Adam Brett Walker Waived, Claimed By Milwaukee

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

indentured servants for 7 years....yikes

There could definitely be improvements to that system!

 

Although on the flip side, this contributes to scarcity of available players which can boost individual player values.  The biggest example is MLB free agency -- recall how Charlie Finley argued in the 1970s that they should make every player a free agent, every year.  There would still be some bidding wars for top talent, but overall that would have depressed player values.

 

I think the same sort of applies to marginal guys like Walker.  There are plenty of other assets like him -- but most of them are not freely available at any given moment.  The Brewers probably don't claim him if a bunch of similar assets are free agents every year, or aren't subject to the draft or whatever.  Maybe Walker doesn't even get added to the Twins 40-man last year either if that is the case.  Maybe electing free agency, if that was possible for Walker, would depress his value -- would teams be less interested in signing him, knowing their control would expire after 1 year?

[Mike Sixel]

 

There could definitely be improvements to that system!

 

Although on the flip side, this contributes to scarcity of available players which can boost individual player values.  The biggest example is MLB free agency -- recall how Charlie Finley argued in the 1970s that they should make every player a free agent, every year.  There would still be some bidding wars for top talent, but overall that would have depressed player values.

 

I think the same sort of applies to marginal guys like Walker.  There are plenty of other assets like him -- but most of them are not freely available at any given moment.  The Brewers probably don't claim him if a bunch of similar assets are free agents every year, or aren't subject to the draft or whatever.  Maybe Walker doesn't even get added to the Twins 40-man last year either if that is the case.  Maybe electing free agency, if that was possible for Walker, would depress his value -- would teams be less interested in signing him, knowing their control would expire after 1 year?

 

Right. the law of unintended consequences is all over any change to the system, and frankly, I have not thought about it much....

[Squirrel]

Moderator Crown of Wisdom

 

Uh yeah, if that isn't completely oxymoronic I'm not sure what is.

[nicksaviking]

 

 None of the moderators wishes to wear their Moderator Crown of Wisdom all the time when just trying to talk baseball.

 

Wait, you can take yours off?

 

You guys firmly stapled mine to my butt to remind me where all my bright ideas come from. Now I can't even sit down any more to make my rants.

[Craig Arko]

Uh yeah, if that isn't completely oxymoronic I'm not sure what is.

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/wondrous-items/wondrous-items/h-l/headband-of-mental-prowess

[Squirrel]

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/wondrous-items/wondrous-items/h-l/headband-of-mental-prowess

Lol ... is that my Christmas present?

[Craig Arko]

Lol ... is that my Christmas present?

I suppose you want +6, too?

[ThejacKmp]

 

And like you say, it doesn't really matter whether Walker is stuck at AAA with the Twins or with the Brewers.

 

I disagree and think this is perhaps the crux of it. It sometimes does matter which organization Walker might get stuck in - there might be an easier path back to the 40 man and MLB in one over the other or a hitting coach Walker thinks might make a difference or a AAA location closer to family.

 

If we want to do this fairly (I know, I know, not MLB's motivation but whatever) we should let Walker decide. If the Twins drop him and the Brewers claim him to their 40 and then drop him from it with no one else claiming him, he gets to choose which organization to join. And if the Reds picked him up and dropped him too and then no one else claimed him, he'd be able to choose from all three organizations.

 

I'm all in favor of anything that gives MILB players some small semblance of a choice.

[Mike Sixel]

 

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/wondrous-items/wondrous-items/h-l/headband-of-mental-prowess

 

Seriously, you sent her to pathfinder? Not sure we can be friends anymore....

[Vanimal46]

 

I disagree and think this is perhaps the crux of it. It sometimes does matter which organization Walker might get stuck in - there might be an easier path back to the 40 man and MLB in one over the other or a hitting coach Walker thinks might make a difference or a AAA location closer to family.

 

If we want to do this fairly (I know, I know, not MLB's motivation but whatever) we should let Walker decide. If the Twins drop him and the Brewers claim him to their 40 and then drop him from it with no one else claiming him, he gets to choose which organization to join. And if the Reds picked him up and dropped him too and then no one else claimed him, he'd be able to choose from all three organizations.

 

I'm all in favor of anything that gives MILB players some small semblance of a choice.

Concur. Giving the prospect the choice is the best route to go. Or have some sort of rule that if you pick up a 40 man player in the off-season such as ABW, he has to remain on the 40 man throughout the off-season. It just doesn't seem to be fair that a team could pick up a player off waivers, then remove him from the 40 man less than a week later. 

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

I disagree and think this is perhaps the crux of it. It sometimes does matter which organization Walker might get stuck in - there might be an easier path back to the 40 man and MLB in one over the other or a hitting coach Walker thinks might make a difference or a AAA location closer to family.

 

If we want to do this fairly (I know, I know, not MLB's motivation but whatever) we should let Walker decide. If the Twins drop him and the Brewers claim him to their 40 and then drop him from it with no one else claiming him, he gets to choose which organization to join. And if the Reds picked him up and dropped him too and then no one else claimed him, he'd be able to choose from all three organizations.

 

I'm all in favor of anything that gives MILB players some small semblance of a choice.

 

Of course.  I didn't mean to imply that organizations don't differ in their opportunities for a player, that much is obvious.  Just saying that if the Twins and Brewers both want to outright him off their 40-man roster, the Twins don't have any greater claim to do so.

 

Your very limited free agency idea is an interesting one, although again a lot of the benefit would go to teams.  The Twins would have more incentive to drop guys like Walker from the roster if you give them another way to possibly retain them.  And the player's "choice" in the matter is so limited as to be virtually nonexistent (pretty much whatever 2-3 teams that had an open 40 man roster spot to claim you during the waiver period, but didn't want you on said roster).

 

Pro sports leagues are inherently pretty unfair to players in terms of team assignments and other contract restrictions, and fiddling around the margins isn't going to do much.  An across the board increase in pay and benefits for minor leaguers is past due, and many times more important than tweaking waiver rules.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Concur. Giving the prospect the choice is the best route to go. Or have some sort of rule that if you pick up a 40 man player in the off-season such as ABW, he has to remain on the 40 man throughout the off-season. It just doesn't seem to be fair that a team could pick up a player off waivers, then remove him from the 40 man less than a week later. 

Again, though, increasing the burden on the claiming team only further encourages teams to drop guys from the 40-man roster.

 

I think the issue you describe is partly mitigated by the fact that team assignments don't really matter in the offseason -- it will make no material difference to Walker to be property of 3 different organizations this month.

 

Maybe akin to a pay raise, giving the players a small cut of the waiver fee would be appropriate?  Not enough to make them want to get waived, but enough that they are adequately compensated if they have to at least consider moving or changing other plans.

[Vanimal46]

 

Again, though, increasing the burden on the claiming team only further encourages teams to drop guys from the 40-man roster.

 

I think the issue you describe is partly mitigated by the fact that team assignments don't really matter in the offseason -- it will make no material difference to Walker to be property of 3 different organizations this month.

 

Maybe akin to a pay raise, giving the players a small cut of the waiver fee would be appropriate?  Not enough to make them want to get waived, but enough that they are adequately compensated if they have to at least consider moving or changing other plans.

I'm all for giving minor league players the raise they so richly deserve. I think that's a completely separate issue than what ABW and other prospects are going through right now on waivers. 

I would think the other rule I proposed where the player has to stick on the team's 40 man all off-season stops some of the rapid fire waiver claims and DFAs. 

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

I'm all for giving minor league players the raise they so richly deserve. I think that's a completely separate issue than what ABW and other prospects are going through right now on waivers. 

I would think the other rule I proposed where the player has to stick on the team's 40 man all off-season stops some of the rapid fire waiver claims and DFAs. 

I'm not sure if pay is a completely separate issue.  We all sort of accept that athletes can get jerked around a bit if they are compensated for it.  Problem is, minor leaguers don't seem to get compensated much for it (akin to college athletes too).

 

And while your rule would stop some waiver claims, I'm not sure that's good for guys like Walker.  So he clears waivers a couple weeks ago and gets outrighted by the Twins -- how is that better for Walker?   While salary isn't an issue in the offseason, benefits are:

 

http://athletewealth.com/mlb40man/

 

Also, presumably if Walker can survive on a 40-man roster through the tender deadline, he can lock in a higher minor league salary for 2017?  (Not sure exactly how that works, though.)

 

And maybe your rule would be enough to encourage another team to try waiving and outrighting their own version of Walker that they were previously considering protecting.

[diehardtwinsfan]

I'm wondering if the easy solution is to require that pickup to remain on the 40 until May. I don't have a problem with a team grabbing a guy being DFAd if they want to keep him on the 40 and use him. It's just a tad unfair when they pick him up and DFA a week later. 

[Mr. Brooks]

I'm wondering if the easy solution is to require that pickup to remain on the 40 until May. I don't have a problem with a team grabbing a guy being DFAd if they want to keep him on the 40 and use him. It's just a tad unfair when they pick him up and DFA a week later.

This would restrict player movement though. Nobody is claiming a guy like Walker if they have to carry him until Spring, nobody. That is far too restrictive. Teams need flexibility during the offseason with those last few 40 man spots.

This would allow teams to remove all these fringe guys at this time of year, with zero worry of losing them.

I just don't really see an issue with the current process.

[ThejacKmp]

Of course.  I didn't mean to imply that organizations don't differ in their opportunities for a player, that much is obvious.  Just saying that if the Twins and Brewers both want to outright him off their 40-man roster, the Twins don't have any greater claim to do so.

 

Your very limited free agency idea is an interesting one, although again a lot of the benefit would go to teams.  The Twins would have more incentive to drop guys like Walker from the roster if you give them another way to possibly retain them.  And the player's "choice" in the matter is so limited as to be virtually nonexistent (pretty much whatever 2-3 teams that had an open 40 man roster spot to claim you during the waiver period, but didn't want you on said roster).

 

Pro sports leagues are inherently pretty unfair to players in terms of team assignments and other contract restrictions, and fiddling around the margins isn't going to do much.  An across the board increase in pay and benefits for minor leaguers is past due, and many times more important than tweaking waiver rules.

If we moved to this system, perhaps more teams would leave a 40 man spot open. A guy like walker might go through ten franchises and then have a real choice.

[Otto von Ballpark]

If we moved to this system, perhaps more teams would leave a 40 man spot open. A guy like walker might go through ten franchises and then have a real choice.

That would mean even more rapid-fire claims and DFAs, which is apparently what most other posters in this thread are trying to avoid.

[old nurse]

 

I disagree and think this is perhaps the crux of it. It sometimes does matter which organization Walker might get stuck in - there might be an easier path back to the 40 man and MLB in one over the other or a hitting coach Walker thinks might make a difference or a AAA location closer to family.

 

If we want to do this fairly (I know, I know, not MLB's motivation but whatever) we should let Walker decide. If the Twins drop him and the Brewers claim him to their 40 and then drop him from it with no one else claiming him, he gets to choose which organization to join. And if the Reds picked him up and dropped him too and then no one else claimed him, he'd be able to choose from all three organizations.

 

I'm all in favor of anything that gives MILB players some small semblance of a choice.

That  choice was paid for by a signing bonus. For Walker it was 490000 for his choice.  For the far fringe player like Walker, the bouncing around happens to a couple of players every year. The world is not fair.

 

[ashbury]

Uh yeah, if that isn't completely oxymoronic I'm not sure what is.

[ThejacKmp]

 

That  choice was paid for by a signing bonus. For Walker it was 490000 for his choice.  For the far fringe player like Walker, the bouncing around happens to a couple of players every year. The world is not fair.

 

It wasn't really his choice. The Twins drafted him and his choices were to play for the Twins or to not play baseball in the minor leagues that year.

 

Guys drafted out of high school have more of a choice as they can always go to college. A guy like Walker, a college junior when he was drafted, has much less choice. If he goes back for his senior year, he loses all leverage; unless he has a fantastic senior year he's going to have to take whatever offer he's given (or hope he doesn't stagnate taking a year off and going back into the draft).

 

This is veering way off topic but this draft process is one of the reasons my normally moderate political sensibility is all for the nationalization of baseball. Let's stop pretending this is a capitalistic business - baseball is a cartel that cuts off competition and achieves a monopoly by avoiding anti-trust laws. It treats it's employees as inhumanly as possible (even the highly-paid stars only got to this point by defeating collusion and other robber baron tactics - and the owners won't even put Marvin Miller in the Hall of Fame).

 

We should nationalize baseball (paying the owners market value) and then cities/states should take over the teams they hold. I'd be much more willing to build the Twins a stadium if taxpayers would gain the profits it enables. Also, imagine how awesome it would be if GM was a locally elected position - Terry Ryan would've had to be public with their plan.

 

Again, sorry to veer this off topic but the minor league system just makes me so upset.

[Mike Sixel]

 

This would restrict player movement though. Nobody is claiming a guy like Walker if they have to carry him until Spring, nobody. That is far too restrictive. Teams need flexibility during the offseason with those last few 40 man spots.
This would allow teams to remove all these fringe guys at this time of year, with zero worry of losing them.
I just don't really see an issue with the current process.

 

Well, you aren't required by your employers (who, btw, can change w/o you having a choice if you want to stay in the industry) to move across the country to keep your job, and then to lose that job a couple days later......so, I can see where maybe you don't have an issue with the rules. That has to have an impact on these guys.

[Mr. Brooks]

Well, you aren't required by your employers (who, btw, can change w/o you having a choice if you want to stay in the industry) to move across the country to keep your job, and then to lose that job a couple days later......so, I can see where maybe you don't have an issue with the rules. That has to have an impact on these guys.

1)That is the job he signed up for. When you enter a career field you weigh all the pros and cons and decide if you want to pursue it. Moving around the country is a huge part of milb life. Even if you don't change teams you move every time you are promoted or demoted.

 

2) Why would he have moved during the offseason, knowing full well that Milwaukee was fairly likely to try to run him through waivers again? That would make no sense.

Even if he's waived by 12 different teams this offseason it isn't going to affect his life any more than 1 team waiving him.

[old nurse]

 

It wasn't really his choice. The Twins drafted him and his choices were to play for the Twins or to not play baseball in the minor leagues that year.

 

Guys drafted out of high school have more of a choice as they can always go to college. A guy like Walker, a college junior when he was drafted, has much less choice. If he goes back for his senior year, he loses all leverage; unless he has a fantastic senior year he's going to have to take whatever offer he's given (or hope he doesn't stagnate taking a year off and going back into the draft).

 

This is veering way off topic but this draft process is one of the reasons my normally moderate political sensibility is all for the nationalization of baseball. Let's stop pretending this is a capitalistic business - baseball is a cartel that cuts off competition and achieves a monopoly by avoiding anti-trust laws. It treats it's employees as inhumanly as possible (even the highly-paid stars only got to this point by defeating collusion and other robber baron tactics - and the owners won't even put Marvin Miller in the Hall of Fame).

 

We should nationalize baseball (paying the owners market value) and then cities/states should take over the teams they hold. I'd be much more willing to build the Twins a stadium if taxpayers would gain the profits it enables. Also, imagine how awesome it would be if GM was a locally elected position - Terry Ryan would've had to be public with their plan.

 

Again, sorry to veer this off topic but the minor league system just makes me so upset.

Walker could have chose not to sign. He could have completed and used his education.  Baseball is capitalistic as can be.  The cartel that is baseball fits right in with the monopolies of yore when the country was capitalistic  The workers have made gains, but not so much for the vast majority who play for pay. AB Walker, Plouffe, Chris Carter are all proof the system works for the owners.

[ThejacKmp]

 

Walker could have chose not to sign. He could have completed and used his education.  Baseball is capitalistic as can be.  The cartel that is baseball fits right in with the monopolies of yore when the country was capitalistic  The workers have made gains, but not so much for the vast majority who play for pay. AB Walker, Plouffe, Chris Carter are all proof the system works for the owners.

 

That's like saying that an aspiring lawyer could have chosen to not take the bar and become a food delivery guy - it's true, but it's not what he or she spent most of their life preparing for so its not much of an option. ABWIII spent his whole life pursuing a baseball career and was forced to become an indentured servant to a Twins team that can basically do whatever it wants with him.

 

I disagree that baseball is as capitalistic as it could be - it has an antitrust exemption for a reason.

I think the issue is your definition of capitalism. Capitalism is based on competition and the ability for new businesses to form to fill in for market inefficiencies. That isn't baseball. Baseball is a cartel and cartels are not real capitalism. MLB has consistently used the legal system to fend off any competitors and even appointed a judge (Kenesaw Mountain Landis) as its first commissioner to help this effort.

 

If baseball were as capitalistic as it could be while still being a sport, it would look like soccer in Europe. Anyone can form a soccer team and build it up to compete at the highest levels - that's where most of the biggest clubs began. The odds are stacked against you but there's free flow into the system.

[Mr. Brooks]

"Forced to become an indentured servant."

 

Wow. Did they waterboard him, or abduct him at gunpoint?

 

Thousands of people use their lifelong baseball training to get a scholarship, then get a degree and a good career. Walker chose to keep pursuing baseball. Nobody forced him to do anything.

[Mike Sixel]

I actually didn't say "forced"......

 

And, if people think being at the whim of employers, and being forced to move to keep your job is the same in the rest of the world, it isn't......it just isn't the same at all.

 

Is that really hard to understand? Imagine if you had kids, and to keep your job, you could be forced to move every year for 7 years before you had a choice....

[Mr. Brooks]

I actually didn't say "forced"......

 

And, if people think being at the whim of employers, and being forced to move to keep your job is the same in the rest of the world, it isn't......it just isn't the same at all.

 

Is that really hard to understand? Imagine if you had kids, and to keep your job, you could be forced to move every year for 7 years before you had a choice....

The person above me said forced.

 

Imagine if you knew that was not only a possibility, but extremely likely when you accepted that job.

I mean come on, it's part of the job.

You can't compare one specific issue with one profession to every other profession.

That would be like saying (of firefighters), imagine if your boss forced you to go into a burning building to keep your job. It's silly.

 

People weigh the pros and cons before they go into a profession. Each one has its own set of each. You don't get to accept the likely cons of your chosen profession, and then complain when one comes up.

[Mike Sixel]

 

The person above me said forced.

Imagine if you knew that was not only a possibility, but extremely likely when you accepted that job.
I mean come on, it's part of the job.
You can't compare one specific issue with one profession to every other profession.
That would be like saying (of firefighters), imagine if your boss forced you to go into a burning building to keep your job. It's silly.

People weigh the pros and cons before they go into a profession. Each one has its own set of each. You don't get to accept the likely cons of your chosen profession, and then complain when one comes up.

 

That is a false equivalency.....

 

Wait, so if you take a job, and the conditions aren't what you want, you can't complain? thank goodness people 100 or even 50 years ago didn't agree or we'd be working on the weekends, with no overtime, and no rights at all...

[Mr. Brooks]

That is a false equivalency.....

 

Wait, so if you take a job, and the conditions aren't what you want, you can't complain? thank goodness people 100 or even 50 years ago didn't agree or we'd be working on the weekends, with no overtime, and no rights at all...

Speaking of false equivalency.

Comparing basic humane working conditions with having to move once every 5 or 6 years, with the upside of making more money than my entire family tree will make in all their lifetimes.