Comments on: Out Of Options, But Out Of Luck? http://www.baseballamerica.com/blog/prospects/2010/03/out-of-options-but-out-of-luck/ Tue, 26 Mar 2013 14:43:54 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Joe http://www.baseballamerica.com/blog/prospects/2010/03/out-of-options-but-out-of-luck/comment-page-1/#comment-49599 Joe Sun, 14 Mar 2010 14:16:18 +0000 http://www.baseballamerica.com/blog/prospects/?p=7744#comment-49599 Matt, JJ Cooper wrote an article on Greg Porter. Who has a career average of .297, if you include his great season last year in Indy ball where he was B.A Indy player of the year his career average is over.300. I understand that he will be 29 this year. But why do you think he didn't sign with an affiliate club. He obviously proved he still has the pop in his bat. But it make you wonder when there are guys who sign with career avg's in the low .200's. What are your thoughts on this? Matt,
JJ Cooper wrote an article on Greg Porter. Who has a career average of .297, if you include his great season last year in Indy ball where he was B.A Indy player of the year his career average is over.300. I understand that he will be 29 this year. But why do you think he didn't sign with an affiliate club. He obviously proved he still has the pop in his bat. But it make you wonder when there are guys who sign with career avg's in the low .200's. What are your thoughts on this?

]]> By: Jason http://www.baseballamerica.com/blog/prospects/2010/03/out-of-options-but-out-of-luck/comment-page-1/#comment-49398 Jason Fri, 12 Mar 2010 22:49:53 +0000 http://www.baseballamerica.com/blog/prospects/?p=7744#comment-49398 NIce article. I understod the "option" move pretty much, but this confirms some things that I had assumed. Here's some analysis that could clarify Diann's question. Things like options and the disabled list only exist during the regualr season, not the offseason. If you look at ba's transactions lists in late September, or major league transaction lists in October, you'll see that teams recall the balance of their 40-man roster "not to report" (players who weren't September callups), then in October they'll activate everybody off the 15- and 60- day DL's. These are procural moves to restore everybody to the "active" roster for the offseason and spring training. So if someone is sent down in mid 2009, but doesn't play in the majors again until 2011, here's a timeline of their roster status: mid 09: optioned to the minors end  of 09 season: added back to the active 40-man roster for the offseason (recalled not to report) 2010 spring training : optioned to the minors (a different "option" than the 2009 one).   While option/option years a little tricky due the wording and such, I think that most people would agree that waivers are the strangest transaction to fully understand, since there are som many types, and they affect sevaral things (sending players to the minors, post-July 31st trades). I think that would be a good topic to explore next. Also, maybe an article about miscellaneous roster moves that don't completely make sense. For instance, why do teams place players on the 15-day Dl in September, even though the active roster is expanded, 15-day DL moves don't open up 40-man roster spots, and since non-playoff teams do it sometimes, it's not a goof move to give them an extra eligible player for postseason. NIce article. I understod the "option" move pretty much, but this confirms some things that I had assumed.
Here's some analysis that could clarify Diann's question. Things like options and the disabled list only exist during the regualr season, not the offseason. If you look at ba's transactions lists in late September, or major league transaction lists in October, you'll see that teams recall the balance of their 40-man roster "not to report" (players who weren't September callups), then in October they'll activate everybody off the 15- and 60- day DL's. These are procural moves to restore everybody to the "active" roster for the offseason and spring training.
So if someone is sent down in mid 2009, but doesn't play in the majors again until 2011, here's a timeline of their roster status:
mid 09: optioned to the minors
end  of 09 season: added back to the active 40-man roster for the offseason (recalled not to report)
2010 spring training : optioned to the minors (a different "option" than the 2009 one).
 
While option/option years a little tricky due the wording and such, I think that most people would agree that waivers are the strangest transaction to fully understand, since there are som many types, and they affect sevaral things (sending players to the minors, post-July 31st trades). I think that would be a good topic to explore next.
Also, maybe an article about miscellaneous roster moves that don't completely make sense. For instance, why do teams place players on the 15-day Dl in September, even though the active roster is expanded, 15-day DL moves don't open up 40-man roster spots, and since non-playoff teams do it sometimes, it's not a goof move to give them an extra eligible player for postseason.

]]> By: Matt Eddy http://www.baseballamerica.com/blog/prospects/2010/03/out-of-options-but-out-of-luck/comment-page-1/#comment-49382 Matt Eddy Fri, 12 Mar 2010 20:13:28 +0000 http://www.baseballamerica.com/blog/prospects/?p=7744#comment-49382 In order to send a 40-man roster player to Triple-A, a club must send him there on optional assignment. The only way to "preserve" options is to keep a player on the active 25-man roster for an entire season. Stay tuned to our weekly transactions blog and in the coming weeks, you'll see examples of hundreds of players sent to Double-A and Triple-A on optional assignment. In order to send a 40-man roster player to Triple-A, a club must send him there on optional assignment. The only way to “preserve” options is to keep a player on the active 25-man roster for an entire season.

Stay tuned to our weekly transactions blog and in the coming weeks, you’ll see examples of hundreds of players sent to Double-A and Triple-A on optional assignment.

]]> By: Diann http://www.baseballamerica.com/blog/prospects/2010/03/out-of-options-but-out-of-luck/comment-page-1/#comment-49381 Diann Fri, 12 Mar 2010 19:28:05 +0000 http://www.baseballamerica.com/blog/prospects/?p=7744#comment-49381 Ok, but even if he had not plated in the Big Leagues since 2010? Ok, but even if he had not plated in the Big Leagues since 2010?

]]> By: Matt Eddy http://www.baseballamerica.com/blog/prospects/2010/03/out-of-options-but-out-of-luck/comment-page-1/#comment-49379 Matt Eddy Fri, 12 Mar 2010 19:10:22 +0000 http://www.baseballamerica.com/blog/prospects/?p=7744#comment-49379 <p>Diann, Under the scenario you present, the player in question would use all three of his options. Thus in 2012, he could not return to the minors without first clearing waivers. Your '09 and '10 reasoning is correct, but in '11 that would also count as an option.</p> <p>Each time a player is sent to minor leagues, even to start a season, one of his option years is consumed. (In rare occasions, a player will be granted a fourth option year. We'll get to that next time.)</p> <p>A rough rule of thumb: If a 40-man player spends time in the minors (on anything more than rehab), he mostly likely is on optional assignment.</p> Diann, Under the scenario you present, the player in question would use all three of his options. Thus in 2012, he could not return to the minors without first clearing waivers. Your '09 and '10 reasoning is correct, but in '11 that would also count as an option.

Each time a player is sent to minor leagues, even to start a season, one of his option years is consumed. (In rare occasions, a player will be granted a fourth option year. We'll get to that next time.)

A rough rule of thumb: If a 40-man player spends time in the minors (on anything more than rehab), he mostly likely is on optional assignment.

]]> By: Diann http://www.baseballamerica.com/blog/prospects/2010/03/out-of-options-but-out-of-luck/comment-page-1/#comment-49378 Diann Fri, 12 Mar 2010 18:55:34 +0000 http://www.baseballamerica.com/blog/prospects/?p=7744#comment-49378 Matt, I wanted to clarify something. If a player is added to both the active and 40 man roster at the same time, say in July of 2009, then optioned down to AAA twice that same season after the call-up, that only counts as one option. He finishes that season on the active. Then, in 2010, he is optioned down to start the season, not to be called up the rest of the year, thus spending the whole season in AAA. He now has eclipsed two options, correct? Let's say he reamains in AAA again for all of 2011. He still will have one more option remaining, correct? That will not be lost until when? Matt, I wanted to clarify something. If a player is added to both the active and 40 man roster at the same time, say in July of 2009, then optioned down to AAA twice that same season after the call-up, that only counts as one option.
He finishes that season on the active. Then, in 2010, he is optioned down to start the season, not to be called up the rest of the year, thus spending the whole season in AAA. He now has eclipsed two options, correct?
Let's say he reamains in AAA again for all of 2011. He still will have one more option remaining, correct? That will not be lost until when?

]]> By: Matt Eddy http://www.baseballamerica.com/blog/prospects/2010/03/out-of-options-but-out-of-luck/comment-page-1/#comment-49377 Matt Eddy Fri, 12 Mar 2010 18:46:55 +0000 http://www.baseballamerica.com/blog/prospects/?p=7744#comment-49377 Dillon, Thanks for catching my mistake. Mitch Talbot did <strong>not</strong> qualify for the 2005 Rule 5 draft. His first time would have been 2006, had the Devil Rays not added him to the 40-man. The reason: Talbot signed a contract for 2003, giving the Astros that year plus ’04 through ’06 to evaluate him. This is true of Carlos Gonzalez, too. He signed a contract for 2003. Dillon, Thanks for catching my mistake. Mitch Talbot did not qualify for the 2005 Rule 5 draft. His first time would have been 2006, had the Devil Rays not added him to the 40-man.

The reason: Talbot signed a contract for 2003, giving the Astros that year plus ’04 through ’06 to evaluate him. This is true of Carlos Gonzalez, too. He signed a contract for 2003.

]]> By: Dillon http://www.baseballamerica.com/blog/prospects/2010/03/out-of-options-but-out-of-luck/comment-page-1/#comment-49372 Dillon Fri, 12 Mar 2010 16:49:01 +0000 http://www.baseballamerica.com/blog/prospects/?p=7744#comment-49372 Great artciel. Is there a good resource out there for determining remaining options for specific players? Maybe just a site that tells you when a player was first added to the 40-man? I usually just end up searching mlb.com. Also, how are Carlos Gonzalez and Mitch Talbot different? Both were in their 4th season with their clubs in 05. Great artciel. Is there a good resource out there for determining remaining options for specific players? Maybe just a site that tells you when a player was first added to the 40-man? I usually just end up searching mlb.com. Also, how are Carlos Gonzalez and Mitch Talbot different? Both were in their 4th season with their clubs in 05.

]]>