Anyone Want a Good Reliever for Free?
The Cardinals traded Mike Leake to the Mariners today. That makes some sense, as Seattle needed a guy capable of throwing league-average innings more than St. Louis did. Most moves these days are like that, with sensible people making sensible moves that generally look fine. The days of regularly bewildering transactions in baseball are mostly over.
But they aren’t totally extinct. For instance, yesterday, we got this piece of news.
Juan Nicasio is on waivers — but not the kind you’d think.
The Pirates have placed the reliever on irrevocable outright waivers, according to sources, meaning any team can claim him and assume the roughly $600,000 remaining on his contract without giving the Pirates anything in return.
After the July 31 trade deadline, players must go on revocable waivers to be traded. A player that clears waivers, meaning 29 other teams had a chance to claim him and passed, can be traded anywhere. If a team claims a player on trade waivers, that player’s original team can do one of three things: revoke the waivers and keep the player, work out a trade with the claiming team or simply dump the player to the claiming team.
But outright waivers, which are frequently used to remove a player who does not have minor league options from a team’s 40-man roster and send him to the minor leagues, are not revocable. So if a team claims Nicasio — and that seems likely, given that the righty, who will turn 31 Thursday, is a free agent after this season and has a 2.85 ERA with a strikeout per inning pitched in a major league-leading 65 appearances — the Pirates cannot rescind the waivers and keep Nicasio, nor will they get anything back.
You Aren't a FanGraphs MemberIt looks like you aren't yet a FanGraphs Member (or aren't logged in). We aren't mad, just disappointed. We get it. You want to read this article. But before we let you get back to it, we'd like to point out a few of the good reasons why you should become a Member. 1. Ad Free viewing! We won't bug you with this ad, or any other. 2. Unlimited articles! Non-Members only get to read 10 free articles a month. Members never get cut off. 3. Dark mode and Classic mode! 4. Custom player page dashboards! Choose the player cards you want, in the order you want them. 5. One-click data exports! Export our projections and leaderboards for your personal projects. 6. Remove the photos on the home page! (Honestly, this doesn't sound so great to us, but some people wanted it, and we like to give our Members what they want.) 7. Even more Steamer projections! We have handedness, percentile, and context neutral projections available for Members only. 8. Get FanGraphs Walk-Off, a customized year end review! Find out exactly how you used FanGraphs this year, and how that compares to other Members. Don't be a victim of FOMO. 9. A weekly mailbag column, exclusively for Members. 10. Help support FanGraphs and our entire staff! Our Members provide us with critical resources to improve the site and deliver new features! We hope you'll consider a Membership today, for yourself or as a gift! And we realize this has been an awfully long sales pitch, so we've also removed all the other ads in this article. We didn't want to overdo it. In case you didn't read all that, here's the short version. Membership includes:✓Ad-free browsing✓Unlimited FanGraphs & RotoGraphs articles✓Historical & platoon projections✓Leaderboard & player-page stat heatmaps✓One-click data exports✓Customizable player-page dashboards✓Dark & Classic site modes✓Weekly Members-only mailbag✓FanGraphs Walk-Off, your year in review✓Optional homepage photo removal✓Gift articles to non-members
Nicasio was, from what I understand, put on revocable trade waivers earlier this month, claimed, and then pulled back. Now, though, with the Pirates effectively out of the playoff race, the Pirates decided they’d rather just let a team that can use him have him for free, since he can no longer be traded and he’ll be a free agent at the end of the year. The Pirates will save roughly $600K in salary if someone else claims him, which apparently is worth more to them than 10 decent innings from a veteran reliever in September. Given that those innings don’t really mean a lot now, it can reasonably be argued that the $600K in savings, if spent to acquire new talent — that’s enough to sign a significant international free agent, for instance — could help the team more than keeping Nicasio around for the final month of a lost season.
But while you can kind of see why the Pirates would do this with no real alternatives for turning him into any long-term value now, it’s pretty weird for every other contender to essentially get a chance to grab a quality reliever for nothing. Because Nicasio isn’t just some random waiver-wire arm.
Over the last two years, he’s thrown 116 innings in relief, running an 8% BB%, 28% K%, and 47% GB%. That’s good for a 3.35 ERA/2.87 FIP/3.35 xFIP. Opposing batters have put up just a .288 wOBA against him, and he’s been just as good against LHBs as RHBs. Nicasio isn’t a one-batter specialist. He’s a effective high-leverage reliever who can pitch multiple innings and stay in against whoever the opponent sends up.
In terms of production, he’s not all that different from Addison Reed, who the Red Sox traded for before the July 31st deadline. To acquire Reed for the stretch run, Boston took on $2.6 million in remaining salary and sent three lottery-ticket prospects to New York. Whoever gets Nicasio will get him for $600K and no talent cost whatsoever.
Given the minimal cost for a quality reliever who will be on his new team in time to qualify for postseason rosters, every contender in baseball should be putting in a claim. Since waiver order is determined by win-loss record in ascending order, the favorites to win the claim should probably be one of the Rays, Rangers, Mariners, or Royals, all of whom are a game or two under .500 but hanging around the AL Wild Card race. If Nicasio gets past any of those four teams, then everyone in baseball must know something that outsiders do not.
Though Keith Law says he’s heard there’s nothing wrong with Nicasio that led to this decision.
https://twitter.com/keithlaw/status/902926462298316800
If Nicasio is healthy and doesn’t have a pending PED suspension or something, then the Pirates just gave some contender a nice little gift. It’s not often you get a quality bullpen arm for nothing anymore.
Dave is the Managing Editor of FanGraphs.
Doesn’t waiver priority go to the National League first?
Revocable waivers, yes. From what I was told, that isn’t true of outright waivers.
It would be worth bringing this up in the article; I think most FanGraphs readers are going to have the same misconception.
My understanding is that this is how irrevocable waivers work *before* August 1st, but that the divisional preference holds from August 1st to the end of the season even if it’s irrevocable.
Someone should really email MLB to find out though.
I cannot imagine him clearing the NL since they get a chance before he would get to the AL.
Unless I am remembering incorrectly, that is.
Doesn’t smell right, eh? In fantasy baseball, angry owners do stunts like this, but professionals do things for a reason.
Maybe when the first claim went through, an equitable trade was not possible because the claiming team was just trying to block. Then the Pirates deliver an ultimatum ‘we’ll outright him and then your rival gets him.’
And now they make good on the threat.
Seems childish though.
Or they just want to save a little bit of money that is otherwise wasted by him being on the roster.
Or maybe team’s are coveting a “closer” more, also PNC park is a pitcher friendly stadium, and that he is in the NL detract from his value slightly since he doesn’t face a DH everytime in opposing lineups unlike AL relievers even though it’s more likely to happen for a AL starter.
as a reliever, he would rarely be facing a pitcher. More likely he would be facing a PH who would probably make the DH->P a much much smaller gap.
From a business perspective, this kind of makes sense. Not sure why more wouldn’t do this. If you take your fan and player anger hat off, what is the downside really?
Angry fans and players? And hurting your chances to win? Maybe that’s not worth $600K but it is worth something.
meh. does 1 or 2 more wins matter at this point for them? I mean, really? If anything, they might draft higher. And save 600K.
Okay, but just because it’s rational from a bottom-line go-to-the-playoffs sense doesn’t mean it’s rational from the “please your stakeholders” sense.
He’s a middle reliever. None but the most knowledgable/diehard fans will really miss him, and those fans are the most likely to keep the following the team anyway.
I suppose if there were any Pittsburgh fans on this site (or anywhere) we could gauge the reaction, but I guess not.
I went to check the Pirates SBNation site comments because I figured they might have something to say about it.
https://www.bucsdugout.com/2017/8/29/16223792/pirates-reportedly-put-juan-nicasio-on-outright-waivers
This is one of the most popular comments: “Things are beyond fucking rotten in Denmark”
So yeah, sounds like it’s going well.
BTW, there are quit a few Pirates fans on this site.
Yeah, evaluating this as an outsider is very different than as a Pirate fan. To us, this is another cheap move by a cheap owner running a team into the ground. In 2 years since winning 98 games teh ownership/management saw fit to start 2016 with a rotation of Niese, Vogelsong, Locke, Nicasio behind Cole, that is practically criminal neglect. They then gave prospects away to save money on Liriano last soummer and now are dumping their 2nd best RP for a pittance of savings.
Attendance is down, TV ratings are down, team morale is shot, and the manager has checked out (not to mention giving ABs to Jaso/Stewart/Freese instead of letting prospects play). Payroll will be cut further this offseason, Nutting is proving the yinzers right yet again.
How much different does their season look with 140 games from Kang and 80 more games from Marte? You can have a good, budget-friendly plan in place to get that first wild card spot and see it blown to shit by the choices made by key players.
In addition to saving $600K, another benefit is that the Pirates can now give Nicasio’s innings and roster spot to a prospect. That may be even more important than the money.
Roster expansion is in two days, they could bring up a prospect without letting him go.
What players are going to be angry? Aside from whichever reliever gets bumped from the team that claims him. I doubt his teammates (for the next month) are going to heartbroken. He get’s a chance to go to the playoffs now, which I’d assume he is happy about and as a reliever that is unlikely to ever break the bank, the playoff bonuses he might get are nice, too.
This is ignoring factual evidence from players reported in the local media the last several years. They see these moves as lack of management support. Cutch has made comments over the years directly in this area. You dont cut your 2nd best RP for no return and expect his teammates to be happy about it. Its beyond a white flag move since there is no return to the team but money, and everyone knows that money/ownership is the #1 issue in Pittsburgh. The players aren’t blind to moves like this and Liriano where baseball is the #2 priority to money.
Look at the Cards comments today about Leake, players dont like this stuff very much. They made direct comments about STL not acquiring anyone and now selling.
While I agree with you, people aren’t going to take of their fan hat. This is a fanbase that’s already pretty disillusioned with ownership and this does not help.
Am I wrong that they could have put him on revocable waivers a 2nd time, thus making them irrevocable, but different than outright waivers.
This means that unlike outright waivers, irrevocable waivers offers two options: trade or release (much like revocable waivers except you have a third option of taking him back).
Surely whatever team claims him the Pirates could have worked out a trade with, and if they couldn’t then they’d still be at the same outcome they are at now.
The trading team couldn’t be steamrolled but they couldn’t absolutely lowball them perhaps because then the Pirates would just release him and make him available to a competitor.
I don’t think there’s a difference between outright waivers and irrevocable waivers. If irrevocable waivers are IRrevocable, what incentive does the claiming team have to offer anything in trade? It would simply be a gift to the Pirates.
I mentioned that specifically in the final part. You can pay a nominal price for a good reliever and keep him from going to anothet playoff competitor.
Paying for exclusivity.
No. You seem to be suggesting that, after a team put in a claim, the Pirates could then choose to release him rather than let the claiming team take him. That’s not an option.
The entire purpose of waivers is to give other teams a chance to claim the guy for their roster, BEFORE the player can be released. That’s always true. For instance, when a guy wants to sign with a foreign league, rather than simply release him, the team still needs to pass him through waivers. But there’s an informal gentleman’s agreement that no one will claim guys in that scenario.
Under a second time through revocable waivers (which makes them irrevocable – so let’s just call them that) the team cannot revoke the waiver.
Under revocable waivers there are three options:
Pull him back
Trade him
Let the team have him
The second time through, only the last two options remain.
This is straight from FG’s glossary
http://www.fangraphs.com/library/principles/contract-details/waivers/
“If a player has been placed on revocable waivers, claimed, and then withdrawn from waivers, he cannot be pulled from waivers again that season. In other words, if the team placed that player on waivers again that same season and he was claimed, they’d have to work out a trade or let the player go – they can’t pull him back a second time.”
Thus, the Pirates could have placed him on revocable waivers a second time, lost their ability to revoke him, and trade or release him.
They always have the option to release him or trade him.
If they didn’t have the ability to let him go to any other team, then it would be a de facto revocation because they could just refuse to work out a trade with the team, and once time expires, he’s free. MLB can’t force a trade.
Scenario for Jose Smith
Team A puts Smith on RW for a 2nd time
Team B claims him
Team A asks for the moon
Team B says no
Time expires
Team B doesn’t just get him, otherwise why would “work out a trade” even be an option the second time around as FanGraphs mentions.
It’s
Team A puts Smith on RW
Team B claims him
Team A asks for the moon
Team B says no
Time expires
Smith is a FA
This is the way I’m reading the rules otherwise it would be
Team A puts Smith on RW
Team B claims him
Team A asks for the moon
Team B says no
Team A gets him back
He either has to be traded or released, otherwise it’s the same as being a revocable waiver.
Nope.
In normal revocable waivers, the scenario is this:
Team A puts Smith on RW
Team B claims him
Team A asks for the moon
Team B says no
Time expires
Team B is forced to take on Smith (and his contract) for nothing
This is what happened with the White Sox and Alex Rios. There are a few other examples too, but I’m too lazy to look them up. This is why expensive players usually pass through waivers unclaimed. By claiming a guy, the claiming team has made a commitment to taking him for nothing.
With irrevocable waivers, the only difference is that Team A doesn’t have the option of pulling Smith back from the waiver wire. In both types of waivers, if time expires without a trade being worked out, the claiming team is forced to accept the player and his contract. In neither scenario is “release him” an option unless he passes through unclaimed.
At the end of July, they decided not to trade him for prospects; a sign they considered themselves in the playoff race. But then, at the beginning of August, they placed him on waivers; a sign they had given up. But then they pulled him off waivers; a sign that they still thought they were still in the race. And now, they’ve placed him on revocable waivers; a definite signal they’re giving up.
What’s up that? At the very least, if they were on the fence, it would’ve been smart to wait until later in August (after the standings had a little more time to shake out) to place him on revocable waivers.
I assume they thought he’d sneak through waivers under the assumption that there was no way they’d give him up, but that backfired, and now this is their only option.
that’s how August works. Try to sneak him through, or trade him to the one team who claims him
It would be foolish to think he wouldn’t get claimed on revocable waivers. And why would they try to sneak him through waivers if they didn’t want to trade him? And if they *did* want to trade him, why didn’t they do it a week earlier before the deadline?
I can’t think of a logical explanation that would justify that sequence of events.
It is fairly common for nearly all players to be placed on waivers in August, almost as a rule, with no intention on doing anything with them. Only a rare class of players Trout, Harper, Kershaw, Bryant, Altuve, and the like are not placed on waivers.
1. If a player doesn’t clear waivers, you cannot trade them in August. Hard to trade for someone if you don’t have pieces to offer in return.
2. There may be no intention on trading at that time, Ibut if a contender suffers a season altering injury in August, they may get desperate, and take a look at who is available and over pay.
Word was that Harper was placed on waivers this year.
They should not have put Nicasio on waivers early in August, because there was a very good chance that they WOULD do something with him. Putting him on waivers early prevented them from doing something with him.
Well it isnt their “only option”, keeping your 8th inning guy has some value to the current team, more than 600k shoudl to ownership.
I need to brush up on my waiver wire rules: What is stopping a non-contender with a high waiver priority from claiming him and then place him on revocable waivers to try to flip him? Worst case scenario, if you wan tot dump the salary again, put him back on revocable waivers and you are only out the waiver claim fee (which I think is $50k)
Once you claim a player, the remaining salary on his contract is your responsibility even if you release him to free agency. The “worst case” is that the other teams see through your hollow attempt to flip MLB players like a day-trader, and no one claims him the second time so you’re out the full salary PLUS the $50,000 claim fee.
I think the main issue is time. Doesn’t it take a few days to get through waivers? By the time you claimed him, and put him through waivers again, it would be September. I suppose you could still get a small piece for him at that point, but he wouldn’t be playoff eligible for the new team so his value would be greatly diminished.
What do you think the worst team is who will put in a waiver claim?
-Obviously the Rays/Mariners/Royals are going to be in on this.
-Assuming that NL teams go first (debatable here) he could get all the way to the Marlins and Cardinals. Probably not all the way to the Brewers.
-I could see Preller putting in a claim as a big FU to the rest of the league…hard to see the Giants, Braves, Mets, Reds, or Phils going for it.
Since the Cardinals just opened a 40-man roster spot by trading Leake, I would expect Nicasio to get claimed by them or the Marlins. No way he makes it to the AL teams mentioned above.
If I owned the White Sox or Phillies, I would claim the guy then put him on revocable waivers, to see if I could get anything from the lowest team to claim him.
There’s not enough time for that. By the time Nicasio cleared waivers a second time it would be after the Sept 1 cutoff to be playoff-eligible.
I guess I’m a little surprised he hasn’t been claimed yet. How long does this process usually take?
Aaaand the Phillies claimed him. Didn’t even get to the Padres!
Are the Phillies holding or trading Nicasio????