People seem to be overlooking the fact that Thompson did a terrific job for the Angels in 2010 AND 2011. Before that, he was pretty bad.

They're treating him as though he's been horrible all along.

No, they don't want to wait and wait to see which Thompson shows up this year, they have other young options that are in the wings and need to show what they can do up here.

It's really too bad we have to wait for late April's appearance of Cassevah. He's reliable, something we need so badly right now.

He is just like our other relievers, good to start an inning not so good with runners on.
last year 10.24 ERA, with runners in scoring position.

I somehow missed THAT stat. :(

Well, it looks like the A's have seen enough...

"The Athletics have designated Rich Thompson for assignment, the team announced. The move creates room on the 40-man roster for Jim Miller, who was recalled from Triple-A.

Thompson, 27, was claimed off waivers from the Angels last week. He faced three batters during his brief time with Oakland, allowing a single in between two outs. The Angels designated the Australian-born right-hander for assignment after he allowed four runs in his first 2 1/3 innings of the season. Thompson pitched to a 3.00 ERA with 9.3 K/9 and 3.3 BB/9 in 54 innings last season and is out of options, meaning he can't be sent to the minor without first clearing waivers." - MLBtraderumors

Wow. He faced three batters and allowed a hit.

That's certainly a good reason to basically dump him. :(

He certainly was nothing more than a very brief stopgap for the A's, wasn't he?

Another reason to question the competence of Mike Butcher ( as if there were not already plenty to wonder why he keeps his job) He thought this guys was good enough for the Angels pen, and it turns out he threw one inning and proved he wasn't even good enough to stay in Oakland.
My guess is he will clear waivers this time, go to the minors for some teaching and mental rehab, and come back up and be effective.
Mark my words.

Just out of curiosity - and not that the Angels would - but does anyone know whether the rules allow Team A, having DFA'd a player who is claimed off waivers by Team B but then DFA'd by Team B, to turn around and claim the player back?

Good question. I would think as a team that had already released him, you would go to the back of the line, and would have to wait until every other team decided NOT to claim him before you got your turn at claiming him, and then you would have to pay back the $450,000 that you just got from Oak.

>>Wow. He faced three batters and allowed a hit.<<

It's even worse than that. The A's brought him in with the bases loaded and one out to face Paul Konerko, AJ Pierzynski, and Alex Rios - all of whom are hitting .340 this season playing full time.

He got the first out, then allowed a grounder up the middle which scored the guy on third, then got the third out.

And then was released. Not exactly a terrible performance. I wonder if his velocity is down or something, which is the only thing I can think of that teams would be cutting him so quickly.

But DFA'd is not always the same as released. I'm sure there are plenty of instances when a team really hopes a player who is out of options will clear waivers. And again, I'm not saying that's the case with Thompson and the Angels. I just wondered whether there's some rule, as you suggest, that might push Team A to last on the list, or something.

There is DFA, where a player must clear waivers... and then there is "unconditional" release which basically makes a player a free agent.
I don't pretend to be an expert on all of the rules and nuances. Those are the basics as I understand them.

The Angel can re-claim him through waiver but they would have to release somebody else that is on the 40 man roster to do it.