Kriske released

[Tony-OH]

As for Kriske, I'm not sure why he was DFA'd earlier. If you wanted to sneak a guy through waivers and felt this timing would be easier, why would they not have tried Hunter Harvey now instead of earlier when he was scooped up? 

[Sports Guy]

7 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

As for Kriske, I'm not sure why he was DFA'd earlier. If you wanted to sneak a guy through waivers and felt this timing would be easier, why would they not have tried Hunter Harvey now instead of earlier when he was scooped up? 

Yep…this is the type of thing that makes no sense to me.  I just don’t see the logic at all.  It’s far easier to sneak him through now vs a month ago.  

[interloper]

I think trying to guess at move timings and the like is a fool's errand. We just don't know enough about the process and the evaluations of guys and other procedural goings on of a front office. Unless something is very obvious, I don't see much use in speculating on why one guy is DFA'd later than another. There's probably a bunch of reasons, most of them probably very boring lol. 

[NCRaven]

Maybe they just decided it was time to cut bait with Harvey.  Wish him luck and show him the door.  It could blow up in their faces, but really, what are the odds that he ever produces big time results at this point?

[Sports Guy]

2 minutes ago, NCRaven said:

Maybe they just decided it was time to cut bait with Harvey.  Wish him luck and show him the door.  It could blow up in their faces, but really, what are the odds that he ever produces big time results at this point?

Better than several other guys they kept over him.

[NCRaven]

Just now, Sports Guy said:

Better than several other guys they kept over him.

Meh.  If they cut Kriske a month ago and Harvey today, we might feel differently about it but the result would be the same.  I wouldn't have done it, but I'm sure it wasn't done without reason.

[Sports Guy]

1 minute ago, NCRaven said:

Meh.  If they cut Kriske a month ago and Harvey today, we might feel differently about it but the result would be the same.  I wouldn't have done it, but I'm sure it wasn't done without reason.

I think the reason was simply they felt he would pass through.  It was a gamble that didn’t pay off.  
 

I mean, it’s possible that it’s more than that, just like Pop last year, but it’s pretty easy to assume that this was the reason. 
 

The issue is that it was an unnecessary gamble.

[HowAboutThat]

4 minutes ago, NCRaven said:

Meh.  If they cut Kriske a month ago and Harvey today, we might feel differently about it but the result would be the same.  I wouldn't have done it, but I'm sure it wasn't done without reason.

They always have a reason, that’s a given.

The question is whether the reasons are any good.

[Tony-OH]

40 minutes ago, NCRaven said:

Maybe they just decided it was time to cut bait with Harvey.  Wish him luck and show him the door.  It could blow up in their faces, but really, what are the odds that he ever produces big time results at this point?

Which could be true, but can you look at Kriske's stuff and Harvey's stuff and tell me why anyone would keep Kriske over Harvey, even with the injury history of Harvey? I don't have a huge issue with DFaing Harvey, but I would have done it during a time when it was the best chance to sneak him through waivers.

Personally, i think they got made at him for saying what he said about getting hurt in rehab. Now grant it, the guy could break his own back stepping on a crack, but I wouldn't mind having him in the organization in the off chance he stays healthy. 

Really, neither of these guys will be pitching regularly for a contending team in the major leaguers.

[Frobby]

1 hour ago, Tony-OH said:

Which could be true, but can you look at Kriske's stuff and Harvey's stuff and tell me why anyone would keep Kriske over Harvey, even with the injury history of Harvey? I don't have a huge issue with DFaing Harvey, but I would have done it during a time when it was the best chance to sneak him through waivers.

Personally, i think they got made at him for saying what he said about getting hurt in rehab. 

I seriously doubt that’s the reason they DFAd him.  

[Tony-OH]

30 minutes ago, Frobby said:

I seriously doubt that’s the reason they DFAd him.  

I don't think it's the only reason, but I do think it was part of it. Harvey is the kind of arm you claim and hope he can stay healthy when you are in the Orioles situation. The fact that they DFA'd him tells me there's more to the story then just frustrated with his inability to stay healthy. But, it's spilled milk now. time to move forward.

[interloper]

Re: Harvey, any number of things might be true. But my take was always, part of it is the O's prioritizing guys who could potentially take the hill reliably, even if they were kind of underwhelming. That said, if they really believed in Harvey's ability, they would have kept him. But it's hard to keep a guy like him on the 40-man when you have to accommodate constant IL stints and rehabs. Like it's probably almost a relief when he finally hits the 60-day so you can stretch your roster legs a little bit. 

But the prioritizing on usability might translate into a guy like Kriske hanging around longer until you need the roster space. Dunno. I may be talking out of my butt on this one, admittedly. 

[interloper]

Ah, and here's our answer. He's pursuing an international deal. 

 

 

[sportsfan8703]

Not a bad guy to try and claim then DFA. If the Nats claimed him then he went pretty early in the process order. 

[NCRaven]

I think most of us expected the O's to try to pass him through waivers, just like KC did.  That .339 slugging nine was ripe for a move off the 40 man roster.  And, it's probably not the last time that he'll see himself in DFA limbo.