Jharel Cotton outrighted

[Brandon]

On 4/13/2022 at 12:23 PM, Danchat said:

I recall last year we had a thread that tracked roster moves the Twins made throughout the 2021 season, and I think that did a good job condensing things down to having all the official moves here rather than having a new topic for every move (bigger moves will still warrant their own topic). I'd like to start off with the flurry of moves that happened today:

Kirilloff to 10-day IL (right wrist inflammation)
Cotton DFA'd

Larnach recalled from St. Paul
Rodríguez selected from St. Paul

So it seems the Cotton experiment is over already - though he may clear waivers. Rodriguez seems like temporary arm who will likely be DFA'd within the next week.

 

Feel free to post more updates here for future roster moves.

 

 

in mlbtraderumors they said his velocity is down and he is walked 4 in 2 innings so its not like he is not looking good as a pitcher at this point.  I might have given him another outing to show he can straighten out but i get the logic in bringing in pitchers who can throw strikes. and maybe they can keep him in AAA to get straightened out and brought back up.  

[Russ]

What happened here?  Seemed to have been a wasted roster spot.

[Rosterman]

Or a wasted major league signing. 

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2021/11/twins-claim-jharel-cotton-outright-rob-refsnyder.html

 

[jorgenswest]

I guess is I am not understanding what is meant by waste.

Seems like all teams need to rotate players through the back end of the 40 to manage injuries or pitching needs. It seems quite ordinary to claim a player and then later waive the same player hoping they clear.

I am not certain how claiming Cotton in the winter and then later designating him is that different in 40 man roster usage than other teams. Sometimes you claim a guy like Adrianza and he sticks for a few years. I would guess that Adrianza is not the norm.

[stringer bell]

I'm curious about DFAs. Cotton was designated prior to Rodriguez and we already know that he (Gonzalez) was unclaimed and returned to St. Paul. Cotton was designated to make a place for Rodriguez (and a day later, Garlick) and we haven't heard the outcome of his DFA. What is the difference?

[Richmond Dude]

8 minutes ago, stringer bell said:

I'm curious about DFAs. Cotton was designated prior to Rodriguez and we already know that he (Gonzalez) was unclaimed and returned to St. Paul. Cotton was designated to make a place for Rodriguez (and a day later, Garlick) and we haven't heard the outcome of his DFA. What is the difference?

I think, *think*, that this would mean that one or more waiver claims were made on Cotton and they are attempting to work out a trade.  If I recall, the designating team has a week to do that from the time of the DFA.

[stringer bell]

3 minutes ago, Richmond Dude said:

I think, *think*, that this would mean that one or more waiver claims were made on Cotton and they are attempting to work out a trade.  If I recall, the designating team has a week to do that from the time of the DFA.

So, if more than one team claims a player, the outcome can be delayed by a bit of a bidding war? If one team claims a player, the team that designated the player can hold on for the full week and if no one claims that player, then they can move him back to AAA (e.g. Rodriguez)?

[Otto von Ballpark]

44 minutes ago, stringer bell said:

I'm curious about DFAs. Cotton was designated prior to Rodriguez and we already know that he (Gonzalez) was unclaimed and returned to St. Paul. Cotton was designated to make a place for Rodriguez (and a day later, Garlick) and we haven't heard the outcome of his DFA. What is the difference?

When DFA, a team has up to a week to decide what to do with the player. They probably put Rodriguez on waivers immediately, but may have waited with Cotton. (The waiver period is now 3 days, so they’d have to place him on waivers no later than 4 days after the DFA.)

[Otto von Ballpark]

29 minutes ago, Richmond Dude said:

I think, *think*, that this would mean that one or more waiver claims were made on Cotton and they are attempting to work out a trade.  If I recall, the designating team has a week to do that from the time of the DFA.

Waivers are not revocable — there is no working out trades from waiver claims. The player is simply awarded to the claiming team with the highest priority at the end of the waiver period. (You may be confusing them with the old August “trade waivers” but these are outright assignment waivers.)

[Richmond Dude]

1 hour ago, Otto von Ballpark said:

Waivers are not revocable — there is no working out trades from waiver claims. The player is simply awarded to the claiming team with the highest priority at the end of the waiver period. (You may be confusing them with the old August “trade waivers” but these are outright assignment waivers.)

You're right.  I looked up the DFA rules to see what I misunderstood.  Once DFA'd, the team has seven days to either trade him or place him on waivers.  I conflated the two when they are actually separate.

[Dman]

Kind of shocked Cotton made it through waivers.  I really thought Baltimore or maybe even Texas would pick him up again.  I guess he isn't as well thought of as I thought he might be.  Honestly I think this is good news for the Twins.  Get Cotton back to throwing strikes and trusting his stuff and they can think about re-adding him again if needed.

[Rosterman]

1 hour ago, Dman said:

Kind of shocked Cotton made it through waivers.  I really thought Baltimore or maybe even Texas would pick him up again.  I guess he isn't as well thought of as I thought he might be.  Honestly I think this is good news for the Twins.  Get Cotton back to throwing strikes and trusting his stuff and they can think about re-adding him again if needed.

Well, there would have to be a 40-man spot made, and would also have to take on his $700,000 salary. 

[lecroy24fan]

1 hour ago, Rosterman said:

Well, there would have to be a 40-man spot made, and would also have to take on his $700,000 salary. 

And with 10 days until every team has to drop 2 players from the MLB roster.

[USAFChief]

1 hour ago, Rosterman said:

Well, there would have to be a 40-man spot made, and would also have to take on his $700,000 salary. 

A team cutting someone from their 40 man would simply give that $700k to Cotton instead. 

Money isn't a factor here. 

Not one other MLB team thought Cotton was better than their worst 40 man rostered pitcher.

[stringer bell]

1 hour ago, USAFChief said:

A team cutting someone from their 40 man would simply give that $700k to Cotton instead. 

Money isn't a factor here. 

Not one other MLB team thought Cotton was better than their worst 40 man rostered pitcher.

And risking the person they take off the 40-man roster to claim Cotton. 

[USAFChief]

1 hour ago, stringer bell said:

And risking the person they take off the 40-man roster to claim Cotton. 

Right. Nobody in MLB thought Cotton was better than the worst reliever on their 40 man.

[Rigby]

4 hours ago, USAFChief said:

Right. Nobody in MLB thought Cotton was better than the worst reliever on their 40 man.

Except, well....uh.....you know.............

[Otto von Ballpark]

9 hours ago, USAFChief said:

A team cutting someone from their 40 man would simply give that $700k to Cotton instead. 

Money isn't a factor here. 

I tend to agree that money isn't much of a factor here, although 40-man guys in the minors don't necessarily make the full MLB minimum, and guys with less experience (for example, Blayne Enlow) tend to make less than vets in such situations. (The exact amount can be based on how many years you've been on the 40-man, and what your previous year's salary was.)

So depending on the players involved, there could have been a modest salary cost for a team to cut someone in favor of Jharel Cotton.