mlpeel

Close: the second time a player goes on waivers within a waiver period (there are 4 per year), the waiver request can't be withdrawn. So a player can go on waivers 4 times in a year without the club being at risk of losing him. Those are exactly the guys who *don't* get claimed on waivers. If a team claims such a player on waivers and the claim is allowed to stand, it now owns that player's contract -- with all the obligations that entails. If, on the other hand, the player clears waivers and is released (or refuses an assignment and becomes a free agent), the waiving club has to pay his contract. Any other club can sign that player for pro-rated major league minimum (which they actually pay to the club paying his salary).

If a club requests waivers on a player and then withdraws the request, it is prohibited by rule from requesting waivers on that player for 30 days from the date the previous request was withdrawn. If it puts him on waivers again 30 days after a claim/withdrawal and a new waiver period hasn't started, the waivers request cannot be withdrawn. These rules sharply limit the usefulness of your suggestion of how things work.

As noted in another post, Corey's major league service time is irrelevant: calendar time determines the need for waivers before optional assignments. Hendry was free to trade Patterson without waivers. After the July 31 trading deadline, that won't be true -- but on July 31, the waivers currently secured on Patterson's contract will expire (they will also expire automatically if the Cubs promote Patterson to the big league club again before July 31). If the Cubs want to trade Corey after July 31, they'll have to pass him through waivers again. Not until he reaches 5 years of service, which won't happen until sometime next June at the earliest -- and the longer he remains in the minors this year, the longer that will take. Big league service time does not accumulate for guys optioned to the minors, only for guys on the major league 25 man active roster or a major league disabled list.

Of the players who were originally signed by the Cubs (I don't know the detailed transaction history of guys like Barrett or Ramirez to say for certain), Ohman, Wood, and Zambrano are the only ones with options who would have to clear waivers for an optional assignment. Well, check that: Maddux still has 2 option years left...

Somebody call? Your statement is not completely true, SC, though it is usually correct. The qualifier that determines the need for waivers is *not* major league service time, as some in this thread have stated, but a.) how long it has been since the date the player first reported to the active list of the major league team, and b.) how many option years he had remaining at that time. In the current instance, Patterson made his major league debut on September 18, 2000 (I believe Patterson reported the same day he made his debut; the date isn't more than a day or two off at most, so I'll use it as though it was the reporting date); he had all 3 options remaining at that time (actually, he was technically eligible for a fourth option year under MLR 11©; but since his callup occurred after the end of the 2002 minor league seasons, there was no time window to exercise that fourth option and it evaporated with the end of the 2002 season). Since he had 3 option years, he did not have to clear waivers to use an option until 3 *calendar* years had passed; that is, as of September 18, 2003, Patterson had to clear waivers before he could be optioned to the minors. Prior to that date, he could be optioned freely -- and he was in the 2001 season. Please note that Patterson did *not* have 3 years of major league service until midway through the 2004 season; under the Basic Agreement, 3 years of service time affects outright assignments to the minors but not optional assignments (see below). Just to recap, the clock for waivers starts ticking on the day the player first reports to the big league club (so it's July 8, 2005, for both Matt Murton and Adam Greenberg, even though Murton made his major league debut and Greenberg didn't) and the clock expires after the number of calendar years elapsed equals the number of option years the player had remaining at the time he reported. After the clock expires, it doesn't matter how many options the player still has remaining: he must clear waivers first before a remaining option (if any) can be used. The purpose of this rule is to prevent clubs from optioning established players to the minors as punishment. Obviously, a productive player will not clear waivers (not usually, anyway): another major league club will put in a claim, preventing the optional assignment, on the theory that if the waiving club is dumb enough not to want this guy, we'll take him (which is the point of the waiver rule in the first place: if a player is good enough for the league, the other clubs will decide that by claiming him rather than letting him leave the league). And yes, when a player has no more options, he must clear waivers before his contract can be assigned to the minors. This is called an outright assignment: the player is transferred from the major league club's 40 man reserve list to the minor league club's reserve list (35-38 players, depending on the level), though the major league club is still on the hook for any guaranteed clauses in the major league contract. When waivers (including special waivers) are requested for the purposes of outrighting a player to the minors, they can't be withdrawn: if another team claims him, the player will stay in the majors with the claiming team (or the team with the highest waiver priority when more than one team puts in a claim). The Basic Agreement grants players rights against being outrighted to the minors. A player who has at least 3 years of major league service (Patterson) or who has been outrighted to the minors before (Dubois) can refuse the assignment and become a free agent; in both cases, if the player accepts and goes to the minors, he gets another chance at free agency after the season unless the team adds him back to the major league reserve list. Note this applies only to outright assignments: Corey had no ability to refuse an optional assignment. Also under the Basic Agreement, a player who has 5 years of major league service cannot be assigned to the minors at all (either outright or optionally) without his prior written consent. If Patterson returns to the big leagues soon, then in about a year the Cubs (or the team he's traded to) won't have the option of optioning Corey to the minors even though he'll still have an option left: he completed his fourth year of major league service before the end of June, so he's less than a year in the bigs from having the right to refuse any kind of minor league demotion.

He was careful not to betray any opinion. I got no impression that he was impressed or exasperated or bored or anything -- though a couple of questions made him laugh. I daresay it seemed much like "Down on the Farm" or interviews by other fan sites.

I do have an interview scheduled with Hughes, but that's for my research: I won't have room for anyone else's questions, and I'm not clear how much of the topic matter will be of interest to NSBB readers. But if I haven't exasperated him after that interview, I can sound him out about answering NSBB questions at some future time.

If this question is directed to me, I'm afraid you'll have to rephrase it: I don't know what you're trying to ask.

Consarn it, vance, you spoiled my surprise. There's a 100% chance of it: I arranged it before I arranged this interview with Mr. Fleita. Though perhaps I shouldn't say 100%: Mr. Stockstill's about 50 times harder to catch up to than Mr. Fleita...

It's not too hard to read a little more between the lines. Contrast his comments on Guzman ("his future is in the rotation") with those on Ryu ("As to starter or reliever, that depends on our needs") and Hill ("In my mind he's a starter in AA this year, but he has to earn it."). Guzman's got nothing to prove to him except health; the other guys might get elbowed aside if they don't show enough.

No, that was John Connolly the Cubs got from the Tigers -- but Mr. Fleita named Connolly alongside Marshall as a possible fast-mover this year. I wasn't at all surprised he named Marshall, but Connolly caught me off-guard there...

I got a sense there'll be more, but that Blasko and Wylie were the guys he was certain couldn't make it to the starting line. For at least 3 outings I know of, Ryu was sitting at 93-94 at Lansing. Tae Li, his former interpreter, told me J. K. topped at 98 that year. I have Ohman topping at 94 last year, hitting 93 fairly often, and working 90-92. A major league average fastball for a lefty is 88-89. Considering that I did rate Marshall in my top 5, I didn't mind hearing that myself. Those questions came towards the very end; he didn't sound tired, but his answers got a bit more clipped. I daresay it's a bit trying to sit for an hour answering questions over the phone...

I was quite surprised when he said that: I wrote that part in all caps. He wasn't specific, but gave the impression of working in the middle 90s. As long as you keep in mind that the operating reference was John Cangelosi, a career bench guy who topped 200 ABs only 3 times in a 13 season career...

He responded on the fly. If you listened to the recording of Down on the Farm someone posted, that's a pretty fair sample of how he talks. For the interview, I sometimes discussed his answers with him a bit to draw out a little more info (much more so at the beginning of the intervew than the end), but usually it wasn't necessary. And you do have to expect the farm director to be positive about the guys whose careers he controls. He knows these players are likely to find out about any remark he makes about them.

Let's hope not: cheeseburgers played some part in Carlos's move from 220 to 250... Fortunately, his wife made him cut that stuff out.