Master Index of Archived Threads


Colon on waivers

Frayed Knot Aug 25 2014 11:30 AM

Not that this by itself is news really. Some fans get out of breath reading stuff like this as they assume it's proof positive that the team wants to get rid of the player at the first possible opportunity. But, in reality, virtually every player that can legally be traded is placed on waivers at this time of year On the other hand, everyone essentially knew going in that Bartolo was going to be under trade speculation from the moment he signed his deal here to the moment it runs out at the end of 2015. So the Mets placing BC on waivers, reportedly just this past weekend (this stuff is supposed to be secret but rarely stays that way) gets the speculators a 'speculatin'. An article at MLB.com talks about: - Angels, With the ace-like Garrett Richards going down for the year (and part of next) it puts them in a spot to explore all pitching options. The drawbacks here are two: as the team in the AL with the best record they'll get LAST dibs on him; that they have very little in the way of top prospects to deal, particularly in the just about ready for prime time types that Sandy reportedly covets these days. - Oakland. Doesn't really need him but they do have reason to want to block Anaheim and there's probably not a lot of danger of the Mets invoking the 'You claim him, you got him' tactic just to get out of the contract. - Dodgers. Seems like they'll go after every big name that isn't already nailed down costs be damned. Plus they have Beckett out and who knows about Greinke after his recent scare, etc. - Pirates. Supposedly were in on the Jon Lester sweepstakes and, at 1.5 games out of the NLC lead, they've got reasons to want to upgrade. Also these teams worked out two trades in the recent past (Byrd, Ike) with seemingly little acrimony. Pitt would get the earliest shot at him from among these listed teams.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Aug 25 2014 11:44 AM Re: Colon on waivers

Let's keep on collecting Pittsburgh prospects.

Edgy MD Aug 25 2014 12:05 PM Re: Colon on waivers

If the A's claimed him and didn't want the contract, they could probably flip it quickly enough. Andrew Lambo, caught in limbo with the Pirates, you want to be a Met?

Frayed Knot Aug 25 2014 12:54 PM Re: Colon on waivers

The thing to remember about Colon is that he's not just a short-term rental, he's a year plus a short-term rental - and the fact that he's had a better than decent year and a decent price while being able to answer the bell for every start (aside from the whole mom dying thing) makes him a more valuable property, not less. I think Sandy will drive a very hard bargain if/when he does get claimed by a team actually looking to land him (or passes through completely and is free game to be dealt anywhere). IOW, no low-minors, long-term projects. Sandy wants some close to plus-in ready guys as we're certainly not in a NEED to get rid of him type of situation. Pitt's big prospect, Gregory Polanco, just got sent down after two months of struggling in his first ML exposure. Now I doubt Pirate mgmt are desperate enough to give up on him so quickly, but if I'm Sandy that's the kind of guy I'm holding out for rather than the three-years older Lambo who sounds kind of Duda-lite-ish. The Dodgers, on the other hand, strike me as a group who just might be crazy enough to talk either (AAA OF) Joc Pederson or (AA SS) Corey Seager figuring that they'll be able to go out and buy themselves a Cuban replacement at a flea market or something. I don't know if Oakland could just re-flip him so easily if they were to claim him. There might be a rule against going through waivers twice within the same time period and, even if not, they'd have to go through the whole process again with everyone knowing that they just want to get rid of him. A highly unlikely scenario IOW.

Benjamin Grimm Aug 25 2014 01:07 PM Re: Colon on waivers

The A's probably couldn't flip Colon immediately, but I'm sure they could after the season. And the difference between now and then is only a little over four weeks of salary.

Frayed Knot Aug 25 2014 01:11 PM Re: Colon on waivers

Benjamin Grimm wrote: The A's probably couldn't flip Colon immediately, but I'm sure they could after the season. And the difference between now and then is only a little over four weeks of salary. That's the more logical scenario. Of course they were the ones who chose not to sign him in the first place opting for Kazmir instead (very similar contracts even). Kazmir got his butt kicked by the Angels last night although had been pitching well up to that point so I don't think it'll throw Billy Beane into panic mode. And besides, I don't think the Mets are just going to lose Bartolo via a claim without compensation.

MFS62 Aug 25 2014 09:35 PM Re: Colon on waivers

CBS Sports is reporting that he has cleared waivers and now can be traded to any team. Later

Nymr83 Aug 25 2014 11:13 PM Re: Colon on waivers

MFS62 wrote: CBS Sports is reporting that he has cleared waivers and now can be traded to any team. Later but if nobody claimed him who wants him? unless there isa money-starved contender hoping to get the Mets to pick up part of the contract in exchange for a prospect whose owners said they cant claim him for risk of getting stuck with the whole thing.

Frayed Knot Aug 26 2014 06:28 AM Re: Colon on waivers

Not claiming him isn't necessarily the same thing as not wanting him. Lots of players slide through waivers, not just MLB's version of untouchables. Also, despite Bartolo's age and girth, his contract is quite reasonable for a league average (or better!) starter who's proven as durable as he's has, especially as it comes with just one year plus a few weeks worth of commitment. I think there'll be more than a few teams asking about him. See the linked Sherman article for starters. Now whether such teams are willing to offer up enough in exchange to entice Sandy to let him go is another story, but I'd be surprised if there weren't some talks.

Edgy MD Aug 26 2014 07:13 AM Re: Colon on waivers

That's a complex part of waivers that doesn't get discussed --- the notion that, if you clear waivers you are demonstrably unwanted. It isn't apparently always so.

Frayed Knot Aug 26 2014 07:36 AM Re: Colon on waivers

Especially since there's long been an understanding where I won't claim/block your waiver players and you won't claim mine. Now supposedly that gentlemen's agreement has broken down in recent years compared to what it used to be, but there's still a degree of tacit understanding where teams don't go throwing claims on every player that they think either they or their rivals might want to take a look at.