Waive Bye-Bye? Evan Grant on Vicente Padilla

Here is the great Evan Grant's commentary on the Padilla fiasco with the Rangers last week. Maybe it served a purpose.
Evan Grant now writes for D Magazine.

BOSTON - The waiver period on Vicente Padilla came in with a bang Wednesday and went out with barely a whimper Friday afternoon.
For whatever reason - his salary, his stuff or his erratic behavior - nobody claimed him.
But that seemed to be a foregone conclusion from the moment we broke the story Wednesday afternoon.
So why do it in the first place?
It’s an impossible question to fully answer because the Rangers won’t talk about waivers - hey, they won’t even officially acknowledge that he was available or that he cleared. We can at least take some guesses, though:
• They wanted to send a message: The next question, however, is to who? To the rest of the team, which has cringed for three-plus seasons every time Padilla goes looking to harvest body parts using a baseball as his extractor? To Padilla?
The waivers move came less than 24 hours after Padilla hit Mark Teixeira twice, earning pay back against Elvis Andrus (hard slide) and Nelson Cruz (head-buzzing). Placing him on waivers would let the club know that “Hey, we’re at least trying to get rid of the guy,” and it would serve as notice to Padilla that his time in Texas could be short.
The only problem with this theory is the vehicle: Waivers are supposed to be double secret probation secret. So, if the Rangers were trying to send a message, they were relying on a media leak doing the work for them. That’s hardly the preferred message delivery system.
Still the message did get out and prompted a “very good” meeting between Padilla and Rangers officials, I’ve been told.
So, if sending a message internally was the reason behind the move, it would have to be considered a success. Well, at least until the Rangers see what kind of approach Padilla brings to the mound on Sunday and beyond.
• They were advertising: The Rangers believe they are contenders, but just like other contenders, they have holes. They could use another bat, particularly if Josh Hamilton is going to be out past the All-Star break. They could use an extra setup man in the bullpen. Every contender could use a front-line starter.
To help fill any hole, they are going to have to move some salary around. Padilla, still due about $8 million for this year, is the largest salary the club could consider moving.
By placing him on waivers, it acts as a classified ad to other clubs:
“Need Starting Pitcher? Contact Texas Rangers. Willing to discuss financial arrangements on this $8 million model.”
It’s broadcast to the whole league that way.
The problem with this is that it doesn’t really save you much work. Jon Daniels could have sent an email to the handful of clubs who might legitimately have interest in him without risking animosity that could arise from Padilla finding out he’d been placed on waivers.
This just seems like too much risk for too little reward, but it might get a conversation or two started that otherwise might not happen.
• They are in deep financial trouble: The Rangers are for sale. The sale price, depending on where you look seems to be dropping. A wise buyer might hold out for several more months to see if Tom Hicks’ financial situation further deteriorates.
Hicks said in an email this week that business operations for the Rangers will operate under this premise “it’s business as usual.”
Maybe Hicks is playing down the degree of the financial situation, but if the Rangers are in deep, deep financial trouble, I’d expected there to be more guys on the way out the door.
It’s possible the Rangers are financially motivated, but doubtful that is the sole reason behind the move.
From where I sit, it seems the most logical reasoning behind the move was to try and send some subtle message to the team and Padilla that his casual head-hunting will no longer be tolerated. But unless the Rangers are willing to go the Sidney Ponson route and release a pitcher having some success, it simply seems strange.