Bedard and waivers
DMZ · August 5, 2009 at 4:47 pm · Filed Under Mariners
Hey, Rule Monger Derek here. In Baker’s article about players likely to be moved by the end of the month, in talking about Bedard he mentions this:
I’d be surprised if the Mariners haven’t tried to put him through waivers already.
To add to that article: I’d be surprised if they had. Here’s why: you can’t request a waiver on a player until they’ve been on the DL as long as they have to be on the DL (ie, for a 15-day DL guy… yeah). Bedard went back on the DL 7/26, and we’re not past 15 days yet.
Then you have to guarantee that the player has recovered and will perform at their normal level, and there’s no way the M’s are going to do that yet (beyond which, what’s his accustomed level at this point – injured?).
Anyway, it’s all in Rule 10.
Look on the bright side – they don’t have to wait to request waivers on Silva.
That seems like a weird rule if I’m interpreting it right. I get the part about the DL… that makes sense. But I don’t get the “guarantee” … that would seem to imply you can’t put an injured player on waivers, which doesn’t sound right. Hyphen and Beltre were on the DL … how would we “guarantee” they’re ok?
“Look on the bright side – they don’t have to wait to request waivers on Silva.”
He’s on the 60-day DL, so I think the same rules would apply.
Silva went on 5/9, so at worst, it’s only a couple more days. Woooo! Here’s hoping.
Baker says that the M’s wouldn’t want to risk having Beltre back on a 1yr 14m deal so they wouldn’t offer him arbitration?
I’d do back-flips if the M’s extended him for 2010 at that price right now.
Speaking of rules, is Silva allowed to accept a buyout for less than he’s owed for the next two years? IE can they basically have him ride the DL or bench or minors and give him the choice to do a buy-out for less, or is our only option to play him, hope he has some fifth starter value (as the blog assumed at the beginning of the season), and see if anyone wants him with the M’s still paying most but not all of his salary?
Silva + buyout != Bedard + waivers
You essentially can’t buy a contract out for less than its remaining value. There’s some room, but it’s more in how and when you might defer money. See Bonilla, others.
I hate it when reality intrudes.
Hey Derek, Just out of curiousity, How did the Padres trade Peavy? I always thought you couldn’t be traded if on the DL. Obviously I am wrong about that.
Larry Stone wrote a blog about that issue recently, MedicineHat.
Ok, I’ll go check it out. I’m not a fan of Stone so I don’t have him on my feed.
thanks for the heads up.
*gasp*
*faint*
*jaw drop*
DMZ – oh you taunt him so.
Rules Smules.
Besides it would be ludicrous to try and pass Bedard through waivers now since the Ms are so close to collecting those two picks that come with his eminent type A status….
He’ll find a way to pull it out. He’s Canadian.
One more question on Silva. At the beginning of the season, this blog suggested that he probably was the best option for the fourth or fifth starter. In other words that he had some slight value above replacement level, though not remotely worth $12 million.
Since Silva’s contract can’t be dumped, would it make sense to play him some these final inconsequential months, assuming he’s recovered from whatever real or imagined injuries beset him, and if he does establish some value, try to work a deal where the M’s for instance ate $9 million a year of his remaining salary, but still saved a three million. Or two million or one million.
Uh… what?! Larry Stone is practically required reading ’round these here parts, son.
He’s actually performing interviews much better this season. Does that count?
It sounds nice in theory, but there’s no possible way Silva could rehabilitate himself enough, in the time provided, to generate any kind of trade interest. We just have to get used to him being the new Greg Hibbard.
Is “can’t effing pitch” considered an injury?
Thanks for the reference. This is, of course, the semi-mythical “Rule 10” that’s supposedly included in a three ring binder that every MLB team has but it not available anywhere else on earth (other than a possible summary on a wiki site), right?
Ooion,thanks for the link. I’d been looking.
The “guarantee” looks to be a way around the player being on the DL as opposed to something to be done after they come off of the DL.
So, the M’s could put Bedard on waivers if they “guaranteed” he could be activated in 72 hours. (which is presumably not the case given the MRI)
The M’s would probably be better off if they just traded him in for a Prius and took the $4500 “Cash for Clunkers” buyout.
Besides it would be ludicrous to try and pass Bedard through waivers now since the Ms are so close to collecting those two picks that come with his eminent (sic) type A status….
Please tell me that was sarcastic humor, Terry.
I have a better chance of dating Halle Berry than Bedard does of being Type A.
Basically, yes. Note, the difference in Peavy’s case is that no guarantee was required since he did not need to be placed on waivers to be traded.
I assumed it was tongue-in-cheek based on this:
He’ll find a way to pull it out. He’s Canadian.
This will probably get deleted for being OT, but [OT]
I realize that Hernandez makes us all warm and fuzzy but without a Bedard when healthy or Washburn having a career year then what is left to fill a number 2 role on this team. How can we not afford to try to keep Bedard until one of the younger players shows he can go out and give us what Washburn did or Bedard did for 5 innings?? Right now I dont see that from Vargas, French, or RRS and I dont think Snell has that much up side.
Maybe new defense can make up for their shortcomings if Bedard does go away. An Arbitration effort for him seems almost destined.
Yeah, where would the team be without Bedard as a stalwart number 2 making his 15 starts every year.
Honestly, I think whoever signs him ought to insist on paying him per pitch.
We should put Silva on waivers and have Felix pitch in his Jersey until he’s claimed