PDA

View Full Version : players that Buster Olney says passed thru waivers..



redsfan4445
08-25-2006, 06:37 PM
per mlb traderumurs

Olney: Waiver Trade Candidates
In case you missed it, Buster Olney posted a list of players who have passed through waivers and can be traded to any team before Thursday's deadline. Here's the list:

David Wells
Shawn Chacon
Jae Seo
Sidney Ponson
Bruce Chen
Jeromy Burnitz
Jeff Conine
Jay Payton
Bobby Kielty
Reggie Sanders
Luis Matos
Jay Gibbons
Geoff Jenkins
Gabe Kapler

redsfan4445
08-25-2006, 06:38 PM
i am shocked LaRue Didnt pass thru!! if this is true

westofyou
08-25-2006, 07:20 PM
i am shocked LaRue Didnt pass thru!! if this is true
Why?

One season doesn't make a career and evidently if he didn't pass through someone sitting at a desk doing this for a living must think that one year isn't a career either, and they would actually have to pay him for it.

GridironGrace
08-25-2006, 07:22 PM
Could any of those help us at all?

Ravenlord
08-25-2006, 07:23 PM
Could any of those help us at all?
possibly Chacon, but i doubt it.

redsmetz
08-25-2006, 07:25 PM
Why?

One season doesn't make a career and evidently if he didn't pass through someone sitting at a desk doing this for a living must think that one year isn't a career either, and they would actually have to pay him for it.

Plus there are times that teams claim players as strategy thereby preventing a rival from getting a needed player. It could be too that he was claimed but the Reds couldn't work out a satisfactory deal.

RedLegSuperStar
08-25-2006, 07:27 PM
Geoff Jenkins would be better than Hollandsworth.. David Wells.. I think would be an upgrade over Milton.. but we don't have much left to bargin with..

joshnky
08-25-2006, 07:40 PM
I think that our holes are not quite as glaring as the Cardinals' holes so I'm glad to see that this list doesn't have any difference makers on it. I think we'll be okay, I was just worried that the Cards might make a move.

redsmetz
08-25-2006, 07:49 PM
I think that our holes are not quite as glaring as the Cardinals' holes so I'm glad to see that this list doesn't have any difference makers on it. I think we'll be okay, I was just worried that the Cards might make a move.

I think Milton could pitch a perfect game and there would be folks on this board who can't recognize the Milton v.2005 is much different than Milton v.2006. He pitched a gutsy game last night, IMO.

Johnny Footstool
08-25-2006, 07:54 PM
I think Milton could pitch a perfect game and there would be folks on this board who can't recognize the Milton v.2005 is much different than Milton v.2006. He pitched a gutsy game last night, IMO.

Yes, he's gone from horrifyingly bad in 2005 to regular bad in 2006.

redsfanmia
08-25-2006, 07:59 PM
If LaRue was claimed he would have been let go. Why would the Reds pull him back?

pedro
08-25-2006, 08:02 PM
If LaRue was claimed he would have been let go. Why would the Reds pull him back?


No way. Why would you give him away for nothing? If Ross were to get hurt do you really want Valentin as the starting catcher and someone from AAA as the back up? I don't.

westofyou
08-25-2006, 08:04 PM
Geoff Jenkins would be better than Hollandsworth..

Jenkins comes along with 1.3 owed for the Month of September, TH about 175K.

Will M
08-25-2006, 08:05 PM
& Krivsky pulled him back then Krivsky need to see a therapist :)

I also assume that this list isn't complete

- Will

redsfanmia
08-25-2006, 08:08 PM
No way. Why would you give him away for nothing? If Ross were to get hurt do you really want Valentin as the starting catcher and someone from AAA as the back up? I don't.
I would give him away just to dump the 5+ million he is owed next year. I could live with a AAA back up to dump LaRue.

redsmetz
08-25-2006, 08:13 PM
Yes, he's gone from horrifyingly bad in 2005 to regular bad in 2006.

I'll respectfully disagree. He has been halfway decent this year. Much better than last year.

jamess697
08-25-2006, 08:25 PM
The only two players worth even considering from this list is Jeremy Burnitz (an upgrade over Hollandsworth as left handed pinch hitter), however his salary is probably to high for a role player. The other is David Wells, but I think that he would be awful in our ballpark. I like our roster the way it is, after September call ups, we will have healther arms in our pen, and down the stretch be as strong as anyone out of the bullpen, in the national league. Their is a good chance that everyone will be talking about our bullpen through October!

joshnky
08-25-2006, 08:49 PM
Yes, he's gone from horrifyingly bad in 2005 to regular bad in 2006.
Regular bad is a good description for every fifth starter in the league and many fourth starters (and second starter if you're STL). He has kept us in games and thats all you can ask for from the back of your rotation.

TOBTTReds
08-25-2006, 09:04 PM
I would give him away just to dump the 5+ million he is owed next year. I could live with a AAA back up to dump LaRue.

Right on

wheels
08-25-2006, 09:07 PM
Regular bad is a good description for every fifth starter in the league and many fourth starters (and second starter if you're STL). He has kept us in games and thats all you can ask for from the back of your rotation.

Most fifth starters don't make 8.5 million.

Just sayin'.

joshnky
08-25-2006, 09:11 PM
Most fifth starters don't make 8.5 million.

Just sayin'.

Totally agree that it was a bad deal but we might as well use him while we have him.

jnwohio
08-25-2006, 09:13 PM
In regard to LaRue and waivers......

The actual waiver process is supposedly "secret". Any list that Olney had compiled would be based on leak(s) and/ or supposition on his part. Therefore, I have to believe that Onlney's list is not a complete list of everybody who cleared waivers.

At the time LaRue would have been on waivers this year's outstanding salary plus next year's salary would have made him a $6 million man. I don't think there is a team or GM alive that would have taken the risk that WK wouldn't have just let him go to clear that $6 million from his books.

The only possibility I see of someone claiming LaRue would have been if prior to Boston dealing for Lopez, the Yankees were still in position to block Boston when LaRue was on waivers and they (the Yanks) did it.

joshnky
08-25-2006, 09:15 PM
In regard to LaRue and waivers......

The actual waiver process is supposedly "secret". Any list that Olney had compiled would be based on leak(s) and/ or supposition on his part. Therefore, I have to believe that Onlney's list is not a complete list of everybody who cleared waivers.

At the time LaRue would have been on waivers this year's outstanding salary plus next year's salary would have made him a $6 million man. I don't think there is a team or GM alive that would have taken the risk that WK wouldn't have just let him go to clear that $6 million from his books.

The only possibility I see of someone claiming LaRue would have been if prior to Boston dealing for Lopez, the Yankees were still in position to block Boston when LaRue was on waivers and they (the Yanks) did it.

I don't know about this. I would think if you coud get a few names you could get them all. All of the general managers in the league no who is out there so it wouldn't be unrealistic to think that Olney could have gotten a complete list.

REDREAD
08-25-2006, 09:37 PM
I wouldn't mind picking up one of those OF that is on the last year of their contract. If we can throw away 2+ million on Cormier for the rest of the year, why not pick up Jenkins for the rest of the year? He's a bat off the bench, and he's insurance in case Freel or Jr get injured. I sure would hate to see an OF injury force us to start Hollandsworth in the playoffs.

westofyou
08-25-2006, 09:56 PM
If we can throw away 2+ million on Cormier for the rest of the year, why not pick up Jenkins for the rest of the year?

That 2 million was for NEXT year, he's under contract, Jenkins would get all his jack for September, not that he'd matter anyway, he lost his starting job in Milwaukee.

Jenkins this season - .251/.333/.388/.720

Denorfia is the replacement for any injury, the guy just needs to be on the 40 man.

Johnny Footstool
08-26-2006, 02:46 AM
Regular bad is a good description for every fifth starter in the league and many fourth starters (and second starter if you're STL). He has kept us in games and thats all you can ask for from the back of your rotation.

It's fine if you disagree with me, but his ERA is 5.22 and the Reds offense averages 5.02 runs per game, so he's generally making the offense work harder than usual. His K/9 is 5.41 -- Danny Graves territory. No matter what spot he occupies in the rotation, that's bad. Granted, he's better than last year, but when you have to shave more than a run off your ERA to be considered even slightly less than horrible, I don't want you pitching for my team.

REDREAD
08-26-2006, 03:13 AM
That 2 million was for NEXT year, he's under contract, Jenkins would get all his jack for September, not that he'd matter anyway, he lost his starting job in Milwaukee.

Jenkins this season - .251/.333/.388/.720

Denorfia is the replacement for any injury, the guy just needs to be on the 40 man.

You're right, I mistyped, I meant to say Cormier was owed that money for next year.

I still wouldn't mind paying Jenkins 1.3 or whatever he's owed for the rest of this year, just to have someone other than Hollandsworth off the bench, and to get some depth. I don't want Denfornia playing in the playoffs either.

westofyou
08-26-2006, 11:01 AM
I still wouldn't mind paying Jenkins 1.3 or whatever he's owed for the rest of this year,

Yeah me either, if it's Monopoly money, what good is depth if it's filled in with garbage?

.202/.321/.326/.647 since the AS game, if WK gave a body for him and ended up paying him "real" money and then after all that all the Reds got was a .647 replacement I'm sure you'd give him a free pass right?

jnwohio
08-26-2006, 11:22 AM
I don't know about this. I would think if you coud get a few names you could get them all. All of the general managers in the league no who is out there so it wouldn't be unrealistic to think that Olney could have gotten a complete list.


The waivers can include anybody on a 40 man roster who isn't on the DL. The street talk is that since teams can pull back anyone claimed, as a matter of strategy they routinely send through everybody and the kitchen sink (you have to get your minor league prospects who are on the 40 man thru to be able to send them to somebody for a "major leaguer"). In such a scenario, does it seem likely that in all the major leagues, that list of 15 guys are the only ones who made it thru without being claimed (or traded as a result of the process)? I think Onlney's list is his top 15 of guys who have done enough to have some name recognition and who may have enough value, in Olney's view, to be of interest to another team.

As to why a GM might tell some and not all.... It is politics and trading. If I've got a guy who made it thru and who I want to move and the market seems slow on him, it can help to have pundits reminding everybody he is available and talking him up. And all the better if in the process his name gets linked (even incorrectly) with team X if that might inspire team Y to come running to me with a a sweet deal just becasue they want to keep him out of the hands of team X.

And the same can work in reverse. If I want a guy who has cleared (and there could be many reasons why I did not just claim him) and his team is ambivalent about moving him or asking more than I want to give, I can try to ramp up the pressure on them by getting it out that he is avaialble.

I don't think any GM (even Leatherpants) is going to fork over an entire list. That is just too risky of being the sort of thing that could cause Uncle Bud Selig to come down on them, not to mention it is not liklely to be in heir own best trading interests.

ChatterRed
08-26-2006, 01:41 PM
I'll respectfully disagree. He has been halfway decent this year. Much better than last year.

I think Milton has been much better than last year. I don't think his era accurately displays how well he's pitched overall. I am much more confident in him keeping us in games this year.

LoganBuck
08-26-2006, 04:01 PM
That may not be the entire list. Only "notable" names. I am sure there are a host of other players that have passed through.

RedFanAlways1966
08-26-2006, 04:17 PM
Yes, he's gone from horrifyingly bad in 2005 to regular bad in 2006.

Higher quality start ratio than Aaron Harang. 59.1% vs. 53.6%.
Higher quality start ratio than the team average. 59.1% vs. 51.9%.

Bad? I guess it is each person's opinion. Bad for the money he gets paid... probably. Bad compared to all MLB starters... I'll say no.

The REDS are 6-3 in games he has started since the All-Star Break. 4-1 in games he has started in August. The only loss in August was a 3-0 shoutout in the game that Greg Maddux threw 6 perfect innings in his 1st Dodgers start.

If he is bad, then I'll have to say that 40%-50% of MLB starters are also bad.

Johnny Footstool
08-26-2006, 06:33 PM
Higher quality start ratio than Aaron Harang. 59.1% vs. 53.6%.
Higher quality start ratio than the team average. 59.1% vs. 51.9%.

Bad? I guess it is each person's opinion. Bad for the money he gets paid... probably. Bad compared to all MLB starters... I'll say no.

The REDS are 6-3 in games he has started since the All-Star Break. 4-1 in games he has started in August. The only loss in August was a 3-0 shoutout in the game that Greg Maddux threw 6 perfect innings in his 1st Dodgers start.

If he is bad, then I'll have to say that 40%-50% of MLB starters are also bad.

So he's had, what, 1 more Quality Start than Harang? The difference is, when Milton gets bombed, he gets bombed early in games, putting more pressure on the bullpen.

He's pitched 45 less innings than Aaron (in only 4 fewer starts) and allowed 4 more homers. His ERA is a run and a half higher.

The guy isn't a good pitcher. He's better than he was last year, but he's still lousy.

RedFanAlways1966
08-26-2006, 09:30 PM
I don't think Milton is having a good year, but I would not call it bad either. He is mediocre. When he is bad, he can look bad. But he does give a good game half the time if we look at the quality start (13QS/22GS). Harang (15QS/28GS) has thrown 43 more innings in 6 more starts. Harang avg. 6.44 IP/GS while Milton is at 6.24 IP/GS. Higher... but by less then 1 out per start. Milton actually has a tad better WHIP than Harang... 1.31 to 1.32. Harang is by far a better pitcher and CONSISTENT. I will not argue that. And we all know that Eric has a knack for the longball and hope their solo shots.

Not to make excuses for Milton, but he did have knee surgery April 23. Take out his last start before the surgery (4.1IP, 9ER) and the 1st start back from surgery (5IP, 5ER) and his ERA is 4.57 (128IP, 65ER). Not an ERA that will win a Cy Young, but good enough for a lot of MLB teams as a #4.

His salary is too high for his numbers. But our previous regime stuck us with it. I don't blame Milton for taking it (I know I would). I'd not shed a tear if he was to be traded and his contract went with him (and was re-spent on better pitching!). If he is on the REDS team, however, and the roster is-what-it-is... then he belongs in the starting rotation as #4 (Harang, Arroyo, Lohse, in no particular order). The REDS are 11-11 in games he has started. As a #4 guy that ain't so bad for the team. Whether it is him, the luck of lots of REDS scoring or better than normal bullpen work... they win 50% of the time when he takes the mound. If your #3, #2 and #1 are each better than him you should be in good shape.

Hopefully Homer will be ready when Eric's last paycheck is sent and we can bid Eric farewell. Until then we hope for his 59% QS ratio (not bad for a #4) to stay there or get better and pray that they score a lot of runs when he has his occasional bad game with lots of HRs. We can also wish a George Steinbrenner (or others) type buys the club and allows us to afford putting Bronson Arroyo in the bullpen! :)

mth123
08-26-2006, 09:45 PM
Here is the thing about Milton. He makes way too much $ but does do a decent job of getting the team to the 7th inning with a chance to win. 6 innings and 3 runs is close to his average and that is really all I expect from a number 4.

As far as the money is concerned, the market for pitchers with any history of success is nuts. A lot of number 4s are complete unproven risks like say Boof Bonser or complete reclamation projects like say Paul Wilson a couple years ago. I'd rather have the Milton type than either of these types and unfortunately, these guys are expensive. The problem is we expect a guy making $9 Million to be a true ace, but that is about $6 to 7 Million short of true ace territory. It is more in the range of Matt Clement, John Leiber, Odalis Perz, Gil Meche, Joel Piniero, etc. Milton is comparable. If we didn't have a type like this, we'd be complaining about going with an unproven (say like Germano or Lizard) or a reclamation (like Joe Mays).