IST: Cubs vs. Pirates

[anotheridiot]

Well there's a couple of issues with this assuming he no longer has options. One I assume he's still on a split contract meaning putting him on the active roster would immediately elevate his salary which if it's only for a week means you're then paying him every day more money than you otherwise would. And also, if he has no options to put him back in AAA would require he pass through waivers which may or may not happen.

That's why I'd be surprised to see him come up now. I think we will see him this year but him coming up because of a short term injury doesn't make much sense to me. If I had to guess it would be either Zagunis, Hannemann or Bote and that largely depends on what they are looking for. Bote can play 1B. The other two would be more targeted as either defensive replacement type in the case of Hannemann or potential short term lead off type hitter in Zagunis though given the way Zobrist is playing if it's not going to be Happ and it's not going to be Almora I'd assume it's almost certainly going to be Zobrist.

The point is Giminez is 35, throws out runners at a clip of 25-30% and does not belong in the minors. He should have a job somewhere in MLB. He wont accept going back to AAA, he would be a free agent and get a job elsewhere. I highly doubt he expected to be down there past the first two weeks anyway.

 

[CubsFaninMN]

Gimenez signed a minor league contract. I'm pretty certain that when a player with major league time under his belt signs a minor league contract, that's a "reset" to his options.

Shae Simmons is the only guy the team signed to an actual split contract, which changes his salary just for the time he is up with the big league team. As long as Gimmy is on the 40-man roster (which I don't believe he is at the moment), the Cubs ought to be able to bring him up and send him back down, as needed, without changing his salary status, at least until he would get to 'x' per cent of his playing time spent on the 25-man roster.

If Gimmy actually had no options, I imagine the Cubs would have released him at the end of ST, to give him a chance to sign on with another team. Theo tends to do that -- witness Pete Bourjos this year, Shane Victorino a couple of years ago -- he won't stash proven veterans, low on options, he picked up "on spec" down in Iowa, he'll release them so they can find work on another team's 25-man.


Edit -- just checked, and indeed, Gimenez is NOT on the Cubs' 40-man roster. Meaning that, if the Cubs bring him up, they have to demote someone off of the 40-man, exposing him to being claimed off waivers. And the only non-pitchers on the 40-man who aren't up with the big league team right now are Bote and Zagunis. So, if they bring up someone for the next two or three days, it will likely be Bote or Zags, I bet.

 

[TC in Mississippi]

1B/OF Effren Navarro gets the call in Rizzo's absence.

 

[TC in Mississippi]

The point is Giminez is 35, throws out runners at a clip of 25-30% and does not belong in the minors. He should have a job somewhere in MLB. He wont accept going back to AAA, he would be a free agent and get a job elsewhere. I highly doubt he expected to be down there past the first two weeks anyway.

There is no "release trigger" on Giminez' deal. It's simply a minor league contract with no promotion clauses. In any case they went with Effren Navarro.

 

[CubsFaninMN]

Hmm... don't they have to move anyone they call up onto the 40-man roster? At the moment, Navarro is listed on the 25-man active roster, but not on the 40-man roster. The transactions are listed as Rizzo being placed on the 10-day DL and the Cubs "selecting the contract" of Navarro from Iowa. I'd think that would automatically place Navarro both on the 25-man and the 40-man rosters.

Or are there waiver consequences for getting put onto the 40-man, and you're allowed to bring up somebody to cover one of the guys on the 25-man going on the DL without naming the replacement (in this case, Navarro) to the 40-man?

 

[beckdawg]

Hmm... don't they have to move anyone they call up onto the 40-man roster? At the moment, Navarro is listed on the 25-man active roster, but not on the 40-man roster. The transactions are listed as Rizzo being placed on the 10-day DL and the Cubs "selecting the contract" of Navarro from Iowa. I'd think that would automatically place Navarro both on the 25-man and the 40-man rosters.

Or are there waiver consequences for getting put onto the 40-man, and you're allowed to bring up somebody to cover one of the guys on the 25-man going on the DL without naming the replacement (in this case, Navarro) to the 40-man?

The way the rosters work is being put on the DL does nothing for your 40 man wise unless you put someone on the 60 day DL. If you do that it "opens" a 40 man slot until that player gets activated from the 60 man DL. Either way in this case you have to put someone on the 40 man if they aren't to call them up or call someone up from the 40 man. In the case of Navarro i'm like 99% sure he wasn't previously on the 40 man roster but I also know that the cubs were at like 38 on the 40 after spring training. My guess is they are mentally saving one for Gimenez later in the year when he is eventually called up to stay.

Best way to look at the 40 man vs 25 man is that the "active roster" ie your mlb roster is just a selection of 25 guys off your40 man with the other 15 being "reserves" who aren't in the majors.

 

[CubsFaninMN]

The way the rosters work is being put on the DL does nothing for your 40 man wise unless you put someone on the 60 day DL. If you do that it "opens" a 40 man slot until that player gets activated from the 60 man DL. Either way in this case you have to put someone on the 40 man if they aren't to call them up or call someone up from the 40 man. In the case of Navarro i'm like 99% sure he wasn't previously on the 40 man roster but I also know that the cubs were at like 38 on the 40 after spring training. My guess is they are mentally saving one for Gimenez later in the year when he is eventually called up to stay.

Best way to look at the 40 man vs 25 man is that the "active roster" ie your mlb roster is just a selection of 25 guys off your40 man with the other 15 being "reserves" who aren't in the majors.

That's what I always thought. I'm guessing it's just the Cubs website getting updated in chunks and not being in sync, but at the moment Navarro is listed as on the 25-man active roster, but is not listed on the 40-man roster. That's what confused me.

I'm guessing the website will show the 40-man correctly later today. I was just concerned that the club needed to bump someone off of the 40-man to put Navarro on it, but if they weren't up to 40 yet, that explains why no one is concerned about Alzolay or de la Cruz or someone like that getting exposed to waivers.

 

[anotheridiot]

There is no "release trigger" on Giminez' deal. It's simply a minor league contract with no promotion clauses. In any case they went with Effren Navarro.

I would not doubt that he is stashed for a trade if some catcher goes down to injury if he is not going to be called up. I guess its nice to have an insurance policy. I mean he has played in 2 of 3 games, and its probably nice to have him catching Maples, Tseng, Zas and Underwood, would be nice if Alzolay were there too.

 

[zack54attack]

There ya go Schwarbs!

 

[Globetrotter]

Nice one Contreras.

 

[CSF77]

Effen who?

 

[CSF77]

I would not doubt that he is stashed for a trade if some catcher goes down to injury if he is not going to be called up. I guess its nice to have an insurance policy. I mean he has played in 2 of 3 games, and its probably nice to have him catching Maples, Tseng, Zas and Underwood, would be nice if Alzolay were there too.

Alzolay started late and getting extra time in Arizona

 

[Diehardfan]

Pretty ugly baseball so far.....

 

[zack54attack]

Ew Chatwood.

 

[CSF77]

So why is it the two guys that looked really good week 1 get hammered week 2 and the 3 that looked bad looked great the 2nd week?

Pit is hot out of the gate but come on now.

 

[TC in Mississippi]

Now Chatwood is just pissing me off.

 

[TC in Mississippi]

Somebody want to tell me again how the guy who had a 4.79 FIP away from Coors last year was going to be great away from Coors?

 

[Omeletpants]

Funny when you guys lecture others about complaining then do it yourself

 

[TC in Mississippi]

Funny when you guys lecture others about complaining then do it yourself

Seriously? I've made a few comments in the past about repetitive negativity and I say a bad thing about a single pitcher and that's what you come back with?

 

[Globetrotter]

Seriously? I've made a few comments in the past about repetitive negativity and I say a bad thing about a single pitcher and that's what you come back with?

Don’t feed the troll.