so for 1/12 of a GM salary (lets call it $500K) the Padres get one of the highest ceiling prospects in baseball.
Its sounds like a steal.
Its sounds like a steal.
Stripping the Padres of an asset - Espinoza, a draft pick, etc. - makes absolutely no sense. There's no precedent for it. The ancillary effects on the Padres would be terrible. MLB is absolutely invested in keeping all 30 teams competitive. Stripping teams of an asset for not using the medical database properly is ... overkill.Wait... what? Theyre never getting Espinoza back, sure, but... what? Because it would hurt the Padres as a team on the field and selling tickets? You're serious?
That's a matter of his contract, and I'm not sure an MLB rules violation is misconduct, particularly if the standard is at all murky. If he sexually harasses someone, then yeah, probably.Not if he was fired for misconduct. I'm sure that would void any contract.
Well, the Red Sox did get Pomeranz and he hasn't died yet, so it's not like the Padres stole something.so for 1/12 of a GM salary (lets call it $500K) the Padres get one of the highest ceiling prospects in baseball.
Its sounds like a steal.
Yes we are! In year five of his MLB career, when the Padres are desperate to recoup any of his vaule.Wait... what? Theyre never getting Espinoza back, sure, but... what? Because it would hurt the Padres as a team on the field and selling tickets? You're serious?
Preller's been suspended for rules violations before, so if the language in his contract is anything less than clear, the Padres deserve what they get (or get stuck with).That's a matter of his contract, and I'm not sure an MLB rules violation is misconduct, particularly if the standard is at all murky. If he sexually harasses someone, then yeah, probably.
Well .. MLB stripped the Red Sox of five assets .. For a practice that was only unacceptable when a team was over the signing limit.Stripping the Padres of an asset - Espinoza, a draft pick, etc. - makes absolutely no sense. There's no precedent for it. The ancillary effects on the Padres would be terrible. MLB is absolutely invested in keeping all 30 teams competitive. Stripping teams of an asset for not using the medical database properly is ... overkill.
I hope that clarifies.
A window to exchange 1st round picks might suffice in lieu of a lottery ticket.Well, the Red Sox did get Pomeranz and he hasn't died yet, so it's not like the Padres stole something.
Maybe they should have to send the Red Sox a lottery ticket to even things out.
OK. The two situation are not comparable, but I'll play along for a moment. I have a few questions, though:Well .. MLB stripped the Red Sox of five assets .. For a practice that was only unacceptable when a team was over the signing limit.
So there IS a precedent here. If the Padres gained a prospect upgrade from the Sox by not properly updating the database shouldn't the Sox - or any other team in the same position - be somehow "made whole"?
Fining Preller does not make the Sox whole.
Why do we consider the Red Sox unwhole in this thing? They got Pomeranz. That's what they were after in the first place. He's not broken, he can still pitch. Supposedly, the info the Pads withheld had to do with how they were treating the guy, not that he had some hidden injury.Fining Preller does not make the Sox whole.
The Sox penalty was pretty harsh, and you can guess it was done to "send a message" as it was the first(that i'm aware of) penalty of its kind.What is a realistic way to "make the Red Sox whole" from your perspective?
The entire team was in on it. They should punish the team instead of only Preller.What would you have suggested?
Assuming "cover him in honey and make him run through a bear infested forest" was off the table?
To the best of knowledge ..OK. The two situation are not comparable, but I'll play along for a moment. I have a few questions, though:
Is there a published MLB rule on international signings?
Is there a published MLB rule on use of the medical information sharing system?
Did the Red Sox already publicly state that there was no need to alter the trade? That they would not pursue compensation?
What is a realistic way to "make the Red Sox whole" from your perspective?
Right, I don't believe we know the full extent of the penalty yet. If the Padres lose a draft pick does that suffice? Remember, there are three "aggrieved" parties here, plus MLB. The Padres aren't swapping picks with all of them.A window to exchange 1st round picks might suffice in lieu of a lottery ticket.
But I would be interested to hear you expand upon why a team cheating another (several) and unfairly enriching itself should not be more severely punished than just not paying its GM $500k. I'm not sure what the organizational punishment is.
Apparently not, or nothing sufficiently specific.OK. The two situation are not comparable, but I'll play along for a moment. I have a few questions, though:
Is there a published MLB rule on international signings?
Is there a published MLB rule on use of the medical information sharing system?
Did the Red Sox already publicly state that there was no need to alter the trade? That they would not pursue compensation?
What is a realistic way to "make the Red Sox whole" from your perspective?
The examination of the Padres' moves has led to a larger conversation about establishing clear and written protocol for what medical information MLB teams must disclose as they prepare trades.
Please, direct me to the the published rules on the use of the medical information sharing system.To the best of knowledge ..
Yes
Yes
Yes
I don't know .. Maybe something like giving the Sox a percentage of the Padres' signing pool in the June draft? There has to be something that penalizes the Padres AND compensates the Red Sox - or any other team.
That would require a lot of hungry bears.The entire team was in on it. They should punish the team instead of only Preller.
Public in this sense refers to the fact that all MLB teams knew about it which is all that matters here. Who cares if the public knows about it.Please, direct me to the the published rules on the use of the medical information sharing system.
EDIT: Per the post above, it doesn't exist. So, you made a mistake?
That the punishment is excessive agree with and is likely the reason. The action is supposed to be punitive, theyre not avoiding that penalty because it would hurt the Padres at the box office or elsewhere, thats just kind of an odd thesis.Stripping the Padres of an asset - Espinoza, a draft pick, etc. - makes absolutely no sense. There's no precedent for it. The ancillary effects on the Padres would be terrible. MLB is absolutely invested in keeping all 30 teams competitive. Stripping teams of an asset for not using the medical database properly is ... overkill.
I hope that clarifies.
Yeah, it was sloppily worded and that's my fault. Thanks for asking to clarify. Because so many teams are involved, and it's not just a Sox-Padres issue, anything involving assets moving is complicated and potentially very unfair to the Padres unless they were injecting players with Bird AIDS or something.That the punishment is excessive agree with and is likely the reason. The action is supposed to be punitive, theyre not avoiding that penalty because it would hurt the Padres at the box office or elsewhere, thats just kind of an odd thesis.
Think youd get farther w "theres no precedent."
Well, I think your entire position on this is patently ridiculous and hopelessly biased. I think you don't give a shit about the Marlins or the White Sox in this situation, that your suggested penalty is overkill and potentially crippling to the Padres, and that you are grossly overrating Espinoza. Also, I don't think you've read or understood what your read in the Olney article and that your last paragraph is riddled with inaccuracy and supposition."The Padres aren't swapping picks with all of them"
why not?
You've yet to explain why the Padres should be allowed to cheat other teams and escape a real penalty. Again wheres the penalty in not paying Preller for 30 days? Hell he may deserve a 7-figure bonus for getting Espinoza for just $500k (his lost salary)
MLB should assess the damage to the respective organizations, rank them and come up with a penalty that both penalizes the Padres and makes the other teams whole. If it means that the Padres swap 1st round picks with 3 teams over some time period, would that be too punitive for knowingly trying to mislead those teams with incomplete medical data? It might be, but it would also act as a better deterrent than a 30 day suspension (and one that can be recouped in short order).
They're already punishing the entire team by making them play for the Padres.The entire team was in on it. They should punish the team instead of only Preller.
But what if it's past the trading deadline? Does the bilked team get to trade with any of the other teams for a replacement that does not have to go through waivers? (Just saying it's really hard to fashion a solution that is enough of a penalty to actually deter.)I think allowing the Sox to just completely reverse the trade when this first came up would have been reasonable.
Give Drew an extra three inches on the outside of the plate for the remainder of 2016.What is a realistic way to "make the Red Sox whole" from your perspective?
I agree it's a tough situation. I still don't think there is a more appropriate way to make the wronged team whole other than to give them the option to revoke the trade, but I agree the penalty shouldn't end there. Some kind of league sanction to deter future wrongdoing is definitely in order. Taking away a draft pick or slot money or something would be fine. Doesn't need to go to the wronged team or anything, just take it away.But what if it's past the trading deadline? Does the bilked team get to trade with any of the other teams for a replacement that does not have to go through waivers? (Just saying it's really hard to fashion a solution that is enough of a penalty to actually deter.)
I agree it's a tough situation. I still don't think there is a more appropriate way to make the wronged team whole other than to give them the option to revoke the trade, but I agree the penalty shouldn't end there. Some kind of league sanction to deter future wrongdoing is definitely in order. Taking away a draft pick or slot money or something would be fine. Doesn't need to go to the wronged team or anything, just take it away.
Edit: I suspect maybe DD had that option and that was what the early report about the Red Sox not pursuing any changes to the deal was referring to. I'm sure we'll all learn more sooner or later.
I am thinking Toradol. Pure speculation on my part of course. Some teams don't permit its use, and if the Red Sox are one of them now and he has still pitched well, its hard to argue the need for compensation. Some pain post-surgery is perhaps not unexpected, so it does not necessarily signal anything that should be worrisome, other than the surgery itself which the Red Sox were aware of.“@Ken_Rosenthal: Sources: Pomeranz and other players traded by #Padres were taking oral medications that SD did not disclose.”
2.99 FIP with Red Sox, and 3.17 FIP with the Padres playing against 22 year olds. I'd say he's pitched alright all things considered.AE has not pitched well since the deal
So what it sounds like to me is the Padres training staff had some sort of routine/regimen for Pomeranz (presumably between starts) and it wasn't documented where the Red Sox would be made aware of it. Pomeranz arrived, met with the training staff, explained whatever that regimen was, and since then he and the staff have been able to do whatever it is they need to do. No real harm done. But Dombrowski wasn't happy that his staff was caught unawares, so he reported it.Sean McAdam was on T&R this morning. Apparently anything remotely related to anything medical needs to be documented. Even aspirin, massages and hot tub baths. It seems in Pomeranz's case it was a matter of a certain routine that he had post shoulder surgery to help him get physically ready to pitch. Evidently MLB is VERY strict with this stuff. I guess it would be one thing to claim ignorance to the need to document some of this stuff, but apparently there were two separate sets of "books" and one didn't document Pomeranz's routine.
Didn't really hear what DD's path to discovery was here, it seems like there wasn't any hidden injury info in the case of Pomeranz other than his pregame routine of working the shoulder post injury. Regardless the whole need to keep two separate and different sets of books on anything seems highly questionable at best.So what it sounds like to me is the Padres training staff had some sort of routine/regimen for Pomeranz (presumably between starts) and it wasn't documented where the Red Sox would be made aware of it. Pomeranz arrived, met with the training staff, explained whatever that regimen was, and since then he and the staff have been able to do whatever it is they need to do. No real harm done. But Dombrowski wasn't happy that his staff was caught unawares, so he reported it.
I can't imagine that Dombrowski would have done the deal differently or not at all if that routine/regimen had been properly documented. The notion that he deserves a re-do or that the Red Sox should be compensated seems over the top.
Two parties agreed to a transaction where the compensation for Team A was X, and due to willful deceit by Team B that compensation is now X-Y, it would seem fair on the surface to make a fair attempt to estimate Y and compensate Team A by that value. The potential that Team B may have knowingly deceived numerous other teams in separate transactions seems to be Team B's problem. If all that comes out of it is that the person directly responsible for overseeing his activity for Team B is suspended for a brief period without compensation such as Y for Team A, then I think those in charge have failed. Team A being "made whole" would be Y coming from Team B. Merely punishing Team B with punishment Z doesn't do anything to help make Team A whole.
If Train A leaves Station 1 at 10:00 traveling 25 mph...
I think the Sox and other teams that were found to have been deceived in some way by SD through Preller's actions should be compensated to the degree it was calculated they were impacted, probably first by a negotiation by the teams and then with input from MLB if unsuccessful. I'm not a fan of and think its wholly inappropriate for governing bodies to use punitive measures to send messages.
This is getting silly. There is no X-Y if the Sox wanted to keep Pomeranz. And since the issue was discovered almost immediately after Pomeranz came over to Boston, and was reported in the media in early August some time after, looking at Pomeranz's recent performance or talking about reversing the deal after the Sox got a handful of starts out of him doesn't make sense. If fairly sure that if he had wanted to, DD could have contested the trade immediately upon discovering the problem. He chose not to, but if he had, the trade likely would have been reversed then. If DD tried to revoke the trade and was refused, I'll stand corrected.One point that seems to get lost here is that the Sox aren't in a very easy position when it comes to "making them whole." True Pomeranz wasn't great this week but the Sox can't just undo the deal and go back to Henry Owens-ville. Even if they leave Pomeranz off the playoff roster, assuming they make it that far, they're in a pennant race and can't afford to just punt every fifth game during the stretch run the way they did up to July. They need Pomeranz this year, damaged goods or not.
What would be extraordinary, tho probably very unlikely given that they've said the punishment of the Pads is final, would be if MLB allowed the season to play out and THEN gave the Red Sox the opportunity to reverse the deal and get Espinoza back. That, in my mind, would actually be fair. But of course also unprecedented and highly unlikely.
No question that what the Padres were doing is questionable and worthy of punishment. My point is that the impact that their deceit had on the Red Sox appears to be minimal at best and there really isn't a need to make them "whole". Which is why they aren't getting anything in the way of compensation in this whole thing.Didn't really hear what DD's path to discovery was here, it seems like there wasn't any hidden injury info in the case of Pomeranz other than his pregame routine of working the shoulder post injury. Regardless the whole need to keep two separate and different sets of books on anything seems highly questionable at best.