JUGGERNAUT

A trade is considered an assignment from one ML team to another. If you think about it how would any trades ever get done in Aug if contenders could block the mlers in such trades? STL 8/06/04 Traded RHP Jason Burch and 2 PTBNL to COL for OF Larry Walker. COL 8/11/04 Acquired LHP Luis Martinez and RHP Chris Narveson from STL. They had claimed Martinez off waivers from MIL before ST & then optioned him to AAA before the season. I believe he had option years left at the time. This looks like a good example because the PTBNL must be on the 40 man roster. Yet the Walker trade was reported 5 days beforehand. That suggests to me that they submitted a list of players to the commisioners office that didn't require ML waivers.

UR waivers remove a player from all player limits (basically the ML 40/25 roster & the 40/40 roster when it expands).

Paraphrasing the MLB rule book: A club needs to secure MAJOR LEAGUE WAIVERS on a player in order to option him for assignment to either the ml club or a ML club when the date of assignment is >= 3 yrs from the date the player was first assigned to a ML club. Option years spent prior to being assigned to a ML club count towards those 3 yrs.

So true Did a woman throw 10 in to trick us? No real man is ever going to admit that! A & C should be switched. On 7, I think "Can't they do that themselves?" is more of a real man response

http://add.yahoo.com/fast/help/us/sports/cgi_sandberg I've asked Ryno whether minor league players having options called up to the majors have to clear ML waivers before being traded. Hopefully he'll respond.

Let's see you asked me to e-mail Stark & ask him, & then when I ask you for his e-mail address you ignore the question & instead engage in another personal attack post. The rule is pretty specific & it comes from a reputable source. A game maker that has a copy of the MLB rule book & makes use of it in their game developement. I've provided the link before but it's pretty obvious by your posts in this thread that you are more interested in personal attacks than the issue of major league waivers.

As it is essential to the KGJ trade & will place greater pressure on the White Sox if he were to publish it I will send him an e-mail & ask him to weigh in on callups that signed ml deals or were governed by ml contracts. BTW it violates ESPN's copyright to simply re-publish Stark's articles. It's best to paraphrase them & provide a footnote or link. Can any one provide his e-mail address?

And the ignorance continues. Read up as these are the ML rules & not just re-gurgitations of columnists: For the umpteenth time, MAJOR LEAGUE WAIVERS: A ML club needs to secure this type of waiver in order to option a player if the date of the assignment is >= 3 yrs after the date the player 1st reported to a ML club. One year is deducted from the 3 yrs if the player spent an option year prior to reporting to a ML club. Now I'll simplify it more for you. I don't believe BMac & Anderson spent any option years prior to reporting to the White Sox this year. Therefore in accordance with the rule, they do not have to clear ML waivers. Further the 40 man roster for nearly all teams often contains ml players (players signed to ml deals) that have been called up throughout the season. Generally speaking, as long as they are 1st or 2nd year players they do not have to clear ML waivers. If you interpret most to mean majority+1 then it's more than likely most players are put on ML waivers. If you interpret it to mean 90%+1 then it's not likely that many players are put on ML waivers. Now Stark has upped the ante by claiming virtually every player in the Major Leagues is put on ML waivers. That's close to 1200 players. The Reds COO hasn't even suggested that many in anger. What's more it defies the rules governing ml players signed to ml deals called up to play in the ML's. So again this looks like a prime example of an off-the-cuff remark without looking at numbers :rolly

I blame it all on OZ. I don't think KW wanted Adkins up. OZ liked him in ST & wanted 7 guys in the pen so he could keep the starters down to 6IP. So far the strategy has been a disaster. Adkins is bad & I don't mean good. Meanwhile he's consumed a spot that should have gone to Owens. The guy has 45BB, a .398OBP, & 32SB. What does that spell? Leadoff hitter. Anderson is not known as a base stealer & Timo sucks as one. When Pods injury kept him from being an effective base stealer the pressure was turned off opposing pitchers. Our offense was suspect with that pressure turned on. Now it's downright sleep-inducing. You have to have a guy at the top who can put that pressure on. If not Owens then Young or even Iguchi. But hell no not Timo! Send Adkins down & bring up Owens. If Owens & Anderson get the job done then say goodbye to Timo when Pods returns.

For the ignorant amongst us: MAJOR LEAGUE WAIVER: A club needs to secure this type of waiver in order to option a player if the date of assignment is >= 3 more yrs after the date the player first reported to a ML club during a non-strike year. One year is deducted from the above 3 yr period for each option year spent. Now that you have been educated (at least a little) please attempt a rational argument as to why Anderson & BMac have to clear ML waivers? For the rest of you, they don't. What is holding this deal up is $$$. Pure & simple. The Reds saving $8.5M/3yr trading KGJ is simply not worth the loss in franchise value & ticket sales to trade him. The $26M owed to him in 2023-2024 if invested probably (5% earned compounded annually) would depreciate to $3M by the time the first payment is due. If JR is serious about going for it ALL he needs to come up with more $$$ for the deal to happen.

It's not $40M. It's $50M. $23.5M due 05-08 & $26M due 2023-2024. It can happen. Jerry just needs to agree to pay the $23.5M. BMac & Anderson both have option years & signed ml deals. They don't have to clear ML waivers. This can get done.

The Cards finally caught up to us. My body is still in the wagon but my foot is hovering about the road. We've got the talent, but I don't think we have the manager. Our record against teams > .500 is nothing to shout about. The team has not been the same since Pods got injured. This is even before he went on the DL. We don't pressure opposing pitchers enough now & our offense is becoming increasingly reliant on the long ball. So what does our fine mgr/gm do? They bring up a suspect arm for the pen & an OF who is not known for stealing bases. Meanwhile a guy with 45BB, .398OBP, & 32SB remains in Birmingham. It's comical to a degree because I never heard KW mention Owens. Instead he was justifying Anderson over Borchy. Apparently our mgr believes Timo is the CAN-DO-EVERYTHING guy on this team. With that thinking how can we possibly lose? I hate to say this but the best thing that can happen to the White Sox is if Timo goes on the DL.

Ultimately it comes down to $$$. As it always does. Whether the news is good or bad amounts to whether it is selling. Idealists don't want to hear that but it's the truth. Why do contractors do a s***ty job remodeling schools in Iraq? Because they only care about the $$$. Whether you want more "feel good" or "feel bad" stories the approach is the same. E-mail/write/phone the editors & tell them what you want & threaten to take your business elsewhere if they don't deliver. It's the American way

Very true. But you can only treat that which you know about. If the world is the body then the places where the terrorists are most prevalent are Afghanistan & Iraq. We are applying the best techniques we know of to combat both. You can't sway terrorists any more than you can sway a cancerous virus. All you can do is try to keep weeding it out. But In the same token by which we can use genetics to help cells resist cancerous viruses we should use diplomacy to sway good people from joining terrorist movements. That's not easy for it means we have to address the causes for which they attack us in the first place. That could have an impact on our capitalist ideology as well as our feminist campaigns.

That changes the hybrid perspective now doesn't it? Unless there are some new reactors coming on line in America I don't see how we can shield ourselves from a major increase in CPI if this happens & is sustainable. Either we curb our appetite for energy or we find new ways to produce it that weaken our dependancy on fossil fuels. There's no other way.

I disagree. There is a vast difference between McVeigh & Bin Laden. How many people would follow McV to their death? Maybe a handful at best. How many people would follow Bin Laden to their death? Millions. A cancerous virus is a good analogy for Al-Queda & Jihad International. It breeds amongst us because we the body can not easily distinguish it as a threat. Chemo is the response. We risk harm to the body's immune system in an effort to control & weaken the threat. We risk harm to civilians in an effort to combat Al-Queda & JI. A failure to do so threatens the very life of the body itself.

I still have hope it gets done. It just seems too good a fit not to happen. The worst thing imaginable is if KGJ is traded to another contender. That would be a major PR hit for the White Sox. That can't be allowed to happen. If JR pony's up the $23.5M the numbers all fall into place. Lindher is a numbers guy. Let's assume I'm right & the Reds wouldn't have to pay a dime on the $26M until 2023. It makes sense if the last payment in 2024 is $16.5M. If Lindher were to invest that $26M such that it made a modest 5% compounded annually it would be worth $49M before 2023. Lindher can make this same argument to new owners. Reporters shouldn't let the Reds COO off the hook. They should ask him if the Reds would have withdrawn KGJ from ML waivers if a team had claimed him. If he says yes, it's not about the $$$. Anything else & it's all about the $$$. As for JR, he shocked the hell out me when he signed Belle that year. It's not impossible. The Reds have the advantage right now. The White Sox are in a 4 gm losing streak & need KGJ desperately. But as the Sep 1st deadline looms the Reds advantage will continue to weaken. After Sep 1st KGJ's trade value plummets substantially. If it's going to happen it probably will be in the nick of time for CWS to add KGJ to the playoff roster.

You would most liken GW2 with GW1, Vietnam, Cambodia, & Korea. These are all wars fought to defend the weak from tyranny & injustice on foreign soil. Sure there are American interests ($$$) involved but that doesn't change what the war is really about. So the question to ask is did JFK, LBJ, RN, or GB1 ever have a 1-on-1 with a grieving mom? I don't think they did. Do I think Bush should? Yes. Why? Because America is more polarized today then we were back then. It would give Bush the chance to present an argument not directed towards her but the doves in general. I'd be happy to write the speech for him: It's been nearly 4 years now since 9/11. There has not been a major terrorist attack in the US since then. Do you know why? Because dedicated & honorable men & women like your son have given their lives to fighting terrorism across the globe. As ghastly as Iraq is I want you to imagine a world in which Iraq is still under control of Saddam Hussein. How strong would Al-Queda be today in such a world? How many major attacks would the world have seen with such a strong Al-Queda? Why did Al-Queda attack us on 9/11? Was it because we are trying to spread free-trade practices across the globe? Was it because we believe women have as much right to run a company as men do? If we choose to do nothing & go about business as usual would that have changed their reasons for attacking us on 9/11? Would a do nothing stance have led to even greater attacks? These are the questions the commander in chief must ask before weighing the consequences of action. I believe I have made the right choice. I am fully aware the cost is high in terms of both blood & money but to do nothing risks even greater costs. History is on my side. What history tells us is that terrorism whether it is born of Nazi Germany or Al-Queda continues to manifest itself if left unabated. The do nothing stance led to millions of lives lost at the hands of Nazi Germany before America entered the war. It still confounds me today how Germany could lose WW1 & rise to power in such a short time later to wage WWII. That's how I saw Saddam Hussein & Iraq. They attacked Kuwait & threatened the world's oil supply in GW1. They were defeated but the sanctions did little to prevent a new rise in power. The OFF scandal is a testament to that. We might have jumped the gun on the WMD intelligence but what's the alternative? To wait until we have irrefutable proof that Iraq has WMD's? By that time he would have had enough power to threaten not just Kuwait but all members of OPEC. Is it just about oil? No. But it's important to understand that in the world we live in today oil is life. Most of the cities in this world owe their electricity to oil & other fossil fuels. Our civilization can no more survive without electricity than it can without water. Your son died because he was dedicated to protecting both freedom & life. He protected those who are not yet capable of defending themselves. It won't wash away your grief but it should fill you with pride. <hug the mom for best effect ;>

To Chris Widger I would reply Timo's gawn. That's the biggest impact in adding KGJ. Jr would play some DH, some OF, & if Ozzie thinks he can even some 1B. It's not any different then when Ozzie was trying to juggle time for Thomas, Timo, Dye, Everett & the rest of the bench. They never had a 4 gm losing streak in that time. Jerry pony up the $23.5M & get this done!

Was Lindher right in rejecting that proposal? Columnists are now reporting that it's $50M left on KGJ's contract. This makes sense if you assume that the deferred $$ from 00-04 is non-transferrable in the contract. That would leave $26M left in deferred $$ & $23.5M due from 05-08. If it's structured like Thomas' contract was then they will be making payments on the $$ owed from 00-04 before 05-08. It's a backloaded payment scheme where the last payment owed in 2024 is $16.5M. So that means they won't feel the debt burden of the $26M until about 2021. You can weigh that against expected increase in franchise value or investment value to realize the vaue of that debt will depreciate to below 1/2 that value. So in terms of the near future of the team the Reds were getting just $8.5M/3yr in relief. Enough to maybe sign a good setup man. So that equates to KGJ + $15M for mlers & a RP. Who in their right mind would do that deal when KGJ is so HOT at the plate right now? If KW & JR really want to win a championship they've got to pony up some more $$$. Agree to pick up the $15M in exchange for the Reds taking on all of the $26M deferred. Then allow the Reds to choose from a list of players that don't have to clear ML waivers. $23.5M/3yr is still a good deal for KGJ.

From the CWS trans logs: ml-deals: C Raul Casanova, C Chris Widger, INF Pablo Ozuna, INF Jorge Toca, INF Greg Norton, RHP John Stevens, OF Tony Alvarez, INF Ricky Gutierrez, ML-deals: RHP Jon Adkins, RHP Jeff Bajenaru, LHP Neal Cotts, RHP Felix Diaz, RHP Kris Honel, RHP Bobby Jenks, LHP Arnie Munoz, LHP Paulino Reynoso, RHP Matt Smith, RHP Sean Tracey, INF Joe Crede, INF Ross Gload, INF Willie Harris, INF Pedro Lopez, INF Casey Rogowski, INF Wilson Valdez and OF Joe Borchard. Purchased contracts: INF Pablo Ozuna, C Chris Widger, RHP BMac, C Jamie Burke, OF Brian Anderson If you look at the puchased contracts listings for all teams this just seems like a normal procedure when moving players whom signed ml deals to the 25 man roster. I don't think it changes their status as an optional-assignment when they have option years left. With that in mind I think the White Sox can trade BMac & Anderson w/out having to secure ML waivers on them. That makes sense when you consider the purpose of option years.

I'm not sure if BMac or Anderson would have to clear waivers. There are two rules that seem to govern them. optional assignment: a player signed to a minor league contract that is later placed on the 40 man roster. Such a player can be moved from ml-ML for 3 seasons. These represent the players 3 option years. The first option year is spent on the 1st day the player is placed on the 40 man roster. When the option years expire a player signed to a ml contract must clear waivers before being re-assigned. major league waivers: If the date of assignment is >= 3 yrs after the date the player 1st reported to a ML club during a non-strike year then a team must secure this type of waiver to option a player. Wrt to both BMac & Anderson I am sure they have option years left. So it depends on whether they were signed to ml deals or ML deals. If they were signed to ml deals then I believe they don't have to clear waivers.

http://mlb.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/mlb/schedule...nt_dates_05.jsp Aug 1: Beginning today through the last day of the championship season, players may be assigned between Major League clubs ONLY after ML Waivers have been secured during the current waiver period. Oct 2: Official closing of the 2005 championship season Oct 3: Beginning today, players may be traded between ML clubs without waivers in effect. For certain, they could complete the trade so to speak on Oct 3rd. The question is can they complete it earlier so the Reds could get use of those players in Sept? You have to finalize your post-season roster by Sep 1st. I think that becomes the list of players that still require ML waivers til Oct 2nd. Any one not on that list might be considered an optional assignment. I'm checking on what their status would be. But it's certainly within the rules because it amounts to 2 separate trades in two different periods.

$$$. You're essentially agreeing on what BMac, & Anderson would mean in $ values to the Reds & applying that to the KGJ trade. The Reds use that added cost as collateral for the CWS to give them the players they want. It might have happened in the past. You would have to look at the Sep transaction logs to see evidence of it.

Outside of KGJ as Jason pointed out all AL contenders can block us from any plan B options. Either claiming the player we want or claiming the players are trade partner would want. Having the best record in the AL really sucks when it comes to ML waivers. The only thing that seems possible is for the CWS to trade for players that have cleared waivers & splitting the trade into two parts: before & after the ML waiver period. They would have to take on more $$$ initially as collateral that they would give up the talent when the waiver period expires. They would get that extra $$$ back when they traded the talent they promised the other team. The assumption of course is that the players that team wants would be worth more than the extra $$$ involved.