Melky Cabrera DQ's himself from batting title

[Dick Whitman]

http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/8407726/san-francisco-giants-melky-cabrera-disqualifies-nl-batting-title

But here's what I don't get:

As the agreement is worded, the only way Cabrera would qualify for the batting title is if the Giants had a rainout and played only 161 games, in which case 499 plate appearances would be sufficient. Such a situation is unlikely this late in the season.

Wouldn't such a situation be more likely this late in the season, not less, as teams typically do not make up rainouts if they don't play a team again this season?

 

[cranberry]

You can add hitless plate appearances under 10.22 (a) that could have brought him to the necessary 501. That rule was changed on a one-time basis to exclude players who are suspended.

 

[LongTimeListener]

California gets zero rain in September. Not sure exactly where all they're going, but with the short time frame I'd be shocked if they face any rain at all the rest of the way.

I haven't clicks the link, but the Graf you posted is incorrect if it doesn't include the "adding an 0-for-1 to get him to the minimum" exception.

 

[Versatile]

I hate this. Hate it. Players shouldn't get to determine what records they hold. The record books should be free from politicking and singular circumstance.

 

[Smasher_Sloan]

Dusty Feldbaumer should have disqualified him.

 

[Rusty Shackleford]

Dusty Feldbaumer should have disqualified him.

Andrew McCutcheon should have disqualified him.

 

[Azrael]

You'd have to assume he has a pretty big bonus clause in his contract if he "wins" the "batting title." Might have something to do with that.

Might also be a trial balloon by the league to see what's expungable and what isn't.

 

[Liut]

I cannot believe MLB and the Player's Association would agree on anything.

 

[LongTimeListener]

I do agree with Vers though -- what if Miguel Cabrera finds himself in a Braun situation in the offseason but the FedEx office was open, do they take the Triple Crown away?

 

[Dick Whitman]

The Tony Gwynn Rule at least gave them a plausible ground here. They lucked out. Not sure what would have happened had he had just one more plate appearance. They dodged a huge bullet.

 

[LongTimeListener]

How does the Gwynn Rule give them a plausible ground? It isn't a choice whether they apply it. It's the rule.

 

[Dick Whitman]

How does the Gwynn Rule give them a plausible ground? It isn't a choice whether they apply it. It's the rule.

Because he doesn't have the plate appearances to normally qualify. So they can "lift" that rule for one year, then change it back. But what if he had 503 plate appearances, then what do you do? There's not some arcane exception to manipulate. I suppose they could have said, "For this year only, the rule is 3.2 plate appearances per game."

 

[LongTimeListener]

That doesn't look to me like a rule that they can choose to apply when they want to. It's the rule.

 

[Starman]

The rule should be changed -- like tonight -- that if a player fails to meet minimum appearance standards in any given season due to PED suspension, he is ineligible for any statistical leadership awards.

And if that's unfair to Melky Cabrera, tough ****. Maybe he shouldn't have gotten caught.

 

[LongTimeListener]

The rule should be changed -- like tonight -- that if a player fails to meet minimum appearance standards in any given season due to PED suspension, he is ineligible for any statistical leadership awards.

And if that's unfair to Melky Cabrera, tough ****. Maybe he shouldn't have gotten caught.

I would go a step farther and say that in any season a player misses time due to PED suspension, he's ineligible. Accounts for the leftovers who were discovered late the previous season. Merriman precedent and all.

But as to the actual Gwynn Rule, which makes no judgment on the reason for the missed time (suspension, injury, late call-up), I just don't see how any option applies. It isn't as if baseball has previously said "well, on this one we'll take a look." If a guy can take an ohfer all the way up to 502 and still win, he wins.

 

[Spartan Squad]

I hate this. Hate it. Players shouldn't get to determine what records they hold. The record books should be free from politicking and singular circumstance.

You're right, normally players should pick and choose. But Cabrera is taking responsibility for his wrong doing by making sure he doesn't get rewarded even after getting his 50 games suspension. My issue with this is Cabrera said he doesn't want to accept a tainted award, but would he have accepted this award if he never got caught? Of course he would. It's at best a shallow expression of apology. This way, MLB doesn't give him the title anyway and make up some malarkey that gives him the title anyway.

 

[LongTimeListener]

According to CSN Bay Area's Andrew Baggarly, who broke the story, this is one step in Cabrera's image-rehab efforts in hopes of getting added to the postseason roster. He's on the shelf for five postseason games, and out here there has been quite a bit of discussion about what they'll do if they make it to the NLCS or beyond.

 

[MankyJimy]

Melky didn't need to do this. He accepted his punishment by serving his suspension. We also don't know how much or if the steroids even helped at all. Everyone seems to think there are many more using PEDs so if that's true how come Melky was the only one to hit .346?

 

[outofplace]

I hate this. Hate it. Players shouldn't get to determine what records they hold. The record books should be free from politicking and singular circumstance.

This. This is exactly the slippery slope Commish-for-Life Bud said he didn't want, but now he's letting it happen. I actually applaud the sentiment on Cabrera's point, though I doubt it is anything but image rehab on his part, but no way in hell MLB should do this.

 

[MankyJimy]

This is an off the wall idea, but what if MLB allowed one player in each team to take any PEDs they wanted?