How did we not claim Berkman?

[StearnsFTW]

Anyone have any theories?

 

Because I can't think of a single good reason.

 

Nice bench bat and you can get a head start on talking him into being your 1st baseman next year (if you're so inclined, as I am).

 

Edit: I know we probably wouldn't have ended up with him anyway, but still. As a type A, obviously St. Louis pulls him back, but for God's sake, claim him anyway.

[Invader3K]

There's no point in putting in a claim that isn't going to work out, I'd guess. Melvin might even call their GM before bothering.

[StearnsFTW]

There's no point in putting in a claim that isn't going to work out, I'd guess. Melvin might even call their GM before bothering.

So, if that's the thinking, and he winds up on the Braves, that makes Melvin look pretty darn stupid............there's simply no downside to claiming him. I don't get it.

[dadofandrew]

You can't claim spendy players like that. They could have claimed him, had him get hurt, and SL could have let him go. No reward, some risk. There was no upside to claiming him, so, no one did. They deal with reality, and know one mistake could cost millions.

[Invader3K]

You can't claim spendy players like that. They could have claimed him, had him get hurt, and SL could have let him go. No reward, some risk. There was no upside to claiming him, so, no one did. They deal with reality, and know one mistake could cost millions.

Good point. Berkman would still be owed about $1.3 million this year, if my math isn't off. Not exactly peanuts for a small market club.

[RockCoCougars]

No upside? I'd give Berkman $1.3 million down the stretch, no hesitation whatsoever. He'd be ideal for this squad off the bench. I will be irate if somehow a playoff opponent gets him.

[KCBrewerfan34]

Dude the Cardinals would never let him go. Move on LOL

[trwi7]

No upside? I'd give Berkman $1.3 million down the stretch, no hesitation whatsoever. He'd be ideal for this squad off the bench. I will be irate if somehow a playoff opponent gets him.

 

Yes no upside, if he's healthy they're not trading him to us. If he say breaks his leg and his out 4 months, they let him go and make us pay him. No upside.

[RockCoCougars]

No upside? I'd give Berkman $1.3 million down the stretch, no hesitation whatsoever. He'd be ideal for this squad off the bench. I will be irate if somehow a playoff opponent gets him.

 

Yes no upside, if he's healthy they're not trading him to us. If he say breaks his leg and his out 4 months, they let him go and make us pay him. No upside.

I disagree. What is the point of claiming anybody on waivers then? You claim a guy like this mainly to block your competitors up the food chain from getting him. Like you said, if he's healthy, chances are they are not trading him anyway. I'll take my chance that he doesn't 'break his leg' between the time he goes on waivers and September 1st, if he does, I'll collect the draft picks that will come when he's a free agent.

[StearnsFTW]

No upside? I'd give Berkman $1.3 million down the stretch, no hesitation whatsoever. He'd be ideal for this squad off the bench. I will be irate if somehow a playoff opponent gets him.

 

Yes no upside, if he's healthy they're not trading him to us. If he say breaks his leg and his out 4 months, they let him go and make us pay him. No upside.

I disagree. What is the point of claiming anybody on waivers then? You claim a guy like this mainly to block your competitors up the food chain from getting him. Like you said, if he's healthy, chances are they are not trading him anyway. I'll take my chance that he doesn't 'break his leg' between the time he goes on waivers and September 1st, if he does, I'll collect the draft picks that will come when he's a free agent.

I agree. I've seen a couple of explanations, none of which makes any sense to me. I know it's not a big deal because St. Louis would pull him back from us anyway, but as I said in my original post, if we pass and Atlanta claims him and works out a deal, that is a really bad thing for us. And entirely preventable.....

 

Edit: The money thing is crazy, BTW. So, if we could "buy" Lance Berkman for the next 5 weeks + playoffs for $1.3M, some of you wouldn't do that?

[Baldkin]

No. You see, we could NOT buy him for the next 5 weeks + playoffs. St Louis would never have let him come to us if he was healthy.

 

We could ONLY buy him if he wasn't going to play, at all, for the next 5 weeks and the playoffs due to some injury. There is NO reward for the Brewers for claiming him.

 

Your attitude of "Claim everyone, and hope none of them gets hurt, so the 3% chance he gets sent to the Braves doesn't happen" is just a horrible idea for a team like the Brewers to do, and would leave them no financial flexibility after one or two mistakes.

[RockCoCougars]

Berkman seems like a move that Atlanta would make. He's owned the Brewers over the years, and I really don't want to be facing him in the playoffs without a LH reliever (and he's hit Narveson pretty well if you are going to throw him out there). I will be irate if he ends up going to Philly or Atlanta due to inactivity on the part of the Brewers. The fact that the Cardinals would likely get a pretty good prospect in such an event makes it even worse.

[StearnsFTW]

No. You see, we could NOT buy him for the next 5 weeks + playoffs. St Louis would never have let him come to us if he was healthy.

 

We could ONLY buy him if he wasn't going to play, at all, for the next 5 weeks and the playoffs due to some injury. There is NO reward for the Brewers for claiming him.

 

Your attitude of "Claim everyone, and hope none of them gets hurt, so the 3% chance he gets sent to the Braves doesn't happen" is just a horrible idea for a team like the Brewers to do, and would leave them no financial flexibility after one or two mistakes.

Whoever said "Claim everyone"?

 

I'll just claim the guys with 170 OPS+s and $1.3M left on their contract. Particularly when my likely first round playoff opponent could use a guy in RF.

[MNBrew]

The thing is, this waivers thing has been going on since they moved the non-waiver trade deadline back to July 31. It used to be August 31 (like back in '82 when the Brewers landed Don Sutton, for instance). It's normal stuff that pretty much everyone gets put through waivers whether teams have thoughts of trading them or not. With how many things get leaked these days, and with all the sources who get stuff onto the internet, we just hear more about them -- this year more so than ever, esp. in terms of particulars (i.e., who claimed who). Historically, the point of the August trade waivers isn't to expect your guys to get claimed so you can work out a deal, but to see who makes it through waivers so they might be able to be traded freely (a la Larry Walker to St. Louis comes to mind as an example).

 

I don't think the Cardinals ever would've traded Berkman to the Brewers, so thoughts of that strike me as just sheer fantasy -- doubtlessly fun, but sheer fantasy nonetheless. The apparent frustration that the Brewers wouldn't bother putting in a claim on Berkman just doesn't seem rational.

[RockCoCougars]

Why doesn't it seem rational? I think everyone agrees that they need a power bat off the bench. A power bat from the left side, even better. Why wouldn't the Brewers put a claim in on every power hitter in the last year of their contract (or young and cheap). There aren't that many players in the baseball that fit the bill. How hard would it be for some intern to present Melvin with a list of say, guys with over 15-20 homers who are owed less than, say $2-3 million? My guess is that list would be pretty short. The GM staff could then put claims in for guys that they do their due diligence on. If the Brewers didn't claim Berkman, they better not have claimed anyone who doesn't pitch left-handed.

[Invader3K]

There's no way the Cards would have let Berkman go to the Brewers this season. None. They are still technically in the pennant race, and it's not like they are cash strapped and need to shed salary. What kind of message would it have sent to their fan base?

 

They certainly wouldn't want to give up the comp picks they'll get if he declines arby and leaves in free agency. This idea is just a pipe dream that wouldn't happen, so no need to seethe at Melvin over it.

[StearnsFTW]

There's no way the Cards would have let Berkman go to the Brewers this season. None. They are still technically in the pennant race, and it's not like they are cash strapped and need to shed salary. What kind of message would it have sent to their fan base?

 

They certainly wouldn't want to give up the comp picks they'll get if he declines arby and leaves in free agency. This idea is just a pipe dream that wouldn't happen, so no need to seethe at Melvin over it.

As long as the Braves don't get him I'm not seething. I didn't really mention that in my first post, so I can definitely see (after rereading it) why people are responding the way they are.

 

I agree that there's no way the Brewers would've gotten him, I just worry about him being a Brave.

[RockCoCougars]

Agreed. It's not about the Brewers getting him, it's about keeping the Braves from getting him. Like I said, above, this seems like the type of move that the Braves (or Phillies) would make. Lets say the Cards are 11.5 back on Tuesday night. Why wouldn't they move Berkman if the Brewers magic number is down to 16 or something? Melvin's culpability in this all depends on when Berkman was placed on waivers. If it had been three weeks ago, I might give him a pass, but based on the press reports it has been in the past week. Melvin was foolish not to put in the claim.

[Invader3K]

Agreed. It's not about the Brewers getting him, it's about keeping the Braves from getting him. Like I said, above, this seems like the type of move that the Braves (or Phillies) would make. Lets say the Cards are 11.5 back on Tuesday night. Why wouldn't they move Berkman if the Brewers magic number is down to 16 or something?

To get comp picks for him if he leaves after the season. He will probably be a Type A free agent.

[trwi7]

cubsdie wrote:

---

As long as the Braves don't get him I'm not seething. I didn't really mention that in my first post, so I can definitely see (after rereading it) why people are responding the way they are.

I agree that there's no way the Brewers would've gotten him, I just worry about him being a Brave.

The Braves were never going to get him unless the Cardinals felt they were completely out of the division race and the Braves sent the Cardinals a ton of quality talent. I hope it hits the news wire that the Brewers put Braun on waivers and nobody claimed him and a bunch of fans from other teams ask why they didn't claim him. The answer would be as obvious as it is for Berkman. There's no point in claiming him since the Brewers aren't going to trade him.

[RockCoCougars]

I hope it hits the news wire that the Brewers put Braun on waivers and nobody claimed him and a bunch of fans from other teams ask why they didn't claim him. The answer would be as obvious as it is for Berkman.

 

I disagree, the two cases aren't similar at all in my view. You didn't see me complaining on the David Wright thread, did you? That one is as obvious as Braun. Berkman is a free agent in a few months. Why did Houston trade him last August? I believe the Yankees got a comp pick for him, did they not? Berkman had a much longer background in Houston than he does in St. Louis. Though the odds are fairly low, I would not be shocked at all if he was traded.

[pretendastronaut]

No team put a claim on Berkman, so I'm not sure how Melvin is a fool for not stopping some hypothetical that never happened. Add to that, indications are Berkman wants to come back to St. Louis next year, and they probably don't trade him to anyone. The Yankees supposedly put in a claim on Carlos Pena, and the Cubs pulled him back because both sides may want him back in Chicago next year, it happens.

 

Also, the Braves and Brewers had nearly identical records for most of the past week, so I don't even know how they would handle the priority there, maybe who did it first? In that case, there's no guarantee that claiming Berkman would have stopped a Braves claim.

 

I don't know, seems like a weird issue to get upset about. Players go through waivers, plenty of claims have been awarded this month, and I can't recall one that has been completed.

 

Edit: Thome was a waiver deal, pretty large oversight there. But still can't think of anyone outside of him.

[LaprilOne]

It is beyond me how people like to call RR and Melvin "fool," "idiot," "stupid" and other nasty names.

 

Disagree with strategy, but that does not make them stupid. Magic number is 19, not bad for stupid fools running the team.

[igor67]

A couple of random things to think about as to why claiming everyone and their uncle might not be wise. What if the stars align and a couple of guys fall into your lap? That's a quick way to blow a hole in next year's budget, to say nothing of the roster management problem. I'm guessing that if he had gotten the chance Melvin might have tried to block Thome to the Phillies, and a play a little bit of hardball. However, it's pretty easy to imagine burning more than a few bridges among other GMs by claiming all sorts of guys, and in effect blocking a whole bunch of trades. It's a small world and being a jerk can very easily have consequences in a couple of months when he goes looking to make offseason deals.

[bigredrobbo]

I hope it hits the news wire that the Brewers put Braun on waivers and nobody claimed him and a bunch of fans from other teams ask why they didn't claim him. The answer would be as obvious as it is for Berkman.

 

I disagree, the two cases aren't similar at all in my view. You didn't see me complaining on the David Wright thread, did you? That one is as obvious as Braun. Berkman is a free agent in a few months. Why did Houston trade him last August? I believe the Yankees got a comp pick for him, did they not? Berkman had a much longer background in Houston than he does in St. Louis. Though the odds are fairly low, I would not be shocked at all if he was traded.

Houston was salary dumping, and saw Berkman as part of their past rather than part of their future. Berkman actually thought he might be re-signed by the Astros this winter and was disappointed to be told that they had no intention of doing so. There's just such a huge difference between that scenario and now, that to link the two is pretty fatuous, to be honest.

 

For St. Louis to even suggest that they might waive Berkman to us, pretty much says to the fanbase, "yup, we've thrown in the towel". Plus, there's a groundswell of opinion over there that he might be an insurance policy at 1B should Pujols do the unthinkable and leave.

 

I guess I can't believe that we're debating the sanity or otherwise of a scenario that would never in a million years have happened.