PDA

View Full Version : Coutlangus DFA



Danny Serafini
03-31-2008, 10:31 AM
Per team press notes. Did not see that one coming. One other spot on the 40 man will not be cleared until after 1pm, which is interesting.

*BaseClogger*
03-31-2008, 10:31 AM
:thumbdown

princeton
03-31-2008, 10:38 AM
Beware of dropping lefties!

hopefully this means that they're thrilled with Danny Herrerra and Pedro Viola

Team Clark
03-31-2008, 10:48 AM
Wow... that really isn't necessary. Dropping the count? Hmmmm...

lollipopcurve
03-31-2008, 10:51 AM
Beware of dropping lefties!

hopefully this means that they're thrilled with Danny Herrerra and Pedro Viola

The roster is raining lefties. Stanton, now Coulangus......

reds44
03-31-2008, 10:52 AM
Not sure I agree with this one, but okay.

dfs
03-31-2008, 10:54 AM
damn, that's silly.

NC Reds
03-31-2008, 10:57 AM
This is a horrible move. There is fodder on the 40 man roster but Cout was not it.

Yuck. :thumbdown

Stormy
03-31-2008, 11:06 AM
Hopefully he'll be back, as this move otherwise makes no sense. A relatively young lefty, who is hard to hit, is tough on LHH, can miss some bats, who isn't all that easy to take deep, and whose primary issue is control related (not unusual for a LHP with only 40+ career IP under his belt). Not the guy you DFA on this roster.

princeton
03-31-2008, 11:08 AM
Hopefully he'll be back, as this move otherwise makes no sense.

I figure that a Coutlangus trade has already been worked out, but the other team has to free up a 40 man spot for him, which'll be done within a day or two.

RedlegJake
03-31-2008, 11:13 AM
I figure that a Coutlangus trade has already been worked out, but the other team has to free up a 40 man spot for him, which'll be done within a day or two.

That makes eminent sense and I hope you're right.

klw
03-31-2008, 11:15 AM
Well if there is ever a time of year to try to sneak a guy like Coutlangus off of the 40 man it is probably now when teams are lagrely looking to shed players or to pick up a more estbalished player. Not the time of year to pick up a guy on whom there likely is limited scouting information.

Stormy
03-31-2008, 11:15 AM
I figure that a Coutlangus trade has already been worked out, but the other team has to free up a 40 man spot for him, which'll be done within a day or two.

I hope you're right, and that this is part of a larger transaction.

puca
03-31-2008, 11:30 AM
I hope you're right, and that this is part of a larger transaction.

So do I. And I hope it is a decently significant transaction. Otherwise they are throwing away Coutlangus to keep Mercker. That would be pointless. Coutlangus may not be ready to help the Reds right now, but I'm guessing neither is Mercker. The difference is the potential to help in the future.

REDREAD
03-31-2008, 11:34 AM
I got the feeling last year that Cout was on his way out. They just seemed to give up on him.

Hopefully, he is traded. I actually really doubt they are trying to sneak him past waivers for the purpose of trying to keep him. He will be claimed. IMO, there's no doubt that will happen.

reds44
03-31-2008, 11:47 AM
From Fay:


From the Reds:

Today the Reds placed on the 15-day disabled list, retroactive to 3/21, RHP Matt Belisle (right forearm) and SS Alex Gonzalez (left knee) and, retroactive to yesterday, C David Ross (lower back); designated for assignment LHP Mike Stanton and LHP Jon Coutlangus; purchased the contracts of non-roster invitees C Paul Bako (#9), RHP Johnny Cueto (#47), RHP Mike Lincoln (#57), LHP Kent Mercker (#50) and OF Corey Patterson (#23)...another spot on the 40-man roster will be cleared after 1:00 p.m. today.

Coutlangus is a bit of a surprise.

RedsManRick
03-31-2008, 11:48 AM
W...T...F...

I'd rather have Cooter than Affeldt, straight up.

Guacarock
03-31-2008, 11:50 AM
One possibility: Coutlangus is being packaged as a sweetener with Freel in a deal to the Phillies for Helms. Why it makes sense?

We know the Phillies were desperate to snag a southpaw reliever, having offered Helms for Stanton. So instead the Reds give them Coutlangus to fill that need, providing they take on Freel with his $3 million salary in '08 and $4 million in '09. Freel fits the scrappy, blue collar mold that Phillies fans like, and he can serve as their super utility guy for 2b, 3B and all the OF.

We get back Helms for 2.15 million this season as a backup to Encarnacion at 3B, RH pinch hitter with some clout and potential platoon partner for either Votto or Hatteberg at 1B. True, we have a bit of a logjam at 1B, but maybe not if Helms is playing a lot of 3B or if Dunn gets traded at some point in the season and Votto gets slotted into LF.

Yes, I realize these are all conjectures and hypotheticals, but they bear pondering. And after all, there are only a few hours left to stoke the hot stove before the umpires at Great American yell "Play Ball!"

PuffyPig
03-31-2008, 11:58 AM
One possibility: Coutlangus is being packaged as a sweetener with Freel in a deal to the Phillies for Helms. Why it makes sense?



Why it doesn't make sense?

It was reported we could have had Helms for Stanton.

RedsManRick
03-31-2008, 12:03 PM
I don't understand the trade issue. Are we assuming that no team will want to mess with the 25 man roster it broke camp with?

Here is a 28 year old lefty, with next to no mileage on his arm thanks to be a converted OF, who strikes out nearly a batter per inning, has ground ball tendencies and is nearly unhittable against lefties. A health, cheap LOOGY.

What are the odds he makes it through waivers? Certainly a team or 3 is carrying somebody they'd drop from him.

Guacarock
03-31-2008, 12:06 PM
Why it doesn't make sense?

It was reported we could have had Helms for Stanton.

That's true, but the Reds owe Freel even more ($7 million cumulative) than they owed Stanton ($3.5 million). So maybe Helms wasn't the hangup to the other deal. Maybe the hangup was just a desire on the Krivdawg's part to shed $7 million in sunk costs, as opposed to $3.5 million.

Yes, Freel is a much more productive player than Stanton, so it's a little unfair to refer to him in this way. But he has become more extraneous to the Reds, with Hopper and Keppinger emerging as cheaper, younger, equally useful utility men on our bench.

klw
03-31-2008, 12:07 PM
Per team press notes. Did not see that one coming. One other spot on the 40 man will not be cleared until after 1pm, which is interesting.

Maybe they can't get in touch with Drew Anderson for some reason until after 1pm?

Nugget
03-31-2008, 12:25 PM
If I have the count correct don't they still need to make room on the 40 man for the roster changes - Capellan, Cout, Stanton and Livingston are off - who else?

edabbs44
03-31-2008, 12:29 PM
I don't understand the trade issue. Are we assuming that no team will want to mess with the 25 man roster it broke camp with?

Here is a 28 year old lefty, with next to no mileage on his arm thanks to be a converted OF, who strikes out nearly a batter per inning, has ground ball tendencies and is nearly unhittable against lefties. A health, cheap LOOGY.

What are the odds he makes it through waivers? Certainly a team or 3 is carrying somebody they'd drop from him.

Maybe the Reds can drop Mercker or Lincoln and pick him up.

TRF
03-31-2008, 12:36 PM
If I have the count correct don't they still need to make room on the 40 man for the roster changes - Capellan, Cout, Stanton and Livingston are off - who else?

I think Capellan was sent back.

CaiGuy
03-31-2008, 12:39 PM
Coutlangus>Mercker

blumj
03-31-2008, 01:06 PM
I don't understand the trade issue. Are we assuming that no team will want to mess with the 25 man roster it broke camp with?

Here is a 28 year old lefty, with next to no mileage on his arm thanks to be a converted OF, who strikes out nearly a batter per inning, has ground ball tendencies and is nearly unhittable against lefties. A health, cheap LOOGY.

What are the odds he makes it through waivers? Certainly a team or 3 is carrying somebody they'd drop from him.
Would a team need to mess with their 25 man to claim him right now? They'd just need a 40 man spot, no? I don't see the point to a DFA now unless they're planning to trade him. They could have tried to sneak him through waivers without it.

Tom Servo
03-31-2008, 01:07 PM
I'm not digging this at all.

PuffyPig
03-31-2008, 01:14 PM
Would a team need to mess with their 25 man to claim him right now? They'd just need a 40 man spot, no? I don't see the point to a DFA now unless they're planning to trade him. They could have tried to sneak him through waivers without it.


They can still try and sneak him through waivers, with or without the DFA.

The DFA creates the immediate opening.

Falls City Beer
03-31-2008, 01:17 PM
Wayne Krivsky can butcher a bullpen. It's no longer a blind spot; it's become a crippling disease.

RedsManRick
03-31-2008, 01:17 PM
So, DFA = remove from 40 man roster. How does that happen without him being subject to waivers? I understand you can waive somebody while keeping them on the 40 man as a way to avoid using an option. So you can waive without designating for assignment. But doesn't the DFA necessitate being passed through waivers? Can somebody clarify?

princeton
03-31-2008, 01:19 PM
So, DFA = remove from 40 man roster. How does that happen without him being subject to waivers? I understand you can waive somebody while keeping them on the 40 man as a way to avoid using an option. So you can waive without designating for assignment. But doesn't the DFA necessitate being passed through waivers? Can somebody clarify?


Reds have a short amount of time (10 days IIRC) to trade him, or else he has to pass through waivers.

PuffyPig
03-31-2008, 01:20 PM
So, DFA = remove from 40 man roster. How does that happen without him being subject to waivers? I understand you can waive somebody while keeping them on the 40 man as a way to avoid using an option. So you can waive without designating for assignment. But doesn't the DFA necessitate being passed through waivers? Can somebody clarify?


When you DFA, you have 10 (I think) days to trade him, release him or put him through waivers.

RedsManRick
03-31-2008, 01:23 PM
Reds have a short amount of time (10 days IIRC) to trade him, or else he has to pass through waivers.

I thought that was part of the waiver process. Player's DFA were placed on revocable waivers. If a team claims him, the Reds can attempt to work out a trade with the claiming team, they can let him be claimed, or they can re-add him to the 40 man roster -- but then he cannot be DFA'd again that season. If he passes through unclaimed, they can keep him and assign him wherever. However, he is not on the 40 man roster during this period.

If this is true, I imagine that he will be claimed by somebody. We will try to work out a trade with that team. If we can't, depending on what's played out over the next 10 days, we'll pull him back and kick off somebody else. I think this is just trying to sneak him through at a moment where people are already focused on sorting through their own 40 man issues. I hope that they wouldn't just let him go.

princeton
03-31-2008, 01:27 PM
I thought that was part of the waiver process. Player's DFA were placed on revocable waivers. If a team claims him, the Reds can attempt to work out a trade with the claiming team, they can let him be claimed, or they can re-add him to the 40 man roster -- but then he cannot be DFA'd again that season. If he passes through unclaimed, they can keep him and assign him wherever.


No.

revocable waivers don't come into play until August. Coutlangus will go on irrevocable waivers at some point within 10 days, unless traded first.

I think that if unclaimed, Coutlangus has to accept assignment to minors, but that Stanton can just take the money and go wherever he likes, including home.

boognish
03-31-2008, 01:28 PM
It is possible Coutlangus can accept the assignment if a trade isn't worked out. Since he was already reassigned to the minor league camp, I am holding out hope that a trade is the most likely scenario.

IslandRed
03-31-2008, 01:33 PM
I thought that was part of the waiver process. Player's DFA were placed on revocable waivers. If a team claims him, the Reds can attempt to work out a trade with the claiming team, they can let him be claimed, or they can re-add him to the 40 man roster -- but then he cannot be DFA'd again that season. If he passes through unclaimed, they can keep him and assign him wherever. However, he is not on the 40 man roster during this period.

I don't think that's exactly right. Revocable waivers is the August process; I'm pretty sure a DFA involves "normal" waivers where if he's claimed, he's gone. And I don't think he has to clear waivers first to be traded. Basically, they can shop him around for several days and then put him on waivers only if they're going to attempt to outright him to the minors.

PuffyPig
03-31-2008, 01:35 PM
Basically, they can shop him around for several days and then put him on waivers only if they're going to attempt to outright him to the minors.

That is right.

RedsManRick
03-31-2008, 01:35 PM
I don't think that's exactly right. Revocable waivers is the August process; I'm pretty sure a DFA involves "normal" waivers where if he's claimed, he's gone. And I don't think he has to clear waivers first to be traded. Basically, they can shop him around for several days and then put him on waivers only if they're going to attempt to outright him to the minors.

Ah, thanks for the clarification.

blumj
03-31-2008, 01:58 PM
The thing is, there are teams with open 40 man spots right now who are juggling relievers who are out of options. Those teams aren't likely to let an optionable loogy go by when they might have to dump their own loogy for a 25 man spot for their 5th starter in a week or two.

Kc61
03-31-2008, 02:11 PM
This is a move that anticipates Coutlangus will stay with the team, just not on the 40-man roster. It is really only a roster move -- unless somebody picks him up on waivers. That's possible, but not very likely this time of year. Most teams have a roster crunch now, most teams aren't looking to add guys dropped by the Reds or anyone else.

westofyou
03-31-2008, 02:15 PM
This is a move that anticipates Coutlangus will stay with the team, just not on the 40-man roster. It is really only a roster move -- unless somebody picks him up on waivers. That's possible, but not very likely this time of year. Most teams have a roster crunch now, most teams aren't looking to add guys dropped by the Reds or anyone else.

So it's a good time to sneak a guy who walks more than 5 guys every 9 through?

It's a gamble... like drawing for 3 of a kind it's a standard one, with a standard payoff.

princeton
03-31-2008, 02:18 PM
So it's a good time to sneak a guy who walks more than 5 guys every 9 through?

It's a gamble... like drawing for 3 of a kind it's a standard one, with a standard payoff.


Reds picked him up two years ago under similar circumstances.

two more years of experience, some major league games... he's more attractive now to some teams (those that like experience and have immediate need) than he was two years back, and less attractive to others that like potential.

RedsManRick
03-31-2008, 02:46 PM
So it's a good time to sneak a guy who walks more than 5 guys every 9 through?

It's a gamble... like drawing for 3 of a kind it's a standard one, with a standard payoff.

If Coutlangus was a free agent the Reds could've signed him to a 1 year, $3M deal...

westofyou
03-31-2008, 02:55 PM
If Coutlangus was a free agent the Reds could've signed him to a 1 year, $3M deal...

If you say so Rick!!

that would suck though.

RedsManRick
03-31-2008, 02:59 PM
If you say so Rick!!

that would suck though.

Indeed. Wasting $3M on a reliever with a 5+ BB/9 would suck indeed...

westofyou
03-31-2008, 03:10 PM
Indeed. Wasting $3M on a reliever with a 5+ BB/9 would suck indeed...

On that note... The Cubs gave Kent Merker 1.2 after he averaged 5/9 IP in 2003

camisadelgolf
03-31-2008, 04:18 PM
J.C. Romero can top that. In 2007, he walked 40 hitters in 56.3 IP and then signed a contract that guarantees him over $10MM through the next three years.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/r/romerj.01.shtml

westofyou
03-31-2008, 04:24 PM
J.C. Romero can top that. In 2007, he walked 40 hitters in 56.3 IP and then signed a contract that guarantees him over $10MM through the next three years.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/r/romerj.01.shtml

Yep, I have him on my strat team, has like a 1.6 in BH and .30 In BB allowed.

Chip R
03-31-2008, 10:26 PM
And Gary Majewski still has a job. :dunno:

I've been as critical of Coutlangus as anyone but I sure don't want to lose him.

Patrick Bateman
03-31-2008, 10:30 PM
The thing that pisses me off is when the Reds spend 3M on guys like Affeldt, Stanton, and Cormier, when there are cheaper options like Cout that end up with no worse results. In Cout's case, he has obvious skills v. lefties, is young, and cheap, meanwhile should only get better.

Why ditch guys like that when the alternatives are more expensive, aging, and at best, similarily talented players?

blumj
03-31-2008, 11:28 PM
Don't most loogies tend to have pretty high walk rates? I mean real loogies, not just lefty relievers. Because, right handed hitters tend to kill them, so they're better off walking pretty much all of them they wind up having to pitch to, and they're almost always facing just the very best lefthanded hitters in the highest leverage situations. If a loogy could actually get the best lefties out, without walking many of them, and get a good chunk of the righties out, too, he wouldn't be a loogy, he'd be a good relief pitcher who just happens to throw lefthanded. In a way, the whole point of a loogy is that he can do that one, very specialized job as well as a good pitcher without having to actually be a good pitcher.

WVRedsFan
03-31-2008, 11:38 PM
The thing that pisses me off is when the Reds spend 3M on guys like Affeldt, Stanton, and Cormier, when there are cheaper options like Cout that end up with no worse results. In Cout's case, he has obvious skills v. lefties, is young, and cheap, meanwhile should only get better.

Why ditch guys like that when the alternatives are more expensive, aging, and at best, similarily talented players?

I hear you.

Like Chip said, Cout is out, but Majewski still has a job? Is it only because of the worst trade the Reds have made in Krivsky's tenure? I think that's the case.

I scratch my head everytime we acquire these "has beens" for mucho dollars, give them a multi-year contract, and then DFA them. Many might defend these actions, but I consider it the pinnacle of incompetence when you foolishly throw away money on these guys and throw away a kid who could have done the same thing for a lot less money.

OnBaseMachine
03-31-2008, 11:43 PM
I don't understand this move. There are about four or five guys on the current 40 man roster who I would have cut before Coutlangus - Drew Anderson, Juan Castro, Gary Majewski, Paul Bako now that he's on the roster are just a few I would have cut.

Ron Madden
04-01-2008, 02:30 AM
Wayne has done some good things during his time here.

So far, very few of those good things have had anything to do with improving the bullpen.

(JMHO)

traderumor
04-01-2008, 07:20 AM
All I know is that the number of DFAs that have gone on to great things is few, while the landscape is littered with guys that much hand wringing was done here over their cut by the Reds, yet never surface to perform well elsewhere.

RANDY IN INDY
04-01-2008, 07:41 AM
I liked Coutlangas. I thought he had a lot of potential and hope the Reds can keep him.

REDREAD
04-01-2008, 08:52 AM
The thing that pisses me off is when the Reds spend 3M on guys like Affeldt, Stanton, and Cormier, when there are cheaper options like Cout that end up with no worse results. In Cout's case, he has obvious skills v. lefties, is young, and cheap, meanwhile should only get better.

Why ditch guys like that when the alternatives are more expensive, aging, and at best, similarily talented players?


Not only that, but they signed some absolutely horrible guys like Ricky Stone for "insurance" vs injuries. If I understand correctly, we could've dumped some garbage off the 40 man roster and kept Coutlangus. If nothing else, he's a huge upgrade over the stiffs in AAA which are there for emergency backup.

edabbs44
04-01-2008, 08:59 AM
All I know is that the number of DFAs that have gone on to great things is few, while the landscape is littered with guys that much hand wringing was done here over their cut by the Reds, yet never surface to perform well elsewhere.

Kent Mercker is on the roster. I don't care if Coutlangus never pitches again in the bigs, they kept Kent Mercker over him.

Not even going to start with Mike Lincoln or Affeldt.

edabbs44
04-01-2008, 09:06 AM
Wayne has done some good things during his time here.

So far, very few of those good things have had anything to do with improving the bullpen.

(JMHO)

Quantity over quality, my friend. That's Wayne's game.

Watching what Wayne is doing with the bullpen has to be one of the most comical things I have ever seen.

The guy has acquired how many relievers in 2 calendar years, spent countless millions on those numerous acquisitions and traded useful guys like Kearns and Denorfia in his efforts to upgrade the bullpen. And it is still in bad shape.

Joseph
04-01-2008, 11:10 AM
I'm more disappointed in the loss of Richie Gardener.

traderumor
04-01-2008, 01:45 PM
Kent Mercker is on the roster. I don't care if Coutlangus never pitches again in the bigs, they kept Kent Mercker over him.

Not even going to start with Mike Lincoln or Affeldt.I am learning that when discussions involve chaff, people have their personal preferences over which chaff they would rather have on their ballclub--from the one's making the decisions to those deadpanning the decisions.

princeton
04-04-2008, 10:09 AM
I figure that a Coutlangus trade has already been worked out, but the other team has to free up a 40 man spot for him, which'll be done within a day or two.

maybe I'm wrong...

five more days to work out something regarding Coutlangus.