Nationals even mess up waiver claims

gilesfan said:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs.../another-development-in-david-dejesus-status/

Exactly what I have said repeatedly.

The Nationals now have three options remaining: 1) Pull DeJesus back and keep him and his the remaining $2.5 million owed on his contract; 2) Allow the Rays to just take on DeJesus and his entire contract; 3) The two sides can work out a trade. ESPNChicago.com first reported that the Rays claimed DeJesus on Thursday morning.

It is standard practice for teams to place players on waivers, and the Nationals have placed everyone on waivers after the July 31 non-waiver trade deadline. That, however, doesn’t mean the player will be traded.

When the DeJesus trade was announced, the Nationals publicly said they were sending the Cubs a player to be named later. But, according to a person familiar with the deal, the Nationals are not sending a player and instead paying a small fraction of the waiver fee. So, if the Nationals trade DeJesus to the Rays, they could be adding a prospect without having lost one in the first place.
Click to expand...

We were arguing about nothing. You were exactly right and so was I. Yes, everything you said is exactly whats been going on, but my point was that it was an unnecessary/dumb move, which is also the case. I just didnt think he fit the Nats well off the bench if they kept him. If they allowed the Rays to take on his contract, then why the fug pick him up in the first place and say yall are going for it one last time...last but not least, I just think it will be hard for the Nats to get anything for Dejesus worth while with the money he will be making next season.

All in all, its much a do about nothing.
 
So if they get a player for Dejesus, how was it a bad move?

If they decide to keep him, how is it a bad move?
 
Why doesn't he fit off the bench? (which is the only excuse you have). Are there better 4th OFers that can back up CF?
 
Irrespective of their intent, the Nationals are NOT getting a freaking prospect for DeJesus (unless they are picking up salary or something). Even then it'll qualify more as a warm body. Hardly a move I'd consider giving Rizzo props for.
 
ramadon101 said:
Irrespective of their intent, the Nationals are NOT getting a freaking prospect for DeJesus (unless they are picking up salary or something). Even then it'll qualify more as a warm body. Hardly a move I'd consider giving Rizzo props for.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't give him big props for the move. But, getting a prospect....any prospect for nothing is a smart move.
 
gilesfan said:
No, they didnt.
Click to expand...

Was this report incorrect?

The Nationals have acquired David DeJesus from the Cubs in exchange for a player to be named later, the team has announced via press release. The Nationals reportedly claimed DeJesus off waivers before working out a trade with Chicago. In order to clear roster space for their newest acquisition, the Nationals released fellow outfielder Roger Bernadina.
Click to expand...
 
gilesfan said:
Why doesn't he fit off the bench? (which is the only excuse you have). Are there better 4th OFers that can back up CF?
Click to expand...

I would save that 6.5 million and bench spot and go after Mike Morse. Say what you want but the Nats miss his bat this year. Harper can slide over to CF and Morse to LF and the Nats would have a heck of a OF in Harper, Werth, Span, and Morse. There isnt much on the FA market thats better than DeJesus, but he doesnt exactly stand out either.

If the Braves had plenty of money and settled for DeJesus as our 4th OF, I wouldnt be happy. Maybe we value DeJesus differently, idk. I just think the Nats could do a lot better. If this was a trade that was simply to try and flip him, so be it. If they are just getting him and then eventually buying him out, so be it.

I dont think he would fit off the bench bc hes 34 yrs old, his game is baserunning and defense...The Nats need hitting and they could do better.
 
The Nats need hitting and your propose signing Mike Morse and his .234/.289/.424?
 
50PoundHead said:
I read a report that the Nats sent the Cubs cash instead of a player. Can't remember where I read that.
Click to expand...

Nothing is concrete on how much they sent, but the speculation is they paid the waiver fee and the rest of Dejesus's contract this year.
 
Dunit24 said:
I would save that 6.5 million and bench spot and go after Mike Morse. Say what you want but the Nats miss his bat this year. Harper can slide over to CF and Morse to LF and the Nats would have a heck of a OF in Harper, Werth, Span, and Morse. There isnt much on the FA market thats better than DeJesus, but he doesnt exactly stand out either.

If the Braves had plenty of money and settled for DeJesus as our 4th OF, I wouldnt be happy. Maybe we value DeJesus differently, idk. I just think the Nats could do a lot better. If this was a trade that was simply to try and flip him, so be it. If they are just getting him and then eventually buying him out, so be it.

I dont think he would fit off the bench bc hes 34 yrs old, his game is baserunning and defense...The Nats need hitting and they could do better.
Click to expand...

Where did you get 6.5 mil from? Doesn't he only make 1.5 next year?

Also, Morse is horrible and never healthy.
 
They can buy out his contract for $1.5 million, but the option is a full $6.5 million.
 
Yes, I would take Morse over DeJesus anytime. Morse was a very good player for the Nats and they never should have let him go. That aside, I just dont think DeJesus is a good baseball player anymore. Bottom line is if you feel the Nats are a better team with DeJesus, thats okay, they might be..im just tired of discussing this over and over lets just agree to disagree and carry on regarding something else.
 
Dunit24 said:
Yes, I would take Morse over DeJesus anytime. Morse was a very good player for the Nats and they never should have let him go. That aside, I just dont think DeJesus is a good baseball player anymore. Bottom line is if you feel the Nats are a better team with DeJesus, thats okay, they might be..im just tired of discussing this over and over lets just agree to disagree and carry on regarding something else.
Click to expand...

Have you looked at Morse's numbers the past 2 years? Like at all?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top