Royals Review: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:

Around SBN: Check out our NFL Scoreboard: scores, schedule and blogs Bar-right-arrows

Please no!

Kansas_state_tiny by playingwithfire on

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2008/07/yankees-eyein-1.html

 

Should the Jarrod Washburn deal fall apart, the Yankees are exploring an alternative in Brian Bannister for Melky Cabrera.  Bob Dutton of the Kansas City Star writes,

"Nothing appears imminent, but the framework for a deal seems to exist because New York has already shown a willingness to part with [Melky] Cabrera. Add this: The Royals nearly obtained Cabrera in a trade-deadline swap two years ago for veteran outfielder Reggie Sanders before Sanders suffered an injury."

In this scenario, David Dejesus moves to left to make room for Cabrera in center.  And Mark Teahen would get back to his natural position at first base.  Cabrera is making $461,200, only $40,200 more than Bannister, and both are set to reach arbitration after this season.

The Yanks prefer Washburn but are in negotiations after the Mariners rejected an offer of Cabrera and Kei Igawa for the lefty veteran.  Seattle might want Brett Gardner as well as for the Yankees to take on all of Washburn's $14MM contract through next year.

1 recs | Comment 113 comments

Read Related

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

I don't particularly trust this source but still

That’s a retarded idea. As much as I hate pitchers that pitches on “smart” like Bannister, I don’t hate them quite as bad as an average-below average CF that can’t hit. Especially if it pushes an equal defensive CF in DeJesus in to left where his bat is worth a lot less.

by playingwithfire on Jul 27, 2008 2:10 PM EDT   0 recs

Melky > Gathright

Move Rosa to the rotation… he sure cant be any worse than bannister right now… then move cortes up to triple a… i think its a great idea..

Yasuhiko Yabuta is to Major League Baseball as Drew Carey is to The Price is Right

by focs on Jul 27, 2008 3:47 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I don't think you move Banny

For a fourth OF.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Jul 27, 2008 4:14 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

+1

Melky is a pretty good 4th OFer. Not even a very good 4th OFer. And if we acquire him, he might become fixture in the lineup for years. And he can’t hit, period. This would be really, really stupid.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Jul 27, 2008 5:04 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Melky and Teabag are two different players

...and Teabag is the better one of the two.

Teahen’s career line: .268/.334/.422

Cabrera’s career line: .269/.332/.378

The two are basically the same when it comes to average and OBP, but despite the lack of power Teahen has for a COFer, his SLG is nearly 45 points higher than Melky’s, and his career OPS+ is 10 points higher.

Cabrera may be younger, but there has been no indication that he will ever be able to hit for any sort of power, and he doesn’t even have Gathright’s ability to steal bases. He would be a far worse offensive liability than would Teahen.

by DarthYoshi on Jul 27, 2008 5:16 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

the difference is that its likely that cabrera will improve some...

maybe immensely…but its far less likely for teahen.

TPJ...you're dead to me

by billybeingbilly on Jul 27, 2008 5:22 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Teahen is what he is, I agree

but what I am saying is that even if Cabrera still has the ceiling to keep improving (which he likely does), there is no indication that he will be anything more than a light-hitting OFer who does a decent job of getting on base. The Royals just don’t need an outfielder like that.

by DarthYoshi on Jul 27, 2008 5:24 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Teahen is much better than Cabrera already

And while Melky is younger, his numbers have dropped significantly each of the last 3 years. Shouldn’t one be concerned that he’s not getting better; he’s actually getting worse.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Jul 27, 2008 5:24 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

and teahen isnt?

TPJ...you're dead to me

by billybeingbilly on Jul 27, 2008 5:54 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Teahen may be getting worse, but he's at a higher level

He’s staying consistently significantly better than Melky.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Jul 27, 2008 6:52 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

You can give up on Teahen

I’ve come to the conclusion that Teahen isn’t going to be a good power hitter again. He may well be a .425 SLG guy, but I’m guessing that’s about it.

And, Melky has never had a season as good as Teahen’s best season. And I think most of Melky’s seasons have been worse Teahen’s career average. Teahen > Melky.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Jul 27, 2008 5:12 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I love it.

This is a great deal for us. Bannister is 27 and pans out to be an average MLB player from what we’ve seen. Cabrera is 23 and has been in the league for 3 years. He came up as a 19 year old in the NY spotlight. A relaxation of media attention could be just what he needs. He’ll be under our control for several more years. These are the beginning of the prime of his athletic days. I think it’s worth a shot. Maybe we can throw Olivo in becuase they are looking for a catcher and get one of their pitching prospects.

What do you think?

by 306008 on Jul 27, 2008 4:10 PM EDT   0 recs

In all likelihood, we would be better served by letting Olivo decline his option at the end of the year

and take a compensatory sandwich pick rather than get some C+ pitching prospect from the Yanks’ farm system (assuming Olivo manages to maintain his Type B status through the last couple months of the season).

I don’t think this would be a good trade for the Royals-Cabrera is essentially a slightly better Joey Gathright whose OBP has been steadily declining since 2006 and who can’t slug over .400 for the life of him. The last thing we need is another light-hitting outfielder-we have plenty of those in Omaha. I know we’d be selling low if we were to trade Bannister now, but this is selling quite low. If Bannister were to ever regain his 2007 form, this would go down as an awful trade—not quite as bad as the Perez-for-Dye trade, but pretty damn bad.

by DarthYoshi on Jul 27, 2008 5:04 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Researched

Looked at some of the Yankees pitching prospects. Let’s do this. Bannister and Olivo for Cabrera, LHP Phil Coke, and if they’ll give up one of these guys, maybe Alan Horne, Dan McCutchen, Zack McCallister, or George Kontos. My vot is either Horne or McCallister.

by 306008 on Jul 27, 2008 5:06 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Please for the love of god no

Why would the Royals want a very light hitting OFer? His defense is pretty good, but not great. And his hitting is poor, even for a CFer.

2006 .752 OPS
2007 .718
2008 .657

I know he’s just 23, but I don’t see growth or improvement there. He still might improve, but to where? A .730 OPS? Sounds like a competent 4th OFer and no more than that. As a starting OFer, he stinks. Am I missing something here? Bannister is not a great pitcher. I’m not against trading him for the right return. But this would be selling very low. And it would be adding another all-defense, no-hit player to the lineup (probably as a fixture for years). That makes no sense. Just because Dutton reports it, doesn’t mean it is true. So I’m going to reserve my DM criticism unless and until this happens. But if it does happen, I’m going to lose it.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Jul 27, 2008 5:03 PM EDT   0 recs

Cabrera

Here are his 162 game averages….

.269 batting average
74 runs
156 hits
26 doubles
4 triples
10 home runs
66 RBI
15 for 20 SB
.332 OB
.378 SLG
.710 OBSLG

Sounds very similar to DeJesus through 3 seasons. Just .010 on the batting average and 3 or 4 more homers and 10 more SB. Don’t forget he’s only 23. He will hit the prime of his career. I think it’s a great trade for us.

There is no way he compares to Gathright.

by 306008 on Jul 27, 2008 5:14 PM EDT   0 recs

comparing Cabrera to DDJ in terms of offensive output is ridiculous

DDJ has a career line of .285/.358/.421 with a 104 OPS+ (take away his 2007 season, which is looking more and more like an aberration, and those stats would be even higher). He kicks the shit out of Melky in pretty much every statistical measure of offensive performance.

Even if we were to look only at DDJ’s first three seasons, as you suggest, Cabrera still does not match up. DDJ’s 2004 line was .287/.360/.402, which was the worst of his first three seasons with the Royals (DDJ had a whopping 7 major-league ABs in 2003, so I’m not counting that), and he still was way better than Cabrera is now. Relying on counting stats like you are (for stuff like RBIs, hits, and runs) is not nearly as persuasive.

by DarthYoshi on Jul 27, 2008 5:23 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

There's no comparison with Dejesus

I’m going to ignore the counting stats, because they should be ignored. After three seasons, DeJesus’s OPS was MUCH higher than .710. And given the fact that Melky has gotten worse each year since 2006, can we be confident that he’s going to get much better? His stats are all going in the wrong direction.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Jul 27, 2008 5:23 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

jinx!

you owe me a pop

by DarthYoshi on Jul 27, 2008 5:24 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

????

Why would the Royals want Melky Cabrera? Especially with Maier in the mix now. Cabrera is not as good as DeJesus, Teahen or Guillen and the Royals already have three perfectly good 4th outfielder candidates. Plus there is no obvious candidate to replace Bannister in the rotation at this point. No way should they trade Bannister just to upgrade their bench.

If this really is a trade being discussed I find it a head scratcher. The Royals don’t need any more roster fillers. If they are going to make a trade they should go for Jason Bay.

www.rockchalktalk.com for pretty good KU baseball coverage

by James Quinn on Jul 27, 2008 6:13 PM EDT   0 recs

it upgrades the team b/c it pushes gload to the bench instead of starting at 1b for the next two years...

banny isnt exactly helping this team right now….and maier sucks

TPJ...you're dead to me

by billybeingbilly on Jul 27, 2008 6:17 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I'm all for pushing Gload to the bench at any cost

I really don’t think the trade is so bad. Bannister is OK in a 4th or 5th starter type of way, and is easily replaced. Rosa could take his place in the rotation. Cabrera has a little upside and was rushed to the MLB level. I don’t know if he’s the answer as a starter, but he would be an excellent 4th OF and a solid stop gap until someone better comes along. Honestly, if the Royals can get a solid OBP guy and decent power guy in the offseason, I think this offense will improve greatly.

by lordbyronk on Jul 27, 2008 6:25 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

We should be giving up on talent?

In a non-contending year, you let talented players continue to play and work on whatever they need to work on. I’m not saying Bannister is going to be an ace or a #2 SP, but he’s definitely not a guy you give up on or demote because you think Rosa might help the Royals win one or two more games this year. In a non-contending year, you should think and act long-term, not short-term.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Jul 27, 2008 9:43 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

there's a place for guys who dont perform at a good level....

its omaha.

long term thinking…is giving guys like rosa a shot until banny figures out something that allows him to get out major league hitters

TPJ...you're dead to me

by billybeingbilly on Jul 27, 2008 9:59 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Rosa will get his shot

And that shot should be at the expense of Davies, not Bannister. Bannister >> Davies. And Bannister isn’t going to figure out how to get out MLB hitters again by facing AAA hitters.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Jul 27, 2008 10:16 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

he might need to learn a new pitch...adjust mechanics...whatever...

those things can all be done in omaha

TPJ...you're dead to me

by billybeingbilly on Jul 27, 2008 10:18 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

They can also be done in Kansas City

Rosa’s injured anyways.

Rowdy Hardy Fan Club member.

by doublestix on Jul 27, 2008 10:23 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Have you heard the nature and extent of Rosa's injury?

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Jul 27, 2008 10:32 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Elbow

I don’t think it’s bad but their being extremely careful with him since he’s had injuries in the past.

Rowdy Hardy Fan Club member.

by doublestix on Jul 27, 2008 10:44 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

If they think that is the nature of the problem, then sending him down would make sense

I don’t see any evidence that this is the problem. I haven’t heard or read anything like that from Bannister, McClure or Hillman. I think if the problem was something like that, they would have sent him down by now.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Jul 27, 2008 10:24 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

there has to be something like that in play when he's in the stretch...

something is off from where it was in the past.

what else would it be?

TPJ...you're dead to me

by billybeingbilly on Jul 27, 2008 10:41 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Are you saying, what else could be the problem other than mechanics?

Approach, strategy, pitch selection, etc. (as well as bad luck). And if McClure is a very good pitching coach who has helped other pitchers with their mechanics, then wouldn’t KC be the best place for him to work on his mechanics?

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Jul 27, 2008 10:52 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

if we're not worried about winning games i suppose...

which our GM has stated as being very important….

although, they’re pretty hypocritical with it b/c they wont let billy play 1st b/c he might hurt the team…but they continute to let banny go out there every 5 days

TPJ...you're dead to me

by billybeingbilly on Jul 27, 2008 10:59 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I am all for nailing Gload to the bench,

but moving Teahen over to first to replace Gload is not a move I am excited about at all.

The Royals already have a few “house options” that I like more than that. Bring up Shealy and let him play every day. The guy is having a very solid year in Omaha, .298/.381/.513. Or simply play Butler at first every day and DH Samsanite. Putting Teahen at first just replaces one subpar first baseman with a somewhat better subpar firstbaseman.

www.rockchalktalk.com for pretty good KU baseball coverage

by James Quinn on Jul 27, 2008 8:15 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

It is funny to me how everybody is on the Shealytrain

Gload never slugged below .500 in AAA. I don’t think Shealy is much of a option. I am in favor of giving him one last dying chance but I think he’ll fail as he has in the past I wouldn’t get too excited.

Every fight is a food fight when you’re a cannibal.
-- Demetri Martin

by kcscoliny on Jul 27, 2008 10:53 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Probably

but he’s a better bet to perform than Gload.

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jul 28, 2008 12:52 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

NHZ, didn't you read the post?

he sucks, isn’t that all you need to hear?

by I need more Esteban on Jul 28, 2008 12:57 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I think we should play Esteban at first

that way, if he does badly, you’ll have to change your name to “I need less Esteban” or if he does well “I am totally satisfied with my Esteban content.”

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jul 28, 2008 1:02 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

FINALLY

someone jumps on my line that I stole from Rany

OMG Banny. FWIW I am only crdtng u w/3 runs allwd bc of DDJ OMFG

by devil_fingers on Jul 29, 2008 5:36 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Olivo

Will Olivo keep his type B status sitting on the bench behind Buck and starting every fifth game? If so, keep him. Otherwise, I say we package him with Banni, move them both, get back two pitching prospects and a 23 year old OF who his better than anyone is giving him credit for. He’s an upgrade over Gathright. Our OF would be DeJesus, Cabrera, Guillen. We have Esteban on the bench and Gload on the bench. It makes us a better team I think.

Here is our 40 man OF’s. Who would Cabrera be better than?
DeJesus. No.
Teahan. Half the strikeouts, equal in average, less power, more SBs. ? Defensively?
Guillen. No.
Maier. Yes.
Gathright. Yes.
Costa. Yes.

Does that improve our team? Offensively and Defensively, yes. Pitching wise… no. But in all honesty. Banni will only be on the NYY roster for the rest of this season until they think Hughes and Kennedy are ready. We’ll be able to get Banni back through a MiLB trade if it’s that big of a deal.

by 306008 on Jul 27, 2008 11:35 PM EDT   0 recs

We don't really know what the deal is with Olivo

He has a contract with a mutual option for 2009. If he declines that option, he might be a class B FA. Or he might not be. He also may not have quite enough service time to become a FA. According to some, he’ll be one day of service time short of the necessary threshold.

And Teahen hits considerably better than Melky and has for each year of their careers. Melky is probably a little better defensively. And Teahen is one of the best baserunners in baseball (base running, not base stealing). No serious argument can be made that Melky is even as good as Teahen.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Jul 27, 2008 11:42 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Plus, Olivo is much better than any other catcher in the organization who would replace him.

Olivo is helping out the team this year, and he very well may be back next year. If the Royals trade him they have no one at Omaha ready to take his place. Tupman is having a terrible year. I like the idea of the Royals holding on to Olivo unless they are blown away with an offer.

www.rockchalktalk.com for pretty good KU baseball coverage

by James Quinn on Jul 27, 2008 11:46 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Olivo

Next year, one should expect him to regress to something closer to his career average of .240/.275/.411. His likely replacement from inside the organization would be Brayan Pena (Omaha’s current #1 catcher). His AAA career numbers have been .307/.354/.402 (mostly in the International League). Not much power, but a decent contact hitter who manages a pretty good OBP (this year he’s hitting at approximately that level for Omaha). He would likely be worse than Olivo in the majors, but how much worse? His SLG would be considerably lower than Olivo’s but his OBP may well be higher (you don’t have to work too hard to have an OBP over .275). The kicker is that Pena would play for league minimum, while Olivo’s option is for $2.7M. I’d much rather have Pena as the backup catcher and have an extra $2.3M to play with. Long story short, if the mutual option is exercised or if he’s not FA eligible, I’d prefer to trade him in the offseason.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Jul 28, 2008 12:03 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Olivo

1. He’s not FA eligible. He IS going to be one day short.

2. Small rant, but why can’t Butler play first base and Olivo DH against lefties? Where is the downside to this? Olivo’s numbers against LHP are pretty f’ing good, and Gload’s just flat out suck. My lineup tomorrow (against a lefty)—

CF DeJesus, SS Aviles, DH Butler, RF Guillen, 2B Grudzielanek, DH Olivo, 3B Gordon, C Buck, LF German

It won’t happen, but it probably should.

Rowdy Hardy Fan Club member.

by doublestix on Jul 28, 2008 12:21 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

1. His contract may include a clause which says the Royals will waive arbitration rights to him. Considering that the contract includes the mutual option (which would be moot if he’s arb. eligible), there’s a good chance that the arb. waiver is part of the contract.

2. I have no problem with that. The question would be is Olivo as backup catcher + DH vs. lefties worth $2.7M to the Royals. If the Royals have all-hit, little-D on the team next year like Guillen and Dunn or Burrell, we might want the DH spot open for them pretty frequently.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Jul 28, 2008 12:34 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Your point #1

would solve the issue I bring up in my second paragraph below.

Of course, that brings up the question of what people were thinking when the contract was signed. Obviously, both parties were aware that Olivo would be one day short of FA service time at the end of one season. The mutual option - i.e., the Royals surrendering that one day - is a concession on the club’s part. Explicitly waiving arbitration rights would be another concession on the club’s part. So I wonder if we got Olivo cheaper than we otherwise might have expected to.

Sarcasm™. It's the new gravy.

by jonfmorse on Jul 28, 2008 12:38 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

This is odd

We all know the Royals have a good deal of extra money, they are probably going to turn a $20M profit this year. $2.3M is not a lot to spend to upgrade a roster spot which will get 200-300 plate apperances next year in covers a vital defensive position.

The Royals spent $36M on Guillen. The offensive gap between Guillen and Emil Brown is less thant the gap will be between Olivo and Pena/Tuppman. Spending $2.3M on Olivo should not be seen as a deal breaker. Personally, I would be glad to see Olivo locked up with a two year contract. I’d be fine giving him a 2/8, especially if it does not contain a no-trade clause.

www.rockchalktalk.com for pretty good KU baseball coverage

by James Quinn on Jul 28, 2008 10:27 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I wouldn't be too excited by that move.

Buck is getting a large amount of playing time at Catcher. If KC is gonna continue to play Buck 4-1 starts then they might as well sell Olivo at the highest value either FA’s or a trade and call up Pena. Pena doesn’t provide the power that Olivo does but as a Switch hitter provides more of a natural platoon split with Buck as your primary catcher.

Every fight is a food fight when you’re a cannibal.
-- Demetri Martin

by kcscoliny on Jul 28, 2008 12:52 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Would you be happy to pay him 2/8 if he reverts back to his career numbers of .240/.275/.411?

I would think that Brayan Pena could manage .250/.300/.350 which, given the higher value of OBP, is nearly the same production and for league minimum. That additional $2.3M spent on Olivo might be money that could be spent on someone decent for the front end of the bullpen (which needs an upgrade). If the Royals go out and get a top tier FA for $15-20M per year, there isn’t going to be much money left for other things. You might think that the Royals can easily afford a $90M payroll, but I think that’s more than a little high, and I bet Glass does too.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Jul 28, 2008 1:33 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

The Royals have enough money that they do not need to make this choice

They can both keep Olivo and buy on the free agent market. They can carry a roster salary of at least $80M.

I have no idea how good Pena is behind the plate, but we know Olivo is an above average backstop.

The guy is worth some money. The Royals have a good deal of money and not enough good players. It seems like an easy call to me.

www.rockchalktalk.com for pretty good KU baseball coverage

by James Quinn on Jul 28, 2008 1:42 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

If the payroll is $80M

...then they can afford a top tier FA and Olivo at $2.7M next year. But I don’t think they’d be able to afford much of anything else in the way of FA’s. I’d much rather jettison Olivo, replace him with Pena and have that money there to fill a hole in the bullpen.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Jul 28, 2008 1:50 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Eh,

I just don’t see keeping Olivo as any kind of priority. Buck’s better than him, and Olivo’s likely to enter his decline phase sooner.

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jul 28, 2008 1:54 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Honest question

Why do you think Buck is better than Olivo?

www.rockchalktalk.com for pretty good KU baseball coverage

by James Quinn on Jul 28, 2008 4:01 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

He's younger

so less likely to decline soon. He has a better OBP, and decent pop for a catcher. Historically, he’s done better than he has this when it comes to limiting the running game, so I don’t think he’s going to be below average defensively going forward.

A mind without purpose will walk in dark places.

by NHZ on Jul 28, 2008 4:20 PM EDT to parent up   0 recs

I keep having to point this out

and you, being a lawyer, should understand it.

There is no way that Olivo is not a free-agent if he declines his option. The very act of including the player option has to be a de facto rescinding of the team’s Reserve Clause rights to the player, and I bet you money that if the Royals were to attempt to force him to remain Royals property if he declined his option, there’s be legal wrangling.

Now, where this becomes interesting is this: if he declines his option, he may become a free agent (because the inclusion of the option guarantees it) yet not provide the Royals with a compensation pick (because collective bargaining rules could result in an argument that since he should still be Royals’ property, they’re voluntarily releasing him).

Sarcasm™. It's the new gravy.

by jonfmorse on Jul 28, 2008 12:35 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

There is no way that Olivo is not a free-agent if he declines his option. The very act of including the player option has to be a de facto rescinding of the team’s Reserve Clause rights to the player, and I bet you money that if the Royals were to attempt to force him to remain Royals property if he declined his option, there’s be legal wrangling.

A contract cannot overrule the collective bargaining agreement. But I think this is all very fuzzy. I don’t think it is at all clear if he’s arbitration eligible or FA eligible or if he could get the Royals a compensatory pick.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Jul 28, 2008 12:45 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

Clarification

It’s fuzzy because of our lack of information. If we knew everything that was in the contract, I think we’d have our answer. I suspect there is a waiver of arbitration clause in there.

This is just my opinion. I could easily be wrong.

by NYRoyal on Jul 28, 2008 12:46 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs

A contract cannot overrule the collective bargaining agreement

if the contract works to the player’s or union’s detriment. My impression has always been that in pretty much every instance, the purpose of a CBA is to place restrictions and obligations on the employer, not the employees, and that the employer can grant concessions to employees at their discretion unless said concessions are deemed unfair to the union as a whole. Waiving Olivo’s final day of team control would not, under any circumstances, be viewed as such. (Can you imagine any situation where the union would actually file a grievance over that and force the Royals to retain Olivo’s rights? Really?)

Regardless, a team can most certainly disclaim its rights to a player at any time and for any reason. A player is eligible for free agency at any time if the team grants it. If they owe him money, they’re on the hook, but that’s irrelevant here. (See Thomas, Frank; Sexson, Richie. Neither player was “eligible” for free agency either, insofar as they were still under contract.)

There is a small loophole regarding waivers; technically, if a player is DFAed without options, is claimed by another team, and the waiving team releases the player rather than withdrawing the designation, the player’s contract is then the property of the claiming team. But neither you nor I have ever seen a team make a waiver claim when a player is “designated for assignment for the purpose of giving the player his unconditional release,” because (a) the claiming team is then also stuck with the contract and (b) paying the waiver fee is a pointless waste of money when you can just sign the player without giving his old team $25K or whatever the fee is this week. Plus, waivers are irrelevant during the off-season anyway, so a moot point in Olivo’s case.

Sarcasm™. It's the new gravy.

by jonfmorse on Jul 28, 2008 4:32 AM EDT to parent up   0 recs