1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

MLB season delayed

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Regan MacNeil, Mar 12, 2020.

  1. outofplace

    outofplace Well-Known Member

    Giving a year of service when the player didn't play seems odd to me, even if it is because of circumstances beyond the player's control.

    My reservation wasn't specifically about pissing off the Dodgers. I'm more concerned with fairness than I am with who gets pissed off. I don't know specific examples, but I'm sure there are other situations that this screws a team over.

    What about low-revenue franchises? Doesn't this screw them? They lose a year of control of a player for nothing.

    You are right in questioning the value of what the Red Sox got in return, especially with the revelation that Verdugo still has a fracture in his back.
  2. Michael_ Gee

    Michael_ Gee Well-Known Member

    The Dodgers still have an entire season in which they are the only team that can negotiate with Betts. That's not as good as having him play for 160 or so, but it's not nothing.
  3. bigpern23

    bigpern23 Well-Known Member

    It is odd, but the alternative is telling 27-year-old Mookie Betts that he's not eligible for free agency until he's 29 instead of 28. It's telling Aaron Judge, who has made a grand total of $3.8M in his career ($2M in salary earnings), that he's not eligible for his big payday until he's 32. The list goes on. The players would revolt, and understandably so.

    Many/most/all of these franchises will still be around long after these guys have aged out and retired. Every year of earning potential is far more valuable to the players than one year of their service time is to the franchises. It doesn't screw the franchises enough to risk the blowback and acrimony from the players.
    cake in the rain likes this.
  4. Elliotte Friedman

    Elliotte Friedman Moderator Staff Member

    Im shocked at all of the people on here saying they don't think Betts should get credit for the year. If he worked in newspapers, you'd be screaming he's been screwed by ownership.

    Someone wake up Fredrick!
  5. ChrisLong

    ChrisLong Well-Known Member

    He's still in the 10 o'clock meeting. Don't bother him.
    BrownScribe likes this.
  6. micropolitan guy

    micropolitan guy Well-Known Member

    That credited year of service could be a game-changer for the 25th or 26th player, or some rookie. A big-league player needs just 43 days of service to qualify for a pension benefit. Forty-three days of service can guarantee an MLB player a $34,000 per year pension benefit. Major league baseball players become fully vested in their pensions after 10 years of service, so many borderline players with nine years of service now might be golden too.

    It's a gift that will keep on giving. Lots of impact on the backend, too.
  7. Twirling Time

    Twirling Time Well-Known Member

    The most common final score in baseball is 3-2, followed closely by 4-3.

  8. Sea Bass

    Sea Bass Well-Known Member

    Am I to take from this that there has been a Major League Baseball game that ended 49-33?
  9. Spartan Squad

    Spartan Squad Well-Known Member

  10. Batman

    Batman Well-Known Member

    It's ridiculous that Betts sometimes plays a 12-inning game and only gets paid for nine innings.
  11. DanOregon

    DanOregon Well-Known Member

  12. 2muchcoffeeman

    2muchcoffeeman Well-Known Member

    Thank you, Scott Boras.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page