Orioles Discussing Machado Promotion to Norfolk

[Can_of_corn]

Okay, why?

Not speaking for Wildcard of course but I can think of a few reasons.

1- Reward him for his play this season

2- Let the fans get a look at him

3- Acclimate him to the speed of the game

4- Let Buck and the coaches get a chance to interact with him

5- Extend his season

[Tony-OH]

I wonder if Harper's major league success is having a bearing on the Orioles' thought process here? Outside of the Sally League last year, Harper never put up big numbers in the minors yet he's had some very good success in the majors this year. I'd be lying if I didn't think Machado might be our best third base option right now or at the very least, shortly. Honestly, if I'm the Orioles I'd start having him play third base. Even if I believe that Machado will be able to play shortstop in the major leagues (I do), no one is going to move JJ Hardy off of shortstop anytime soon. Hardy is too valuable defensively. If Machado can show he can handle 3B defensively effectively and he then shows an ability to hit some AAA pitching, then is he truly a worse option then our current ones? I mean, Betimit can hit left-handed but he's too inconsistent defensively and he doesn't bring a ton to the plate while batting right-handed. Andino is our best defensive 3Bman but he's a poor hitting second baseman and truly would be a terrible hitting third baseman. REynolds days at third base are over and so are Davis'. Tolleson is AAAA/Utility guy.

So at the end of the day, is it out of the question that Machado might be out best option at 3B come the end of July? I don't really think so.

[weams]

I wonder if Harper's major league success if having a bearing on the Orioles' thought process here? Outside of the Sally League last year, Harper never put up big numbers in the minors yet he's had some very good success in the majors this year. I'd be lying if I didn't think Machado might be our best third base option right now or at the very least, shortly. Honestly, if I'm the Orioles I'd start having him play third base. Even if I believe that Machado will be able to play shortstop in the major leagues (I do), no one is going to move JJ Hardy off of shortstop anytime soon. Hardy is too valuable defensively. If Machado can show he can handle 3B defensively effectively and he then shows an ability to hit some AAA pitching, then is he truly a worse option then our current ones? I mean, Betimit can hit left-handed but he's too inconsistent defensively and he doesn't bring a ton to the plate while batting right-handed. Andino is our best defensive 3Bman but he's a poor hitting second baseman and truly would be a terrible hitting third baseman. REynolds days at third base are over and so are Davis'. Tolleson is AAAA/Utility guy.

So at the end of the day, is it out of the question that Machado might be out best option at 3B come the end of July? I don't really think so.

I can see everything that you are pointing out as relevant. How would a Sept call up effect his 40 man roster status and his arb clock?

[Frobby]

I can see everything that you are pointing out as relevant. How would a Sept call up effect his 40 man roster status and his arb clock?

The time counts, and he'd take up a roster spot.

[CA-ORIOLE]

I can see everything that you are pointing out as relevant. How would a Sept call up effect his 40 man roster status and his arb clock?

Pretty sure it does not affect service time or arb clock at all. I'm guessing this is what they might be thinking too. Imagine in if we were still in it in Sept and had Bundy and Machado on the roster.

[CA-ORIOLE]

The time counts, and he'd take up a roster spot.

Well, he'd have to be added to the 40 man. Are you sure about service time? I thought when we were going through option time etc, that Sept. callups didn't count as service time.

[Tony-OH]

Well, he'd have to be added to the 40 man. Are you sure about service time? I thought when we were going through option time etc, that Sept. callups didn't count as service time.

I'll check to make sure, but I didn't think September call-up time counted towards arbitration time either.

[Frobby]

Are you sure about service time? I thought when we were going through option time etc, that Sept. callups didn't count as service time.

I'm relatively sure. Article XXI of the CBA says that a player is credited with one day of service time for each day he is on the active major league roster -- no mention of an exception for September call-ups. Article XV(E) says that rosters are 25 through 8/31 but may be expanded to 40 after that; no mention of any service time exception in that Article, either. I also don't see any exceptions in Article VI(E) (describing who is eligible for arbtiration) or XX(B) (dealing with who is eligible for free agency).

Mind you, calling a player up does not affect how many options he has left -- options are used when a player on the 40-man roster is sent down to the minors for the first time in a season, not when a player is called up.

Here is a link to the CBA if you want to look through it: http://mlbplayers.mlb.com/pa/info/cba.jsp

[weams]

I'm relatively sure. Article XXI of the CBA says that a player is credited with one day of service time for each day he is on the active major league roster -- no mention of an exception for September call-ups. Article XV(E) says that rosters are 25 through 8/31 but may be expanded to 40 after that; no mention of any service time exception in that Article, either. I also don't see any exceptions in Article VI(E) (describing who is eligible for arbtiration) or XX(B) (dealing with who is eligible for free agency).

Mind you, calling a player up does not affect how many options he has left -- options are used when a player on the 40-man roster is sent down to the minors for the first time in a season, not when a player is called up.

Here is a link to the CBA if you want to look through it: http://mlbplayers.mlb.com/pa/info/cba.jsp

This makes sense. Thanks.

[Trackmaster]

I'm relatively sure. Article XXI of the CBA says that a player is credited with one day of service time for each day he is on the active major league roster -- no mention of an exception for September call-ups. Article XV(E) says that rosters are 25 through 8/31 but may be expanded to 40 after that; no mention of any service time exception in that Article, either. I also don't see any exceptions in Article VI(E) (describing who is eligible for arbtiration) or XX(B) (dealing with who is eligible for free agency).

Mind you, calling a player up does not affect how many options he has left -- options are used when a player on the 40-man roster is sent down to the minors for the first time in a season, not when a player is called up.

Here is a link to the CBA if you want to look through it: http://mlbplayers.mlb.com/pa/info/cba.jsp

So does this mean that there is no more of strategically waiting until the middle of May to bring up a top prospect to shield him from a year of service time?

[Frobby]

So does this mean that there is no more of strategically waiting until the middle of May to bring up a top prospect to shield him from a year of service time?

No, it still matters. The rules about free agent eligibility haven't changed at all, and it will still be beneficial to wait 2-3 weeks into the season before bringing a player up. The reason is that, as before, 172 days of service time is considered a full year, but there are about 185 days in a season; and if a player is optioned to the minors but gets recalled within 20 days, he gets service time credit for the time during which he was optioned. So, if a player was on the 40-man roster and is optioned during spring training, he has to be kept down at least 20 days or his service time will be reinstated. If a player is not on the 40-man roster, then he has to be kept down about 13 days so that he will accumulate less than 172 days that first season.

For arbitration, the rules are similar, except the threshhold for who qualifies as a "Super-Two" has been liberalized. It used to be the top 16% of players with more than two and less than three year, now it is the top 22%. So, to keep a player from being eligible for arbitration, it will now be necessary to hold him back longer than before. To me, it will rarely make sense to hold back a player just to try to keep him from getting "Super Two" status under the new rule, but it will continue to make sense to hold them back the 2-3 weeks necessary to extend free agency by a year.