Players Who Have Been Placed On Revocable Waivers

Alfonso Soriano, Carlos Marmol and Roy Oswalt are the only players known to have cleared waivers so far this month (not counting the long list of players who have been traded). But we know other players have been placed on waivers, even though some of the details surrounding those cases remain unclear. Here's a list of the players that have been placed on revocable waivers this month, along with what we know about each player:

Please note: This post concerns players placed on revocable Major League waivers. Many other players have been placed on release waivers or outright waivers, but those waivers are irrevocable — teams can't pull players back off of irrevocable waivers. This post was first published on August 23rd.

Full Story | 37 Comments | Categories: Uncategorized

37 Responses to Players Who Have Been Placed On Revocable Waivers Leave a Reply

  1. FrankPereiroBlog 3 years ago

    Why would a player be placed on revocable waivers? I don’t understand why any team would place a player on waivers to pull him back later? Could you please explain a little bit about this move? Thank you

    • Tko11 3 years ago

      That is exactly what I was going to ask…the only reason I can think of is that they want to test out the market if anyone is actually interested in the player. Other than that I do not see a reason why a team would put a player on waivers and then pull him back. Maybe the front office is bored after the trade deadline?

      • Also, doesn’t it mean that if they clear waivers, they can be traded post trade deadline?

        • Tko11 3 years ago

          Yea if they clear, they can be traded to any team.

      • MaineSox 3 years ago

        Just on the off chance that no one claims them, that way they could potentially be traded if the opportunity arose.

    • You Know Who 3 years ago

      Almost every player is placed on waivers especially ones with big contracts just to gauge interest from other teams. Entire rosters will go on waivers at this point in the year and placing a player on waivers doesn’t mean a team wants to move that player, they just want to see hypothetically who other then them would want him if the player was made truly available, perhaps in the offseason. Make a little more sense?

      • rockfordone 3 years ago

        Extactly – I’m sure A-Rod,Rios,Dunn,etc have cleared waivers. Reason stated above – teams looking for interest – now and in future.

    • drjayphd 3 years ago

      After July 31, if you’re going to trade someone, they have to go through waivers. Teams will put basically their entire roster on waivers at some point, if only to leave their options open. Usually, if a team claims someone, they’ll either get pulled back or traded to the claiming team.

    • MaineSox 3 years ago

      They place them on revocable waivers instead of outright waivers so they can pull them back if someone claims them. If a player is placed on outright waivers and someone claims him the player is gone no matter what; with players that a team wants to try to trade they would put them on revocable waivers so they don’t risk losing them without getting anything in return if they are claimed.

    • 55saveslives 3 years ago

      The Red Sox/Dodgers trade is a good example. Although I don’t know if Adrian was on revocable. Since the Dodgers took all their bad contracts, they were willing to part with Agon.

      • Spit Ball 3 years ago

        I would imagine he must have been on revocable waivers for two reasons. First off if he was on irrevocable waivers another team could have claimed him before he got to the Dodgers and the Red Sox would have accomplished nothing as they would not have parted with him without dumping Beckett/Crawford. Secondly the Dodgers could have claimed him outright and said you can keep Beckett and Crawford. Thirdly if you put him on irrevocable waivers the Red Sox would have had no leverage to extract prospects from the Dodgers. The Red Sox and Dodgers must have came to an agreement that if all three made it through irrevocable waivers too them, they would work out a deal where the two teams would work on a deal to make this happen. At this point the Red Sox had some leverage to extract minor leaguers at minimum cost. Either way it took some professional trust to pull this thing off as either team could have burned the other.

        • Jim McGrath 3 years ago

          Im not 100 % sure but I think both teams tried each other out before AGon went on waivers–I think Beckett was claimed first then they put AGon on, he was claimed and then it grew to CC and Punto. I probably have that wrong –I would like to know for sure–if anyone has the chronology. There definitely had to be trust established first.

  2. @FrankPereiroBlog:disqus They place on revocable waivers to see teams interest in a player. If a team claims the player they can pull the player back, let the claiming team have the player or work out a trade. If they clear waivers then the player can be traded just like before the trade deadline. So placing the player on revocable waivers is almost a feeler to see who is interested. A lot of big name players are placed on waivers around this time of year with most being pulled back. Hope that helps.

    • FrankPereiroBlog 3 years ago

      That makes a lot of sense, Justin. Thank you for the answer.

      Although, I like Tko11’s answer better: Maybe the front office is bored after the trade deadline

      Naaah, really, thanks Justin

  3. Johnny_Felix 3 years ago

    will you guys also be making a list for the outrighted and release waivers too?

  4. Cannonball9 3 years ago

    Dreaming: ‘Loney, De La Rosa, Webster and Sands to the Red Sox, and Gonzalez, Crawford, Beckett to the Dodgers.’ – Dylan Hernandez, LA Times

    • Tko11 3 years ago

      Yes Loney would make a viable replacement for Gonzalez! Is this a legit proposal in the LA Times?

      • Cody 3 years ago

        Of course Loney’s not a viable replacement. If he were, why would they trade him? Nobody trades apples for apples. But anyway, Loney is not really trade-bait. Heck, he’s close to not being employable. And are Crawford and Beckett even on Waivers? I think a Sands and Dee Gordon package for AG would get some interest though.

        • Ben_Cherington 3 years ago

          “I think a Sands and Dee Gordon package for AG would get some interest though.”
          I dont

          • Cannonball9 3 years ago

            Agree, Dodgers would be ecstatic with that deal if Sox agreed.

          • Cody 3 years ago

            Dee Gordon + Scott Van Slyke? Keep in mind that AG hasn’t lived up to his salary in Boston. He’s going “cheap”, at least in relative terms.

          • GasLampGuru 3 years ago

            People need to come off this “Gonzalez hasn’t met expectations” nonsense.

            This is a gold glove caliber 1B who hit .338/.410/.538 with 27 HR, 117 RBI, 108 R, 74 BB in his first year; which also happened to be his first year coming off of shoulder surgery. He had 215 hits.

            Despite a disappointing first half in 2012, he’s still on pace to hit .300 with 20 HR, 100+ RBI, 80+ runs over the course of a season in which the team was missing Crawford and Ortiz for a long time, traded Youk and lost his replacement to injury. He’s had Cody Ross hitting behind him most of the season. He also agreed to play RF despite not being the most athletic player in the league so the team could squeeze he, Youk and Middlebrooks into the same lineup.

            His problem this season is he’s been chasing pitches he’d normally lay off of in what I’d assume is an attempt to pick up the slack for the guys who have been injured or less productive. He’s too good for the Sox to just give up on him.

          • Cody 3 years ago

            He hit 40 HR at Petco. He hit more than 30 there 4 years in a row. He has yet to top 30 HRs since he got a big contract in Boston.

            Like I said… “he hasn’t lived up to his salary”. I really doubt Theo thought his power would go down in Fenway when he made his offer. So yes, he’s still a great player, but no, he has not met expectations.

            And you can blame injuries to Crawford and Ortiz all you want. But just remember this… he hit 30+ HR in the middle of the Padres’ lineup. The Padres…. think about that. They didn’t even have an Ortiz or Crawford to get injured. So the protection theory about his production is kind of invalid, unless you think Ludwick or Kouzmanoff count as “protection”.

            And he’s too talented of a player to chase pitches to “pick up slack” for anyone. I don’t think any players at the MLB level think they have to swing at bad pitches to make up for their teammates. He’s actually probably pressing a little bit because he knows he’s underperforming compared to what he’s capable of. <– in other words, "not meeting expectations"

          • MaineSox 3 years ago

            Fenway actually isn’t a whole lot better than Petco as far as home runs go, particularly to LF which is where Gonzalez hits a significant number of his home runs. Where Fenway distances its self from Petco is in non-home run extra base hits – particularly doubles – and last year he was only four extra base hits away from his career high.

            Last year was his best offensive season of his career according to wOBA, and second best according to wRC+ and OPS+, it was also his best defensive season according to UZR and second best according to DRS, and it was his best overall season according to wins above replacement. And even using a conservative $4.5M per WAR he was “worth” $29.7M last year. But yeah, he totally wasn’t worth the $5.5M he got paid last year, or even the $21M he’s getting this year, or the $21.5M he’s getting starting next year.

          • Cody 3 years ago

            From an article posted on this morning:

            “2012 has not been a great season for Gonzalez. He is hitting
            .301/.345/.473 which is still good for 15% better than league average
            (by weighted Runs Created Plus, wRC+), but it is a far cry from his
            typical production and ranks just twelfth among qualified first baseman.”

            “…far cry from his typical production…” = “not meeting expectations”.

            Plus, 12th among 1B whereas 3rd in salary = “hasn’t lived up to his salary”

            The great thing about baseball, is that you can find stats to support almost any argument (except perhaps that Joe Blanton was a smart acquisition). But at the end of the day, perception is reality. And it seems that what Boston expected from A-Gone, and what he’s has delivered, are not equal. And, the turn this conversation took was about “expectations”.

            However, to be fair, I will rescind what I set about not living up to his salary. Mostly because the value of anything is exactly equal to what somebody will pay for it. And obviously there are teams interested in paying him $21M, despite not meeting expectations. And to be honest, I’m a Dodger fan, and I would love to have him at 1B (because it’s other people’s money).

          • MaineSox 3 years ago

            Perception is actually very rarely reality. And if you’re basing your entire argument on less than a year’s worth of data, which is silly; you have his entire career to look at, or even just his time with the Red Sox (since you’re talking strictly about his value to the Sox) so the only reason to look at just this year is because it fits your narrative better. Yes he’s having a down year this year, no he didn’t have a down year last year (it was the best of his career), and yes he’s been hitting more-or-less like his old self since the allstar break, so you’re really looking at half a season and declaring him a disappointment.

          • Cody 3 years ago

            Whoa now, nobody is calling him a disappointment. Just not meeting expectations.

            And the reason for the time frame isn’t because it supports my narrative, it is because the time frame has to match his $21M contract, since this whole discussion started when I said “not living up to his salary”. To use any earlier stats wouldn’t be sensible given he had a different salary then. Honestly, I doubt anybody would dispute he lived up to his earlier contracts.

            Plus, in my defense, in a prior post I even highlighted his San Diego stats to explain where the “expectations” came from.

            And lastly, when I say “perception is reality”, it’s just an old saying that means what is perceived by people has more weight than what is actual reality. It’s not saying the two are the same. On the contrary, it is saying that when different, which you say is often, then the perception becomes the reality of the group. So when you say “Perception is actually very rarely reality”, you are not disagreeing with me as you’d like.

            If you’re feeling defensive, we can just stop here and accept where we agree: Adrian Gonzalez is a great player, that we would both like to have on our team.

          • MaineSox 3 years ago

            I guess it doesn’t really matter why you are using a half season sample size, the fact of the matter is it’s a meaningless sample, and your whole argument is based on it. And the original argument was that he would be “going cheap, in relative terms” because he hasn’t performed up to his salary, no where does that imply that it’s only referring to just his new salary (instead of all of the salary that they have had to pay him), and even if it does, there’s no way someone gets any sort of discount based on a half season sample size.

            And the original point still stands, there’s no way that Sands and Gordon interests the Red Sox at all.

        • Cannonball9 3 years ago

          Yes, Crawford passed thru & Beckett is on now (read MLB Rumors :P)
          Seems do-able, Red Sox would get huge salary relief (that’s what evens the deal out). AGon clearing waivers in AL is necessary to make it even possible.

        • MaineSox 3 years ago

          I’m sure the Dodgers would love to trade a player with negative value and a replacement level player (who is an outfielder – the last thing the Sox need) for Gonzalez, but I don’t think the Red Sox would even consider it.

          • Cody 3 years ago

            Sands is also a 1B, which the Red Sox would need w/o AG.

          • MaineSox 3 years ago

            Sure, but I don’t think he could headline a deal for Gonzalez, even though he made himself a decent prospect with a great 2010 season. He has had two trips to the majors since then and has been essentially a replacement level player; he also was putting up most of his good numbers in really hitter friendly leagues (the Pacific coast league is the #1 most hitter friendly league in the minors, the California league is #2, and the Southern league is #5) and there have always been legitimate concerns about him struggling against breaking balls and striking out too much.

            That doesn’t mean he’s destined to be a bad player, but he’s not anywhere near the level of Gonzalez, and would have to be the second or third best player in a Gonzalez trade, not the best player.

        • notsureifsrs 3 years ago

          no interest at all in gordon, but de la rosa is a potential centerpiece

    • CHendershott 3 years ago

      LOL at this comment in retrospect

  5. MetsEventually 3 years ago

    Someone claim Torres please. I’ve never seen a worse baseball player.

Leave a Reply