MLB Spring Injuries and Concerns.

[Can_of_corn]

If you are given the choice between 25M and betting on yourself and you bet on yourself and lose, yea I don't have much sympathy for you.

You made the choice, your agent should have advised you of the risks.

Many billion people are worse off.

[CaptainRedbeard]

If you are given the choice between 25M and betting on yourself and you bet on yourself and lose, yea I don't have much sympathy for you.

You made the choice, your agent should have advised you of the risks.

Many billion people are worse off.

That's where we're seeing past each other. To each their own, I suppose. I just think this is a mischaracterization of the situation. You shouldn't have to have a choice where you have to "bet on yourself" to get a payday that's still far less than you're worth. It's also not like players are opting to take some risky gamble by not taking early extensions - career ending injuries like Parker's are very uncommon.

Typically the team friendly extension guarantees slightly more than what you'd expect their earning floor to be in lieu of an unlikely injury or severe drop-off in performance. It's only appealing if you're extremely risk averse - the risk neutral path is to not take an extension after 1-2 years in the league at a high level.

Again, saying many billions of people are worse off is so irrelevant. Of course they are. We're talking about professional athletes here. Just because they're exceptionally well off doesn't mean they're immune to get unfairly treated relative to their peers. I see a case of a person who was not adequately compensated for their work and I say that's unfortunate for them. Why does it have to be more complicated than that?

[Can_of_corn]

Their peer group is other year 1-3 players. They are as far removed from free agents as guys in AA are removed from them.

[CaptainRedbeard]

Their peer group is other year 1-3 players. They are as far removed from free agents as guys in AA are removed from them.

Why should that be his peer group? His peer group is professional baseball players. They're playing the same game, their contributions count the same in the outcome of the games regardless of their age and experience, their value to the team is based on their production. Bucketing peer players based on age rather than ability should have no impact on salaries from a fairness point of view, it's only done because it's a relic of a system made to suppress player salaries that was only partially broken with the advent of free agency.

Here's a more fair system: Rookies get paid league minimum. Each year for the subsequent 5 years, players are under team control and can go to salary arbitration, without the 20/40/60 increasing salary nonsense. Teams have less money to pay free agents and free agents get smaller contracts, but young players are paid what they're actually worth. The incentive to draft and develop still exists through the value of optional team control for young players.

The same amount of salary can go to players overall, but you don't have issues of overpaid free agents on the back end of their contracts and underpaid year 1-6 players. Why won't this happen? Because the union reps are the players that "made it" and paid their dues, so to speak, of below market salaries in years 1-6, and want their back-end career compensation. Agents make their name on giant free agent contracts. The only players who would benefit from a change are the players who don't have the same voice, much like the minor league players who have been represented poorly.

[Can_of_corn]

Guys in AA are not professionals?

[CaptainRedbeard]

Guys in AA are not professionals?

Actually, technically according to their compensation, I don't believe they are completely. I think they're classified as seasonal or part time, which is why teams can dodge some employment regulations and don't have to pay them for workouts, meaning they make less than the effective minimum wage. There may be some advancements in their status that I'm not aware of. I know there's been some recent litigation.

But that's not the distinction I was trying to make and I'm sure you knew that. Obviously by the context I meant professional MLB players that were contributing to major league games, no different that the veteran players, and should be compensated as such.

[thezeroes]

Actually, technically according to their compensation, I don't believe they are completely. I think they're classified as seasonal or part time, which is why teams can dodge some employment regulations and don't have to pay them for workouts, meaning they make less than the effective minimum wage. There may be some advancements in their status that I'm not aware of. I know there's been some recent litigation.

But that's not the distinction I was trying to make and I'm sure you knew that. Obviously by the context I meant professional MLB players that were contributing to major league games, no different that the veteran players, and should be compensated as such.

I do not believe that this type of compensation for Pre-Arbitration Years would ever muster enough support from either the Union or the Owners. Secondly, I do not think the Owners would want this unless there was a "Salary Cap" to keep players from demanding more $$$. I also believe that the Union would want the structuring of your type of Pre-Arb. players salaries to automatically boost all salaries to a higher level.

As the structure is now used, the Union has specfics as far as how much salary a player can have "Cut". This would also have to be bargained to a lower level (percentage)if a player under-performs your type of structure.

[CaptainRedbeard]

I do not believe that this type of compensation for Pre-Arbitration Years would ever muster enough support from either the Union or the Owners. Secondly, I do not think the Owners would want this unless there was a "Salary Cap" to keep players from demanding more $$$. I also believe that the Union would want the structuring of your type of Pre-Arb. players salaries to automatically boost all salaries to a higher level.

As the structure is now used, the Union has specfics as far as how much salary a player can have "Cut". This would also have to be bargained to a lower level (percentage)if a player under-performs your type of structure.

Oh what I proposed will absolutely never happen, for the reasons you outlined and for a couple that I stated as well. I have no delusions on that. It's not something the union wants to push for. Just commenting on how unfortunate it is for a player like Parker to slip through the cracks as a player who had two very successful pre-arb years and never got a payday for it.

[25 Nuggets]

Kyle Schwarber exits game with injured knee.

Things don't appear serious.

If there's a team than can afford resting an OF it's the Cubs. But it's spring training anyway.

The Cards however -- Peralta could be out until the All-Star break after having surgery. That hurts their lineup big time. If only Ian Desmond waited a few days longer. Right now the debate is whether they should trade for a SS.

[weams]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Eduardo Rodriguez with knee inj expected to miss opening day. Had knee issue with AA Bowie in 2014 before trade. <a href="https://t.co/qe6YlS4vQ2">https://t.co/qe6YlS4vQ2</a></p>— Steve Melewski (@masnSteve) <a href="

">March 11, 2016</a></blockquote>

<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

[Can_of_corn]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Wieters left game with right elbow soreness <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/orioles?src=hash">#orioles</a></p>— Roch Kubatko (@masnRoch) <a href="

">March 12, 2016</a></blockquote>

<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

[ReclaimTheCrown]

Haha. Yeah, this is potentially extremely bad.

[Enjoy Terror]

If there's one player who I'd probably buy a round for the bar if he had a season ending injury, it's Eduardo Rodriguez.

Not saying I actually wish an injury on him or anyone... but if he HAPPENED to be injured... yeah.... drinks on me.

[Can_of_corn]

Welp, Wieters is dead.

Time to see if he can throw left handed.

[Enjoy Terror]

I observed yesterday that of Gallardo's 33 starts in 2015, 12 were quality starts, and only one of them came after the all star break (14/33).

Reason being is that he failed to pitch into the sixth inning in all but two of those starts. Someone pointed out to me that the Rangers were pulling him in the 5th consistently to go the pen, but I call BS on that because he only failed to reach 90 pitches once in the entire second half. Gallardo was completely gassed by the end of the 5th inning in almost all of his starts. It's amazing the Rangers offered him a QO. It's even more amazing that we bit on it.