Quantcast

Writing about the post-July-31 trading system has become an annual rite. Not a lot has changed since I explained the process last year (including this here preamble!), but the players involved have changed, as has the Cubs’ situation.

Invariably, the non-waiver trade deadline passes, a bunch of would-be trades don’t happen, and folks start to wonder something they didn’t really openly wonder on July 30: what’s that “non-waiver” part mean?

The short answer is that, before the July 31 non-waiver trade deadline, anyone can be traded to any team. After that date, trades can still happen, but you’ve got to first deal with the sticky issue of “waivers.” I offered a very brief explanation during this year’s Blogathon.

You’ve actually heard the term “waivers” before. Waivers are relevant not only in August, you see. They’re used throughout the year, for various purposes, and the types of waivers employed vary based on the time of year and the purpose of the waiver. The waivers relevant for our purposes today are Trade Assignment Waivers. I like to think of them as August Waivers.

Ok, but what are “waivers”?

In a super shorthanded description: waivers are the way you say to every other team in baseball, “hey, you want this guy?” And, if you want to trade a guy in August, you’ve got to first give every other team a chance to take him (and his contract) for nothing. Those are August’s Trade Assignment Waivers.

If a player is placed on waivers, any team may “claim” him. If more than one team claims the player from waivers, only one team’s claim actually goes through. Priority is given to teams in the player’s league, with the team with the worst record getting highest priority. If no team in the player’s own league claims him, then priority goes to the other league, again, in reverse order of the standings. (So, for Cubs players, the Marlins will have the first priority, then the Giants, then the Brewers, and so on up the standings until you reach the Pirates, and then it flips over to the bottom of the American League pile.)

If another team claims the player off waivers (and its claim is either the only claim or is the highest priority claim as described above), the player’s current team has three options:

(1) It can allow the claiming team to assume the player’s entire contract, who then places him on its 25-man roster; or

(2) It can trade the player to the claiming team within two business days of the claim; or

(3) It can cancel the waiver by pulling the player back.

If the player is not claimed by any team within 47 hours (business days only), the player is said to have “cleared waivers.” That player is then free to be traded to any team, released, or assigned to a minor league team (subject to various collectively-bargained-for rights about refusing assignments).

One more important piece of the pie, which I’ll just grab from 2011′s edition, since I’d mostly be saying the same thing:

Now, I know what you’re wondering: so who has been placed on waivers? The short answer is: no idea. The slightly longer answer is: probably just about everyone.

The complete answer is: unless the information leaks (or a player is ultimately traded to or assumed by another team), you’re not going to find out who is on waivers. This isn’t your fantasy football league. Who has been placed on waivers is a highly secretive business, for reasons that I’d think would be obvious. Every year, it leaks that some superstar has been placed on waivers, and the media erupts. “OMG! YANKEES PLACE AROD ON WAIVERS!!!!1!!LOL!!!!” [Ed. - My, how quickly things change.]

Sorry, folks. It’s not a story. And the reason is tied to that “slightly longer answer” up there. Because of the revocable nature of waivers, teams risk almost nothing by placing virtually every player on waivers in August. If there’s even a tiny chance you might want to move a guy, you might as well throw him up on waivers, and see what happens. If he clears waivers, cool. If he’s claimed, you can work out a trade, or just pull him back. No fuss, no muss.

The only risk that I can see is that, if a guy is placed on waivers in August, is claimed, and then is pulled back by his team, that’s it for him. No more waivers that year. But, for the types of players who would be claimed by a bunch of teams (i.e. stars or cheap players), you’re probably not going to want to place that player on waivers later in the year anyway.

So, against that backdrop, let’s take a quick look at the Cubs’ tradable pieces (because of the revocable nature of these waivers, you can safely assume – whether it’s true or not – that all Cubs will be waived).

Unlikely last August, the Cubs no longer have any obvious albatross contracts that you just know will clear waivers. Indeed, I could make an argument for every single player on the Cubs’ 25-man roster being claimed by some team out there (in terms of his contract).

For example, although someone like Nate Schierholtz has a great deal of trade value, he almost certainly will not be traded in August. First, because of his productivity and desirable contract, he is a lock to be claimed. Second, because he offers even bad teams nice value in 2014, he would likely be claimed by one of those non-competitive, sub-.500 teams. And that team is not going to offer much in the way of trade. (Remember: when a player is claimed, the Cubs can trade that player to that team. But a market of one team is not much of a market when it comes to wringing out acceptable trade value.)

Thus, guys like Schierholtz, Jeff Samardzija, Luis Valbuena, and James Russell (and other guys who are obviously not trade candidates like Anthony Rizzo and Starlin Castro) are simply not going to be traded this month.

David DeJesus may have a teeny, tiny chance of clearing waivers, given his 2014 team option and its associated buyout. I say that because, while I tend to think he’s worth $6.5 million in 2014, I suppose there’s a chance that other teams don’t feel that way. In that instance, the teams that would want him for the stretch run would be picking up the remainder of what he’s owed this year (about $1.5 million) plus the buyout on his option year (another $1.5 million). Is a month and a half of DeJesus worth $3 million? Again, I tend to think it would be to a contender who needs him, but you never know. All in all, I think DeJesus falls into the same category as the above players.

Ditto most of that discussion for Carlos Villanueva, who is under contract for $5 million in 2014. I tend to think a number of teams would gladly take him and his contract if they could have him for free. So, as with DeJesus, I pretty much don’t see Villanueva being a legitimate trade candidate in August.

The only pieces I could see the Cubs moving in August are complementary pieces with fringe value, like Kevin Gregg, Matt Guerrier, Dioner Navarro or Cody Ransom. I suppose you could say that about Julio Borbon or Cole Gillespie, too, but I doubt any team would want to trade for them, regardless. Ryan Sweeney isn’t going to return from the DL to really enter this conversation (and I tend to think the Cubs may want a chance to bring him back in 2014), and Brian Bogusevic is also still on the DL (I tend to think he is more like a Borbon/Gillespie type than one of the initially-listed fringe value types, anyway).

The rest of the roster is made up of guys with no meaningful trade value, and/or guys that the Cubs pretty clearly want to keep for 2014.

So that leaves Gregg, Guerrier, Navarro, and Ransom as realistic possible August trade candidates. Lower-value, complementary pieces often make it through waivers, or their value is sufficiently small (and market sufficiently reduced) that it is possible to work out a reasonable trade with that one claiming team. I wouldn’t be surprised to see one or two of these guys dealt this month. All are low value impending free agents, though, so don’t get your hopes up for an impressive return.

A final note on September trades – We call the end of August the “waiver trade deadline,” but, strictly speaking, it isn’t a deadline at all. Trades can still go through in September, but here’s the rub: to be eligible for a playoff roster, a guy has to be on your team before September 1. So, although a team *can* acquire a guy in September, in-season trades overwhelmingly tend to involve sending big league pieces to teams in playoff contention. If you can’t use that piece for the playoffs, the value of that piece is driven down considerably. Hence, the last batch of important trades tend to happen in August, before the “waiver trade deadline.”

  • #1lahairfan

    Always one of my favorite articles to read. I’m not sure why.

  • fromthemitten

    I seem to recall the cubs traded bill Mueller after the Aug 31 deadline but that’s it

  • papabear

    Cubs will have a difficult time getting anyone through wavers this year. If you don’t agree give the name. I don’t think the cubs have a bad contract on the roster

  • H.A.

    Matt Guerrier is still owed about $1.5 million the rest of the way. He’s done a nice job here with the Cubs. But I could see the Cubs just letting a claiming team take him for nothing so they can save some cash and look at someone else in the pen the rest of the way.

  • ssckelley

    Wasn’t it reported that the Cubs put Soriano on waivers last August?

    • Coop

      Yes, which would make a lot of sense – the claiming team would be on the hook for the entirety of his remaining contract – that would have saved the Cubs a ton of money.

    • http://www.bleachernation.com Brett

      Yes. He was probably the first guy the Cubs put on waivers, and the first one to clear …

      • ssckelley

        So a waived player can remain on the active roster?

        • http://www.bleachernation.com Luke

          Revocable waivers, yes.

          • ssckelley

            Weird rules, “hey Soriano, you have been waived but you are starting in left field tonight”.

            • hansman1982

              Completely different beast than the “DFA Waivers”. Most of these players either have no clue they went through the waivers or can figure it out on their own (Cliff Lee for one)

          • http://www.bleachernation.com Brett

            It’s all up there. These are Trade Assignment Waivers. Different animal.

  • augiepb

    If my memory serves me correctly this is how the Sox got Alex Rios. He had a ton of money and years left on his contract, Toronto put him on waivers, the Sox claimed him and Toronto said…sounds good he’s yours.

    I remember back when it happened Kenny would say how they just really wanted him and what not. I would be interested to hear for real if they claimed him thinking they would be able to work out a trade to save money, or if they really planned on getting him for nothing.

    • Rebuilding

      They were supposedly trying to block some of the teams behind them in the claim process from getting him. I think they thought the Tigers were going to claim him. An instance of being too cute for your own good

  • oswego chris

    yep…Kenny claimed him, and the Jays(right?) said. “He is yours!”

  • Rebuilding

    The Rangers promoted both Odor and Salinas to AA today. Doubtful either one is a PTBNL, but thought some might find it interesting after how much they were discussed

    • nkniacc13

      apparently all ptbn in Garza deal were pitchers

  • cubs2003

    Tangential, but I’m kind of surprised the regular trade deadline didn’t get extended to the 15th or something with the additional wild card. Seems like it would make sense.

  • papabear

    Biggest thing the Cubs are doing the rest of the week and maybe next week is setting up rosters. Looking at who goes ware. Would be fun to sit in on those meetings.

    I don’t know anything – but makes since that now that the trade work is done time for the higher ups to look more at what we have.

  • Crockett

    Black hole of information question:

    Did the Cubs ever complete the “compensation” portion of the Hoyer/McLeod deals?

    Which PTBNL do the Cubs still have on the table? Trading for? Away?

    • nkniacc13

      Cubs have 7 PTBNL coming and 1 going. Most of the 7 will be cash so more than likely 2 or 3 of the 7 will actually be players

      • Crockett

        7? Wow. Can you list the trades?

        • nkniacc13

          Carpenter, Gonzalez, Lillibridge, Hairston, Moscoso, Takahashi and Garza

        • Josh

          Alberto Gonzalez to Yankees
          Takahashi to Rockies
          Hairston to nationals (1 in, 1 out)
          Garza to rangers (1 or 2)
          Lillibridge to Yankees
          Moscosco to giants

          I believe that is it…..I may be missing one from early season

          • Josh

            Drew carpenter to rockies

            That’s the one I missed

      • BlameHendry

        why the hell do we take small amounts of cash (relatively speaking) over potential prospects when we are the financial powerhouse of the NL central???

        • wvcubsfan

          Maybe because the people in the front office that get paid a whole bunch of money to make these decisions would rather have the money than the player(s) that were offered.

          Call me crazy, but I think I’ll side with those guys over a random blog commenter. Especially one that wants to continue to blame a person that is no longer here and that truly deserved much less of the blame than fans wanted to saddle him with.

          • nkniacc

            It could be that its based on performance and they don’t get a choice because of poor performance.

        • ssckelley

          Because the players the Cubs would have to sit or release to make room for the acquisitions may be better than the PTBNL they get in return.

    • http://www.bleachernation.com Brett

      Yes, the compensation for Hoyer/McLeod was settled, I believe, with compensation in the form of “no compensation.”

      • DarthHater

        So Byrnes concluded that “no compensation” had a higher WAR than any of the potential PTBNLs they could get from the Cubs? Smart guy.

  • FFP

    Papelbon of the type likely to move in August this year.
    Maybe why Gregg is still on this team?

  • Pingback: Cubs Minor League Daily: We’re Talking Playoffs | Bleacher Nation | Chicago Cubs News, Rumors, and Commentary

  • Pingback: What Gets You Booted from the Cubs and Other Bullets | Bleacher Nation | Chicago Cubs News, Rumors, and Commentary

  • wilbur

    Good summary of waiver trades. Maybe Donnie Murphy would get some takers. Cubs could use a catcher I think with Navarro being out now. Waiver deal or ptbnl might be a good route to gain a backup cathcher.

    • ssckelley

      I would hate to see the Cubs give up much of anything to acquire a catcher for this season unless it involved a player the Cubs would have to clean off the 40 man in the offseason. I am afraid it might be JC Boscan time.

  • Pingback: The Washington Nationals’ David DeJesus Waiver Gambit | Bleacher Nation | Chicago Cubs News, Rumors, and Commentary

  • Pingback: Making Trades in August – The Waiver System, The Trade Candidates, and More | Bleacher Nation | Unofficial Chicago Cubs News, Rumors, and Commentary

Bleacher Nation Privacy Policy and Terms of Use. Bleacher Nation is a private media site, and it is not affiliated in any way with Major League Baseball or the Chicago Cubs. Neither MLB nor the Chicago Cubs have endorsed, supported, directed, or participated in the creation of the content at this site, or in the creation of the site itself. It's just a media site that happens to cover the Chicago Cubs.

Bleacher Nation is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com.

Google+