Ryan Braun and August Waivers

[xisxisxis]

So the yearly exercise of placing almost all players on REVOCABLE waivers will begin soon and the media reports of who, *gasp*, were exposed will come...

 

My question is: If the Brewers place Braun on revocable waivers and another team picks him up, should the Brewers let him go?

 

(I don't know the nuts and bolts of the process, so I don't know if a team pulls the player back then can trade him to the claiming team, or if the Brewers would not reclaim him if team X gives them compensation)...

 

This isn't Braun hate, I am interested in the general take on what others think. Braun is owed 2 more years (2019-2020) of salary that there is good indication, he won't be able to "earn". I had hoped that we could get 1.5-2 WAR out of him this year and somewhere between 1-1.5 per year the next 2 years, but that is looking way too optimistic. He is owed $34M for '19-'20 and ~$6M for the remainder of '18. Letting him go would weaken this years team and might effect a deep playoff run, but would the salary relief be better spent on C upgrade and a FA OF with a more cost-effective deal next year. With the addition of Schoop and Moustakis, the offense is better off and might be able to offset a loss of Braun. If the Brewers did let him go or negotiate a trade, would it be good to add another OF such as McCutcheon through a waiver trade? IF, there was a claim by another team on Braun, it's tempting to trade him for the salary relief, but it's a big risk if we don't add back another OF through the same mechanism...

[StearnsFTW]

I'd let him go if someone claimed him. And I think there's a close to zero percent chance anyone would.

 

The question I think is pertinent is how much money would you pay someone to take him. I'd pay around a third I'd think just to move on.

[KeithStone53151]

From a strictly baseball/team building point of view, I think it probably makes sense to let him walk if another team claims him. But there would be significant negative feedback from fans and it may be viewed negatively in the clubhouse. If Braun leaves and ever plays elsewhere, it has to happen the right way.

 

One other piece to this, I'm not entirely sure that Braun couldn't veto that move with his no trade rights. I know it isn't a trade, I think djoctagone might be better suited to weigh in on that piece.

 

And one last piece, I highly doubt anyone claims him anyway...so this is probably moot for the most part.

[pacopete4]

We are going to need Braun if we are serious about making a run. Aguilar is already trending towards having a meltdown and we don’t have much options for a RH bat unless Santana were to figure himself out.

[NievesNoNO]

Why would Braun agree to a trade at this point? Remember he needs to approve any deal.

[pacopete4]

Why would Braun agree to a trade at this point? Remember he needs to approve any deal.

 

Unless it is LA, he probably wouldn’t.

[young guns]

I'm fairly sure the player can still veto. I think this came up in discussions last year with verlander and that he could still veto even if Detroit just wanted to dump him. But I'm not positive.

[MadScientist]

I can't see any reason any team would risk claiming Braun, but if so I think the Brewers would let him go. Losing him really wouldn't hurt the team very much, production wise, although it might impact morale.

[adambr2]

It basically has no chance of happening, considering he was not claimed in August 2016 when he was a lot more productive than he is now.

 

Hypothetically, yes if he was claimed they should let him walk for free, as the roster and financial flexibility benefits would outweigh what he brings at this point. But again not happening, because to answer the other part of it, yes if hypothetically claimed he can refuse it with 10/5 rights and would do so unless the claiming team was the Dodgers.

[OldHeidelberg]

It tougher than it seems on the surface since even with Schoop they still need him against lefties so letting him go would weaken this team this year I would think. His production is still pretty solid even with the low BA. But getting out of that contract opens up so many options in the off season, I am sure they would let him go and take their chances with Broxton or someone else against lefty starters the rest the way. But it's not happening.

[xisxisxis]

I'm fairly sure the player can still veto. I think this came up in discussions last year with verlander and that he could still veto even if Detroit just wanted to dump him. But I'm not positive.

 

I thought if the team just let the player be claimed on waivers (no trade) that the player could not veto a waiver claim. I think it's only if the Brewers would try to "trade" him through the waiver process that he can say no, but don't know the exact details...

 

Edit: From a Jayson Stark article:

Like outright waivers, a player with a no-trade clause who is claimed must be pulled back if the player’s no-trade clause allows him to block a deal to the claiming club. However, the player may waive the no-trade clause and join the claiming club.

 

So if the Dodgers claim him then it's possible to let him go...

[KeithStone53151]

I'm fairly sure the player can still veto. I think this came up in discussions last year with verlander and that he could still veto even if Detroit just wanted to dump him. But I'm not positive.

 

I thought if the team just let the player be claimed on waivers (no trade) that the player could not veto a waiver claim. I think it's only if the Brewers would try to "trade" him through the waiver process that he can say no, but don't know the exact details...

 

I think the bold part is right, even if it's a waiver claim/dump...I think the player can still veto the move. I'm not 100% sure on that but I also recall the Verlander thing last year and think I remember him having veto rights regardless. At this point, I'm not even sure Braun would approve a trade to the Dodgers. We are competitve and Braun wants to win, his playing time here is somewhat limited but he might not play at all in LA.

[pacopete4]

Clutch stats. This team doesn’t have many performers when the chips are down. Tough to replace if you’re serious about winning this season.

[A Swing and A Drive]

Don't fool yourself. The Brewers would let him go if he were claimed and someone took on the entire contract.

 

Would help them be "serious" about winning BEYOND this season.

[igor67]

I would be stunned if he got claimed, but all things considered I'd take any heat (I really don't think at this point there would be that much fan heat) and just let him go. That would free up a lot of money for doing other things. I too had hoped in a more limited role he'd be able to put up reasonable numbers, but that doesn't seem to be the case. And at his current rate there is a serious risk of him being a complete roster anchor rather just really then expensive depth

[xisxisxis]

So I found this at spotrac.com:

 

No Trade Protection, can block trades to all teams except the Angels, Dodgers, Marlins, Rays, and Nationals.

 

Too bad the Angels are out and the Nats are not likely to be buyers as each of those teams could, in theory, make a claim...

[MrTPlush]

A few things are a given here:

 

-No team is dumb enough to claim Braun

 

-No way we don’t laugh and let the claiming team have him.

 

Mod edit: No reason to call out other posters like that

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

I think any opportunity to trade or otherwise jettison Braun has come and gone. Which is fine. This is what happens when stars age, and the risk that you run when you sign stars to large, long-term contracts.

 

Braun is going to continue to serve his role as basically an expensive limited-position utility player though 2020, when his mutual option will likely be bought out. I think he has the ability to get hot and hopefully carry the team's offense for short stretches, but the MVP version of Ryan Braun likely isn't going to ever be back. But as a wily veteran and team leader, you could do worse.

[coolhandluke121]

You don't just "let him go" in that situation. Technically I'm almost positive you work out a trade with the first team that claims him. You can trade him for a used jock strap, but it's still a trade and therefore he can block it. What good is a no-trade clause if the player could be dumped in a waiver deal?

 

The Brewers and Braun can negotiate some kind of buy-out after the season. If he's not gonna get any playing time, he might consider it, but he's still gonna get some pa's this year. Santana is a big question mark in all of this but I do think he'll bounce back and be ahead of Braun next year.

[coolhandluke121]

So I found this at spotrac.com:

 

No Trade Protection, can block trades to all teams except the Angels, Dodgers, Marlins, Rays, and Nationals.

 

Too bad the Angels are out and the Nats are not likely to be buyers as each of those teams could, in theory, make a claim...

 

That's outdated. His 10/5 rights kicked in last May. That's why some of us were so disappointed they didn't do the LAD deal in 2016.

[OldHeidelberg]

I think any opportunity to trade or otherwise jettison Braun has come and gone. Which is fine. This is what happens when stars age, and the risk that you run when you sign stars to large, long-term contracts.

 

Braun is going to continue to serve his role as basically an expensive limited-position utility player though 2020, when his mutual option will likely be bought out. I think he has the ability to get hot and hopefully carry the team's offense for short stretches, but the MVP version of Ryan Braun likely isn't going to ever be back. But as a wily veteran and team leader, you could do worse.

 

Yes, I have finally given up this season that he is going to be the player of old but my first thought after the Mouse trade was I sure am glad we have Braun for lefty starters and off the bench to balance out the LH hitters. An very expensive role player for sure but a pretty good one when healthy. Plus I think he is a notorious Cub killer.

[OnaBadger58]

Braun has been one of the most clutch players on the team... And that's about it right now. Still have faith he has a hot streak in him this year.

[KeithStone53151]

Braun is still a very good hitter when healthy. With how good the team is in general, and especially how good the outfield is...Braun helps the team more in a part time starter/ph role and playing only when he's healthy and feeling good. The team would be worse right now if we let Braun walk, but over the next 2 years we could easily buy Braun's production at a fraction of the cost.

[NievesNoNO]

So I found this at spotrac.com:

 

No Trade Protection, can block trades to all teams except the Angels, Dodgers, Marlins, Rays, and Nationals.

 

Too bad the Angels are out and the Nats are not likely to be buyers as each of those teams could, in theory, make a claim...

 

That's outdated. His 10/5 rights kicked in last May. That's why some of us were so disappointed they didn't do the LAD deal in 2016.

 

One of Stearns few mistakes imo. Anyway, I can't see a team claiming him where he'd accept the move. The Brewers are in the position that most players want to be in.

[adambr2]

From a strictly baseball/team building point of view, I think it probably makes sense to let him walk if another team claims him. But there would be significant negative feedback from fans and it may be viewed negatively in the clubhouse. If Braun leaves and ever plays elsewhere, it has to happen the right way.

 

Is anyone outside of the ultra-casual fan really going to have negative feedback on Braun leaving anymore? I just don't see anyone these days saying "Well Braun is gone, so I'm not watching or going to games."

 

Hypothetically, if the Packers were able to survive the backlash from moving on from Brett Favre after 16 seasons, I think the Brewers would do just fine if they decided to move on from Braun. People find new favorites. At the end of the day if you're winning, that pretty much takes care of everything else.