Email a copy of 'Reds Claimed Hisanori Takahashi' to a friend
Loading ...
By Ben Nicholson-Smith | at
Email a copy of 'Reds Claimed Hisanori Takahashi' to a friend
MLB Trade Rumors is not affiliated with Major League Baseball, MLB or MLB.com
hide arrows scroll to top
MetsEventually
Super sad face.
Nick Migliore
Well at least you have Dickey face as your avatar!
camisadelgolf
Okay, so once he rejected the claim, he went back on waivers, am I right? If that’s the case, would that mean the Mets would be given another chance to claim him and negotiate another contract? That’s the big question I have.
oleosmirf
i would think the Mets still can’t bring him back but who knows for sure.
safari_punch
I think the Mets can still bring him back, because technically he is property of the Reds for five days and after that he is a free agent. If the Reds can’t get a deal done in that window, then were to sign him after, they wouldn’t be allowed to play him until May 15th.
The Mets won’t have this issue.
bas_in_denmark
I’m not sure this is right. As far as I can tell any team that has unconditionally released a player after August 31 would be barred from signing said player before May 15. The Mets have unconditionally released Takahashi so the rule would still apply to them, no?
venn177
I don’t believe it applies because it was written into Takahashi’s contract that he be released.
Slopeboy
Whether the Mets can or cannot sign him before May 15 is a moot point. He’s asking 3 years $15MM. They obviously didn’t think he was worth that, and he thinks he can get that, so it’s going to be interesting to see what the Reds will do. I don’t think he’s worth all that and can’t see the Reds going there either.
jeenyus245
as long as Takahashi does not end up a Philthy, everything will be okay.
Ethanator99
Did the Reds actually want him or was this some sort of move that could benefit the Reds in a different way? The reason I ask is because the Reds don’t really have a need for a Takahashi
bas_in_denmark
Well, they may need to replace Arthur Rhodes. Maybe they see him as a power lefty in the bullpen. I can’t see him getting more than two years though.
yankee2195
I completely agree. The Reds need another good arm in the bullpen like Takahashi. He’s not that bad of a pitcher, too.
camisadelgolf
For the record, Takahashi is only willing to sign with a team that will use him as a starter, and I’m sure the Reds knew that. Keeping that in mind, they have no use for him as a starter when you consider that they already have Bronson Arroyo, Johnny Cueto, Edinson Volquez, Mike Leake, Homer Bailey, Travis Wood, Aroldis Chapman, etc. Therefore, I’m thinking it’s safe to assume that the Reds’ motive had nothing to do with actually offering Takahashi a contract.
My understanding is this: the Reds claimed Takahashi without ever having the intention of signing him. Since the Reds now become the team that released him, it gives the Mets a chance to reach an agreement before May 15th. However, this completely contradicts what Adam Rubin said, so take that with a grain of salt.
Jay
as stated above in the update Mets can resign him but he can’t play for them until may 15. 2011
nathanalext
I’m super confused by this whole situation. Please, someone tell me I’m not the only one!