Comments on: Rainout Roundup

By: Seamus

Seamus — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 22:17:11 +0000

@Texy: Oh I don’t disagree that it’s dopey to criticize the Yankees for celebrating the division win…and yeah, I know it’s now a tradition.

By: sittingstill

sittingstill — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 21:36:50 +0000

@texy: The player would have had to be in the new organization by 8/31 (even if in the minors) to be eligible for postseason play.

Agreed, totally, that it is rather silly that we can’t see the rules!

By: Texy

Texy — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 21:31:00 +0000

@sittingstill: But does that deadline apply equally to all players? Or only players who weren’t claimed off waivers and withdrawn?

Here’s the part I can’t find anyone to address: if a player was placed on waivers and claimed, but the submitting team withdrew the player off waivers — can that team then simply DFA him without regard to the claiming team? It seems like the DFA route is just a way to circumvent the waiver claim.

Although maybe it’s not really a circumvention at all, since they’re essentially held out of the trade pool until after the season is over. But in the Yankees’ case, they made a claim on a guy they ostensibly wanted to help them in the postseason (which is false here, I know- they were just mucking up the Sox-Mets works), the Sox pull the guy off waivers… and then can simply wait and trade him while the Yankees are still playing? They could even trade him to the Angels or Tigers/Twins. That doesn’t seem fair.

Again, this is all with a giant neon caveat that I wish I could just see the rules for myself!

By: sittingstill

sittingstill — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 21:24:36 +0000

@ texy–Cot’s also says this in their transaction dates page:

October 5, 2009
All players on optional assignment must be recalled. MLR 11 (a).
First day players may be traded without waivers in effect.

http://mlbcontracts.blogspot.com/2003/01/important-transaction-dates_03.html

I don’t think they’ve put Carter on waivers–they’ve just designated him for assignment.

By: Texy

Texy — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 21:24:33 +0000

@sittingstill: Are they trying to test out guys to fill in in the Justin Masterson Long Relief Role? I know the 40-man was light on pitching to begin with, but I don’t know what specific holes they see that they’re trying to plug. I sure was wishing for Justin Masterson last night…

On Carter, someone somewhere mentioned that he’d be good in a Kotchman-esque role – like you mention, DH with some off-the-bench 1B work mixed in. He’s not going to get that in the NL.

By: sittingstill

sittingstill — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 21:17:30 +0000

Of course, the corollary is–if they’re willing to take the chance on Carter being claimed to activate Richardson, AND willing to make what could be considered an interesting DL move by putting Bates there to activate Cabrera… what’s up with the bullpen?

By: sittingstill

sittingstill — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 21:14:15 +0000

Interesting–my understanding was that it was the end of the regular season. Thanks for the correction! That said, I’d be surprised if he got claimed off waivers–he got as far as the Yankees, who won’t do it now that their 40-man is full, and I’d be awfully surprised if any NL team claims him (I remain a bit baffled that the Mets do–I wish the best for him, but I think he’d be better with a chance to DH than to pinch hit).

By: Texy

Texy — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 21:11:11 +0000

@Canad-Ian: All it takes is 5 innings. The Jays were beating the tar out of the Sox before the 7th.

By: Canad-Ian

Canad-Ian — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 21:05:57 +0000

That game was a gift from mother nature. I have a feeling that the Sox would have made it very close because Casey Janssen was on the verge of blowing it completely. A win is a win, even if it was only seven innings!

By: Texy

Texy — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 20:47:08 +0000

@Texy: @sittingstill: So I was on the right track – sort of.

From Major League Rule 10 (summary by Sox Prospects, since the MLR are not published by MLB):
“When the proposed assignment is to another MLB club, waivers shall be required from 4:00 pm ET on July 31 until the day after the World Series.”

And from Cot’s Baseball Contracts:
“November 10, 2009
End of waiver period (August 1 – November 10). Waivers secured on or after August 1, 2009, expire at 5 p.m. EST. MLR 10 (c)(4).”

These are the times when I wish they’d just publish the full Major League Rules on mlb.com, so I can digest the rules myself. Of course, they never will – neither will the NFL or NBA.

By: Becks0823

Becks0823 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 20:36:08 +0000

I feel like this week has been dramatic for all the wrong reasons. And it’s only Tuesday.

By: Texy

Texy — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 20:12:59 +0000

@sittingstill: I thought the “end of the season” for roster moves when a player had been claimed off waivers and subsequently DFA’ed during the regular season occurs 5 business days after the last game of the World Series – so because the Yanks put in a waiver claim, he can’t be traded to any team other than the Yankees until 5 days after the WS.

Of course, I could be wrong. It has been known to happen. On occasion. (ok, on lots of occasions…)

By: shaggy

shaggy — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 19:50:31 +0000

That Fitzgerald/Beckett link was absolutely Hi-Larry-Us!

By: sittingstill

sittingstill — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 19:43:07 +0000

Carter will be traded to the Mets as planned. Keep in mind that the team has 10 days to move a player who has been DFA’d, which here will take them past the end of the regular season, at which point he doesn’t have to be exposed to a claim.

By: Texy

Texy — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 19:25:55 +0000

@Seamus: I get that – but at this point, I think it’s too late: it’s already tradition. That’s what they do now. So I don’t begrudge anyone who does that. But, like I said- had the article attached everyone for those kind of celebrations, fine. I understand that viewpoint (and yours) – and get why that’s grating. But it’s not like the Yankees are doing something unique in that respect, so they shouldn’t be singled out.

And I can’t hate Canada – they gave us Jason Bay. And the Expos… NATSTOWN!

By: Seamus

Seamus — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 19:04:30 +0000

IMNSHO, celebrations shouldn’t occur until you win the pennant. Period. Not winning the division, not even winning the wild card.

While it was fun to see our boys celebrate, I still felt it really wasn’t necessary…unless you don’t see yourself celebrating the one celebration all teams want. What then?

“Ah, at least we partied when we won the division/wild card.”

Really? Does that take the sting out of being eliminated later on? No offense to anyone who likes the early celebrations but me, I’d rather hold out for the one that really means something.

PS – Texy, ignore the Canucks….they still suck the Queen’s wrinkled up old dick. :)

By: Texy

Texy — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 18:50:18 +0000

@Piney61: I agree. And that article made me extra stabby because it either was trying to single out the Yankees for something every team does (and does deservedly so, in my opinion- I love the celebrations) or it was trying to say the Yankees are too good to do something like that (which is patently absurd).

By: Piney61

Piney61 — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 18:06:19 +0000

It’s a long season and if they make it to the playoffs, it should be celebrated. It’s not a celebration, IMO, of making it to the playoffs. It’s more of a celebration of the entire season. I mean yes, the making it to the playoffs is a part of it, but it’s mostly just celebrating HOW they got there, not that they got there. Anybody who whines about celebrating a playoff slot isn’t keeping in mind that “holy crap, they’re one of 8 teams to make it!” that’s worth celebrating even if it is a Wild Card (hell sometimes the Wild Card team is better than almost all the other teams…it’s just that the one team better than them is the one who won the division)

At least that’s how I see it.