Jump to content

Rios, $1M traded to Rangers


PolishPrince34

Recommended Posts

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Aug 8, 2013 -> 02:34 PM)
How does it work with what is coming back? If what the Sox want is on the 40 man, wouldn't they have to clear waivers as well? I think the Sox will try to buy a prospect, but if that fails will just let him go.

 

Whatever players on the 40 man they wanted to trade would have to get by Houston. That's it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 2.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

QUOTE (southside hitman @ Aug 8, 2013 -> 03:36 PM)
I have a hard time believing they didn't know by July 31st what his plan was. I doubt he just up and decided to serve it without letting them know. His name has been attached to this all year, he and the Rangers had time to deliberate and form a plan.

Steve Stone couldn't have been more clear a couple days ago. He said that Cruz's taking the suspension caught the Rangers completely off guard and a number of people around baseball were saying so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Aug 8, 2013 -> 12:34 PM)
How does it work with what is coming back? If what the Sox want is on the 40 man, wouldn't they have to clear waivers as well? I think the Sox will try to buy a prospect, but if that fails will just let him go.

They would have to clear waivers or could be a PTBNL and slid through that way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (southside hitman @ Aug 8, 2013 -> 02:32 PM)
I would be livid, as you should be, if we just dumped him for salary relief. Everything the Sox have said and indicated through these moves are that we are "reloading" not "rebuilding." Rios has value, we might have to eat some salary to get a premium prospect, but it can be done. Dumping salary would be a cop out, especially after we didn't pay any of Peavy's outgoing contract.

No. They can always reallocate those funds during the offseason. Its not like they wouldn't get anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Aug 8, 2013 -> 12:36 PM)
Whatever players on the 40 man they wanted to trade would have to get by Houston. That's it.

I'm going to assume the Astros would select any good prospect headed their way, so if it is someone on the 40, it will be a PTBNL. There are plenty of good prospects who aren't on the 40 man roster though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Aug 8, 2013 -> 02:37 PM)
No. They can always reallocate those funds during the offseason. Its not like they wouldn't get anything.

 

If they trust them to reallocate those funds in a better way then having Rios. Especially in this FA class, which is especially weak. Can't go much over slot in the draft and international signing nowadays, so not much room to spend there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Aug 8, 2013 -> 03:37 PM)
I'm going to assume the Astros would select any good prospect headed their way, so if it is someone on the 40, it will be a PTBNL. There are plenty of good prospects who aren't on the 40 man roster though.

No team is going to want to do a PTBNL with someone on their 40 man unless you hold a gun to the team's head. Guys who are already on the 40 man roster can be called up in September. The Sox aren't going to PTBNL for a guy and then have him contribute to another team's chances.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (fathom @ Aug 8, 2013 -> 07:34 PM)
Just remember, the Rangers thought Cruz was going to appeal his suspension, so it's very possible they claimed Rios and are now much more desperate to get him than they were at the deadline (Sorry if someone posted this already)

 

If Hahn can get them to pay his entire contract and gets a legitimate prospect, then he's a big-time winner in this scenario.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 8, 2013 -> 02:36 PM)
Steve Stone couldn't have been more clear a couple days ago. He said that Cruz's taking the suspension caught the Rangers completely off guard and a number of people around baseball were saying so.

 

Crazy to me if that's the case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would be livid, as you should be, if we just dumped him for salary relief. Everything the Sox have said and indicated through these moves are that we are "reloading" not "rebuilding." Rios has value, we might have to eat some salary to get a premium prospect, but it can be done. Dumping salary would be a cop out, especially after we didn't pay any of Peavy's outgoing contract.

 

His slugging percentage is currently .427. I'd be happy to be rid of his salary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 8, 2013 -> 12:39 PM)
No team is going to want to do a PTBNL with someone on their 40 man unless you hold a gun to the team's head. Guys who are already on the 40 man roster can be called up in September. The Sox aren't going to PTBNL for a guy and then have him contribute to another team's chances.

IF they want Rios and that is the price, then they would. If they are making the deal and including a prospect from their 40 man, they are doing so because that is the price it will take to get Rios. Would they rather have Rios or that other guy on the 40?

 

It really isn't necessarily their option if that is indeed the price that Hahn thinks the Rangers need to pay for Rios.

 

Note: I don't know what that price is, but if thats what the Sox think it is, the other team has 3 options...1 call the bluff and take the contract; 2 accept the trade; 3 decline the trade and lose out on Rios (because the Sox aren't willing to give him up for nothing).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (greg775 @ Aug 8, 2013 -> 02:39 PM)
If Hahn can get them to pay his entire contract and gets a legitimate prospect, then he's a big-time winner in this scenario.

 

I say zero chance of both those things occuring. If we want to shed the entire salary we just let them have him for nothing. If we want any sort of legit prospect we will need to eat some salary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (lasttriptotulsa @ Aug 8, 2013 -> 03:43 PM)
I say zero chance of both those things occuring. If we want to shed the entire salary we just let them have him for nothing. If we want any sort of legit prospect we will need to eat some salary.

Then why move him? He can contribute next year and perhaps bring back a better return in talent either in the offseason or next year at the deadline.

 

It would make zero sense to move Rios for a pittance of a return, save $12 million on his deal, and then give 5/$90 to Choo or Ellsbury.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (southside hitman @ Aug 8, 2013 -> 02:32 PM)
I would be livid, as you should be, if we just dumped him for salary relief. Everything the Sox have said and indicated through these moves are that we are "reloading" not "rebuilding." Rios has value, we might have to eat some salary to get a premium prospect, but it can be done. Dumping salary would be a cop out, especially after we didn't pay any of Peavy's outgoing contract.

 

There have been no indications that this is true.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 8, 2013 -> 02:45 PM)
Then why move him? He can contribute next year and perhaps bring back a better return in talent either in the offseason or next year at the deadline.

 

It would make zero sense to move Rios for a pittance of a return, save $12 million on his deal, and then give 5/$90 to Choo or Ellsbury.

 

I'm not saying we should give him away for nothing. I'm just saying thats there's no way that the team who claimed him will take on the entire contract and give us anything back better than marginal prospects.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2013/08/unkn...on-waivers.html

 

2:45pm: The Rangers are the team that claimed Rios, according to Evan Grant of the Dallas Morning News (on Twitter). Grant cautions that claiming Rios and actually striking a deal to acquire the 32-year-old are very different things.

 

12:58pm: Ken Rosenthal of FOX Sports reports that Alex Rios has been claimed on revocable waivers by an unknown team (Twitter link).

 

Because he is on revocable waivers, the White Sox have 48 hours to work out a trade with the claiming team or pull him back off waivers. Chicago could also let the claiming team have Rios for nothing and be content to dump his salary -- the very manner in which Chicago acquired Rios from the Blue Jays in 2009 -- but that seems unlikely given his .277/.328/.421 batting line. Rios is controlled through 2014 and owed $12.5MM next season with a $13.5MM club option, though each of those salaries will increase by $500K if he is traded.

 

It seems likely that an American League team was awarded the claim on Rios, as waiver priority at this point in the season is determined by league and record. All 15 AL teams would have the opportunity to claim Rios before an NL team. The Rangers and Pirates were both connected to Rios prior to the July 31 non-waiver trade deadline.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (gatnom @ Aug 8, 2013 -> 12:47 PM)
There have been no indications that this is true.

There are indications in that he wasn't moved at the deadline.

 

Oops, nvm, misinterpreted what you meant.

Edited by iamshack
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rangers have indeed claimed him.

 

‏@Evan_P_Grant

MLB Sources: Rangers did claim Alex Rios. But claiming him and acquiring him 2 very different things.

 

https://twitter.com/Evan_P_Grant/status/365558909831876611

 

Yes, claiming does not equal acquiring, but the Rangers have the most incentive to give the Sox something valuable in return for him.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...