2006 Regular Season 3 SIM Complete - Next SIM Thursday 04/10

[funclown]

These are all players that are out of option years and were Rule V draft eligible. Therefore to protect them from the Rule V, teams placed them on the 40 man roster. When ST hits all players on the 40 man roster are added to the active roster. If they are removed from the active roster before the opening day sim, they remain on a minor league contract. But I don't think it's then fair that I can claim those players, and place them in my minor leagues free of charge.

Why were they on waivers to remove them from they're 40 man rosters? If thats the case your taking your chances. If they get picked up then come NEXT season the team who claimed them will also have to do the same thing.

[Carlos]

Why were they on waivers to remove them from they're 40 man rosters? If thats the case your taking your chances. If they get picked up then come NEXT season the team who claimed them will also have to do the same thing.

Exactly.

If someone is upset they lost a guy on waivers because they had to put him on the 40-man to avoid losing him to the Rule 5 but then DFAed him...

Well, I'm not sure how to respond to that. That's the point of the process.


Sent from my mobile device.

[Andrew]

I don't understand why the claiming team doesn't need to pass the player through waivers if he is out of options. He is still being removed from the 40 man roster. It shouldn't matter whose 40 man roster he was removed from.

[Pat]

I don't understand why the claiming team doesn't need to pass the player through waivers if he is out of options. He is still being removed from the 40 man roster. It shouldn't matter whose 40 man roster he was removed from.

Exactly.

In previous versions you had to do this. When I put in the claims this time, they didn't ever go on my 40 man, they went DFA and I had the option to place them in my minors.

I posted the list of players in the Commish To Do List. Sorry for the extra work.

[Andrew]

Pat, do the players show up under your waivers list as cleared? It's possible they are clearing the original waivers and the game isn't forcing you to waive them again.

[Carlos]

I don't understand why the claiming team doesn't need to pass the player through waivers if he is out of options. He is still being removed from the 40 man roster. It shouldn't matter whose 40 man roster he was removed from.

But he's not on the claiming teams 40-man roster which is why the player doesn't have to clear waivers. The claiming team isn't even waiving the player. They are taking the player.

Why should the claiming team be punished for picking up a player? It's not their fault that the original team decided to place the player on their own 40-man, decided against it, and now risked losing that player to the waiver process.

The claiming team is claiming that player and making a decision on what to do with him.

Remember, the only reason someone wants to send a player to the minors is because they don't want him on their 25-man active roster. When a claiming team claims that player from waivers, the player isn't sent to the team's 25-man roster. He's just a member of the organization. So the claiming team can now send that player to the minors.

That's the risk of DFAing a guy. Otherwise, why would the process even exist? A player would essentially continue going through the waiver process for an entire season and land no where if the claiming team also had to waive them (which makes no sense. Why would a claiming team have to waive a player to claim them?).

[Carlos]

Exactly.

In previous versions you had to do this. When I put in the claims this time, they didn't ever go on my 40 man, they went DFA and I had the option to place them in my minors.

I posted the list of players in the Commish To Do List. Sorry for the extra work.

What are you talking about? You never had to do this ever in any baseball game. Ever.

The only time you had to do this is if the guy had a major league contract and had to be placed on the 40-man roster.

Did you place any of these guys on your 40-man roster? No. So what's the problem here?

[Pat]

Pat, do the players show up under your waivers list as cleared? It's possible they are clearing the original waivers and the game isn't forcing you to waive them again.

None showed up on my waivers list at all.

[funclown]

I don't understand why the claiming team doesn't need to pass the player through waivers if he is out of options. He is still being removed from the 40 man roster. It shouldn't matter whose 40 man roster he was removed from.

Cuz when a team claims them they don't have a major league contract therefore the claiming team does NOT have to put them on they're 40 man roster.

Only reason to pass a guy thru waivers is if he's on the 40 man roster.

Not the version people. Been going on for years and like anyone here lost some players in the process.

[Sully]

But he's not on the claiming teams 40-man roster which is why the player doesn't have to clear waivers. The claiming team isn't even waiving the player. They are taking the player.

Why should the claiming team be punished for picking up a player? It's not their fault that the original team decided to place the player on their own 40-man, decided against it, and now risked losing that player to the waiver process.

The claiming team is claiming that player and making a decision on what to do with him.

Remember, the only reason someone wants to send a player to the minors is because they don't want him on their 25-man active roster. When a claiming team claims that player from waivers, the player isn't sent to the team's 25-man roster. He's just a member of the organization. So the claiming team can now send that player to the minors.

That's the risk of DFAing a guy. Otherwise, why would the process even exist? A player would essentially continue going through the waiver process for an entire season and land no where if the claiming team also had to waive them (which makes no sense. Why would a claiming team have to waive a player to claim them?).

This was confusing. Basically, you're saying the claiming team should be able to do exactly what the waiving team would like to, but without going through the process? That doesn't make sense.

I want a guy to go to AAA. I have to waive him to do that. He doesn't clear, and the claiming team can now do exactly what I set out to do in the first place, but without fear of losing the player? Makes no sense.

[Pat]

I agree with Sullivan.

[Andrew]

I think the issue is the players should be awarded a major league contract when they are added to the 40 man roster (presumably before Rule 5) but this is not happening.

[funclown]

I think the issue is the players should be awarded a major league contract when they are added to the 40 man roster (presumably before Rule 5) but this is not happening.

Agreed. Now that's a bug. Past versions a rule V guy gets a contract.

[Carlos]

This was confusing. Basically, you're saying the claiming team should be able to do exactly what the waiving team would like to, but without going through the process? That doesn't make sense.



I want a guy to go to AAA. I have to waive him to do that. He doesn't clear, and the claiming team can now do exactly what I set out to do in the first place, but without fear of losing the player? Makes no sense.

Ask yourself this: if the player clears waivers, what would you end up doing with that player?

So you'll send him to the minors once you claim him back.

Why can't the team who claimed him once the player has gone through waivers take the same step?


Sent from my mobile device.

[Andrew]

FWIW, here's an example of a player getting claimed multiple times:

http://mlb.si.com/2013/08/13/adam-rosales-waiver-rules/

Not sure how accurate this article is, but it states:

The trick is that a player claimed on waivers is placed on his new team’s major league roster and is again subject to the same rules if his new team wants to option him to the minors (if he is out of options) or outright him off the 40-man roster.