I'm going to ask Baseball America transaction guru Matt Eddy about this. Shane Peterson has enough time in pro ball (since 2008, Baseball Cube), that if he had not been on the 40-man at the end of the year, he would have been a minor league free agent. But I've also read that unless you have three years of big league time on your resume, you can't refuse the outright assignment, so not sure if Peterson had a choice here once he cleared waivers. If that's so, it's like the Brewers gained another year of ownership over him. It's something that has confused me for sometime, will see if we can confirm... Matt Eddy: The only time a player may elect FA following an outright assignment is if (1) he has previously been outrighted to the minors, or (2) he has 3 or more years of MLB service. The latter does not apply to Peterson. This reminds me of a player having spent seven seasons with an organization (one short season, and then fulfilling his six-year contract), and then, just before hitting free agency, being added to the team's 40-man roster. Now, with three option years, that player, has effectively been "owned" for ten years by the organization. We've seen players added by the Brewers like this in the past. Don't think they were long-term 40-man roster players after that, however. And now, with what we just discussed, we realize that the same player could be outrighted on the cusp of the 11th season and effectively be owned by that team for 11 seasons. Probably very rare, but must be an example somewhere.