Skip to content

Anyone want Roy Oswalt? He cleared waivers

Aug 28, 2012, 1:20 PM EDT

Roy Oswalt

Roy Oswalt has been a bust for Texas, posting a 5.94 ERA in 50 innings while being demoted to the bullpen, which isn’t exactly what the Rangers had in mind when they signed him for $5 million in May.

He’s still owed about $1 million of that money and Ken Rosenthal of FOXSports.com reports that Oswalt recently passed through waivers without being claimed by any of the other 29 teams.

That means the Rangers are now free to trade him to any team, and with yesterday’s reports about the Dodgers looking to add some veteran rotation help Oswalt might be a fit back in the National League.

For as ugly as the 5.94 ERA looks, Oswalt does have a strong 47/10 K/BB ratio in 50 innings and his average fastball velocity of 91.4 miles per hour is identical to what it was in 2011.

  1. thereisaparty - Aug 28, 2012 at 1:28 PM

    Seems like he should be back in the rotation. Scott Feldman is Scott Feldman. A nice stretch of games doesn’t change that. It is tough to argue that Oswalt has a lower true talent level.

    • beefytrout - Aug 28, 2012 at 1:50 PM

      “Back in the rotation”…. based on what exactly?

      • thereisaparty - Aug 28, 2012 at 2:12 PM

        Scott Feldman being a below average MLB pitcher. Roy Oswalt’s significantly higher true talent level, strong K% and BB%, and the assumption that his unusually inflated LOB%, HR/9, and BABIP will regress to normal levels.

        The reasons against putting him in the rotation? Unreasonable belief that Scott Feldman turned into a quality starter

      • beefytrout - Aug 28, 2012 at 2:35 PM

        So, basically… the argument for Oswalt is based on measuring his “true talent level” and an assumption. Right.

        No one in Texas is under any sort of illusion that Feldman is anything special. He’s basically an arm and a pulse that gets thrown out there every fifth day. But to be fair, he has exceeded expectations when you look at his overall performance. I trust that Daniels/Ryan/Maddux know what they’re doing.

      • thereisaparty - Aug 28, 2012 at 3:05 PM

        Pitcher BABIP cannot remain at such a high level – it is bound to regress. It exceptionally unlikely that Oswalt will keep giving up HR at the rate he has so far. Oswalt’s K% and BB% project a better pitcher than the results have shown. These assumptions are not unfounded beliefs. We just cannot be 100% positive of regression to normal levels actually occurring in such a small sample.

        Why turn to “an arm and a pulse” when the other option is a quality pitcher. And why would you not want to make a baseball decision based up true talent level? If you are making the claim that Feldman is the better pitcher and you expect him to perform like the better pitcher moving forward, I would like to know why.

        Continue trusting all baseball decisions of the Rangers organization, like the insistence on playing Michael Young every day.

      • beefytrout - Aug 28, 2012 at 4:21 PM

        That’s great that the numbers Oswalt was putting up are “bound to regress”… But if you’re in the front office or in the stands, you didn’t want Oswalt brought in to put up crap numbers and then wait for the mathematical certainties to present themselves. You wanted Oswalt to pitch decently, and he simply didn’t, at least as far as what was expected of him. He’s had 8 starts, pitched past 5 innings in 2 of them, and only had one that was a “quality start.”

        So he gets sent to the bullpen to recapture that “true talent” and figure out how to be the pitcher that one specific stat ratio suggests that he could be at some point…. and whines to the press, quits on the manager, and has to take a few days off now and then because he gets overworked too easily.

        Feldman, on the other hand, has had 5 starts since Oswalt arrived where he went at least 6 IP, and 4 of them were “quality” starts. So yeah, right now, give me Feldman over Oswalt.

        As for playing Young every day, well, he’s making $16 million a year, he’s a large presence in the clubhouse, and he’s a fan favorite. If you bench him, you’re wasting money and you run the risk of him being disgruntled and disrupting the locker room. I’m not trying to say he’s a great or even a good option – every time he hits into a DP I want to reach through the TV and punch him in the balls – but he’s what they got, and sometimes you just make do with it.

        Plus, if there was no MY, what would self-professed baseball intellectuals have to complain about?

      • thereisaparty - Aug 28, 2012 at 4:34 PM

        You are overweighting recent performances as indicators of future success, and severely underweighting all the other information we have that would show Oswalt is a better pitcher than Feldman. If I am in the front office, I trust regression instead of trying to guess hot streaks ahead of time (if you can do this, please teach me and everyone else).

        Feldman has never whined? How about when he got moved to the bullpen? And quitting on the manager was Oswalt knowing his limits. He said he had nothing more to offer. Doesn’t that sound like helping? Weird anecdotes you leaned upon to counter the stats …

        Re: Michael Young – you do not understand the concept of sunk costs.

      • beefytrout - Aug 28, 2012 at 5:17 PM

        “You are overweighting recent performances as indicators of future success, and severely underweighting all the other information we have that would show Oswalt is a better pitcher than Feldman. If I am in the front office, I trust regression instead of trying to guess hot streaks ahead of time (if you can do this, please teach me and everyone else).”

        You are not in the front office, though. You are wasting time arguing with a Rangers fan on a blog.

        “Feldman has never whined? How about when he got moved to the bullpen? And quitting on the manager was Oswalt knowing his limits. He said he had nothing more to offer. Doesn’t that sound like helping? Weird anecdotes you leaned upon to counter the stats …”

        I didn’t say Feldman hasn’t whined. I simply said Oswalt has. And if you’re wanting an example of a weird anecdote, how about the one where you say a pitcher who has an admitted limit of 2 innings should be in the rotation? That’s pretty weird, if you ask me.

        “Re: Michael Young – you do not understand the concept of sunk costs.”

        You’re right. That’s why no one has hired me in the front office of a baseball team at any level and in any capacity. Probably the same reason you and I have that in common.

      • thereisaparty - Aug 28, 2012 at 5:33 PM

        “But if you’re in the front office or in the stands” – I was directly addressing this hypothetical you posited.

        I assure you I do understand sunk costs, so unfortunately we do not have that in common. Also, I am not looking for a front office job at the moment, but thank you for thinking of me.
        Further, I do not consider this wasting time. A simple cost-benefit analysis led me to believe that this is a worthwhile expenditure of my time.

        Once again you put too much emphasis one small piece of information (Oswalt only having the stamina for two relief innings). Have you ever wondered why relievers can throw harder than starters? Maybe because energy is used differently. Regardless, it was one game. And it was in relief. This tells us nothing about Oswalt’s ability as a starting pitcher. His stats (like his fantastic K% and BB%) help us get a nice understanding of what he has to offer.

      • beefytrout - Aug 28, 2012 at 5:37 PM

        Oh, I’ll fully concede to your point that Oswalt has lots to offer. I’m simply waiting for him to deliver.

    • pjmarn6 - Aug 28, 2012 at 7:11 PM

      I can pitch at 5.94 for 50 innings will the Rangers pay me $5,000,000?

  2. unlost1 - Aug 28, 2012 at 1:51 PM

    Houston might take him as a 5th starter unless Roger Clemens gets it

    • Francisco (FC) - Aug 28, 2012 at 1:57 PM

      They could take both and make a sort of “old-timer” series in September.

      • bleedgreen - Aug 28, 2012 at 1:59 PM

        Oswalt is only 34…

      • Francisco (FC) - Aug 28, 2012 at 2:20 PM

        Sure but with that back of his he’s 34 going on 50.

  3. stex52 - Aug 28, 2012 at 2:11 PM

    I barf all over the idea of Clemens. Oswalt might make some sense for Houston at 1 MM$. Use some of that money the Yankees just sent them. Seriously, I think they need someone who can eat some innings. The kids weren’t that good to start with, and they are piling a lot on their arms.

  4. CJ - Aug 28, 2012 at 2:35 PM

    The Dodgers will take him!

    • WhenMattStairsIsKing - Aug 28, 2012 at 5:12 PM

      Oswalt doesn’t make enough for the Dodgers to take him. I’m pretty sure they only want guys with over $700 million left on their deals.

  5. thatyankeedude - Aug 28, 2012 at 2:36 PM

    I’m guessing his problems have nothing to do with waiting half the season to find a contending team with a good contract offer.

  6. bradmoss1 - Aug 28, 2012 at 2:47 PM

    Oswalt demanded a trade out of Houston, very doubtful he’d be welcomed back, by the fans or management.

    • thereisaparty - Aug 28, 2012 at 4:12 PM

      Because the management in Houston hasn’t changed at all …

      Houston and Roy Oswalt makes absolutely zero sense. Why would Houston give up anything for one month of a player?

  7. stex52 - Aug 28, 2012 at 3:07 PM

    Really wasn’t demanded. Management wanted permission from him to put his name out. He had refused for a while. Then it occurred to him that maybe he’d like to be on a winner. Atlanta was really his preference, all things being equal.

    I don’t think the fans would have a problem. Good gosh, look at the crap they are being fed every night now.

  8. 18thstreet - Aug 28, 2012 at 3:46 PM

    I think his problem is that he’s trying to pitch in the American League. That was his mistake. A trip back to the NL will cure his problems.

  9. spytdi - Aug 28, 2012 at 3:50 PM

    Feldman is a better long reliever than a starter. he doesn’t know how to establish himself in the early going and maintain any kind of tempo. I’d rather see Martin Perez than either of these guys.

    • thereisaparty - Aug 28, 2012 at 4:10 PM

      Feldman’s problem is that he isn’t a very good pitcher and he shouldn’t be going through a lineup more than twice. This is why he is a better long reliever than starter.

  10. billymc75 - Aug 28, 2012 at 6:45 PM

    He cleared three weeks ago

  11. smokehouse56 - Aug 28, 2012 at 7:40 PM

    As a Phillies fan I was mad as hell when they traded him. I thought what the hell are they doing. That’s why I’m a couch potato and the pros run the team.

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Featured video

This was 'the perfect baseball game'
Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. S. Kazmir (5208)
  2. G. Springer (3783)
  3. K. Uehara (3419)
  4. M. Machado (3258)
  5. D. Pedroia (2921)
  1. J. Reyes (2847)
  2. J. Chavez (2763)
  3. H. Ramirez (2739)
  4. T. Walker (2657)
  5. C. Granderson (2560)