Waivers

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

So, they finalized the David Wells/George Kottaras trade, and Kottaras will be assigned to the Sox AA team immediately. How is it that Kottaras can be traded without having to go through waivers? Wells made it through waivers, but Kottaras was never placed on waivers and certainly wouldn't make it through if he was. He was a part of the Padres 40-man roster. How does this sort of thing work? Anybody?

― polyphonic (polyphonic), Tuesday, 5 September 2006 20:32 (eighteen years ago)

I would likewise like to know why other teams don't block waiver trades all the time.

― c('°c) (Leee), Tuesday, 5 September 2006 21:14 (eighteen years ago)

I thought blocking a waiver deal meant you got that player (cf. the Yankees FOR THE BLOCK picking up Jose Canseco from the D-Rays or someone during some waiver bonanza).

― David R. (popshots75`), Wednesday, 6 September 2006 03:10 (eighteen years ago)

I don't think minor leaguers or players with limited big league experience have to clear waivers unless they are out of options, which is tied to how many times they have been called up to the bigs then sent back down to the minors.

The Pirates famously screwed up quite a few years back with Moises Alou when they had to make a roster move tied to the DL and could not send him back to the minors without clearing waivers as he was out of options. Alou got snagged by the Expos off of waivers for a player to be named later and that was that. It was kind of a big deal at the time as Alou was a prime prospect and then it came up again as soon as Moises turned into a big time player with Montreal.

I don't know how many times a player can come up and down without before they are out of options. I do know it is a reason sometimes why struggling young players are kept with the big club instead of being sent back down to get their game straight.

― Earl Nash (earlnash), Wednesday, 6 September 2006 05:40 (eighteen years ago)

Well, Kottaras has never been called up, so he certainly wasn't out of options.

David, doesn't that mean someone should be able to block the deal and acquire Kottaras?

― polyphonic (polyphonic), Wednesday, 6 September 2006 06:04 (eighteen years ago)

To paraphrase Richard Feynman, there are two things that nobody understands: quantum mechanics, and the waiver process in baseball.

― NoTimeBeforeTime (Barry Bruner), Wednesday, 6 September 2006 06:43 (eighteen years ago)

I think the waiver claim is only one-way - that is, you could claim the Prince of Gout initially, but you can't stop the deal once the claim's been staked (medium well).

― David R. (popshots75`), Wednesday, 6 September 2006 12:38 (eighteen years ago)

Does that mean that theoretically I could put Chan Ho Park on waivers, let him get through, and then trade him for Vlad Guerrero? Don't both team's players have to get through waivers?

― polyphonic (polyphonic), Wednesday, 6 September 2006 15:36 (eighteen years ago)

In this case, both teams' players did clear waivers.

Rotoworld says:

Given that there are several teams out there with some degree of ill will toward the Red Sox, it's surprising that the deal was able to be completed now, instead of after the season. Kottaras was on the 40-man roster, so to be traded now, he had to go through the entire NL and half of the AL on waivers. The Red Sox assigned Kottaras to Double-A Portland for that club's playoff run. He probably won't be called up later.

If Kottaras had been claimed, San Diego could have just pulled him back and completed the deal after the season, which is what happened when Boston traded a PTBNL (supposedly Adam Stern) for Javy Lopez; Tampa Bay, IIRC, put in a claim on Stern, and Stern was pulled back.

― govern yourself accordingly (dayan), Wednesday, 6 September 2006 19:36 (eighteen years ago)

wow, i guess it was something of a gentleman's agreement to not put in the claim, then.

― polyphonic (polyphonic), Wednesday, 6 September 2006 20:29 (eighteen years ago)

No it would just have been futile as the Padres/Red Sox could have just waited until after season to have completed the deal.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Wednesday, 6 September 2006 20:41 (eighteen years ago)

Hmm, I guess that's true. It's not like Kottaras is going to help the Sox this year anyway.

― polyphonic (polyphonic), Wednesday, 6 September 2006 20:44 (eighteen years ago)

It's interesting how the local Boston press here is derisively saluting Theo on this deal (I've heard "ooh, we got their 3rd best prospect" several times) while the national stuff I've read praised the Sox for getting someone useful out of the deal.

― zaxxon25 (zaxxon25), Wednesday, 6 September 2006 21:26 (eighteen years ago)

local Boston press in being jackasses shocker.

― polyphonic (polyphonic), Wednesday, 6 September 2006 21:58 (eighteen years ago)

Five times, right? That sticks in my head for some reason.

― jergins (jergins), Wednesday, 6 September 2006 23:09 (eighteen years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.