I've searched the CBA multiple times around waivers and I see nothing in them that wouldn't allow a 10/5 player to get the Rios treatment. The 10/5 provision states that such a player's contract cannot "be assigned" to another club -- i.e., traded -- but it's not altogether clear that waivers fall under this provision.

You're threatening to do something that cuts directly against the team's best interest. Not much of a threat.

And sticking J. D. Drew in an independant league was not in his best interest (or at least a huge risk, if he had been hurt); and sending Appel back to Stanford was not in his best interest (again, or it is a huge risk). Or when player x under valid contract for the year feels he is underpaid and holds out for another two million, where it is clearly in the team's short-term interest to pay that player another two million and get him on the field (Chris Johnson and the Ttans come to mind); this sort of thing (acting one way in the short-term because of the long-term ramifications happens all of the time).

As I understand things, "trade" is mostly an informal word in MLB rather than an official one. I believe the formal word for all trades, waiver claims, etc., is "transferred," and when it comes to no-trade clauses and 10/5 rights, there's no difference between a trade and a waiver claim. Both are "transfers" that can be blocked by the player.

OK - you might have it right then... or -- at least I'd need to sit down with the waiver portion of the CBA.

Nothing wrong with showing men of will exactly what will is -- Kaizer Sose taught me that.

So your plan would accurately be described as The Triumph of the Will?

So your plan would accurately be described as The Triumph of the Will?

Nein! Nein! Nein!

The 10/5 provision states that such a player's contract cannot "be assigned" to another club

I had a brain cramp in #50. "Assigned" was the word I was looking for.

I had a brain cramp in #50. "Assigned" was the word I was looking for.

Re-reading more of the CBA, it looks like you might be correct... dammit.

Sooo...we're back to bringing Zambrano back into town to make Dempster WANT to leave. Didn't Demp dislike Milton Bradley, too? What's he up to nowadays?

Michael Barrett would listen...

Yes, a 10/5 player can refuse a waiver claim. A waiver claim is essentially a standardized trade or sale, the player's contract for $5,000 or whatever piddling amount the waiver price is. It can be refused by a 10/5 guy. I remember this happening a few years ago, but I can't remember the details. Was it Carlos Lee?

Now you're really reaching, to the point where I think it's fair to say that you're being willfully disingenuous. As if every team doesn't have someone who's upset about being released.

It's irrelevant to the discussion anyway; Silva didn't sign with the Cubs as a free agent.

Yes, a 10/5 player can refuse a waiver claim. A waiver claim is essentially a standardized trade or sale, the player's contract for $5,000 or whatever piddling amount the waiver price is. It can be refused by a 10/5 guy. I remember this happening a few years ago, but I can't remember the details.

I believe it has happened a few times over the years. There was a years-long dispute between the union and MLB over whether players with 10/5 rights or no-trade clauses should even be put on waivers at all.

Was it Carlos Lee?

Lee rejected a trade to the Dodgers earlier this year, but waivers weren't involved. (2012 is his first year with 10/5 rights, although he reportedly bargained some of his away.)

Plan B is getting the band back together... Let's see - we can get Z for a song, we only need to contact Milton's parole officer, and Michael Barrett is already packing. Where is Sammy and his boombox? Has anyone seen Dave Kingman lately?

"Will" takes many forms.

On a serious note, starting Dempster tomorrow seems like madness.

Not starting him tomorrow seems like begging to have to answer a grievance.

The Cubs could magnanimously offer Ryan the opportunity to fly home and talk about things with his family...

I thought Dempster's family lived with him a couple blocks from Wrigley? Is that just he who lives there?

I might be wrong... Rosenthal cited proximity to his home in Vancouver as a factor in his preference.

Did the Yankees ever experience any blowback from this in their pursuit of free agents?

It absolutely did. Most famously, Greg Maddux turned down the Yankees' bigger offer to sign with the Braves. I thought it was an openly discussed concern at the time.

Rumor has it that the concept of a "pennant chase" had to be explained to Dempster, several times...

It's not just "evil" - it's stupid, shortsighted, and pointless. You treat your players more poorly than other clubs do, and you're going to lose your current stars and at best have to pay a premium to get stars to play for you.

I won't speculate as to the attitude of MLB players. But if I were one, I'd want to play for a team whose primary focus was to do anything and everything they could to get better, rather than observing vague notions of "respect" and "loyalty" to employees signed to arm's length contracts.

Has Zonk been spending too much time in the Delta Quadrant again?

Here's hoping Dumpster gets absolutely bombed by the Pirates and pulls a hammy or something...
(Y'know, nothing serious, just enough to torpedo a trade to his precious LA Dodgers.)

Maybe Dempster's expecting a September repeat by the Braves and figured the Cubs might wind up with a better record by the end of the year.

Rosenthal cited proximity to his home in Vancouver as a factor in his preference.

Well, it is true that Atlanta is pretty flippin' far from Vancouver.

Of course, that doesn't explain why Atlanta was allegedly his second choice, or when exactly he expects to be able to get back to Vancouver within the next two months.

Maybe Dempster's expecting a September repeat by the Braves and figured the Cubs might wind up with a better record by the end of the year.

So he'd be expecting to be a contributor to a collapse?

Dempster seems like truly a good guy, and I respect his right to make the best decision for his family. But, as a Cubs fan, Delgado looks pretty tasty. It'd sure be nice if ol' Ryan would come around on this.

I won't speculate as to the attitude of MLB players. But if I were one, I'd want to play for a team whose primary focus was to do anything and everything they could to get better, rather than observing vague notions of "respect" and "loyalty" to employees signed to arm's length contracts.

I would too, but I don't see how dumping a quality player on waivers out of pure spite qualifies as "doing everything they can to get better". That plan lacks the part where the team actually gets better.

But if I were one, I'd want to play for a team whose primary focus was to do anything and everything they could to get better, rather than observing vague notions of "respect" and "loyalty" to employees signed to arm's length contracts.

I prefer an employer that treats me with respect and loyalty.

Dempster's been on the Cubs for almost a decade, and you think the team should just spitefully and uselessly toss him aside, just in order to prove how ruthless they are?

What a welcome awaits Dempster in his debut in Atlanta!

Dempster's been on the Cubs for almost a decade, and you think the team should just spitefully and uselessly toss him aside, just in order to prove how ruthless they are?

Being cuddly hasn't worked out too well.

Time to try something else.

Everyone seems to be conveniently forgetting, too, that Dempster has already publicly said he'd be willing to accept a trade to a contender and if Robothal's reporting is accurate, has also said that while LA was his top choice - Atlanta was his second.

What has changed about Atlanta since these supposed comments? What has changed about "a contender" since the comments we KNOW to be true?

Dempster can't have it both ways - saying both publicly, and I guess I'm assuming, privately that he'd be willing to OK a trade then nix it when the trade gets made.

Yes, he's been with the team for a long time - but he's also been well-compensated for that time. Both contracts he signed with the Cubs worked out well for both parties - Dempster got security and FMV, the Cubs got appropriate production from those contracts. We're square.

If Dempster wasn't serious about "a contender" or waiving 10/5 -- then he shouldn't have said so... He should have said he wasn't interested in any trade.

In this scenario, he has wasted the front office's time... time that could have been spent focusing on moving Garza, LaHair, or the always available Soriano.

I'd still have been peeved if Dempster had said 4 weeks ago "No deal - I'm finishing my contract here" - but in this case, he's wasted everyone's time by saying EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE.

I'm sorry - but that's not a "good guy" - that's a liar. It may be a liar that's just looking out for his own self-interests, but it still makes him a liar.

But if I were one, I'd want to play for a team whose primary focus was to do anything and everything they could to get better, rather than observing vague notions of "respect" and "loyalty" to employees signed to arm's length contracts.

I think you're mistaking the interests of the fan for the interests of the players.

I've never cared whether my employer was "doing anything and everything they could to get better" at their business, so long as they were reasonably competent and successful. I've always cared a lot how well they treat their employees, whether they keep their promises and can be trusted in all the non-contractual agreements and negotiations that make up the worker-employer relationship.

Pro ballplayers are likely to be more competitive than me, and to care more about the organization winning, but I highly doubt that comes first for most of them.

I've never cared whether my employer was "doing anything and everything they could to get better" at their business, so long as they were reasonably competent and successful. I've always cared a lot how well they treat their employees, whether they keep their promises and can be trusted in all the non-contractual agreements and negotiations that make up the worker-employer relationship.

But this is WHOLLY contractual... it's only Dempster's 10/5 rights - a contract issue that prevented the trade from already being in the books.

What's more - ALL the reporting says that Dempster had reached an agreement with the Cubs to OK a deal. He's been quoted publicly saying he'd be willing to accept a trade to a contender - one comment saying he's 'chomping at the bit' for another playoff shot. Robothal reported - prior to this deal with Atlanta hitting the news - that the Braves were his #2 choice. A previous Tribune column in early July said that Dempster had given the Cubs a list of teams to which he wouldn't accept a trade.

Lord help me, maybe it's Ray/Nieporent/et al rubbing off on me - but that employer-employee relationship is a two way street.

Dempster can't say one thing publicly, the same thing by all accounts privately -- and then say the opposite when the public/private agreement actually comes to pass without breaching that very spirit of good faith you cite as important.

Well, it is true that Atlanta is pretty flippin' far from Vancouver.

Of course, that doesn't explain why Atlanta was allegedly his second choice, or when exactly he expects to be able to get back to Vancouver within the next two months.

I've never really understood this notion of "closer to home." Los Angeles is over 1000 miles away from Vancouver. Sure, Atlanta is technically twice as far, but for all intents and purposes, it's the same distance away. That is to say, it's a plane flight away. What does it matter if the plane flight is an hour and a half longer? How often are he or his family going to make that flight?

Once you get past a few hundred miles, you might as well be anywhere on the continent.

I think you're mistaking the interests of the fan for the interests of the players.

I am not so sure. A roster is 25 players, so when a star player says that the team has to improve, whether he expressly says it or not, he means someone has to lose their job, because someone better must take their place. That player (a star) knows it is not him that is in peril, but it is a tacit agreement to go treat someone under contract badly (fire/demote them), so i can be on a team that wins more games.

Here in Chicago the consensus seems to be that Dempster is, pardon the internet-borne colloquialism, "butthurt" that he wasn't "in the loop" as to the X's and O's of how this trade went down. The word on the airwaves today seems to be that Ryan woke up from a nap yesterday afternoon circa 3pm and found out that he was an Atlanta Brave.

For Chicago sports fans, this is reminiscent of the Bears/Dave McGinnis debacle back circa 98/99 when the Bears had decided they were going to hire McGinnis, assumed his signing the contract was a mere formality, and went and did unthinkably egotistical things such as setting up his name on their phone system's directory. That's right, Dave McGinnis had an extension and voicemail setup before he had a chance to sign on the dotted line and the resulting butthurt heralded the Dick Jauron era. It wasn't quite Dick's show... but he was on that show.

It's quite fun to hear Cubbie Nation(tm) up in arms because now they feel like Dempster is personally denying them ~5 cost-controlled years of Cy Delgado (how many starting pitching prospects have the Braves given up that turned out to really bite them in the arse?) and he's being a greedy player. Fans usually want it both ways, insomuchas they gripe and moan when a team is reluctant to whip out the checkbook and sign players' to their ideal contract terms, however in a situation like this where you've got a solid pitcher pitching over his head during a walk year, he's suddenly expected to drop all of his collectively-bargained-rights to "take one for the team."

My favorite reaction has been an edgy reaction from local talk show host and reknown jocksniffer, Laurence "Shake That" Holmes, who went on the offensive calling fans a-holes for demanding that Dempster immediately cedes his 10/5 rights to jump at the first trade that the Cubs can pull off along with a backhand of "...and suddenly everyone is an expert about Braves' pitching prospects. Perhaps Sir Laurence of "SHAKE THAT" wants to have Ryan and that heeeeee-larious Harry Caray impression of his on the People's Hour COLON We Do What We Want sometime. I'm still retching from a Dempster interview by aw-shucks/gee-whiz Baseball Troll(tm) Tim Kurkjian who went out of his way to supply gutbusting LOLing at the same old hackneyed Ryan Dempster impersonations. Suffice to say his whole "act" has worn a bit thin, especially when Cubs fans are seemingly a little bit more focused on results. Shomer Shabbos!

# sir talkstoomuch

What does it matter if the plane flight is an hour and a half longer? How often are he or his family going to make that flight?

Especially considering it's only for 2 months, and he'll be on the road for half that time. I see the Braves have a 4 game series in SF in August. That's more games in SF (the closest either team will be to Vancouver) than the Dodgers. Let them visit then.

how many starting pitching prospects have the Braves given up that turned out to really bite them in the arse?

Yeah, but speaking as one of and for all the teams that have acquired the Bruce Chens, Joey Nations, Kevin Blankenships, Kyle Davies over the years - we're due dammit, you hear me? DUE!

Dempster's been on the Cubs for almost a decade, and you think the team should just spitefully and uselessly toss him aside, just in order to prove how ruthless they are?

Who said anything about spite? The idea was to save money. And actually, the idea wasn't to actually put him on waivers, but to threaten to, so that he'll accept the deal that's better for the team.

Wainwright was really good.

Wainwright was really good.

Cardinal pixie dust. Doesn't count.

What does it matter if the plane flight is an hour and a half longer? How often are he or his family going to make that flight?

If he has a sick kid at home, as I believe was mentioned earlier, perhaps he's considering the ability to get home quicker should the need arise, rather than with more frequncy.

Here in Chicago the consensus seems to be that Dempster is, pardon the internet-borne colloquialism, "butthurt" that he wasn't "in the loop" as to the X's and O's of how this trade went down. The word on the airwaves today seems to be that Ryan woke up from a nap yesterday afternoon circa 3pm and found out that he was an Atlanta Brave.

And if I were Ryan, I'd absolutely share his ass pain. There is no trade without his approval. It ought to come before zonk is salivating over five years of cost-controlled Delgado.

Who said anything about spite? The idea was to save money. And actually, the idea wasn't to actually put him on waivers, but to threaten to, so that he'll accept the deal that's better for the team.

Zonk's since-refuted let him go for a waiver claim argument was, in fact, built on spite.

And if I were Ryan, I'd absolutely share his ass pain. There is no trade without his approval. It ought to come before zonk is salivating over five years of cost-controlled Delgado.

Except he's publicly expressed his willingness TO be traded, had by some accounts PRIOR to the trade going public, listed Atlanta as choice #2, and by OTHER accounts had given the Cubs FO a list of teams to which he'd go.

This wasn't some blindside. It's been discussed - that's documented with Dempster's own public statements and copious reporting of private discussions that jibe exactly with those public statements.

The discussion would be different if Dempster had either no commented OR said he wasn't interested in leaving.

Zonk's since-refuted let him go for a waiver claim argument was, in fact, built on spite.

Well, I think it's open for debate as to whether spite or 6 million dollars was the main course. It's all moot now based on the CBA discussions, but I think I might more accurately term it a "$6,000,000 spite stew".

If the Cubs asked Dempster where he would agree to be traded and Atlanta was a team on his list, then he is being a dick. If they didn't ask, then it's their fault. I assume what actually happened is he said that he would much rather go to the Dodgers than anywhere else, but would agree to Atlanta if there was no way he could go to LA.

Except he's publicly expressed his willingness TO be traded, had by some accounts PRIOR to the trade going public, listed Atlanta as choice #2, and by OTHER accounts had given the Cubs FO a list of teams to which he'd go.

And he reserves the right to change his ####### mind. It's his no-trade right. Not Theo's. Not yours. Not Trixie's. There is no trade until Ryan Dempster says there's one.

If the Cubs want to ship him anywhere, then they ought to tell him that before it's on mlb.com. If following that rather simple protocl isn't a concern for the other parties, then I don't see why he has some obligation to waive his right to make their lives either That other players have allowed themselves to get pressured by fans and media into waiving their no-trade rights through this bassackward system is no reason why Dempster should play along.

Being cuddly hasn't worked out too well.

Time to try something else.

This isn't a real argument.

I agree with SoSH U (#95) on this one. The player has the contractual right to choose whether or where he can be traded, and it's his life.

I think you're mistaking the interests of the fan for the interests of the players.

I've never cared whether my employer was "doing anything and everything they could to get better" at their business, so long as they were reasonably competent and successful. I've always cared a lot how well they treat their employees, whether they keep their promises and can be trusted in all the non-contractual agreements and negotiations that make up the worker-employer relationship.

Pro ballplayers are likely to be more competitive than me, and to care more about the organization winning, but I highly doubt that comes first for most of them.

No, I'm saying what I would want as a player (or an employee in any other industry). I want to work for a company who wants to be the best. I don't want to work for a company who is content with mediocrity and people who have no future at the company rotting on the payroll, simply because they've ascended to some senior status.

I don't want to work for a company who is content with mediocrity and people who have no future at the company rotting on the payroll, simply because they've ascended to some senior status.

You know, there's some large amount of space between "company that doesn't accept mediocrity" and "company that fires one of its best employees just to show that it can."

I don't want to work for a company who is content with mediocrity

These are management buzzwords with little content, and what content they do have is mostly a load of crap. Unexceptional competence is a valuable thing to any organization, in most positions.

I also agree with PF that on the specific issue here - the Cubs theoretically cutting Dempster out of spite - we're really stretching the bounds of "seeking excellence" or whatever.