transmission, of all waiver requests and their disposition. Notification shall include:

(1) the date on which the waiver request was made;

(2) the date of expiration of the waiver period;

(3) if the waiver period has expired, whether or not claims were

filed;

(4) if claims are not filed, the period for which waivers have been

granted; and

(5) if claims were filed, whether or not the Club requesting

waivers has withdrawn its request. In the event claims were filed and

the Club requesting waivers has withdrawn its request, the Office of

the Commissioner need not identify the claiming Club or Clubs.

 

Translation: By Friday 2PM CDT we will know if Levine was telling the truth or not about Griffey Jr being placed on waivers this week.

[YASNY]

http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/spo/mlbpa/mlbpa_cba.pdf

 

F. Waivers

Any assignment of a Player contract must conform to the rules regarding

waivers contained in Major League Rule 10.

In addition, each Friday, not later than 3 P.M. E.D.T., the Office of the

Commissioner shall notify the Player's Association, by facsimile transmission, of all waiver requests and their disposition. Notification shall include:

(1) the date on which the waiver request was made;

(2) the date of expiration of the waiver period;

(3) if the waiver period has expired, whether or not claims were

filed;

(4) if claims are not filed, the period for which waivers have been

granted; and

(5) if claims were filed, whether or not the Club requesting

waivers has withdrawn its request. In the event claims were filed and

the Club requesting waivers has withdrawn its request, the Office of

the Commissioner need not identify the claiming Club or Clubs.

 

Translation: By Friday 2PM CDT we will know if Levine was telling the truth or not about Griffey Jr being placed on waivers this week.

 

What makes you think that WE will know?

[JUGGERNAUT]

The official link: http://mlbplayers.mlb.com/pa/pdf/cba_english.pdf

 

I've not found anything suggesting a limit on the number of times a team can put a player on waivers & withdraw him. But if they do put him on waivers & he clears he's then considered cleared for the entire waiver period. In this case the rest of Aug.

[RockRaines]

I do believe every team puts just about everyone on waivers

[JUGGERNAUT]

What makes you think that WE will know?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Player's clearing waivers show up in the transaction reports. If KGJ is either claimed, withdrawn, or cleared of waivers it will be reported in MLB transactions.

 

Some more info:

The salary of a player claimed off waivers DOES count towards the luxary tax assessment for that year. So KGJ's $41M will cost the NYY$ & BOS much more than other teams.

 

The most any team has ever claimed salary wise in a so-called block move is $14M.

That's the infamous SDP Randy Myer's claim. A far cry from the $41M owed KGJ.

 

I highly doubt Levine was telling the truth. It makes no sense that the owner would approve the GM putting him on waivers to dump $15M/3yr & risk getting 0 talent in return.

[YASNY]

Player's clearing waivers show up in the transaction reports.  If KGJ is either claimed, withdrawn, or cleared of waivers it will be reported in MLB transactions.

 

Some more info:

The salary of a player claimed off waivers DOES count towards the luxary tax assessment for that year.  So KGJ's $41M will cost the NYY$ & BOS much more than other teams.

 

The most any team has ever claimed salary wise in a so-called block move is $14M.

That's the infamous SDP Randy Myer's claim.  A far cry from the $41M owed KGJ.

 

I highly doubt Levine was telling the truth.  It makes no sense that the owner would approve the GM putting him on waivers to dump $15M/3yr & risk getting 0 talent in return.

 

Show me Remlinger being claimed or cleared.

[GoSox05]

Griffey seen us knock around the yanks, now he wants a part of history, cant say i blame him.

 

I hope he would just DH though most of the time.

 

Hes a big name, a superstar, but hes seems pretty leveled headed and i think he would fit in good with the team.

[BlackBetsy]

Well, let's think about who might claim him to block the trade....note, this is not where Griffey would be WILLING to go (just teams that would be willing to take on his salary, a la Canseco/Yankees a few years ago).

 

National League (goes first, in order of waiver claim):

 

Colorado - May not be willing to take on salary, but could claim to get * player

Pittsburgh - No chance, too much $$

San Francisco - They could take on $$, could use CF with Grissom done.

Dodgers - Salary maxxed out, also have Milton Bradley

Arizona- Salary maxxed out.

Chicago Cubs - With Patterson out of the picture in CF for now, they could put in a claim. Star power helps with team image.

Milwaukee - No chance.

San Diego - It's a possibility they put in a claim to get him for stretch run and trade him over the winter, but not really likely.

NY Mets - Nope, they have Beltran

Florida - Not with salary as is and Pierre in CF

Washington - This could work. They have no true centerfielder and are looking for star power for new ownership. They can take on additional salary. Jim Bowden (who acquired Griffey for Cincy) is the GM

Philadelphia - Probably not.

Houston - Won't take on salary

Atlanta - Andruw Jones. Nuff said.

St. Louis - Have Edmonds.

 

So, from the NL, I see as possibilities - San Francisco, the Cubs, San Diego and Washington.

 

Here's the AL Order:

 

Kansas City - No chance

Tampa Bay - No chance

Seattle - Not with all the salary they took on before this year.

Detroit - Probably not with the salary taken on before season.

Baltimore - Possible. Team needs star power, and has been willing to spend

Texas - Unlikely.

Minnesota - Yeah right. Carl Pohlad owns them. (They also have Torii Hunter)

Toronto - Nope.

NY Yankees - Tony Womack is playing CF. They can take on salary. I'd be surprised if they DIDN'T claim him. I'd also be surprised if he agreed to be traded to NY.

Cleveland - Not likely to add salary, and have Grady Sizemore in CF.

Oakland - No way. Just re-signed Kotsay.

LA Angels - Not likely, with Finley in CF.

Boston - Not with Damon in CF.

 

So, in the AL, Baltimore and the Yankees are possibilities for a claim. All in all, I'd say there's about a 5% chance he clears waivers to the White Sox.

[Dick Allen]

Griffey waivers can always be revoked. I'm sure he either will be placed on waivers or already has been. And I would bet the owner of the Reds would rather have the money the GM and President of the Reds agreed to pay than the prospects the White Sox were sending back.

FWIW, Steve Phillips is taking credit for all the waiver claims being made the past several years. He said he claimed 150 players on waivers in 1997 in order to block trades.

[Dick Allen]

Well, let's think about who might claim him to block the trade....note, this is not where Griffey would be WILLING to go (just teams that would be willing to take on his salary, a la Canseco/Yankees a few years ago).

 

National League (goes first, in order of waiver claim):

 

Colorado - May not be willing to take on salary, but could claim to get * player

Pittsburgh - No chance, too much $$

San Francisco - They could take on $$, could use CF with Grissom done.

Dodgers - Salary maxxed out, also have Milton Bradley

Arizona- Salary maxxed out.

Chicago Cubs - With Patterson out of the picture in CF for now, they could put in a claim.  Star power helps with team image.

Milwaukee - No chance.

San Diego -  It's a possibility they put in a claim to get him for stretch run and trade him over the winter, but not really likely.

NY Mets - Nope, they have Beltran

Florida - Not with salary as is and Pierre in CF

Washington - This could work.  They have no true centerfielder and are looking for star power for new ownership.  They can take on additional salary.  Jim Bowden (who acquired Griffey for Cincy) is the GM

Philadelphia - Probably not.

Houston - Won't take on salary

Atlanta - Andruw Jones.  Nuff said.

St. Louis - Have Edmonds.

 

So, from the NL, I see as possibilities - San Francisco, the Cubs, San Diego and Washington.

 

Here's the AL Order:

 

Kansas City - No chance

Tampa Bay - No chance

Seattle - Not with all the salary they took on before this year.

Detroit - Probably not with the salary taken on before season.

Baltimore - Possible.  Team needs star power, and has been willing to spend

Texas - Unlikely.

Minnesota - Yeah right.  Carl Pohlad owns them.  (They also have Torii Hunter)

Toronto - Nope.

NY Yankees - Tony Womack is playing CF.  They can take on salary.  I'd be surprised if they DIDN'T claim him.  I'd also be surprised if he agreed to be traded to NY.

Cleveland - Not likely to add salary, and have Grady Sizemore in CF.

Oakland - No way.  Just re-signed Kotsay.

LA Angels - Not likely, with Finley in CF.

Boston - Not with Damon in CF.

 

So, in the AL, Baltimore and the Yankees are possibilities for a claim.  All in all, I'd say there's about a 5% chance he clears waivers to the White Sox.

There is not a chance in hell Angelos would take on Griffey's entire contract with his injury history. The Yankees may claim him, but I doubt it unless they have something worked out for a trade. They don't have the money to burn this year, and would be locked into Griffey for a long time. I would be real surprised if Griffey didn't clear waivers. There is too much of an injury history with too much money left on the table.

[JUGGERNAUT]

Show me Remlinger being claimed or cleared.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

You have to understand the relationship between DFA & waivers. Unless the player has ml options left he must first clear waivers before being DFA'd. Remlinger has no ml options left.

 

In the transaction log:

8/5/05 Chicago Cubs ...and designated LHP Mike Remlinger for assignment.

8/9/05 Boston Red Sox ...Acquired LHP Mike Remlinger and cash considerations from the Chicago Cubs for Minor League RHP Olivo Astacio. Activated LHP Mike Remlinger.

 

Now what happened for this trade to happen?

Boston put in a claim when he was placed on waivers. Both teams had to wait for 3 business days to pass to see if any lower standing team puts in a claim. After the 3 days Boston is awarded the claim. The Cubs can either withdraw the claim or proceed with a trade.

[sircaffey]

There is not a chance in hell Angelos would take on Griffey's entire contract with his injury history. The Yankees may claim him, but I doubt it unless they have something worked out for a trade.  They don't have the money to burn this year, and would be locked into Griffey for a long time. I would be real surprised if Griffey didn't clear waivers. There is too much of an injury history with too much money left on the table.

 

I would be surprised if NYY claimed Griffey. 1 because he's overpaid. 2 because they are in dire need of pitching and will most likely claim any pitcher put on waivers. 3 because I think they will make a hard charge at Damon in the offseason. I'd think they would much rather overpay for Damon than an aging Griffey who's better suited at DH for the remainder of his career.

[southsider2k5]

Griffey waivers can always be revoked. I'm sure he either will be placed on waivers or already has been. And I would bet the owner of the Reds would rather have the money the GM and President of the Reds agreed to pay than the prospects the White Sox were sending back.

FWIW, Steve Phillips is taking credit for all the waiver claims being made the past several years. He said he claimed 150 players on waivers in 1997 in order to block trades.

 

Hmmm which by basic logic means that there were a whole bunch of people that didn't get claimed, which means there were litterally hundreds of players on waivers during that season. Huh, I guess that means basically everyone goes on waivers

[fathom]

If a team makes a claim on Griffey Jr., they better be sure they can handle his contract. What's to stop the Reds from just saying "fine, you take him, and we won't have to pay another cent of his contract"? Just as the Padres got stuck with Randy Myers ridiculous contract, the Reds could possibly jump at the chance at getting out of Griffey's contract without a scratch. I know everyone thinks such and such team will try to block the trade.....but this isn't a one year contract that expires at the end of the season we're dealing with.

[JUGGERNAUT]

There is not a chance in hell Angelos would take on Griffey's entire contract with his injury history. The Yankees may claim him, but I doubt it unless they have something worked out for a trade.  They don't have the money to burn this year, and would be locked into Griffey for a long time. I would be real surprised if Griffey didn't clear waivers. There is too much of an injury history with too much money left on the table.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Griffey is owed $30M in deferred payments on top of the remaining guaranteed years of his contract. Which means if the NYY$ were to claim him their luxury tax assessment would be hit by what he's making this year & a portion of the value of those deferred payments. That's simply too much to even expect the NYY$ to take on.

 

As for the other teams you mentioned the Cubs & Giants are out of the race. They can get KGJ for 2006 for a much lower price than claiming him off waivers. The same applies to BAL which is practically out of the race. Adding a bat won't help thier recent pitching woes.

 

Which leaves SDP, & WAS as potential suitors. I don't think either team has that kind of $ to spend on an often injured player they must play in the field.

[southsider2k5]

If a team makes a claim on Griffey Jr., they better be sure they can handle his contract.  What's to stop the Reds from just saying "fine, you take him, and we won't have to pay another cent of his contract"?  Just as the Padres got stuck with Randy Myers ridiculous contract, the Reds could possibly jump at the chance at getting out of Griffey's contract without a scratch. I know everyone thinks such and such team will try to block the trade.....but this isn't a one year contract that expires at the end of the season we're dealing with.

 

Exactly IIRC we are talking about $50 million to claim him. That isn't exactly chump change for anyone trying to simply block a trade.

[Kyyle23]

Im actually kind of worried that Griffey would clear waivers, and the Reds would work out a trade with someone other than the Sox. I dont think the problem for the Sox is worrying wether he will make it through waivers rather it is wether the Sox will be the one that the Reds deal with.

[Milkman delivers]

Im actually kind of worried that Griffey would clear waivers, and the Reds would work out a trade with someone other than the Sox.  I dont think the problem for the Sox is worrying wether he will make it through waivers rather it is wether the Sox will be the one that the Reds deal with.

 

No way does KW let Griffey get away a second time and let some other team get better while we really, really need offense. He'd top any offer.

[JUGGERNAUT]

Hmmm which by basic logic means that there were a whole bunch of people that didn't get claimed, which means there were litterally hundreds of players on waivers during that season.  Huh, I guess that means basically everyone goes on waivers

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

No it doesn't. Unless he wants to name names it's just heresay. Secondly 150 players represents about 13% of MLB players on 40 man rosters. A far cry from EVERYONE.

 

Other GM's that have been interviewed on the subject have said it's rare for teams to block. It's considered reasonable by contenders but definitely would be frowned upon by the league if a non-contender did it. Teams do not use the waiver wire to guage interest. They use it to dump salaries or DFA a player in the course of the season.

 

During the course of the ENTIRE season it's reasonable to suggest that has many as 20% might get put on waivers but most of them are put there because they are out of ml options and a team seeks to DFA them.

Edited August 11, 2005 by JUGGERNAUT

[Dick Allen]

Im actually kind of worried that Griffey would clear waivers, and the Reds would work out a trade with someone other than the Sox.  I dont think the problem for the Sox is worrying wether he will make it through waivers rather it is wether the Sox will be the one that the Reds deal with.

The White Sox are the last team in line to put in a waiver claim. So the only chance they would have of acquiring him is if all the other teams passed. Considering they already had a deal agreed upon, and most other contenders would be very leery of his contract, if Griffey were to clear waivers and was going to be moved the White Sox would have to be considered the favorites to land him.

Another waiver claim in which the player was awarded to the claiming team trying to block a trade was Jose Canseco when he went to the Yankees. I believe it was from TB. That was an entirely different circumstance than Griffey though. His contract was up at the end of the season, and he rotted on the Yankees bench.

[southsider2k5]

No it doesn't.  Unless he wants to name names it's just heresay.  Secondly 150 players represents about 13% of MLB players on 40 man rosters.  A far cry from EVERYONE.

 

Other GM's that have been interviewed on the subject have said it's rare for teams to block.  It's considered reasonable by contenders but definitely would be frowned upon by the league if a non-contender did it.  Teams do not use the waiver wire to guage interest.  They use it to dump salaries.

 

You just contradicted yourself there, you said it was rare to have happen, yet 150 players were claimed by one GM, so if was rare and and such a low percentage of players, that would stand to reason that a lot more players weren't claimed???

[Rowand44]

Here's a question for you guys: If Griffey makes it to the Sox to they put a claim in on him or just let him pass through? If they claim him they might be able to get him for absolutely no players just take on that crazy contract, also this negates any chance of another team(the yankees) making a trade for Jr.

[Al Lopez Ghost (old)]

Im actually kind of worried that Griffey would clear waivers, and the Reds would work out a trade with someone other than the Sox.  I dont think the problem for the Sox is worrying wether he will make it through waivers rather it is wether the Sox will be the one that the Reds deal with.

Well, wouldn't the White Sox claim him? Then the Reds would have to deal with the White Sox. No?

[YASNY]

You have to understand the relationship between DFA & waivers.  Unless the player has ml options left he must first clear waivers before being DFA'd.  Remlinger has no ml options left. 

 

In the transaction log:

8/5/05  Chicago Cubs  ...and designated LHP Mike Remlinger for assignment.

8/9/05  Boston Red Sox ...Acquired LHP Mike Remlinger and cash considerations from the Chicago Cubs for Minor League RHP Olivo Astacio.  Activated LHP Mike Remlinger.

 

Now what happened for this trade to happen?

Boston put in a claim when he was placed on waivers.  Both teams had to wait for 3 business days to pass to see if any lower standing team puts in a claim.  After the 3 days Boston is awarded the claim.  The Cubs can either withdraw the claim or proceed with a trade.

 

My point is ... That WE wouldn't necessarily be made aware of it. It's not publicized when some is claimed, cleared or put on waivers. Jayson Stark may gather that info and write a column about it, but it doesn't make the daily transaction wire that hits the papers.