Repoz, thanks for linking this, this is great. I had no idea about the 3 years after being put on a major league roster thing. I know there's been some debate on option years here before (essentially, does a player use up an option year if he's not sent down), and this is great.

Also, is primer the message board he was referring to?

Nice article.

I tried to google the board he referred to, and I couldn't find it.

I tried to google the board he referred to, and I couldn't find it.

I've got mad Google skillz:

SOSH...about 1/3 of the way down.

Steve Phillips the other night said that players with no trade clauses (either blanket or limited) could not be placed on major league waivers. Is this true?

If so, if a player waives his NTC, can he then be placed on waivers? Could he reach some sort of agreement with his GM saying that I'll only accept a claim from this list of teams and otherwise the waivers should be revoked? Would that be enforceable? Why is the sky blue?

I wouldn't trust a single thing that Steve Phillips says. I assume the opposite of what he says is true.

Steve Phillips thought the remains of Kevin Appier were worth $40 million.

Some baseball executives are unaware of the three-year rule. Back when Alan Benes was still a prospect, the Cardinals tried to option him at the end of spring training. To Jocketty's surprise, they found they had to pass him through waivers, because with all his time on the major league DL, more than three years had elapsed without his being optioned since his first promotion to the major league roster. They were able to get him through waivers, what with his uncertain health and all other teams being in the process of making their final reluctant cuts to get down to the opening day 25. As Law points out, even if a claim had been made, they could have revoked the waivers. But that would have forced them to burn a spot on the 25-man roster for Benes.

Now, an unrelated question on something not covered in the article: When a player -- say, Jose Cruz Jr. -- is DFA'd after July 31, can he be placed on waivers twice during the 10-day DFA period? Can L.A. first place him on revocable major league waivers as a prelude to a trade before they have to place him on release waivers? Otherwise, it would seem you couldn't trade a DFA'd player after July 31.

Really, really great stuff. Much appreciated.

While we're on arcane stuff, the Royals signed Luke Hochevar to a MLB contract. There is much discussion as to the implications of that.

(a) Am I correct in assuming that has absolutely no bearing on his service time?

(b) Does this mean he must be on the 40 man roster (thus beginning his option years)?

(c) What other implications, if any, does this have? Why are teams so reluctant to give MLB contracts to draftees?

While we're on arcane stuff, the Royals signed Luke Hochevar to a MLB contract. There is much discussion as to the implications of that.

(a) Am I correct in assuming that has absolutely no bearing on his service time?

(b) Does this mean he must be on the 40 man roster (thus beginning his option years)?

(c) What other implications, if any, does this have? Why are teams so reluctant to give MLB contracts to draftees?

From what I know, the answer to both a) and b) is Yes. As for c), I`ll leave it to others who know this stuff better.

I tried to google the board he referred to, and I couldn't find it.

I've got mad Google skillz:

SOSH...about 1/3 of the way down.
It in ST on Primer, too.

The funny thing is that Snow seems to be a fanastic guy and a quick email to him cleared this up (as well Keith's smarts). While some more famous writers make their living on hackery, Chris is not one of them.

a) Am I correct in assuming that has absolutely no bearing on his service time?

Correct. Service time refers to days on the Active Roster (the 25-man roster, or its post-September-1 equivalent).

(b) Does this mean he must be on the 40 man roster (thus beginning his option years)?

Yes ... maybe. Depends on whether his contract was a 2006 contract or a 2007 contract. Delmon Young was drafted first overall in 2002 but signed late and signed a 2003 contract, so his first option year was used in '03.

(c) What other implications, if any, does this have? Why are teams so reluctant to give MLB contracts to draftees?

Because they cost a 40-man spot AND they can easily run out of options before they reach the majors, although that's more true for HS prospects. And MLB discourages it.

Steve Phillips the other night said that players with no trade clauses (either blanket or limited) could not be placed on major league waivers. Is this true?

It's not accurate, although I believe that what Phillips stated is the union's position. However, I don't believe such a player can be claimed and assigned to the claiming club without his permission.

Here's another one....is priority for waivers in the post-trading deadline period still by league, or is it ordered by overall record across both leagues?

Yes ... maybe. Depends on whether his contract was a 2006 contract or a 2007 contract. Delmon Young was drafted first overall in 2002 but signed late and signed a 2003 contract, so his first option year was used in '03.

By my count, that would mean he ran out of options last year. I must be missing something...

pkb33, I believe that it's by overall record across both leagues.

The Primer thread referencing the other, apparently deleted Primer thread is here.

By my count, that would mean he ran out of options last year. I must be missing something...

Young was drafted in '03, not '02.

By my count, that would mean he ran out of options last year. I must be missing something...

And I found it, now that I RTFA.

Young was drafted in '03, not '02.

Correct. Just run $year++ on that whole sentence of mine. Young signed an '04 contract, has used options in '04, '05, and '06, and will have one more for next year.

Major league waivers (the ones we care about this month) still use the league distinction - same league first, other league second. And I have no qualms about saying how silly I think that is. It's gone in everything else, from outright waivers to the Rule 4 and Rule 5 drafts.

The Orioles got Lopez through waivers, and the Sox have acquired him.

Sox get Lopez

The Sox aren't confirming so keep that in mind. Most likely, they are just delaying the announcement.

It's not clear if Lopez cleared waivers or if the Sox claimed him; not that it really matters if they've worked out a deal, anyway.

Why are teams so reluctant to give MLB contracts to draftees?

As far as I can tell, there are about 5 or 6 reasons, but Keith already mentioned the biggies:

1) and 2) As Keith mentioned, it uses up option years, and they use up a spot on the 40-man roster; as a function of these, there's also a much shorter time period where you can keep someone off the 25 man roster, and a shorter time period when a team can control the player before ultimate free agency (i.e. if they wanted to stall someone in the minors so the team controls the player's peak seasons instead of the player becoming a free agent at 27).

3) Major league bonuses have to be structured differently than minor league bonuses. This mostly comes into play for high schoolers (and Jeff Samardizjas) who were two-sport stars. A two-sport star can have their signing bonus pro-rated over a longer period than a player who only focused on baseball, which is part of the reason why you see smaller market teams like the Rays signing so many guys who were two-sport stars (probably 2/3 of the Rays' top 5 round picks over the past 5 or 6 years have been multi-sport guys). In any case, you can't do this with a major league deal, so you'll almost never see a multi-sport guy get a major league deal. On the other hand, you can structure the salary more creatively with a major league deal, but that doesn't work out as well for the agents.

4) You have more flexibility with minor leaguers than with guys on the 40-man roster. Not that it would necessarily happen, but let's say that Manny Ramirez cleared major league waivers after the deadline and the BoSox actually wanted to trade him. De(l)mon would also need to clear waivers to make a trade here, but with a minor league contract, he wouldn't need to clear waivers to make the trade because he's not on the 40-man roster. This is a very small point though, because I can't imagine too many places where this would actually happen, unless it became much more common to sign major league contracts as an amateur, which leads to...

5) MLB doesn't like them because a whole slew of problems could arise if it became common practice (just imagine if MLB was like the NBA, where you have all these 20 year old kids who aren't ready to play yet clogging up roster space), and they give teams a hard time for signing players to major league contracts, just as much so as for signing players over slot. The commish can be a vengeful, wrathful Bud, so even if there are no sanctioned ramifications for taking a certain action, a team is less likely to get support from the commissioner's office if teams are constantly crossing them. Hence, teams try not to go handing out ML contracts if they can help it.

I'm not 100% sure on this, and maybe someone else can verify with respect to this part, but I also think that there are certain portions of the CBA which apply to minor leaguers on the 40-man roster which don't apply to minor leaguers not on the 40-man. If that's the case, then there are other financial benefits to keeping someone off the 40-man roster as well, since you don't have to pay them certain benefits and the like, but since teams generally keep their 40-man roster full anyway, that's probably a net zero.