Waivers/DFA

[ThisIsMyCrew]

Can someone shed some light on this whole August waivers situation? It was brought up in the in game thread to just put our players on waiver, ie cain.

 

If a player is put on waivers, then claimed, do we owe any more money to them? Or does the claiming team take on the whole contract? Is there any negations that can happen to send money with a claimed player?

[Oxy]

Before this year it was negotiable and waivers was revocable. Neither is the case anymore (I think. If no trades can be made I'm not sure what the point of "revocable" waivers would be).

 

What's interesting is that in past years these things all happened behind the scenes until the trade was actually made, and then it was made public,so almost all veterans were "waived" then that player was either traded or the waiver was revoked if that player was claimed and no deal could be made...and nobody heard about it. I suppose the same will happen this year in that if a guy is waived and claimed then we'll hear about it, but if he is waived and NOT claimed it will be forgotten.

 

I'm just curious who will be waived by the Brewers come August 22nd or so.

 

And no, if we waive a guy and he is claimed the claimant takes on the entire contract as well.

[jerichoholicninja]

If a player is waived and not claimed wouldn't he be a free agent and therefore it will be news?

[Oxy]

If a player is waived and not claimed wouldn't he be a free agent and therefore it will be news?

 

Only if he is also Designated for Assignment...the two often go together, but not when revocable waivers are being discussed--which in the past often happened in August but no longer.

 

Also, in that case the waiving team owes the player the remainder of his guaranteed contract.

[DHonks]

can a player still be waived with the intention of them being claimed, but if unclaimed then pulled back off of revocable waivers?

 

example:

Brewers put Braun on waivers. If Dodgers claim him, we let him go and they assume entire contract. However, if unclaimed, we pull him back, thus preventing us from paying lots of money to someone no longer wearing our uniform.

[Oxy]

can a player still be waived with the intention of them being claimed, but if unclaimed then pulled back off of revocable waivers?

 

example:

Brewers put Braun on waivers. If Dodgers claim him, we let him go and they assume entire contract. However, if unclaimed, we pull him back, thus preventing us from paying lots of money to someone no longer wearing our uniform.

 

There is no reason to "pull back" or "revoke" an unclaimed player as there is nothing to pull back from...If a player is waived (but neither claimed nor DFA'd), 'tis as if he was never waived at all...The MLB has mostly guaranteed contracts because...well...that's the way it's always been since Curt Flood and Marvin Miller and Arthur Goldberg opened the gates to free agency.

[DHonks]

can a player still be waived with the intention of them being claimed, but if unclaimed then pulled back off of revocable waivers?

 

example:

Brewers put Braun on waivers. If Dodgers claim him, we let him go and they assume entire contract. However, if unclaimed, we pull him back, thus preventing us from paying lots of money to someone no longer wearing our uniform.

 

There is no reason to "pull back" or "revoke" an unclaimed player as there is nothing to pull back from...If a player is waived (but neither claimed nor DFA'd), 'tis as if he was never waived at all...The MLB has mostly guaranteed contracts because...well...that's the way it's always been since Curt Flood and Marvin Miller and Arthur Goldberg opened the gates to free agency.

 

maybe I wasn't clear. The difference between someone being claimed on waivers and someone being waived, unclaimed, and becoming an unrestricted free agent is that in the former the other team is on the hook for the salary, in the latter the Brewers would still be on the hook.

 

So if someone is put on waivers but unclaimed, the old Aug-Sept system allowed teams to pull that player off waivers and retain him. Can a person placed on waivers still be pulled back?

[Oxy]

So if someone is put on waivers but unclaimed, the old Aug-Sept system allowed teams to pull that player off waivers and retain him. Can a person placed on waivers still be pulled back?

 

I don't know but it would be kind of silly. I suppose you'd gain a little bit of knowledge about who thinks the contract might be worth it in the off-season when trading is allowed--but any claiming team could say they primarily wanted the player/contract for THIS year so the trade value changes drastically in the offseason.

 

I get what you are saying though.

[Lathund]

So if someone is put on waivers but unclaimed, the old Aug-Sept system allowed teams to pull that player off waivers and retain him. Can a person placed on waivers still be pulled back?

 

What teams used to do isn't to pull back players that went unclaimed, but rather players who were claimed but where no trade could be agreed and who they wouldn't want to lose for nothing. Waivers themselves don't mean released, the players who cleared waivers in August were still on the roster, business as usual. Justin Verlander reportedly cleared waivers in early August (Teams would waive many, if not most, of their players in early August as there was no downside to it) and was traded at the end of the month. He's already cleared waivers at that point, teams can't claim him, but he's free (But not required) to be traded, released or sent to the minors (Though obviously could and would refuse that). I don't think anything has changed regards to waivers themselves, just that there is little point to putting players on waivers since you can't trade them.

[MadThinker88]

The old August process has been removed...

So I do not believe the "revocable" waivers exist anymore.

 

If you waive someone, the person is gone from the MLB roster & 40 man roster. If the person clears waivers (goes unclaimed) they can get sent to the minors or if the player has enough time they can decline the assignment & look to join another organization.

 

The waiving team is still responsible for the existing contract or a claiming team assumes the existing contract. If the player declined the minor league assignment, they still keep getting paid (by the waving club) & any team that signs him is only responsible for paying a pro-rated portion of the MLB minimum. That pro-rated amount is subtract from what the waving club continues to pay.

 

Edit: I think this link from MLBTradeRumors will help everyone. It was posted 8/1/19..

 

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2019/08/so-what-can-teams-do-in-august.html

[djoctagone]

If you waive someone, the person is gone from the MLB roster & 40 man roster. If the person clears waivers (goes unclaimed) they can get sent to the minors

not necessarily.

 

the process of clearing waivers you're describing is an outright assignment. the player is outrighted off the 40-man roster and sent outright to the minor leagues. the first time that this happens for any player with under five years of mlb service, the club retains all rights of control. the player must accept the outright assignment to the minor leagues.

 

however, once said player accepts an outright minor league assignment from any major league club (note not an optional minor league assignment), he reserves the right to refuse any subsequent outright minor league assignments. if he does so, he voids his contract and becomes a free agent.

[djoctagone]

So if someone is put on waivers but unclaimed, the old Aug-Sept system allowed teams to pull that player off waivers and retain him. Can a person placed on waivers still be pulled back?

not since the 2018 season. those days are gone.

[MadThinker88]

DJ - Can we agree 2 things??

1) There are only 2 types of waivers - outright & release.

2) In both cases, the player is removed from the MLB 25 and 40 man rosters.

[djoctagone]

yes, but i hope you'd also agree that motorists and cyclists should use turn signals at all times.

[MadThinker88]

yes, but i hope you'd also agree that motorists and cyclists should use turn signals at all times.

 

Absolutely. Very few of us can actually read minds...

[rickh150]

RA Dickey might be on our radar. He should be, at least.

[rickh150]

Could teams potentially just dump salary by running FA or anyone deemed worthy through waivers, and if other teams want the players let them have them, salary commitment and all? Will this happen in August? Some teams will still want to add to their bench or pen, and bad teams will gladly drop salary since they are completely out of playoff contention. If bad teams can save a few hundred thousand dollars, they'll do it right?

 

Let's say we are 10 games out of the WC on Aug. 28, could we just run Moose and Grandal thru waivers to potentially save around 5 millions dollars?

[Oxy]

Could teams potentially just dump salary by running FA or anyone deemed worthy through waivers, and if other teams want the players let them have them, salary commitment and all? Will this happen in August? Some teams will still want to add to their bench or pen, and bad teams will gladly drop salary since they are completely out of playoff contention. If bad teams can save a few hundred thousand dollars, they'll do it right?

 

Let's say we are 10 games out of the WC on Aug. 28, could we just run Moose and Grandal thru waivers to potentially save around 5 millions dollars?

 

I thought so...but after reading djocto's posts I am no longer sure. i was under the impression that if nobody claimed them we could keep them (revoke putting them on waivers and save face by not releasing/outrighting) those players. But if nobody claims them and we are forced to remove them from the roster that would be a bad look.

 

I guess we'll all find out in the next few weeks.

[djoctagone]

yes, grandal or moustakas could be designated for assignment in august, forcing the brewers to either try to outright them to the minors by clearing waivers (either has enough service time to refuse the minor league assignment), or release them.

 

advantage of the new club to signing a released player: the new club pays a pro-rated minimum and the original club is on the hook for the majority of his remaining salary. disadvantage of waiting until the player is released: competing with 28 other teams on the free market, as opposed to just the teams ahead of you in the waiver claim process, and the acquiring team assumes all responsibility for the remainder of the contract.

 

any team could submit $50,000 to the brewers and claim either on outright assignment waivers.

 

the claiming team would be responsible for the remainder of the player's contract--including the mutual option for 2020 in the case of grandal and moustakas.

 

i think it's reasonable to expect that many teams will try to expose veteran players to outright waivers in late august.

[adambr2]

One thing that bears mentioning is that a player's no-trade clause still applies in the event of a waiver claim. (I'm almost positive, at least that is how it worked under revocable waivers in years past).

 

So if the Brewers were to waive Braun or Cain and someone did claim them, we could not just dump their contract unless they agreed to it (if the claim were made by one of Cain's 15 NTC teams, or in Braun's case, any team)

[rickh150]

yes, grandal or moustakas could be designated for assignment in august, forcing the brewers to either try to outright them to the minors by clearing waivers (either has enough service time to refuse the minor league assignment), or release them.

 

advantage of the new club to signing a released player: the new club pays a pro-rated minimum and the original club is on the hook for the majority of his remaining salary. disadvantage of waiting until the player is released: competing with 28 other teams on the free market, as opposed to just the teams ahead of you in the waiver claim process, and the acquiring team assumes all responsibility for the remainder of the contract.

 

any team could submit $50,000 to the brewers and claim either on outright assignment waivers.

 

the claiming team would be responsible for the remainder of the player's contract--including the mutual option for 2020 in the case of grandal and moustakas.

 

i think it's reasonable to expect that many teams will try to expose veteran players to outright waivers in late august.

 

Not sure why team would have to designate said player for assignment.. players were run thru waivers for years while still being active in the majors.

[Outlander]

The Brewers should really evaluate where they are at at the end of August and consider putting Moose and Grandal on waivers. If they got rid of them would save on September salary and not having to pay the option after the season and hopefully ownership would let Stearns use those funds for 2020. Would imagine teams would put claims on them and the Brewers would be off the hook. Just another option for smaller markets like Milwaukee, gives them the opportunity to sign these bigger free agents to one year deals with mutual options that are never picked up but if things go south for the team they get rid of the player and the liability to pay the option.

[djoctagone]

Not sure why team would have to designate said player for assignment.. players were run thru waivers for years while still being active in the majors.

those days are gone. august 2018 was the last time that revocable waivers could happen.

 

they're irrevocable waivers now. the team must commit to removing the player from the 40-man roster, and potentially, the organization entirely.

[Oxy]

Technically, that's true. But it would be pretty easy for the GMs to set up a Group email and unofficially waive guys and see if anybody wants to pick them up.

 

Obviously, guys could lie and not actually pick up a player they said they would, but that would be awfully bad business if everybody knew you lied.

[djoctagone]

it should be noted that players with a full no-trade clause in their contract or players with ten-and-five service (ten years, the last five with the same club) cannot be placed on irrevocable outright waivers. they can be released, but there's no way for another club to immediately assume responsibility for the remainder of the player's contract.

 

we're not aware of any players on the brewers with a full no-trade clause, but ryan braun certainly qualifies as a ten-and-five player.