Does the ADA open the door for teams full of walking midgets?

[Lucky Jim]

The PGA lost their case to require Casey Martin to play without using a golf cart because the courts decided that walking from hole to hole was not a fundamental part of the game. MLB could argue that a midget wasn't a legitimate ballplayer because he wouldn't be able to play adequately on defense; run the bases well; or hit for average. Of course, there is a precedent for baseball signing players out of high school, so if a midget were able to play regularly in an ordinary league at any level, he might have a case -- providing that an MLB team was willing to sign him.

I think that the counter would be to have the pitcher groove the pitches, move the infielders in to bunt distance, and move the outfielders into just behind the bases. I doubt if a midget could hit the ball out of the infield or run fast enough to make it safely to first if he did manage to hit the ball. Most major league pitchers ought to be able to place their pitches within a midget's minuscule strike zone if they only concerned themselves with location and not with velocity or movement.

The inability to play defense might not be a valid argument, now that the DH has opened up baseball to one dimensional ballplayers. If a GM could find some midgets with marginal running speed -- say roughly the level of a Yadi Molina or an Ernie Lombardi -- then he might be able to get away with signing them solely to DH in September.

The cost to a team would be about $60K per player, assuming that they only played for the month of September, given that they'd have to be paid the ML minimum.

I think this is one of those instances where there's no need to regulate because the market wouldn't sustain a team of midgets. It's good for a one-off gambit, I think, but that's about it.

More interesting, I think, is the recent challenge by NFL players of the drug policy under the ADA -- players with addictions protected from league enforcement? Stay-tuned...

[utvolzac]

This might be the greatest thread ever.

How hilarious would it be to beat the Yankees using a team full of little people. 150 million .vs. 150 inches.

[ScottieBaseball]

I don't think this would work. Little people have a lot of health issues in addition to just being really short. Lots of bone and joint deformities,poor muscle tone, motor delays, respiratory issues, and spinal/skull problems, just to name a few that would affect how they play sports. Many of them have shunts in their heads because of hydrocephalus, so contact sports can be really dangerous. Getting beaned would be a disaster, and since their heads would be a lot lower than what pitchers are used to, that's a big risk. They'd be really slow between the bases because of the short legs and muscle development problems and any kind of collision with an average-height player would probably result in severe injury. Most of these people top out at the average height for a 7-year-old boy. Would you stick a 7-year-old out there with a bunch of grown men, even just to stand at the plate? No way, right? The mental image of them getting hit by a 93 MPH fastball gives me the willies. Too many safety problems here.

According to the previously mentioned LPAonline.org, there are a bunch of different types of dwarfism, and not all involve even one of the medical issues you described. Height and short legs may be the only general obstacles that a little person might face in the big league game, so I don't think the safety problems are any different than I'd face.

[DrungoHazewood]

I ran some basic calculations using a binomial distribution and various walk rates:

OBP	4/6	5/7	6/80.300	7.050%	2.880%	1.130%0.350	11.740%	5.560%	2.530%0.400	17.920%	9.630%	4.980%0.450	25.530%	15.290%	8.850%0.500	34.380%	22.660%	14.450%0.550	44.150%	31.640%	22.010%0.600	54.430%	41.990%	31.540%0.650	64.710%	53.230%	42.780%0.700	74.430%	64.710%	55.180%0.750	83.060%	75.640%	67.850%0.800	90.110%	85.200%	79.690%0.850	95.270%	92.620%	89.480%0.900	98.420%	97.430%	96.190%0.950	99.780%	99.620%	99.420%

4/6 means the probability of at least four walks in six plate appearances - in other words the odds of scoring one or more runs by walks alone in six plate appearances, given the OBP in the first column. The OBP is assumed to be driven solely by walks. 5/7 and 6/8 are the same thing, five walks in seven PAs, or six in eight.

Seems to me there's a threshold here around 60% or so where it would make sense (well, at least to me. Maybe not to sane people) to field a September team of nine little people in road games, then sub them all out in the bottom of the first. If they could draw walks in 75% or 80% of their PAs it clearly gives an advantage. Remember, an average AL team scores 0.58 runs in the first inning. If your little people could draw a walk 75% of the time they'd have better than a two-in-three chance of scoring three runs.

I'm going to write a letter to Mike Veeck. If he can't pull this off on one of his Indy League teams nobody can.

[Pedro Cerrano]

I've thought about this in another context, in another sport. A hockey team signing the 1200 pound woman on Springer to be their goalie. Throw an XXXXXXL uni on her and plop her in front of the net and a team could never score.

She would just have to be able to withstand a barrage of pucks being hit her way each night but for a million or so dollars I think she'd manage.

[DrungoHazewood]

I've thought about this in another context, in another sport. A hockey team signing the 1200 pound woman on Springer to be their goalie. Throw an XXXXXXL uni on her and plop her in front of the net and a team could never score.

She would just have to be able to withstand a barrage of pucks being hit her way each night but for a million or so dollars I think she'd manage.

I've often wondered the same thing.

[RShack]

This thread just keep getting better ;-)

[DrungoHazewood]

It just occured to me that this strategy would be even more successful if you didn't start with it, but instead used it in the late innings. Any time you're within a few runs in the 9th or you just needed baserunners you'd use your little guys to pinch hit. Leverage is much higher and win probability would be most effected by legions of late-inning Gaedels.

If you did things that way you might even be able to get away with this on a smaller scale before September roster expansion.

[RShack]

It just occured to me that this strategy would be even more successful if you didn't start with it, but instead used it in the late innings. Any time you're within a few runs in the 9th or you just needed baserunners you'd use your little guys to pinch hit. Leverage is much higher and win probability would be most effected by legions of late-inning Gaedels.

If you did things that way you might even be able to get away with this on a smaller scale before September roster expansion.

Right. Makes sense. (Did I really just say that?)

So, the basic idea is that the batter is crouched like a C, but with a bat in his hands. It would create a late-inning PH role for the no-hit 2nd and 3rd C's.

What I find amusing (in addition to the rest of it) is the image of the ST drills to get everybody ready for it. While the P's are out running back and forth across the OF, everybody else would be crouch-walking across the OF with bats in their hands...

[Migrant Redbird]

So, the basic idea is that the batter is crouched like a C, but with a bat in his hands. It would create a late-inning PH role for the no-hit 2nd and 3rd C's..

Instead of being crouched like a C, more like a closed up notebook.

And you really wouldn't need to be a midget to do it. Anyone reasonably limber ought to be able to approximate the strike zone of a crouching midget.

Which makes me wonder if someone hasn't actually tried it before in spring training or the minor leagues -- possibly even many times. The only caveat is that the batter needs to actually be able to swing from the position -- no straightening up as he strides into the pitch. My suspicion is that it's been tried and it failed miserably -- the batter being able to swing is more of a handicap to him than having to deal with the reduced strike zone is for the pitcher. Umpires would, for the most part, tend to give the benefit of the doubt to the pitcher, especially if they regarded Gaedel clones as being a travesty to the sport.

I think the Gaedel experiment succeeded on a one time basis because it caught the opposing pitcher by surprise. If MLB had permitted Veeck to continue playing Gaedel, I think that the league would have dealt with him and his OBP would have ended up being worse than that of an AL pitcher.