I really want to keep Villar (Update: Traded to Marlins for LHS Easton Lucas)

[weams]

1 minute ago, thezeroes said:

Precludes them Outrighting Him but puts the ball in his court.

Agreed. I explained my take. Thanks for the excellent contributions here. 

[thezeroes]

4 minutes ago, weams said:

Now remember, these change all the time so I may be referencing something outdated. 

https://www.thecubreporter.com/book/export/html/3525

This was the newest of all the Waiver Rules that I could find. they were update in November 2019.

[NCRaven]

39 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Another way to look at this: if another team had put Villar on waivers, would you want the O’s to claim him and be bound to arbitrate with him?    If not, then why be upset that we put him on waivers and might non-tender him?

He is the second best player on this team behind Mancini.  Letting him go for nothing except salary savings is disappointing on any level.  I have to watch Davis flounder through another season and don't get to watch Villar.  That's beyond disappointing.  Are they related?  No, but yes.  One is kept because of money, one is let go because of much less money.  I don't believe that cutting Villar helps the rebuild in any way.  It only makes my viewing experience much worse.  Can't explain why I'm upset any clearer than that.

[interloper]

1 minute ago, NCRaven said:

He is the second best player on this team behind Mancini.  Letting him go for nothing except salary savings is disappointing on any level.  I have to watch Davis flounder through another season and don't get to watch Villar.  That's beyond disappointing.  Are they related?  No, but yes.  One is kept because of money, one is let go because of much less money.  I don't believe that cutting Villar helps the rebuild in any way.  It only makes my viewing experience much worse.  Can't explain why I'm upset any clearer than that.

No one was apparently willing to trade for him. O's were aggressive at the deadline AND so far this winter. You can't force a trade. It sucks, but it's not any fault of the Orioles. 

[NCRaven]

Just now, interloper said:

No one was apparently willing to trade for him. O's were aggressive at the deadline AND so far this winter. You can't force a trade. It sucks, but it's not any fault of the Orioles. 

I would prefer that they kept him rather than let him go for nothing.  Watching Richie Martin Part II at SS and Richie Martin Clone at 2B, or something approximating that does not appeal to me as a fan of baseball.  I accept the rebuild.  Doesn't mean I agree with every single move to cut money or put crap on the field.  This seems unnecessary to me.

[webbrick2010]

I'm okay with them waiving Villar who I found to be the most entertaining player

but 

why not throw the fans a bone and release the worst player in ML history?

[interloper]

4 minutes ago, NCRaven said:

I would prefer that they kept him rather than let him go for nothing.  Watching Richie Martin Part II at SS and Richie Martin Clone at 2B, or something approximating that does not appeal to me as a fan of baseball.  I accept the rebuild.  Doesn't mean I agree with every single move to cut money or put crap on the field.  This seems unnecessary to me.

Yeah I hear ya. Can't really argue with that. I would also like to watch Villar. 

[sportsfan8703]

5 minutes ago, NCRaven said:

I would prefer that they kept him rather than let him go for nothing.  Watching Richie Martin Part II at SS and Richie Martin Clone at 2B, or something approximating that does not appeal to me as a fan of baseball.  I accept the rebuild.  Doesn't mean I agree with every single move to cut money or put crap on the field.  This seems unnecessary to me.

It just seems like we're further along in the rebuild than we actually are because we had a relatively high payroll in in 2018 under Buck, and we were a dumpster fire.  That was not year 1 of the rebuild.  2019 was year 1.  We are just starting year 2.  It's probably a 5 year rebuild.  

[Frobby]

10 minutes ago, NCRaven said:

I would prefer that they kept him rather than let him go for nothing.  Watching Richie Martin Part II at SS and Richie Martin Clone at 2B, or something approximating that does not appeal to me as a fan of baseball.  I accept the rebuild.  Doesn't mean I agree with every single move to cut money or put crap on the field.  This seems unnecessary to me.

Assuming Villar is gone, it will be interesting to see if Elias picks up a veteran infielder or two at a lesser salary.    There are about 30 2B/SS types on the FA market and not that many openings for starters, so prices could be pretty cheap.    

[jerios55]

5 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Assuming Villar is gone, it will be interesting to see if Elias picks up a veteran infielder or two at a lesser salary.    There are about 30 2B/SS types on the FA market and not that many openings for starters, so prices could be pretty cheap.    

The one knock on Villar that people seem to not argue is his average at best defense.  Considering we were far worse at preventing runs than producing runs, maybe they target a defensive first guy.  Doesn't mean it needs to be a Richie Martin like project either, but I could see a desire to have better team defense.

[sportsfan8703]

8 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Assuming Villar is gone, it will be interesting to see if Elias picks up a veteran infielder or two at a lesser salary.    There are about 30 2B/SS types on the FA market and not that many openings for starters, so prices could be pretty cheap.    

I don't think it's a given that we redshirt Martin in AAA for any extended period of time.  I think Martin is the everyday SS.  

[weams]

8 minutes ago, Frobby said:

Assuming Villar is gone, it will be interesting to see if Elias picks up a veteran infielder or two at a lesser salary.    There are about 30 2B/SS types on the FA market and not that many openings for starters, so prices could be pretty cheap.    

I am assuming that is why when he telegraphed this at the first hotstove that he said he was shopping for a middle infielder. 

[weams]

Quote

Outright Release Waivers

Outright Release Waivers are irrevocable and cannot be withdrawn once they are requested.

While a player claimed off Outright Assignment Waivers costs $50,000 (formerly $20,000), a club can claim a player off Outright Release Waivers for the minuscule sum of $1. However, a club that claims a player off Release Waivers is responsible for paying 100% of the player's remaining salary, whereas if the same club waits until the player clears Release Waivers, the club can sign the player for the MLB minimum salary (or prorated portion of the MLB minimum salary), with the player's former club responsible for the balance.

A player who is claimed off Outright Release Waivers has the option to decline the assignment and become a free-agent (he has up to five days to decide). For most players, refusing an Outright Release waiver claim means the player's contract is terminated with no severance and his former club owes him nothing (same as an Article XX-D minor league FA who refuses an Outright Assignment), but for a player with "no trade" rights who refuses an Outright Release waiver claim, the player is owed his full salary for the balance of the contract, same as if he had not been claimed.

A player on an MLB Reserve List (40-man roster) who is released during the period of time extending from MLB Opening Day through August 31st cannot be added back to the MLB Active List of the club that released the player for at least 30 days - UNLESS - the MLB Active List of the club that released the player has at least one open slot during the period of time beginning when the player is released and extending up until the released player is re-signed and added back to the club's MLB Reserve List, and a player on an MLB 40-man roster who is released anytime during the period of time extending from September 1st to MLB Opening Day cannot be added back to the MLB 40-man roster (or MLB 25-man Active List) of the club that released the player until May 15th. 
NOTE:: While an unsigned player under club control who is not tendered a contract for the next season ("non-tendered") on December 2nd (or on December 1st if 12/2 falls on a Saturday or on November 30th if 12/2 falls on a Sunday) becomes a free-agent, it is not considered the same thing as an Outright Release, so a club can re-sign a non-tendered player to a Major League contract (or minor league contract) without any restrictions anytime after the player is non-tendered. Thus, December 2nd (or December 1st or November 30th in certain years) is a sort of roster "island oasis" in the middle of the off-season where a club can drop a player from its MLB Reserve List (including injured players) without having to worry about waivers or restrictions on off-season outright assignments or Outright Release.

A player on an MLB Reserve List (40-man roster) signed to a non-guaranteed contract who is released more than 15 days prior to Opening Day receives 30 days salary as termination pay (paid at the "minor league rate" if the player is signed to a "split contract"), and a player on an MLB Reserve List signed to a non-guaranteed contract who is released 15 or fewer days prior to Opening Day receives 45 days salary as termination pay (all players paid at the "Major League rate"). A player on an MLB Reserve List signed to a non-guaranteed contract who is released prior to MLB Opening Day receives 100% of his salary as termination pay if he is released while he is unable to render service due to an injury or illness suffered while under contract to the club.      

A player on an MLB Reserve List who is released during the MLB regular season receives 100% of his salary as termination pay (paid at the "minor league rate" for players on Optional Assignment to the minors).

An unsigned player on an MLB Reserve List released during the off-season receives no termination pay.

A Rule 6 Selected Player (a player who was selected in the MLB Rule 5 Draft) cannot be released until restrictions have been removed, and if Rule 6 restrictions have been removed and the player is released, the player's termination pay is always paid at the "Major League rate" as long as he is released prior to being outrighted to the minors.

Outright Release Waivers cannot be requested on a player while he is on the Bereavement List, Military List, Suspended List, Disqualified List, or Ineligible List. 

A club cannot option a player signed to a "split contract" to the minors if the purpose of the assignment is to release the player and avoid paying termination pay at the "Major League rate."

A player is automatically & immediately removed from his club's Reserve List (40-man roster) and Active List when placed on Outright Release Waivers.

I believe these are the waivers he was placed on and it won't be something we can confirm until it is over since it was never acknowledge that he was even on waivers. All the experts would be assuming also as there is no published list for us or them to view. 

[weams]

Just now, weams said:

I believe these are the waivers he was placed on and it won;t be something we can confirm until it is over since it was never acknowledge that he was even on waivers. All the experts would be assuming also as there is no published list for us or them to view. 

Villar's 2019 contract has been fulfilled. 

[jerios55]

10 minutes ago, sportsfan8703 said:

I don't think it's a given that we redshirt Martin in AAA for any extended period of time.  I think Martin is the everyday SS.  

Well, we need a 2B and SS.  Martin can only do one.  I guess it depends on where Alberto plays as well.  Maybe even Wilkerson.  I do think we'll see a 2B/SS position acquisition (to fill vacated Villar spot) even if new player becomes the utility and someone else gets the everyday at bats.