Will Texas put any of their arms on Waivers by the end of August?

[sportsfan8703]

The Rangers are currently 7.5 GB in the AL West and 10 GB in the AL WC.  Let's say they're 10+ GB in both races come Aug. 28th... would they put any of their pitchers on release waivers in hopes that someone just claims them, and pays their remaining 2024 salary?  As defending champs do they have too much pride to do this?  Does the owner even care about salary savings?

The interesting arms that are pending Free Agents are Scherzer(43.3), Heaney(13), Robertson(10), and Chafin(4.75).  That's 70 million times (1/6thish) that they could save.  Which would be about 12 million that they could potentially save if all of them are claimed.

We saw the Angels do this last August.  Obviously, we would be interested.  Who knows if this would happen?  Then waiver position comes into play by reverse order of the standings.  You could really go down the rabbit hole if it would be better to be in 2nd place behind the Yankees if we could get Scherzer and Robertson.  

[Greg Pappas]

Honest question.   I don't recall the rules regarding the end of August, but can't teams begin putting players through waivers now?  I'd be happy to add talent, even if that talent is not eligible for the playoffs.  We really need pitching help.  

[Gunnar]

The Angels did this last year but I believe they were trying to get under the luxury tax threshold, something like that.  The Rangers wouldn't save much by doing this and I would think they don't want to just throw in the towel, especially given what they showed can happen if you make the playoffs.

[sportsfan8703]

3 minutes ago, Gunnar said:

The Angels did this last year but I believe they were trying to get under the luxury tax threshold, something like that.  The Rangers wouldn't save much by doing this and I would think they don't want to just throw in the towel, especially given what they showed can happen if you make the playoffs.

Yeah, that's my thinking.  But what if they're 12 games back?  I bet they intend to hit Free Agency hard for a quick retool.  Maybe allowing those handful of pitchers to get claimed by a playoff team keeps them in the good graces of Agents?  

Also, Cleveland, Houston, Seattle, Minnesota, and Kansas City, would likely have waiver priority over us even if we were .5 GB of the Yankees.  

I doubt the Rangers want to help out Seattle or Houston win a World Series.  

[Aristotelian]

They really should have sold at the deadline. With waiver trades after the deadline no longer a thing, wouldn't we lose out to any team with a higher waiver priority? So anyone other than the Braves?

[bpilktree67]

1 hour ago, sportsfan8703 said:

The Rangers are currently 7.5 GB in the AL West and 10 GB in the AL WC.  Let's say they're 10+ GB in both races come Aug. 28th... would they put any of their pitchers on release waivers in hopes that someone just claims them, and pays their remaining 2024 salary?  As defending champs do they have too much pride to do this?  Does the owner even care about salary savings?

The interesting arms that are pending Free Agents are Scherzer(43.3), Heaney(13), Robertson(10), and Chafin(4.75).  That's 70 million times (1/6thish) that they could save.  Which would be about 12 million that they could potentially save if all of them are claimed.

We saw the Angels do this last August.  Obviously, we would be interested.  Who knows if this would happen?  Then waiver position comes into play by reverse order of the standings.  You could really go down the rabbit hole if it would be better to be in 2nd place behind the Yankees if we could get Scherzer and Robertson.  

They are only paying Scherzer 12 million.  The Mets are paying 31 million of it this year.  So it will only cost a team about 2 million so I doubt he would get far on the chain with so many teams needed pitching.  

[bpilktree67]

55 minutes ago, Aristotelian said:

They really should have sold at the deadline. With waiver trades after the deadline no longer a thing, wouldn't we lose out to any team with a higher waiver priority? So anyone other than the Braves?

They need to put the waiver deadline trades back in with the new wild card format.  There are a lot of teams that are on the bubble and now it is making the price for trading at the deadline astronomical .  

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, bpilktree67 said:

They need to put the waiver deadline trades back in with the new wild card format.  There are a lot of teams that are on the bubble and now it is making the price for trading at the deadline astronomical .  

I don't see why that's bad, it's just different.

[bpilktree67]

2 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I don't see why that's bad, it's just different.

Yeah it is.  It does hurt teams and fans though.  Once you are out of it and you have some young players the teams and fans want to see those young guys get some MLB experience.  For Teams like the Rangers there isn't a lot of openings because they have so many vets on the roster taking up space.  I am sure the fans would rather see Leiter getting a start instead of Haney or Scherzer when they are basically out of playoffs.  With roster sizes cut down now in September it hard to get those guys some experience even more if you can only bring up 2 guys.  

[Can_of_corn]

8 minutes ago, bpilktree67 said:

Yeah it is.  It does hurt teams and fans though.  Once you are out of it and you have some young players the teams and fans want to see those young guys get some MLB experience.  For Teams like the Rangers there isn't a lot of openings because they have so many vets on the roster taking up space.  I am sure the fans would rather see Leiter getting a start instead of Haney or Scherzer when they are basically out of playoffs.  With roster sizes cut down now in September it hard to get those guys some experience even more if you can only bring up 2 guys.  

I don't think fans are "hurt" teams either to be honest but fans especially. 

Teams can find a way to get those players up if they really want to.

[SteveA]

1 hour ago, Aristotelian said:

They really should have sold at the deadline. With waiver trades after the deadline no longer a thing, wouldn't we lose out to any team with a higher waiver priority? So anyone other than the Braves?

The Braves???

[Aristotelian]

4 minutes ago, SteveA said:

The Braves???

I thought it was based on last year's wins. Never mind!

[SteveA]

Just now, Aristotelian said:

I thought it was based on last year's wins. Never mind!

Ah, OK.   

[OriolesMagic83]

2 hours ago, Aristotelian said:

They really should have sold at the deadline. With waiver trades after the deadline no longer a thing, wouldn't we lose out to any team with a higher waiver priority? So anyone other than the Braves?

Doesn't it go by leagues?  So the O's would be last in line in the AL league and then it would be in reverse order of record in the NL. 

[rm5678]

1 hour ago, OriolesMagic83 said:

Doesn't it go by leagues?  So the O's would be last in line in the AL league and then it would be in reverse order of record in the NL. 

No, I believe it just simply goes by reverse W-L record regardless of league. It used to be by leagues but that changed when they eliminated the August waiver trade deadline.