2016 Draft Post-Draft Waivers

Guardians · Post by **Guardians** » Mon Feb 27, 2017 10:35 pm

Post guys you want here (per Shawn here: viewtopic.php?t=6283&start=100)

Padres · Post by **Padres** » Tue Feb 28, 2017 5:39 am

In priority order:

Flores, Bernardo LHP (B/T: L/L) 8/23/1995

Velazquez, Hector RHP (B/T: R/R) 11/26/1988

Civale, Aaron RHP (B/T: R/R) 6/12/1995

Only have roster space for two of the above ... after appropriate releases.

Phillies · Post by **Phillies** » Tue Feb 28, 2017 9:43 am

I'll put in a claim on Aaron Civale (will drop someone if awarded).

WhiteSox · Post by **WhiteSox** » Tue Feb 28, 2017 9:59 am

I'll put in a claim on Aaron Civale (will drop someone if awarded).

Giants · Post by **Giants** » Tue Feb 28, 2017 11:30 am

Yankees wrote:I'll put in a claim on Aaron Civale (will drop someone if awarded).

Seems like all the cool kids are doing it, count me in for the Civale sweepstakes too! Will take Shaun Anderson if I don't Civale and Scott Moss if I don't get Anderson

Yankees · Post by **Yankees** » Tue Feb 28, 2017 3:01 pm

I'd like to put a claim in on Mark Karaviotas and John Schuknecht, in that order. I'll release '15's if I get them.

Mets · Post by **Mets** » Tue Feb 28, 2017 4:05 pm

What if I want a sleeper guy but don't want to draw attention to the guy so other lazy teams try to claim him during the waiver period. This public waiver thing...ugh.

Phillies · Post by **Phillies** » Tue Feb 28, 2017 4:18 pm

Mets wrote:What if I want a sleeper guy but don't want to draw attention to the guy so other lazy teams try to claim him during the waiver period. This public waiver thing...ugh.

Gotta agree

Royals · Post by **Royals** » Tue Feb 28, 2017 5:09 pm

Mets wrote:What if I want a sleeper guy but don't want to draw attention to the guy so other lazy teams try to claim him during the waiver period. This public waiver thing...ugh.

No argument here. Still haven't seen a good reason on why we cut it off at 5.

Nationals · Post by **Nationals** » Tue Feb 28, 2017 5:42 pm

Padres wrote:
Mets wrote:What if I want a sleeper guy but don't want to draw attention to the guy so other lazy teams try to claim him during the waiver period. This public waiver thing...ugh.
No argument here. Still haven't seen a good reason on why we cut it off at 5.

yeah, i tend to agree here. if its just going to a 24 hour waiver after, make the draft 6 rounds and eliminate the public bidding altogether. or something like that.

Royals · Post by **Royals** » Tue Feb 28, 2017 6:23 pm

Or make it a full 10, and let people drop picks/remove from queue when they're done.

Padres · Post by **Padres** » Tue Feb 28, 2017 7:04 pm

Mets wrote:What if I want a sleeper guy but don't want to draw attention to the guy so other lazy teams try to claim him during the waiver period. This public waiver thing...ugh.

If you want a player you consider a sleeper just don't post it here and wait to see if he survives this waiver period. If so, sign him after this waiver period.

Nationals · Post by **Nationals** » Tue Feb 28, 2017 7:23 pm

WhiteSox wrote:
Mets wrote:What if I want a sleeper guy but don't want to draw attention to the guy so other lazy teams try to claim him during the waiver period. This public waiver thing...ugh.
If you want a player you consider a sleeper just don't post it here and wait to see if he survives this waiver period. If so, sign him after this waiver period.

Thats the plan.

But the gripe i believe is when other people out your sleeper when posting a list of players. So when you posted Civale as 3rd priority, that mightve been Nicks top guy. Not saying they wouldnt have, but the fact his name was listed could have influenced Jason and\or Jake to place a claim too, where he might have been lower priority to someone not named publicly.I

Basically, peoples priorities become public when it could have been avoided and kept private. Who knows if any of it would matter, but the way it was set up enabled the possibility of an impact for, IMO, no benefit.

Giants · Post by **Giants** » Tue Feb 28, 2017 9:05 pm

Yeah. I think the argument against 6th rounders had to be the hassle of adding and subtracting picks. I definitely was swayed by the attention to Civale so I'll freely admit to being part of the problem, might make sense to just have a 24 hour moratorium and then a free for all rather than public waivers

Nationals · Post by **Nationals** » Tue Feb 28, 2017 10:34 pm

I'll place a claim for each of the following in order:

Jordy Barley - SS - 12/3/99
Yenci Pena - 3B - 7/13/2000
Ronald Bolanos - P - 8/23/1996

Royals · Post by **Royals** » Tue Feb 28, 2017 11:33 pm

The heck? Why is league time three hours off from mountain instead of 2?
Well, as we're 25 hours past the start of this thread and 36+ past the end of the actual draft, I'm gonna sign unclaimed guys.
*Edit* Or not, since 16- isn't an option in creating players.
Seriously, just bring back the extra rounds, give everyone ten rounds of picks and let people drop the ones they don't want. Neat and tidy.

Dodgers · Post by **Dodgers** » Wed Mar 01, 2017 8:28 am

16- is an option now. The time is correct for EST, you might need to check your user prefs.

WhiteSox · Post by **WhiteSox** » Wed Mar 01, 2017 9:01 am

I think if we are going to have a waiver period after the draft maybe we should have it be hidden.

If you wanted to claim a drafted player maybe an email could be sent to an IBC email address, if two people wanted the same player the higher priority would apply.

I don't blame Jake for claiming Civale, but sounds like he only did it because of the chatter generated in the thread.

Guardians · Post by **Guardians** » Wed Mar 01, 2017 10:17 am

ExCo discussed using an ibc email address for the zips waivers process and it was shot down due to people potentially being concerned about transparency. I think the fix for this situation is a 24-hour dead period after the draft.

Mets · Post by **Mets** » Wed Mar 01, 2017 12:55 pm

Tigers wrote:ExCo discussed using an ibc email address for the zips waivers process and it was shot down due to people potentially being concerned about transparency. I think the fix for this situation is a 24-hour dead period after the draft.

A free for all is not a fix as some people have jobs, etc. and cannot be sitting at their computer at 7:59am for an 8:00am signing.

I don't understand the transparency issue. Is the admin going to collude to make sure certain teams get certain players?

If I have the #2 overall position and I claim someone - it's fairly obvious if someone with a lesser position is awarded that player. Transparency is a lazy excuse and does not apply.

Guardians · Post by **Guardians** » Wed Mar 01, 2017 1:22 pm

Well, we could do a budgeting process, but for leftover, non-drafted players, I'm not seeing the need to invest a lot of effort. If you deal all your picks and need to pick up scraps, that's your issue to deal with. If you really wanted to draft a sixth guy, you could have done a draft and trade with an owner who was willing to accommodate you.
I agree that first come first serve isn't ideal and I think we did a good job addressing that for zips waivers. But once you get past the first 150 draftees, we're typically not talking future Mike Trouts.

Dodgers · Post by **Dodgers** » Wed Mar 01, 2017 9:42 pm

Tigers wrote:If you really wanted to draft a sixth guy, you could have done a draft and trade with an owner who was willing to accommodate you.

I'm pretty sure this is heavily against the rules and we've punished in the past for it. If you wanted to draft a 6th guy, you had until the start of the draft to pick up an extra pick.