Mr. Amaro? You can have my answer now if you like. My final offer is this: nothing. Not even the effort to fax the paperwork into the league office, which I would appreciate if you did personally.

::applause::

But this means the Angels have to pay his salary, yeah?

Guy's thrown 137.1 innings the last two seasons between AA/AAA in 69 appearances (all in relief) with just 19 GF. Are there a lot of MiLB long relievers, cause that seems like odd usage. Even if you don't buy the sub-2 ERA over the last two years, it would certainly seem like he'd be perfectly cromulent organizational depth, so there must be a better story here somewhere, unless there's some oddity of MiLB salary structures that makes this somehow better for one or more of the parties involved than just cutting him.

If the dude had 19 GF in Philly, imagine how many girlfriends he'll have in Anaheim.

But this means the Angels have to pay his salary, yeah?

Then the Phillies could have just released him. Amaro couldn't even bothered to get some cash in the deal?

Is that even legal?

(Semi-seriously, I thought something had to be exchanged. Is this allowable in the CBA? We don't want this guy but rather than release him and make him an FA we're just going to assign his rights to another team?)

And what, the other teams' best offers were to take Cisco and $1,000?

Returning a favor? Doing a favor and hoping for quid pro quo?

Oh Pancho...

Returning a favor? Doing a favor and hoping for quid pro quo?

The Cisco kid was a friend of mine...

The Phillies Traded a Pitcher for Nothing. Why?
By Keenan Mayo
March 19, 2013

On Sunday, Philadelphia Phillies General Manager Ruben Amaro, deep in the throes of slimming down his spring training roster, agreed to send 25 year-old right-handed pitcher Mike Cisco—the team’s 36th round draft pick from 2008—to the Los Angeles Angels. In return the club received nothing: no fresh-faced prospects, no players-to-be-named-later, and no money.

While that seems hardly ideal for the Phillies—and, as some have noted, embarrassing for Cisco—Amaro’s decision isn’t without precedent, and it isn’t without potential upsides. John Hart, a former general manager for the Texas Rangers and the Cleveland Indians, made “no compensation” trades at least three times during his front-office career.

When an aspiring Major Leaguer is released by an organization, he is essentially fired and must begin contract negotiations at square one. But if he’s traded—even for nothing in return—he retains his existing contract.

“When you draft a player or acquire a player, you’ve got a good feel for that player,” says Hart, who currently works as an analyst for MLB TV. “You’ve had a chance to look at the guy at spring training and he isn’t a good fit. You look up and go, ‘Well, what are my options?’ I always try to get compensation if I can. If I can’t, I can release him, which is generally what happens. But if the player is my player, and I drafted him and I liked the guy and I can help him have the chance to get a job somewhere else, then I’d go ahead and make that deal.”

While the circumstances surrounding the trade remain unknown, Amaro’s apparent giveaway is obviously a favor for the Angels, as well as for Cisco. As Hart notes, the Phillies, an organization deep in pitching prospects, has nothing to lose or gain by choosing to trade him for nothing vs. simply cutting him loose. Either way, he’s gone. But this way, the deal is an act of goodwill between teams, which could potentially pay off later.“I would venture to say this,” says Hart. “You try to get compensation but if you can’t, there generally becomes goodwill between the clubs. So if you’re caught somewhere during the middle of the season—you’ve had some injuries and need some middle infielders—you might get some help” from the club that benefited from the donated player. “Everybody,” Hart says, “gets caught like that.”

In 1994, Hart, then GM for the Cleveland Indians, was at the receiving end of a no-compensation trade. “I took Dave Winfield during the strike of ’94, late August,” he says, “[The Minnesota Twins GM Andy MacPhail] did Winfield a favor, and here I got a Hall of Famer for no compensation.” The next season would be Winfield’s last. When the Indians went to the postseason, Hart left Winfield, a 44 year-old plagued with injuries, off the roster. Coincidentally, he activated a pinch runner instead: Ruben Amaro.

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-03-19/the-phillies-traded-a-pitcher-for-nothing-dot-why

FTFA:

Cisco's grandfather is former major league pitcher Galen Cisco, who also was a longtime pitching coach for the Royals, Phillies and Blue Jays. He was kind of a pitching coach's pitching coach.

In 1994, Hart, then GM for the Cleveland Indians, was at the receiving end of a no-compensation trade. “I took Dave Winfield during the strike of ’94, late August,”

BBRef lists the Winfield trade as the Indians purchasing Winfield, but contemporary reports say it was in exchange for a PTBNL.

Probably safe to assume Hart's memory is accurate and the Twins received "no compensation".

When an aspiring Major Leaguer is released by an organization, he is essentially fired and must begin contract negotiations at square one. But if he’s traded—even for nothing in return—he retains his existing contract.

What sort of contract does a guy who's never played in the majors have? There's no guaranteed minor league contracts, are there?

From Dave Winfield entry on Wikipedia:

During the 1994 baseball strike, which began on August 12, Winfield was traded to the Cleveland Indians at the trade waiver deadline on August 31 for a "player to be named later." The 1994 season had been halted two weeks earlier (it was eventually canceled a month later on September 14), so Winfield did not get to play for the Indians that year and no player was ever named in exchange. To settle the trade, Cleveland and Minnesota executives went to dinner, with the Indians picking up the tab. This makes Winfield the only player in major league history to be traded for a dinner, though official sources list the transaction as a sale (sold by the Minnesota Twins to theCleveland Indians).[16]

http://articles.baltimoresun.com/1994-09-11/sports/1994254094_1_global-expansion-salary-cap-orioles/2

If the Cleveland Indians play 16 games or more -- a virtual impossibility at this point -- the player to be named in the Dave Winfield trade would be a Double-A player. Anywhere from one to 15 games would bring a Class-A player in return. If they don't play any more games, Indians general manager John Hart must write a check for $100 made out to the Minnesota Twins and take Andy MacPhail out to dinner. Now that MacPhail has left the Twins to become the president of the Chicago Cubs, shouldn't MacPhail's successor get the free meal?

If you've ever had Cisco, you get rid of it as quick as you can the next day. It takes you by surprise.

If you've ever had Cisco, you get rid of it as quick as you can the next day. It takes you by surprise.

A decent linux box with iptables can run circles around your Cisco.

The Royals acquired C Jason LaRue from the Reds for a PTBNL or cash. That ended up being literally $1.

Thounds like the Angels got Cisco for a thong.

Now that MacPhail has left the Twins to become the president of the Chicago Cubs, shouldn't MacPhail's successor get the free meal?

Nope but he should at least get some soup.

Nice #19. Nice.

If I can’t, I can release him, which is generally what happens. But if the player is my player, and I drafted him and I liked the guy and I can help him have the chance to get a job somewhere else, then I’d go ahead and make that deal.

Grrr ... you're not helping the guy have a chance elsewhere, you're forcing him to take his chances with only one other team. There's no way an outright release doesn't work at least as well for Cisco and possibly better.

If this was a case like Boesch and the Tigers traded him for nothing rather than costing him up to $400 K then you'd be doing the player a favor.

The bit about scratching another team's back in hopes they'll scratch yours later makes sense from the team's perspective.

John Hart must write a check for $100 made out to the Minnesota Twins and take Andy MacPhail out to dinner

The existence of stuff like this is why I thought it was against the rules to trade a guy for nothing. Why have the farce of a $100 payment unless it was required by the rules?