Blue Jays Discussion: Post-post-Deadline Edition: The pitchers on the farm are impressing (Zeuch No-hitter/Pearson to AAA)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Leaftors

Registered User
Jul 21, 2011
2,402
719
Welland, Ontario
zeke said:
well the thing is it helps if the "facts" are actually "facts".

for instance, the waiver priority is no longer league-based, so no, the entire AL didn't pass on him. The Reds were about #10 in waiver priority, I think, and maybe the first team in priority that was in any kind of playoff contention.

Well Zeke, if i'm honest i've looked and found this;

"If a player is waived, any team may claim him. If more than one team claims the player from waivers, the team with the weakest record in the player's league gets preference. If no team in the player's league claims him, the claiming team with the weakest record in the other league gets preference. In the first month of the season, preference is determined using the previous year's standings."

Which to me means that none of the AL teams claimed him since an NL team claimed him and got him.

I also am not sure if you can say something isn't factual and then say "i think" to prove the point that it isn't factual.
 

theaub

34-38-61-10-13-15
Nov 21, 2008
18,881
1,974
Toronto
Waiver priority goes by alternating worst records with the player's league first. Worst AL club, worst NL club, 2nd worst AL club etc. So the Reds, who have the 4th worst record in the NL right now, were 8th.

e: I am basing that off of this article (Deals not done: A guide to waiver trades), which also has very ambiguous language but I'm going to trust more than Wikipedia.
 

Woodman19

Registered User
Jun 14, 2008
18,493
1,869
We are very quickly going from an old expensive injury prone team to a young exciting team in a hurry. May not like the plan or process but they are clearly sticking to their rebuild.
 

Leaftors

Registered User
Jul 21, 2011
2,402
719
Welland, Ontario
Waiver priority goes by alternating worst records with the player's league first. Worst AL club, worst NL club, 2nd worst AL club etc. So the Reds, who have the 4th worst record in the NL right now, were 8th.

e: I am basing that off of this article (Deals not done: A guide to waiver trades), which also has very ambiguous language but I'm going to trust more than Wikipedia.
true, i looked through a couple and clearly couldn't see that one
 

Discoverer

Registered User
Apr 11, 2012
10,735
5,873
We are very quickly going from an old expensive injury prone team to a young exciting team in a hurry. May not like the plan or process but they are clearly sticking to their rebuild.

They always said the transition to a younger, more athletic team wouldn't happen over night. It's taken a few years, but we got there.
 

BertCorbeau

F*ck cancer - RIP Fugu and Buffaloed
Jan 6, 2012
54,993
35,158
Simcoe County
Why was it the proper thing? How did it help the Jays? They got nothing for him and he went to a team with only a few more wins, so hardly a contender.

Galvis goes to a team that will likely give him more playing time ... Might help Galvis land a contract next season

I liked what he brought, somewhat surprised they couldn't garner a return for him at the deadline.
 

canucksfan

Registered User
Mar 16, 2002
43,748
9,404
British Columbia
Visit site
Why was it the proper thing? How did it help the Jays? They got nothing for him and he went to a team with only a few more wins, so hardly a contender.

Gives the Jays a chance to play more young guys. I assume they tried to trade him at the deadline but had no takers. They likely weren’t going to pick up the option.
 

Glenn Isildur Healy

Registered User
Oct 8, 2013
4,524
686
CBC Studios
I don't understand releasing a player with value especially since we have an option on him next season and he meshes well with our young players

Wouldn't releasing Smoak make way more sense? Recall Tellez and let him get regular at bats to end the season
 

Hoverhand

Barry Trotzky
Dec 6, 2015
2,411
1,247
Ontario
I'm all for letting Galvis go to a contender if his contract was done at the end of the year but it's not.

With Gurriel still injured Galvis could find playing time at 2B/DH and then through off days when Gurriel comes back until somebody goes down again. Eventually, over the next year and a bit somebody would have given up an asset for him. The market for middle infielders isn't always this bad.

Look it's probably just a rookie ball starter that's not even in their teams top 20 with their best-case scenario being a middle of the pack reliever but eventually, they're going to need those types.
 

Mach85

Registered User
Mar 14, 2013
3,896
671
I'm all for letting Galvis go to a contender if his contract was done at the end of the year but it's not.

With Gurriel still injured Galvis could find playing time at 2B/DH and then through off days when Gurriel comes back until somebody goes down again. Eventually, over the next year and a bit somebody would have given up an asset for him. The market for middle infielders isn't always this bad.

Look it's probably just a rookie ball starter that's not even in their teams top 20 with their best-case scenario being a middle of the pack reliever but eventually, they're going to need those types.
He's playing over a young guy either way. Biggio is at 2B (Vlad at 3B and Bo at SS). DH is either Smoak, Tellez, McKinney, Drury (also at 3B to spell Vlad), Teoscar when Gurriel is back, and then Tellez in a couple weeks when rosters expand. You're either sitting him, which is not good policy, or you're deciding not to play the kids in a season that's all about playing the kids.

For the life of me I don't understand why people are up in arms about this when there's evidence from the deadline that other MIFers who are better players than Galvis either got nothing or cash considerations.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ricky Bobby

zeke

The Dube Abides
Mar 14, 2005
66,937
36,957
Has to be said...

1. Younger maybe, athletic? Not so much. No fearsome speed on the basepaths, not a lot of plus defenders.

2. Getting younger is not a goal, getting better is. Any team can get younger whenever they want. It's not hard. Getting better is hard.

3. A lot of our Younger ain't so young.

4. Most of the Older a) wasn't so old, or b) was vet filler signed by this very same FO.

5. Drafting and developing kids is the goal of every front office, and happens independently of the front office decisions about the big league team. This same youth movement could have occurred while following a radically different mlb plan, without much change to the future in front of us (and arguably with some better trade bait returning more young pieces).
 

Glenn Isildur Healy

Registered User
Oct 8, 2013
4,524
686
CBC Studios
He's playing over a young guy either way. Biggio is at 2B (Vlad at 3B and Bo at SS). DH is either Smoak, Tellez, McKinney, Drury (also at 3B to spell Vlad), Teoscar when Gurriel is back, and then Tellez in a couple weeks when rosters expand. You're either sitting him, which is not good policy, or you're deciding not to play the kids in a season that's all about playing the kids.

For the life of me I don't understand why people are up in arms about this when there's evidence from the deadline that other MIFers who are better players than Galvis either got nothing or cash considerations.

If anything, Smoak (unlike Galvis), a pending free agent is blocking Tellez

We didn't need to trade Galvis as he's not a FA this off-season and you can't have an entire roster of kids next season
 

Clark4Ever

What we do in hockey echoes in eternity...
Oct 10, 2010
11,510
8,052
T.O.
I think management did right by Galvis, but at the risk of sounding selfish, it would have been better for the club to keep him for depth going into next season, especially considering the season he is having. He could have been rotated into the lineup a few times a week with some creativity.
 

Mach85

Registered User
Mar 14, 2013
3,896
671
If anything, Smoak (unlike Galvis), a pending free agent is blocking Tellez

We didn't need to trade Galvis as he's not a FA this off-season and you can't have an entire roster of kids next season
The existence of another veteran blocking someone isn't an argument for keeping another one.
 

Hoverhand

Barry Trotzky
Dec 6, 2015
2,411
1,247
Ontario
He's playing over a young guy either way. Biggio is at 2B (Vlad at 3B and Bo at SS). DH is either Smoak, Tellez, McKinney, Drury (also at 3B to spell Vlad), Teoscar when Gurriel is back, and then Tellez in a couple weeks when rosters expand. You're either sitting him, which is not good policy, or you're deciding not to play the kids in a season that's all about playing the kids.

For the life of me I don't understand why people are up in arms about this when there's evidence from the deadline that other MIFers who are better players than Galvis either got nothing or cash considerations.
A few things here.

16 of the remaining 41 games are before the rosters expand, so until then depending on Gurriel's injury, he's only blocking McKinney, Drury, and Smoak. Drury and Smoak arent prospects and McKinney isn't good enough to play over a superior player just because he's younger. Then the rosters expand and we have 25 games remaining in which you can slot him in on a handful of off days.

For the life of me, I don't understand the justification of giving up an asset with a year left on their contract just because you have to sit them for 20 games. It's not a bad policy to get the most out of your assets.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->