Waiver Wire...

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Alibiike. Show Alibiike's posts

    Waiver Wire...

    Which players, if any, will Boston place on waivers? Drew would be the obvious choice but because he is on the DL, he can't be. Same for Jenks.

    I'm thinking Scutaro and maybe Dmac.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from wherescreamingcomesfrom. Show wherescreamingcomesfrom's posts

    Re: Waiver Wire...

    usually teams put just about everyone on waivers . . . just to gauge interest. They can always pull them back. All those guys will be there. that doesn't mean they're going anywhere.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Alibiike. Show Alibiike's posts

    Re: Waiver Wire...

    In Response to Re: Waiver Wire...:
    [QUOTE]usually teams put just about everyone on waivers . . . just to gauge interest. They can always pull them back. All those guys will be there. that doesn't mean they're going anywhere.
    Posted by wherescreamingcomesfrom[/QUOTE]

    That would imply the RS are looking to move people and it's not likely that there would be many that fit that category. I thought maybe Papi would be dangled out there but he may take offense at it so I don't think he will.
    The only other player could be Papelbon.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from wherescreamingcomesfrom. Show wherescreamingcomesfrom's posts

    Re: Waiver Wire...

    Maybe, but it isn't necessarily to gauge interest for this year. it is also frequently the foundation for future deals in the offseason. For example, say Boston wants to gauge Reddick's trade value for the upcoming winter - they may put him on waivers see what offers come in, pull him back, and then rekindle the discussion this winter.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Alibiike. Show Alibiike's posts

    Re: Waiver Wire...

    In Response to Re: Waiver Wire...:
    [QUOTE]Maybe, but it isn't necessarily to gauge interest for this year. it is also frequently the foundation for future deals in the offseason. For example, say Boston wants to gauge Reddick's trade value for the upcoming winter - they may put him on waivers see what offers come in, pull him back, and then rekindle the discussion this winter.
    Posted by wherescreamingcomesfrom[/QUOTE]

    Could be. But don't they generally place players on waivers that are either: 1) high salaried, or 2) approaching FA, or 3) out of options
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from PawsoxPhil. Show PawsoxPhil's posts

    Re: Waiver Wire...

    Much like a potential candidate for President takes a poll to guage what the public thinks of him before he decides to run in a primary.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from PawsoxPhil. Show PawsoxPhil's posts

    Re: Waiver Wire...

    The use of waivers has traditionally been associated with marginal players, or players reaching the end of their major league career. Thus, expressions such as waiver wire fodder describe players who are not quite good enough to hold a job, even as a substitute in the major leagues, and can therefore be had for the price of a waiver claim (i.e. next to nothing). A veteran player who has gone through the waiver process is considered to be washed up, and any contribution he makes after that point is an unexpected bonus.

    However, with the evolution of baseball's salary structure, the use of waivers has changed, and players are more often traded or released for financial reasons and not for reasons of production. Thus, some still-productive players, but with expensive contracts, have gone through the waiver process in recent years. Famous cases include Tony Batista, whom the Toronto Blue Jays tried to send to the minor leagues in June 2001, confident that his expensive multi-year contract would scare other teams away from claiming him. However, Batista was claimed by the Baltimore Orioles and spent a number of productive seasons with his new team. Another famous case involved Manny Ramirez, who was placed on waivers by the Boston Red Sox after the 2003 season. In this case, there was no question that Ramirez was still a great hitter, but he had a multi-year contract worth over 100 million dollars, and the Red Sox were looking for some financial flexibility. No team was willing to assume Ramirez' contract and he remained a member of the Red Sox.

    There have also been famous instances when a team has claimed a player off waivers to prevent him from being traded to a competitor and later regretted that decision. Most famous is Randy Myers, whom the Blue Jays wanted to trade after the deadline in 1998. The San Diego Padres claimed him to prevent the once-great closer from ending with a competitor, and worked out a deal with the Blue Jays, sending minor league catcher Brian Loyd to them for Myers. Myers had a 6.28 ERA for the Padres over the remainder of the year, was awful in the postseason, and never pitched again in the majors, while the Padres were saddled with his hefty contract for a number of years while receiving no value in return. Caveat emptor.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedSoxKimmi. Show RedSoxKimmi's posts

    Re: Waiver Wire...

    In Response to Re: Waiver Wire...:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Waiver Wire... : Could be. But don't they generally place players on waivers that are either: 1) high salaried, or 2) approaching FA, or 3) out of options
    Posted by Alibiike[/QUOTE]

    Most teams will place most of their players on waivers during this time not only to gauge interest in certain players, but also to somewhat mask their true intentions to other GMs and also to the individual players.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from zack5042. Show zack5042's posts

    Re: Waiver Wire...

    Andrew miller
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from mattb5fon. Show mattb5fon's posts

    Re: Waiver Wire...

    Anyone think Crawford would be claimed? Not saying i want him moved but after talking trade deadline with a friend i think there are a few teams that would still want him. it will be interesting to see if someone would
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from crmn19. Show crmn19's posts

    Re: Waiver Wire...

    The wire is also a tool to discern other teams' off-season interest in your players.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from fizsh. Show fizsh's posts

    Re: Waiver Wire...

    Remember that the type of waivers being talked about here are revokable waivers, and not the DFA type of waivers.  If a team claims a Sox player on waivers, the Sox can simply revoke the waiver.  That is the reason why most players are put on waivers.  There is no fear of losing the player, however as has been mentioned, you can judge interest in a player, or like Kimmi said, disguise what you are really up to.  Players on the DL cannot be put on waivers, however.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from mattb5fon. Show mattb5fon's posts

    Re: Waiver Wire...

    fizsh i know that i mean what do you think the sox would do if a team claimed crawford. it would atleast be tempting to cut bait.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from siestafiesta. Show siestafiesta's posts

    Re: Waiver Wire...

    I really don't think anyone would claim Crawford.  Who would be willing to pay the remaining $120 mil+ he's owed??  
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from softylaw. Show softylaw's posts

    Re: Waiver Wire...

    The better question is:

    Who will the put on the waiver wire with the intention of getting rid of them?

    Drew

    I just wish they would waive Wakefield, where there will be no interest, then once he clears, ask him to accept a AAA assignement. He'd decline it, as the loyalty claim is utter nonsense.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from can-you-dig-it. Show can-you-dig-it's posts

    Re: Waiver Wire...

    wakefield is a very important part of this team, waiving him would be a mistake.  you know nothing about baseball, I have read your trash here for so long and you are rarely correct on anything about the sox and about baseball.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from PawsoxPhil. Show PawsoxPhil's posts

    Re: Waiver Wire...

    In Response to Re: Waiver Wire...:
    [QUOTE]I really don't think anyone would claim Crawford.  Who would be willing to pay the remaining $120 mil+ he's owed??  
    Posted by siestafiesta[/QUOTE]

    Nobody claimed Manny for the same reason when he was put on unconditional waivers.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from softylaw. Show softylaw's posts

    Re: Waiver Wire...

    wakefield is a very important part of this team, waiving him would be a mistake.  you know nothing about baseball, I have read your trash here for so long and you are rarely correct on anything about the sox and about baseball.

    Wakefield is not important at all, and would be an embarrassment to see on a playoff roster.

    You haven't read, on here, long, becuase you've only been on here for a few weeks.

    Nothing could prove lack of baseball knowledge quite like a defensive claim that Wakefield is an important part of this team. Wakefield and his 2 plus years and 5 plus ERA stinks! Deal with it.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from can-you-dig-it. Show can-you-dig-it's posts

    Re: Waiver Wire...

    again you prove yourself to be wrong.  I have been coming to this site for years not weeks. 
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from redsoxdirtdog. Show redsoxdirtdog's posts

    Re: Waiver Wire...

    Wake's not even in the news???  You're constantly trying to redirect attention away from your pathetic predictions about Ells.  Yep!  He's still an All Star!!  Getting better every day :)  Tek's also done a hell of a job bringing along Salty!!  What a combo!!!  I won't bother covering the multitude of other players you are consistently wrong about.  :)

    Why not go back to what you do best....  Go back to your race baiting, self aggrandizing proclamations about your superior Biblically based "moral code," gay bashing, mindless Right Wing Demagoguery (almost as bad as the Left Wing mindless demagoguery), bashing of the disabled, obsessive compulsive attacking of ANYONE WHO THINKS differently than you, & of course......  your standard claim that you don't need to listen to those who judge you because they do so based on a modern day relativist secular moral standard (even though ALL OF YOUR CHARMING CHARACTER TRAITS are completely antithetical to Christian Biblical Standards / Old & New Testament (any version).  I have to admit.........  You are very good at these things.

    p.s.   Nice to have you back!  As usual, you went & got yourself kicked off again before you could ignore my last response to you.  :) 

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from softylaw. Show softylaw's posts

    Re: Waiver Wire...

    gay bashing

    Sounds like "happy sex". Sex is conduct, not identity. Gay is happy, not a sexual identity.

    Ellsbury "still an All-Star", was not a starter, and Adam Jones is still an All-Star. Ellsbury still not hitting LHP, still a deer in headlights in the field and baserunning decisions
    Ellsbury not going to be extended.

     Tek's also done a hell of a job bringing along Salty!! What a combo!!!

    Salty has brought himself along, after a poor plate start. He's still a poor defensive catcher, as is Varitek. What a combo? For a far superior combo, See Avila and VMart.  

    I won't bother covering the multitude of other players you are consistently wrong about

    Why not use your other identity, "ram". Wrong on Tex. Wrong on AGon. Wong, wrong and wrong.

    And give up the lame conservative shill bad act.

    your superior Biblically based "moral code

    Your moral code is two consenting adults and if they decide it feels good.

    The antithesis of candor is an angry rant about "tolerance of those who think differently". When I say I'm repulsed by homosexual conduct, you characterize it as "gay bashing". The reality is that you ignore the multiple Biblical passages and take the absurd position that those opposed to the conduct are not willing to accept those who "think differently".
     
    I think differently than you, get over it.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from redsoxdirtdog. Show redsoxdirtdog's posts

    Re: Waiver Wire...

    LOL....

    Not too difficult to draw out your true self :)

    Sorry!  One identity.... Dirtdog  NO OTHER!  Unlike you

    As for hating those who are different???  I'll leave that ALL TO YOU!

    It's IRONIC...  I'm actually ashamed to have you characterize yourself as a Christian, a Conservative, a Republican, etc.   As I am ALL 3. 

    YOU ARE A COMPLETE EMBARRASSMENT TO ALL 3

    I'm ashamed to be even close to you ideologically, as you are nothing but a hater!  Christ would reject 95% of what you say & how you say it!!!!

    You're supposed to be a "light." ??????   YOU & those like you, do NOTHING but turn people OFF!!!!!

    Good luck to you.  I hope you're proud!  You're supposed to preach the "Good News!"   Not the daily hate!
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from softylaw. Show softylaw's posts

    Re: Waiver Wire...

    It's IRONIC... I'm actually ashamed to have you characterize yourself as a Christian, a Conservative, a Republican, etc. As I am ALL 3.

    No, you aren't, actually. You are actually a Leftist, Individualist, a modern Democrat. You are all 3.

    Christ would reject 95% of what you say & how you say it!!!!

    Christ would reject 100% of what you say, and how you say it.

    As you reject under "those who think differently", Christ would not reject:

    I Corinthians 6:11
    Leviticus 18:22
    Romans 1:26-3

    I've said a prayer that you recognize and respect the Scripture, and refer you to Isaiah 5:20. "People who think differently" is not a basis for moral athority. Condemn the sins of those who "think differently", and pray for all sinners.

    Now, stop hijacking a baseball thread because you don't like people who think differently on Wakefield deserving a roster spot.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from redsoxdirtdog. Show redsoxdirtdog's posts

    Re: Waiver Wire...

    In Response to Re: Waiver Wire...:
    [QUOTE]It's IRONIC... I'm actually ashamed to have you characterize yourself as a Christian, a Conservative, a Republican, etc. As I am ALL 3. No, you aren't, actually. You are actually a Leftist, Individualist, a modern Democrat. You are all 3. Christ would reject 95% of what you say & how you say it!!!! Christ would reject 100% of what you say, and how you say it. As you reject under "those who think differently", Christ would not reject: I Corinthians 6:11 Leviticus 18:22 Romans 1:26-3 I've said a prayer that you recognize and respect the Scripture, and refer you to Isaiah 5:20. "People who think differently" is not a basis for moral athority. Condemn the sins of those who "think differently", and pray for all sinners. Now, stop hijacking a baseball thread because you don't like people who think differently on Wakefield deserving a roster spot.
    Posted by softylaw[/QUOTE]

    It's clear that you will NEVER get it!

    "Christians" like you always focus on "sins" like homosexuality because that's the one thing they can (definitely say?) does not apply to you???  You harp on it ad nosium, even when it has to do with stories like a young boy asking the Red Sox to participate in a "Help Stop Bullying" PSA, after his uncle died.  WHY????  Well, that's an easy one....

    Guys like you glom onto this issue because it's far easier than dealing with your own "sins."  Your SINS are WELL chronicled in the Bible you claim to read.  BTW.....  The Good Book is not meant as a reference to research the "sins" of others......  Perhaps you missed the references about working on the PLANK in your own eye!!!

    Thanks for the limited Biblical references on your favorite "whipping boy issue."

    TRY!!!!!!!   Looking up what The Good Book has to say about the SINS you are want to ignore in your own life!  i.e.   PRIDE (your biggest!!  THOUSANDS OF CONDEMNATIONS directly FROM GOD!!!)  btw....  God gives special attention to this sin, as this he says "comes before all other.",  SLANDER, A WICKED TONGUE, GOSSIP. LUST, GREED, AVARICE, ETC. ETC. ETC. 

    BTW.....  I am under NO ILLUSION that you will even give the slightest thought to what I have just said.  Sad actually!  If you were a "true believer," as you claim to be, you could not help but see the truth about your own life, how you clearly treat others, & how you LOVE to perseverate over the "sins" of others while steadfastly ignoring your own.

    For the record................  *   I am exactly who I say I am!  BUT!!!  I do have a dog in this fight....  I happen to have a VERY Conservative gay brother who I GUARANTEE goes to a pretty conservative church much more often than you could ever pretend to go.

    I'll make you a deal....  You try to stay away from the constant moralizing, & I'll stay away from calling you on it.  Let's stick to baseball!!!!  I actually enjoy sparring with you on that.  Some of your player analysis is actually spot on......
    Some, however, is obsessively wrong.  No problem with that though :)  I like pointing out when you are obsessively wrong :)
       
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from WE5NUTS. Show WE5NUTS's posts

    Re: Waiver Wire...

    In Response to Re: Waiver Wire...:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Waiver Wire... : That would imply the RS are looking to move people and it's not likely that there would be many that fit that category. I thought maybe Papi would be dangled out there but he may take offense at it so I don't think he will. The only other player could be Papelbon.
    Posted by Alibiike[/QUOTE]
     Lester went on waivers last year. The whole team will probably end up on waivers at some point.
     

Share