Texsox Posted August 17, 2005 Share Posted August 17, 2005 It seems to me, and at my advanced age I may be forgetting some, but it seems rare to hear that this team claimed player X and kept a deal from happening. It seems that there is a gentleman's agreement between teams when it comes to this stuff. I can't recall many times a team claiming someone and blocking a deal. If that wasn't the case, it would be almost impossible to ever do a waiver deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JUGGERNAUT Posted August 17, 2005 Share Posted August 17, 2005 For the ignorant amongst us: MAJOR LEAGUE WAIVER: A club needs to secure this type of waiver in order to option a player if the date of assignment is >= 3 more yrs after the date the player first reported to a ML club during a non-strike year. One year is deducted from the above 3 yr period for each option year spent. Now that you have been educated (at least a little) please attempt a rational argument as to why Anderson & BMac have to clear ML waivers? For the rest of you, they don't. What is holding this deal up is $$$. Pure & simple. The Reds saving $8.5M/3yr trading KGJ is simply not worth the loss in franchise value & ticket sales to trade him. The $26M owed to him in 2023-2024 if invested probably (5% earned compounded annually) would depreciate to $3M by the time the first payment is due. If JR is serious about going for it ALL he needs to come up with more $$$ for the deal to happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3E8 Posted August 17, 2005 Share Posted August 17, 2005 (edited) QUOTE(JUGGERNAUT @ Aug 17, 2005 -> 04:32 PM) For the ignorant amongst us: MAJOR LEAGUE WAIVER: A club needs to secure this type of waiver in order to option a player if the date of assignment is >= 3 more yrs after the date the player first reported to a ML club during a non-strike year. One year is deducted from the above 3 yr period for each option year spent. Now that you have been educated (at least a little) please attempt a rational argument as to why Anderson & BMac have to clear ML waivers? For the rest of you, they don't. What is holding this deal up is $$$. Pure & simple. The Reds saving $8.5M/3yr trading KGJ is simply not worth the loss in franchise value & ticket sales to trade him. The $26M owed to him in 2023-2024 if invested probably (5% earned compounded annually) would depreciate to $3M by the time the first payment is due. If JR is serious about going for it ALL he needs to come up with more $$$ for the deal to happen. Well aren't there two types of waivers? One waiver is for assignment of a player which the text you brought up relates to and the other type of waiver is for the unconditional release of a player. The unconditional release waivers I believe are the waivers that almost all players are placed on at this time of year. So maybe they have different rules and regulations for the unconditional release waivers which would require players on the 40-man to clear no matter what their service time in the MLB is. Edited August 17, 2005 by 3E8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JUGGERNAUT Posted August 17, 2005 Share Posted August 17, 2005 UR waivers remove a player from all player limits (basically the ML 40/25 roster & the 40/40 roster when it expands). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.