Shoppach signed, Aubrey outrighted

and to complete the 100% copy/paste job from Castro's blog:

""The Indians have avoided salary arbitration with Kelly Shoppach, who signed a one-year deal today. The Tribe has not gone to arbitration with a player since Jerry Browne and Greg Swindell in 1991.

Also today, Michael Aubrey, designated for assignment when Carl Pavano was signed last week, cleared waivers and was outrighted to Triple-A Columbus. Aubrey will be a non-roster invitee to Spring Training camp.""

about 3 years ago Brick. 53 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Aubrey lives!

/and there was much rejoicing in the street

by APV on Jan 12, 2009 2:44 PM EST reply actions

Hey maybe we can sneak Marte through!, Like I said before there are two teams that may take a chance on rostering him on a 25. We should hold him till Spring training is over, play him very very very little in spring, and simply try to sneak him through when everyone has pretty much set their 25s (well at least SF as they would be a perfect match for Marte).

by hans on Jan 12, 2009 2:53 PM EST reply actions

To who’s benefit exactly? Honestly, if we’ve decided that he’s not a fit, then we should give the man his walking papers and let him try to catch on elsewhere. I, for one, would wish him well. If it comes back to haunt us, then we’d have no one to kick except for Wedge.

-Erik

by drerikbrady on Jan 12, 2009 3:09 PM EST up reply actions

apparently all we have to do is change his position to 1B and no one will touch him.

by Brick. on Jan 12, 2009 3:14 PM EST up reply actions

I still think we should trade Shoppach. Of course that seems unlikely to happen now.

by world dictator on Jan 12, 2009 3:16 PM EST reply actions

I don’t think that the Pavano signing necessarily rules out a Shoppach trade. If Boston came calling with the right deal, I think we could get something done. I’m not sure I’d be interested in a package centered around Buchholtz, but Masterson is intriguing.

by millionairesrow on Jan 12, 2009 4:23 PM EST up reply actions

This assumes that the only way we would have traded Shoppach is if a young ML ready pitcher was involved. I don’t think that’s the case. Shapiro is the type of GM that will always take value over locking on to a specific position.

Unfortunately, it seems as if the only team looking for a starting Catcher is Boston. For whatever reason, Boston seems inclined to focus on other young catchers (Arizona, Boston).

by world dictator on Jan 12, 2009 7:27 PM EST up reply actions

Are they though? All we have to go by is media speculation. We’ve never really known when Shapiro was talking to a team about any player until the day that deal went down, with only a few exceptions.

Steel Nick

by nickjs21 on Jan 12, 2009 7:30 PM EST up reply actions

Shapiro could definetely pull off a Shoppach trade. There’s plenty of time left in the offseason.

I only said it appears as if we won’t trade Shoppach because the market for catchers seems to have narrowed or at least cooled off.

Of course, we all have to take offseason news with a grain of salt since there’s a lot of secrecy, deception, and omission of information.

by world dictator on Jan 12, 2009 8:14 PM EST up reply actions

I don’t blame BOS for focusing on BOS’s catchers.

by JulioBernazard on Jan 13, 2009 1:22 PM EST up reply actions

I think we ought to trade Vic. Better a year too soon than a year too late.

by mrich on Jan 12, 2009 5:07 PM EST up reply actions

It would be foolish to trade Vic while his value is at an all time low.

by world dictator on Jan 12, 2009 7:15 PM EST up reply actions

I don’t think his value is all that low.

by Jay on Jan 12, 2009 8:23 PM EST up reply actions

I think that ‘all time low’ might be a relative term.

Still the local "Barfield Bounces Back Believer" and confident that there's still a lot of Pronk in Hafner. Oh, and for all the love of Cliffy, there's still a Sleepy Kitten inside.

by mjmarble on Jan 13, 2009 1:39 AM EST up reply actions

Its.

I’m skeptical we could get fair value for vic coming off an injury season.

by world dictator on Jan 13, 2009 11:23 AM EST up reply actions

So, how amazing is it that we haven’t gone to arbitration since 91? I feel like I read about a handful of cases each year, are they all from the same teams?

by Ryan Kelsey on Jan 12, 2009 3:23 PM EST reply actions

Hoynes reporting estimated $1.95M.

by cheech99 on Jan 12, 2009 5:36 PM EST reply actions

Jerry Browne — there’s a name I hadn’t heard in a very long time.

The best thing probably is to hit [Grady] 2nd -- Jay

by Buckeye Brad on Jan 12, 2009 5:46 PM EST reply actions

Actually, his name is reported every damned year as the last guy the Indians took to arbitration.

by Jay on Jan 12, 2009 5:48 PM EST up reply actions

He’s one of the 3 guys the Indians got for trading my favorite player, Julio Franco. They also got Pete OBrien and Oddibe (sp) McDowell.

by Cols714 on Jan 12, 2009 6:05 PM EST up reply actions

Classic dollar for 3 quarters trade.

by cheech99 on Jan 12, 2009 6:06 PM EST up reply actions

I also think that was the year the Franco won the all-star game MVP award and maybe a batting title. Of course I’m too lazy to look it up.

by Cols714 on Jan 12, 2009 6:17 PM EST up reply actions

That trade was in the offseason before the 89 season. Franco had a good 89, but it was 1990 when he won the all-star game MVP, and 1991 when he won the batting title.

Browne actually looked pretty good – a 23-year old regular at 2B posting a 114 OPS+. Unfortunately, that was his peak, and he followed it up with a 104 OPS+ in 1990, and a dismal 56 in 1991 before being shown the door.

McDowell didn’t even last the year, being traded to Atlanta for Dion James during the 89 season. Pete O’Brien put up some Garkoesque numbers at 1B, good for a meager 105 OPS+ in his only season with the Indians.

Since Franco put up a 137 OPS+ playing second for the Rangers that first year, things looked bad right from the beginning. But, hey, he was 30, and we all know that second-basemen don’t age well, I’m sure Franco declined a lot faster than the much younger Browne.

by InfiniteMonkeyTypists on Jan 13, 2009 8:42 AM EST up reply actions

Oddibe McDowell — now there’s a name you don’t fotget!

The best thing probably is to hit [Grady] 2nd -- Jay

by Buckeye Brad on Jan 12, 2009 6:06 PM EST up reply actions

*forget

The best thing probably is to hit [Grady] 2nd -- Jay

by Buckeye Brad on Jan 12, 2009 6:06 PM EST up reply actions

Well I guess I haven’t paid much attention to those announcements.

The best thing probably is to hit [Grady] 2nd -- Jay

by Buckeye Brad on Jan 12, 2009 6:05 PM EST up reply actions

Never said you should.

by Jay on Jan 12, 2009 6:08 PM EST up reply actions

Somebody should just damn take them to arbitration, so we can stop hearing about Jerry Browne.

by odradek on Jan 12, 2009 6:47 PM EST up reply actions

Aubrey is in an unusual position now. He was eligible for a fourth option, which is already a bit unusual. If we want to call him up, we have to add him back to the 40-man roster first. If we want to send him back down, then we’d use up the fourth option.

Here’s the really unusual part. If we don’t ever call him up in 2009, we can add him back to the 40-man, and if my reading of the rule is correct, he will still be eligible for that fourth option in 2010. Also, if we call him up and never send him back down, using up that option, then he’ll still have that fourth option for 2010.

This is unusual because the fourth option is reserved for players who have used up three options but haven’t spent five full seasons as a pro, and “full” in this case means you were not only signed but also on the active roster for at least half the season, i.e., not on the DL. In almost all cases, the fourth option is being granted to a player who is entering his fifth “full season,” but from what I can tell, Aubrey has only had three (2004, 2007, 2008).

So at the end of 2009, he still will have only four full seasons, and if he’s only used up three options, I see no reason why he still wouldn’t get a fourth.

by Jay on Jan 12, 2009 6:08 PM EST reply actions

too bad he doesn’t have a fifth option – that option being the one where he doesn’t have to be a former prospect ruined by injuries

by APV on Jan 12, 2009 6:24 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs

i have learned so much about this stuff from you thanks to michael aubrey alone.

by Brick. on Jan 12, 2009 6:56 PM EST up reply actions

When it comes to obscure transaction rules, the guy is just a nonstop teaching opportunity.

by Jay on Jan 12, 2009 7:12 PM EST up reply actions

i suspect it’s not over yet. and i need to remember to search my comments for “michael aubrey alone” to find your above post to link back to when this needs explained this and/or next season.

BOOO CC

by Brick. on Jan 12, 2009 8:26 PM EST up reply actions

BUT DON’T ACTUALLY.

Steel Nick

by nickjs21 on Jan 13, 2009 12:10 AM EST up reply actions

And that’s actually pretty hard to be. Takes a combination of initial promise followed by continual injury combined with sporadic yet weirdly consistent performance that remains comfortably under the threshold of need now and just over the threshold of might want for later. For years.

by mcrose on Jan 12, 2009 8:37 PM EST up reply actions

I get all of the option stuff, but what are the nuts and bolts of Aubrey actually being a “non-roster invitee”. Is the ball in our court now as far as signing him, or does he have the power? This invitee stuff has always confused me a bit, in addition to what guys on one-year minor league deals are free to do once they’re like Andy Gonzalez-ish.

by supermarioelia on Jan 12, 2009 7:30 PM EST up reply actions

No. An NRI is signed to a minor-league deal and not on the 40-man roster. Everyone on the 40-man is invited to big-league camp — from the CBA standpoint, they are already major leaguers — so everyone else is a non-roster invitee.

We signed Aubrey to a minor league deal out of college, big bonus of course. It became a major-league deal when we added him to the 40-man. Now it’s a minor-league deal again, because teams have the right to outright each player one time from the 40-man roster back into a minor-league deal. (If it ever happens again, the player can opt out.)

by Jay on Jan 12, 2009 8:26 PM EST up reply actions

anyone not on the 40 is an NRI. Beu mills will be an NRI this year.

by Brick. on Jan 12, 2009 8:27 PM EST up reply actions

and he’ll accept the invite because that’s where he’ll pick up his “a”

by Brick. on Jan 12, 2009 8:28 PM EST up reply actions 3 recs

I picked up some “a” at spring training once, but all she did was talk about Mark Grudzielanek all night.

by StickRat on Jan 17, 2009 5:00 PM EST up reply actions

Michael Aubrey cleared waivers

Color me surprised.

Steel Nick

by nickjs21 on Jan 12, 2009 7:31 PM EST reply actions 1 recs

i think the color for suprised should be line green.

by Brick. on Jan 12, 2009 8:29 PM EST up reply actions

and it looks like it’s going to be another typo filled night

by Brick. on Jan 12, 2009 8:29 PM EST up reply actions

You are going through a brutal stretch here, man.

by Jay on Jan 12, 2009 8:33 PM EST up reply actions

it’s bad. i’m officially putting myself on “preview probation” again.

by Brick. on Jan 12, 2009 8:37 PM EST up reply actions

We all have those days, man.

by Jay on Jan 12, 2009 8:47 PM EST up reply actions

I’m officially putting myself on “ending posts with ‘man’ probation.”

by Jay on Jan 12, 2009 8:55 PM EST up reply actions

this aggression will not stand,

by mrich on Jan 12, 2009 9:23 PM EST up reply actions

man

by mrich on Jan 12, 2009 9:23 PM EST up reply actions

So… tempted… for an Andre the Giant quote…

Steel Nick

by nickjs21 on Jan 13, 2009 12:11 AM EST up reply actions

Do you really think it would *float?

Still the local "Barfield Bounces Back Believer" and confident that there's still a lot of Pronk in Hafner. Oh, and for all the love of Cliffy, there's still a Sleepy Kitten inside.

by mjmarble on Jan 13, 2009 1:47 AM EST up reply actions

Logjam at 1B?

I read at MLB.com that Aubrey being outrighted, along with Ryan Garko possibly converting to the outfield, will alleviate a logjam at first base. Would someone please explain this to me? Only way I see this making sense is if Victor Martinez is completely done as a catcher.

by StickRat on Jan 17, 2009 5:08 PM EST reply actions

Aubrey being outrighted doesn’t have much effect, because he was unlikely to be on the major-league roster anyway.

Victor is not completely done at catcher, but the most games he has ever started at first base was 24 in 2007, and he may triple that or more this year.

by Jay on Jan 17, 2009 8:31 PM EST up reply actions