Butter Parque Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 He got claimed on waivers, so there ends that prospect's journey in White Sox Country. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 Wow, we couldn't get a damned thing for him. That's too bad. At least we get the roster spot back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melissa1334 Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 QUOTE(Butter Parque @ Mar 23, 2007 -> 02:44 PM) He got claimed on waivers, so there ends that prospect's journey in White Sox Country. was he that bad? or maybe it was never going to work out for him here, esp. after what happend last year.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 Later tracey, good luck being frustrated on another team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalapse Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 Good for him, he'll likely make that joke of a 30 million dollar bullpen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melissa1334 Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 so we didnt(couldnt) get anything for him? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_genius Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 good riddance Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 Two down, one to go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearSox Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 QUOTE(fathom @ Mar 23, 2007 -> 02:51 PM) Two down, one to go. who was the other one? and who has to go? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flash Tizzle Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 QUOTE(BearSox @ Mar 23, 2007 -> 02:56 PM) who was the other one? and who has to go? I have to believe the two are McCArthy and Tracey, the other is Anderson. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_genius Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 QUOTE(Flash Tizzle @ Mar 23, 2007 -> 03:02 PM) I have to believe the two are McCArthy and Tracey, the other is Anderson. you think Tracey is in the same talent category as McCarthy and Anderson? or are you implying some sort of devious ozzie guillen plan to get rid of players he personally doesn't like? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 QUOTE(mr_genius @ Mar 23, 2007 -> 01:04 PM) you think Tracey is in the same talent category as McCarthy and Anderson? or are you implying some sort of devious ozzie guillen plan to get rid of players he personally doesn't like? I think it's clearly the latter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flash Tizzle Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 (edited) QUOTE(mr_genius @ Mar 23, 2007 -> 03:04 PM) you think Tracey is in the same talent category as McCarthy and Anderson? or are you implying some sort of devious ozzie guillen plan to get rid of players he personally doesn't like? I'm not implying anything. I'm answering a question directed towards Fathom. I could be misinterpreting his post, but I doubt it. Edited March 23, 2007 by Flash Tizzle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_genius Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Mar 23, 2007 -> 03:06 PM) I think it's clearly the latter. ozzie is such an evil bastard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 (edited) QUOTE(Flash Tizzle @ Mar 23, 2007 -> 08:06 PM) I'm not implying anything. I'm answering a question directed towards Fathom. I could be misinterpreting his post, but I doubt it. I would have corrected you if you were wrong. I think it's safe to say that it's not wise to get in Ozzie's doghouse. Edited March 23, 2007 by fathom Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flash Tizzle Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 QUOTE(fathom @ Mar 23, 2007 -> 03:08 PM) I would have corrected you if you were wrong. I think it's safe to say that it's not wise to get in Ozzie's doghouse. Hmm, what do Anderson, Tracey, and McCarthy have in common, again? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LVSoxFan Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 Can somebody explain--I know, mea culpa--how waivers works? Does it mean that basically we have a claim to a player, but if we put him on waivers, we're giving up that claim and anybody can try and get him? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 QUOTE(Flash Tizzle @ Mar 23, 2007 -> 08:10 PM) Hmm, what do Anderson, Tracey, and McCarthy have in common, again? Overrated prospects from within our system? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badatbest Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 QUOTE(Flash Tizzle @ Mar 23, 2007 -> 02:10 PM) Hmm, what do Anderson, Tracey, and McCarthy have in common, again? oooh. ooooh. i know this one! they are all really f***ing white? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flash Tizzle Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 QUOTE(bad at best @ Mar 23, 2007 -> 03:19 PM) oooh. ooooh. i know this one! they are all really f***ing white? Well, actually I meant they're all poor prospects. Ignant racist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shoota Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 QUOTE(Butter Parque @ Mar 23, 2007 -> 01:44 PM) He got claimed on waivers, so there ends that prospect's journey in White Sox Country. What type of waivers? If it's revocable, the Sox can take Tracey off of waivers and keep him in the organization. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregory Pratt Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 Why would they want to? He sucks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wanne Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 My money is on that Tracey will face the Sox at some point this season and the first batter he faces he drills. Then turns to Ozzie with a huge grin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_genius Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 QUOTE(Wanne @ Mar 23, 2007 -> 04:32 PM) My money is on that Tracey will face the Sox at some point this season and the first batter he faces he drills. Then turns to Ozzie with a huge grin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 QUOTE(LVSoxFan @ Mar 23, 2007 -> 01:10 PM) Can somebody explain--I know, mea culpa--how waivers works? Does it mean that basically we have a claim to a player, but if we put him on waivers, we're giving up that claim and anybody can try and get him? Not sure of every last detail, but I can infer this much. Last year, Sean Tracey was placed on the White Sox 40 man roster, thus using up a roster spot. When we signed Erstad, we filled up the last available slot on our 40 man. Every player on the 25 man roster must also be on hte 40 man. Right now, even Danks is not on the 40 man...you don't need to be put on there for some time after you're drafted/signed. Since the Sox had no room on the 40 man, if they wanted Danks to start the season with the big club, someone would have to be removed from the 40 man. To remove a player from the 40 man roster, the player must first pass through waivers if he is to stay within your system. When placed on waivers, each team, going in order of record at the time/during the previous season, has the right to claim that player with no appreciable cost. If no team claims a player, he can be taken off the 40 man and sent back to your minor league organization. If some other team claims the player, he's theirs. There's a lot more details that come into things when you start getting contracts involved for guys who've been in the majors for a while, but I think that's the basics of it. 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.