Who would you let go thru waivers?

[NCCubFan]

Be nice to see someone claim Lee and take him off waivers

 

he already exercised his no-trade clause; he's not going anywhere.

 

Yes, I know that but if a team claims him cant we let them take him ala Rios?

Not if he doesn't want to go. A no-trade clause also gives the player the right to block a waiver claim. Same principle: The player can't be forced to go to a new team against his wishes.

[Dallas Green]

Be nice to see someone claim Lee and take him off waivers

 

he already exercised his no-trade clause; he's not going anywhere.

 

Yes, I know that but if a team claims him cant we let them take him ala Rios?

Not if he doesn't want to go. A no-trade clause also gives the player the right to block a waiver claim. Same principle: The player can't be forced to go to a new team against his wishes.

 

Ah, ok...btw Levine says the Angels would have given us two "good" prospects, who knows.

[Cubswin11]

Hopefully Hendry and the FO can do some convincing to Lee and get him to waive his NTC. A lot of teams injuries at 1B (Red Sox, Phillies, Rays) and others need another bat and could make room for him the Angels, Tigers (move Cabrera to DH or Lee to DH). We could get a decent return for him probably.

[davearm2]

Be nice to see someone claim Lee and take him off waivers

 

he already exercised his no-trade clause; he's not going anywhere.

 

Yes, I know that but if a team claims him cant we let them take him ala Rios?

Not if he doesn't want to go. A no-trade clause also gives the player the right to block a waiver claim. Same principle: The player can't be forced to go to a new team against his wishes.

Wonder what a DFA would do.

 

You are correct that a NTC or 10/5 guy can't be forced to go to a new team against his wishes, but by the same token that doesn't give him irrevocable rights to play for his current team either.

 

AFAIK, Lee would end up a FA, and the Cubs would still be paying him his salary. At that point he could pick his new team (assuming mutual interest of course) or just stay home.

[NCCubFan]

Be nice to see someone claim Lee and take him off waivers

 

he already exercised his no-trade clause; he's not going anywhere.

 

Yes, I know that but if a team claims him cant we let them take him ala Rios?

Not if he doesn't want to go. A no-trade clause also gives the player the right to block a waiver claim. Same principle: The player can't be forced to go to a new team against his wishes.

Wonder what a DFA would do.

 

You are correct that a NTC or 10/5 guy can't be forced to go to a new team against his wishes, but by the same token that doesn't give him irrevocable rights to play for his current team either.

 

AFAIK, Lee would end up a FA, and the Cubs would still be paying him his salary. At that point he could pick his new team (assuming mutual interest of course) or just stay home.

I think that's exactly how it would work. He can block a waiver claim but he can't block an unconditional release.

[davearm2]

Wonder what a DFA would do.

 

You are correct that a NTC or 10/5 guy can't be forced to go to a new team against his wishes, but by the same token that doesn't give him irrevocable rights to play for his current team either.

 

AFAIK, Lee would end up a FA, and the Cubs would still be paying him his salary. At that point he could pick his new team (assuming mutual interest of course) or just stay home.

I think that's exactly how it would work. He can block a waiver claim but he can't block an unconditional release.

I suppose the only hope is that if he was DFA'd, and knew he was done w/ the Cubs, then he would cooperate during the 10-day window the Cubs would have to deal him.

[questionmarkgrace]

I was kind of hoping we would claim someone off waivers like Dunn (some team did claim him) and then sign him to a two or three year deal. It would be nice to get a head start on next year. Plus we wouldn't have to watch D-Lee and his 12 homeruns batting third for the rest of the year. If it were any other team he'd be riding the pine already.

[Backtobanks]

I was kind of hoping we would claim someone off waivers like Dunn (some team did claim him) and then sign him to a two or three year deal. It would be nice to get a head start on next year. Plus we wouldn't have to watch D-Lee and his 12 homeruns batting third for the rest of the year. If it were any other team he'd be riding the pine already.

 

There wouldn't be any guarantee that he would sign with the Cubs, let alone for only 2-3 years when there might be a 4 year deal out there in free agency. As for "riding the pine" for any other team, not if that team didn't have another 1B candidate (unless you mean Nady or Baker :lol: ).

[dew1679666265]

I was kind of hoping we would claim someone off waivers like Dunn (some team did claim him) and then sign him to a two or three year deal. It would be nice to get a head start on next year. Plus we wouldn't have to watch D-Lee and his 12 homeruns batting third for the rest of the year. If it were any other team he'd be riding the pine already.

 

Had we claimed Dunn, in order to get him we'd have to give up significant young talent that wouldn't have made it worth it (most likely).

 

And while I'm not a big fan of DLee still batting third, a vastly underperforming veteran with a good track record (including intangibles) starting for an organization isn't that odd. Jason Varitek got 908 PAs for the Red Sox between 2008 and 2009 even though he posted OPS' of .672 and .703 in those seasons. The reason given for continuing to start him was his "veteran leadership."

[questionmarkgrace]

I was kind of hoping we would claim someone off waivers like Dunn (some team did claim him) and then sign him to a two or three year deal. It would be nice to get a head start on next year. Plus we wouldn't have to watch D-Lee and his 12 homeruns batting third for the rest of the year. If it were any other team he'd be riding the pine already.

 

Had we claimed Dunn, in order to get him we'd have to give up significant young talent that wouldn't have made it worth it (most likely).

 

And while I'm not a big fan of DLee still batting third, a vastly underperforming veteran with a good track record (including intangibles) starting for an organization isn't that odd. Jason Varitek got 908 PAs for the Red Sox between 2008 and 2009 even though he posted OPS' of .672 and .703 in those seasons. The reason given for continuing to start him was his "veteran leadership."

 

yeah but varitek never batted third and played solid defense and handled the pitching staff well. Yes keeping a guy like that in the line up isn't all that unheard of but continuing to bat him third is down right crazy. And of course they cant bench him without any first base prospect to take a look at but the guy is close to the bottom for every hitting stat for 1st baseman in the NL. But I do feel like since he is not an option for next year any decent team would have at least went about acquiring a possibility at the position for the future. Especially given the fact that the Rickets probably wont pay for Dunn or Pena. Chris davis? I don't know this is way off topic now though.

[dew1679666265]

yeah but varitek never batted third and played solid defense and handled the pitching staff well. Yes keeping a guy like that in the line up isn't all that unheard of but continuing to bat him third is down right crazy. And of course they cant bench him without any first base prospect to take a look at but the guy is close to the bottom for every hitting stat for 1st baseman in the NL.

 

Varitek WAR in 2008 and 2009: 1.0 and .5

Derrek Lee WAR in 2010: .5

 

That includes defense and offense, so leaving Varitek in the lineup is no better than leaving DLee in the lineup. That said, I agree with you that he shouldn't still be batting third. I was responding to you saying that any other team would have Lee riding the pine at this point.

 

But I do feel like since he is not an option for next year any decent team would have at least went about acquiring a possibility at the position for the future. Especially given the fact that the Rickets probably wont pay for Dunn or Pena. Chris davis? I don't know this is way off topic now though.

 

Not having any options for the future at first is bad no doubt. I think Ricketts would approve paying for Dunn or Pena, however, just as long as signing them keeps us within budget. The question is, is it better to pay top dollar for Dunn or Pena or shell out some serious prospects for Adrian Gonzalez?