Simon waived?

[Enjoy Terror]

Sarfate was a lot like Simon, IMO.

[Lucky Jim]

People complain just for the sake of complaining it seems. Half the people complaining weren't even sure of the rules on waivers and DFA when they started complaining. Is there anyone arguing that Simon deserves a place on the 25 man roster? If so, whose place should he take? Do you insist that he has value? If so, it's a no brainer that he'll be claimed, right? Put your money where your mouth is? If you place value on Simon (I don't) then he's a lock to be claimed, right? Alfredo Simon is versatile. He's not very good in a lot of roles.

Just to clear all of this up, from your perspective the attempt to figure out the rationale behind a surprising (to us) roster decision is somehow problematic....and not exactly what a fan message board is for?

I mean, aren't you just complaining-for-the-sake-of-complaining about complainers-who-complain-for-the-sake-of-complaining?

[El Gordo]

Just to clear all of this up, from your perspective the attempt to figure out the rationale behind a surprising (to us) roster decision is somehow problematic....and not exactly what a fan message board is for?

I mean, aren't you just complaining-for-the-sake-of-complaining about complainers-who-complain-for-the-sake-of-complaining?

I don't think many are complaining. Just trying to understand the logic behind the move. I would have DL'd Simon to make room for Paulino. He won't be here much longer than Jake Fox was.

I also would eat 4M of Gregg's salary just to get him of the team and free up another spot. Last season when a guy got knocked out early we had Simon. Hendrickson, and Van den Hurk to come in for 2-3 innings and get us to the 7th or 8th, so we didn't burn too many RP's in one game. Who does that this year? I think we are looking at a pen of Gregg, Patton, Ayala, Neshek, Strop, Lindstrom, and JJ. I don't see many guys who could go more than 2 innings. And none of them can spot start.

[El Gordo]

Wada, Wada, and Wada. If you start the season thinking you are going to need your long man more than once a week, you're in big trouble already. The O's can start out with one long man and make adjustments if necessary (AAA callup). I know Buck keeps talking about Wada as a starter but right now all signs point to 5 other starters and Wada as the only candidate for the long job.

BTW, putting Simon on the 15 day DL wouldn't open up a 40 man spot for Paulino.

They have been pretty clear that they don't want Wada in the bullpen. If they did then he would be the logical choice. I t is not uncommon early in the season for SP to not be able to go deep into games. Roch said he thought that Wada will be DL'd and held over for extended ST. If he pitches 5 good innings his next start I could see them optioning Matusz. If Simon on the DL doesn't open up a spot, then what about Roberts, isn't he on the 40 man also?

[wildcard]

I don't have this DFA vs outright waivers thing figured out but I am pretty sure of two things.

1) Revocable waivers are only allowed from August 1st until the end of the season. So I am pretty sure that Simon's waivers are irrevocable.

2) Whether a player is DFA'd or Waivered, he comes off the 40 man roster.

[ccbird]

It seems pretty simple to me. They realize that he'd get claimed if DFA'ed because some team would find room on their 25 man roster. If they waive him, the claiming team only has to find room on the 40 man roster which increases his value to the claiming team. We're hoping to trade him for something more valuable than a bag of balls. If that doesn't happen, they'll revoke the waivers and DFA him.

They did the opposite approach with Eveland because they're hoping he'll make it through and they'd like him as depth in AAA. They know Simon won't make it through so try it the way that could yield value first.

My 2 cents...

I agree that this is likely the O's thinking.

Sure. Kind of. I don't have faith, at this point, that this was the right move, and at first glance it's just one more move for which I fail to see any coherent rationale. None of these, standing alone, are terrible. It's just one sub-optimal, inefficient, decision after another.

More importantly, I'm generally pretty good at discerning an over-arching logic/strategy to how GMs behave. I can't do it here. Maybe it means that Duquette is just playing a wholly different brand of chess and that I'm simply not smart enough to follow. After interviews, a survey of his history, and a bevy of decisions to consider - and, arrogant or not (why stop now?) - I don't think so.

Let me say that Simon or Berken were my two picks to be DFA when I believe Ayala was signed and Angle was removed from the 40 man roster. I wasn't happy that we lost Angle and the fact that we are seemingly now done with Simon only makes me more angry. Another case IMO of exactly what you said above. None of these decisions alone are terrible but they are inefficient, less than optimal and make me question DD that much more. I've said for awhile now that this guy scares the crap out of me and I can pretty confidently opine that he's not playing a game at a level that is beyond you or anybody else.

[El Gordo]

I don't have this DFA vs outright waivers thing figured out but I am pretty sure of two things.

1) Revocable waivers are only allowed from August 1st until the end of the season. So I am pretty sure that Simon's waivers are irrevocable.

2) Whether a player is DFA'd or Waivered, he comes off the 40 man roster.

I think your right.http://www.bizofbaseball.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=667:waivers&catid=44:business-of-baseball-glossary&Itemid=75

[CA-ORIOLE]

I don't have this DFA vs outright waivers thing figured out but I am pretty sure of two things.

1) Revocable waivers are only allowed from August 1st until the end of the season. So I am pretty sure that Simon's waivers are irrevocable.

2) Whether a player is DFA'd or Waivered, he comes off the 40 man roster.

The DFA process allows time and options to trade, waiver or release. If it's not a revocable waiver then I really don't get this, unless they think it was an opportune time to slip him through and/or they've exhausted trade interest (or there is something else we don't know about). DFA's often faciltate trades. Jai Miller for example was not a waiver claim. He was DFA'd by OAK and we traded for him (cash considerations) before he was actually exposed to waivers by OAK. I'm not sure if Eveland was DFA'd by the Dodgers (before we traded for him), but I think he was. It happens all the time.

I like Simon, but I'm not going to say he's something special or that we even need him, but I would think his arm and versatility might draw some interest. It is a good time to slip guys through with the rosters basically set. We'll see I guess.

[weams]

He did not pitch in the minors game as scheduled today. He has been waived.

[CA-ORIOLE]

He did not pitch in the minors game as scheduled today. He has been waived.

Be interesting to see what happens and what the logic was. If the O's are looking to slip him through waivers, they wouldn't say so at this point.

[weams]

Be interesting to see what happens and what the logic was. If the O's are looking to slip him through waivers, they wouldn't say so at this point.

This is Wikipedia's explanation. Andy MacPhail tried explaining it to me when George Sherrill was placed on waivers by the Dodgers. I still don't think I really understand.

If anyone has some additional insight, I will try to get it straight in my brain.

If a player is waived, any team may claim him. If more than one team claims the player from waivers, the team with the weakest record in the player's league gets preference. If no team in the player's league claims him, the claiming team with the weakest record in the other league gets preference. In the first month of the season, preference is determined using the previous year's standings.

If a team claims a player off waivers and has a viable claim as described above, his current team (the "waiving team") may choose one of the following options:

arrange a trade with the claiming team for that player within two business days of the claim; or

rescind the request and keep the player on its major league roster, effectively canceling the waiver; or

do nothing and allow the claiming team to assume the player's existing contract, pay the waiving team a waiver fee, and place the player on its active major league roster.

If a player is claimed and the waiving team exercises its rescission option, the waiving team may not use the option again for that player in that season—a subsequent waiver would be irrevocable with a claiming team getting the player essentially for nothing.[5] If no team claims a player off waivers after three business days, the player has cleared waivers and may be assigned to a minor league team, traded (to any team), or released outright.

The waiver "wire" is a secret within the personnel of the Major League Baseball clubs; no official announcement of a waiver is made until a transaction actually occurs, although information sometimes leaks out.[5][6] Many players are often waived during the post-July "waiver-required" trading period for teams to gauge trade interest in a particular player.[5] Usually, when the player is claimed, the waiving team will rescind the waiver to avoid losing the player unless a trade can be worked out with the claiming team.

[CA-ORIOLE]

This is Wikipedia's explanation. Andy MacPhail tried explaining it to me when George Sherrill was placed on waivers by the Dodgers. I still don't think I really understand.

If anyone has some additional insight, I will try to get it straight in my brain.

It makes sense to me but I don't think we have a right of recission (i.e. revocable waiver) in this case.

[El Gordo]

It makes sense to me but I don't think we have a right of recission (i.e. revocable waiver) in this case.

That's the question I have. In the Wiki explanation it sounds as if we would, but in other explainations I have read it seems as though revocable waivers only happen between Aug 1 and the end of the season.

[backwardsk]

Could that also mean that they are working on a trade and didn't want him to pitch? Sorry if that has already been covered.

[weams]

Could that also mean that they are working on a trade and didn't want him to pitch? Sorry if that has already been covered.

See, I don't know what it means. I think it is a very secretive, very technical process. I would love to completely understand it. From what I was told there are several types of waivers. Rapada was on release waivers, so was VandenHurk. Any one who can help, I will sure appreciate it. I suspect that I am just being dense, if a baseball GM explains it to me and I still didn't comprehend, I may be hopeless.