Waivers - Do this for next year or not?

[Colby]

Linkage - http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?columnist=stark_jayson&id=1860265

Warning from the surgeon general: Trying to make sense of baseball's waiver system can be hazardous to your mental health.

There are all kinds of waivers for all different occasions. But essentially, here is how waiver deals can be made between Aug. 1 and the Aug. 31 deadline for setting potential playoff rosters:

# Virtually every player in the major leagues will be placed on waivers this month, whether a team intends to trade that player or not. If nothing else, the sheer volume of names can at least disguise players whom clubs do want to sneak through so they can be dealt.

# If a player isn't claimed by any team in either league, he can be traded until the end of the month to anyone.

# If a player is claimed, but only by one team, the player can be traded only to the team that claims him.

# If a player is claimed by more than one team, the club with the worst record in that player's league gets priority -- and the player can be traded only to that team.

# If a player is claimed only by teams in the other league, the club with the worst record in the other league gets priority -- and the player can be traded just to that team.

# If a deal can't be worked out or the team doesn't want to trade that player, he can be pulled back off waivers once in August. If he is placed on waivers again before September, he can't be recalled a second time.

# Or, if a team is just hoping to dump a player's salary, it can simply allow a team which claimed that player to have him for a small waiver fee. If that happens, the team that gets the player has to pay his entire salary. That's how the Yankees were stuck with Jose Canseco and the Padres were stuck with Randy Myers in recent years: They claimed those players, thinking they were just blocking other teams from getting them. Instead, their old clubs said: "You claimed him. You got him."

# In the past, many teams claimed players just to keep them from being traded to contenders with a better record. This year, that isn't expected to happen as often, because most teams can't afford to get stuck with a big contract if they're awarded a player they really didn't want.

[Dan Wood]

Just wanted to add this, but when a guy is not on someone's 40 man roster in real MLB play, he can be traded at anytime, even after the MLB trade line.

[Colby]

Just wanted to add this, but when a guy is not on someone's 40 man roster in real MLB play, he can be traded at anytime, even after the MLB trade line.

Really?

Well, it doesn't work out with our EDR rule stating that a player have been drafted.  The new placement of an EDR player on another team would be the 40-man roster.

[Dan Wood]

Guys can be added to the 40 man after the trade, but they cannot be on the 40 man before the trade. So technically speaking guys on our EDR would be able to be traded since they aren't on our 40 man, but after completion of a trade, they can be on another team's 40 man.

[Canada8999]

I don't believe we have a waiver system in place, but it wouldn't hurt to add one (trade deadline implications aside) - you put a high priced player on waivers and someone claims him, the contract is transferred at no cost.  You would think teams could workout a negligible trade for such players, but I'm guessing more of these transactions would happen when owners see 'free'.

To replicate the non-40-man roster trades in our league, we could say that trades are allowed for players with no MLB experience (allow trading prospects), or we could say any trade is allowed, but no player received in a trade after the deadline can be active until the following season (has to remain on the bench).  Just ideas...

[Mr.TradeKing]

or we could say any trade is allowed, but no player received in a trade after the deadline can be active until the following season (has to remain on the bench).  Just ideas...

Why not just not allowing them to be traded again until the following the season (or offseason)?

~MTK

[Canada8999]

Why not just not allowing them to be traded again until the following the season (or offseason)?

~MTK

The idea is to lock down rosters going into the final stretch / playoffs, not so much just reducing trade volume.

[Mr.TradeKing]

I understand, but I don't see anyway your proposal would work. First off, nothing like that would ever happen in the MLB. #2, No playoff-bound team (most likely the main ones interested in a trade) would want to make a trade b/c they would be hurting their team since they can't start the player(s) they'd acquire. #3, I would question the integrity of the World Series if the losing team had Albert Pujols on the bench (for example).

~MTK

[Colby]

Why not just not allowing them to be traded again until the following the season (or offseason)?

~MTK

Once someone is moved on waivers then I believe they can't be moved again that season.  I don't like the benching rule for reasons MTK already gave.

[Dan Wood]

Just because a player is put on waivers doesn't mean that he will be moved. Then again look at Alex Rios last year, decent player with a huge contract. Most teams won't have the money to take on a contract of that size, since we all pretty much use all of our budget. But honestly I don't see the harm in having waivers. If the goal is to emulate MLB, then waivers is definitely a part of it.