Nats Waiver deals for 2012 stretch

[Evolution33]

The Nats needed a back-up catcher and MI. I am confident that those are things that can clear waivers. Would Thames, Snider, Victorino, or Pence been an offensive upgrade over Morse, Harper, or Werth? Was there an infielder other than Mr. ICanSeeYou that is better than Espinosa, Desmond, or Zimmerman and he might not even be with his 1.7 WAR compared to 3.6 for Desmond, 2.4 for Zimmerman, and 2.0 for Espinosa. Health will help the Nats more than any trade would have when you consider the guys who were moved. The only guy that would have upgraded the Nats is Greinke and the Nats didn't have the ML ready short stop they wanted and the Angels did.

[PebbleBall]

Phil Wood said big trades happen after the waiver period?

Shrewd move by Rizzo not making deals yesterday to help their improve their waiver position before the deadline.

[Moore Athletic]

Shrewd move by Rizzo not making deals yesterday to help their improve their waiver position before the deadline.

LOL, thought the same thing.  Big trades are tough for those with the best records since they can be blocked by teams below jockeying with your team for playoff position.  Before the deadline was the time to make moves.

[BigMeech]

I'm not up to snuff on how the waiver wire really works but hypothetically, let's say the Phillies put Cliff Lee on waivers.  Just a pure hypothetical here, mind you.

Let's just say that the Nationals and Phillies would have a deal in place for him, but the Braves decide to claim instead just so he doesn't go to the Nationals.  If this is how it works, why would Rizzo decide to take a chance like this?

[DPMOmaha]

Blockbuster deals almost never happen after the waiver deal, but impactful ones can. 

[Kevrock]

Why wouldn't the Braves claim every single Catcher and IF that was put on waivers so we don't get a chance?

[BigMeech]

Why wouldn't the Braves claim every single Catcher and IF that was put on waivers so we don't get a chance?

They'd be stupid not to, hence why it was stupid for Rizzo to not trade for one at the deadline.

[blue911]

Blockbuster deals almost never happen after the waiver deal, but impactful ones can. 

 When you put players on the waiver wire is an art form we aren't privilege to.

[blue911]

Why wouldn't the Braves claim every single Catcher and IF that was put on waivers so we don't get a chance?

Because they could be stuck with them and have to clear a spot on their active roster.

[PANatsFan]

Because they could be stuck with them and have to clear a spot on their active roster.

haha 25 catchers

[aspenbubba]

Why wouldn't the Braves claim every single Catcher and IF that was put on waivers so we don't get a chance?

i am thinking that if that scenario happened and the Braves kept claiming the player and the Phils withdrew the name that there is some sort of 'gentlemens " agreement in place that would be under the radar if it was consistently repeated to let the player move to another team.I have no evidence of this but I seem to recall that players do move to the designated team eventually. What usually happens is that a "lesser" team far down in the standings puts a claim in then the offering team withdraws the name within 24 hours. Offer , Withdraw ,Repeat as neccessary

[Lintyfresh85]

i am thinking that if that scenario happened and the Braves kept claiming the player and the Phils withdrew the name that there is some sort of 'gentlemens " agreement in place that would be under the radar if it was consistently repeated to let the player move to another team.I have no evidence of this but I seem to recall that players do move to the designated team eventually. What usually happens is that a "lesser" team far down in the standings puts a claim in then the offering team withdraws the name within 24 hours. Offer , Withdraw ,Repeat as neccessary

You can only withdraw a player once.

If you place them on waivers a second time and they are claimed, they become property of the claiming team.

[Kevrock]

haha 25 catchers

[LostYudite]

Because they could be stuck with them and have to clear a spot on their active roster.

...which makes it all one big game of chicken. 

I wonder if this actually happens as much as people think.  I would be interested to know how often somebody makes a defensive claim with no intention of actually trading for the player and no real desire to get him except to block the teams above them.

[blue911]

...which makes it all one big game of chicken. 

I wonder if this actually happens as much as people think.  I would be interested to know how often somebody makes a defensive claim with no intention of actually trading for the player and no real desire to get him except to block the teams above them.

It's how the White Sox got Alex Rios.

[HalfSmokes]

...which makes it all one big game of chicken. 

I wonder if this actually happens as much as people think.  I would be interested to know how often somebody makes a defensive claim with no intention of actually trading for the player and no real desire to get him except to block the teams above them.

if the guy has value and doesn't have an albatross contract, no reason not to claim them- worst case you offer nothing in trade and get a player with value and have to cut your DeRosa

[blue911]

if the guy has value and doesn't have an albatross contract, no reason not to claim them- worst case you offer nothing in trade and get a player with value and have to cut your DeRosa

When there are 50 to 100 names on the list, it isn't that simple.

[blue911]

Rockies Designate Wil Nieves For Assignment

[Hondo]

Who?

Rockies Designate Wil Nieves For Assignment

[Obed_Marsh]

Charlie and Dave would be happy.

[Smithian]

Rockies Designate Wil Nieves For Assignment

SIGN HIM NOWWWWWWWWWWW!!!!

Small sample sized be damned! .298/.333/.404!!!!

[LostYudite]

if the guy has value and doesn't have an albatross contract, no reason not to claim them- worst case you offer nothing in trade and get a player with value and have to cut your DeRosa

Right, but that's not what I mean by "defensive."  That's an easy decision - here's a guy with an ok contract who we'd be ok with keeping if we got him and we get to block somebody better than us.  That's win-win.

I mean a truly defensive claim.  A guy who doesn't fit, or whose contract is problematic, who you wouldn't want to keep, but who you think would improve a rival, so you choose to claim him, rolling the dice that the team who waived him will pull him back and you won't be stuck with him.  This is the scenario that I think probably doesn't happen too often.

Rios was a different case - everybody thought because his contract was so bad that nobody would touch him, but Kenny Williams grabbed him because he actually wanted him.

[MarquisDeSade]

No holes Nats.

[HalfSmokes]

A guy who doesn't fit, or whose contract is problematic, who you wouldn't want to keep, but who you think would improve a rival, so you choose to claim him, rolling the dice that the team who waived him will pull him back and you won't be stuck with him.  This is the scenario that I think probably doesn't happen too often.

Unless you're the Rays blocking the Yankees, I'd having a hard time thinking of such a player. As it pertains to the hats, I can't think of anyone who the braves (or another team) wouldn't block

[LostYudite]

Unless you're the Rays blocking the Yankees, I'd having a hard time thinking of such a player. As it pertains to the hats, I can't think of anyone who the braves (or another team) wouldn't block

Mauer? 

I mean, in all seriousness, I don't think there's any way the Twins would actually waive him, but let's say they did.  He's got $138m left on his deal after 2012.  I don't think the Braves would claim him with McCann and Freeman already on board.  Probably someone in the AL would, maybe, but it'd be interesting.

Of course, there'd be ZERO chance the Nats would claim him.  No way we're taking on that kind of commitment.