2013 MLB Regular Season running thread

Don't worry about it Chip -- I don't know if you saw it or not but when Valverde reported to Toledo a week or so ago he confidently told the Free Press he only expected to be there 'two or three weeks' before returning to Detroit.

 

Until some distressed Tigers fan comes down 75 with a weapon.

 

Baseball seems to have completely abandoned the privacy clause of the CBA now and is leaking worse than a 50-year-old gasket.

Aren't any possible suspensions not supposed to be made public until the appeals process is complete? Yet now baseball seems determined to make sure all these players are publicly shamed before any appeal can even begin. If I'm the players association, this has to be a major point of contention.

 

Crazy story about D'backs GM Kevin Towers, who lost his ability to speak for a couple of weeks due to paralyzed vocal cords probably caused by a virus:

http://arizona.diamondbacks.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20130710&content_id=53307394&vkey=news_ari&c_id=ari&tcid=tw_article_53307394

 

OT, if pushed, I could see the Players' Association filing a suit claiming MLB has violated the CBA and asking for either big damages or even that the CBA be voided.

 

That's why some of this is so hard to understand. They've finally reached a period of years of labor peace. For decades the MLBPA was the villain. When this peace is broken, MLB will be the villain.

 

Not so sure that the Players' Association is of one mind vis-a-vis Braun et al. ...

 

Yeah that's the tricky part of it -- they aren't going to want to be seen as fighting FOR steroid users. I imagine Jetes and the other more outspoken players would have something to say about that.

 

Just to be clear, I am not convicting Braun et al. here ... I'm not all that sold by this bum's allegations, seeing as how his flipping was decidedly self-interested. I would think the evidentiary standard would be higher than what it appears to be in this instance. Nevertheless, there seems to be an emerging super-majority of non-users who not only aren't interested in using, they're not interested in tolerating those who do (or might).

 

That's the rub. MLB is building its case on a guy who was considered totally not credible until MLB bought his cooperation.

 

I don't disagree with your larger point but doesn't the privacy clause only cover failed drug tests? If so, it wouldn't apply here would it?

 

The great Maury Brown explains why MLB can announce before the appeals process is complete:

http://bizofbaseball.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=5867rovision-in-mlb-drug-agreement-will-allow-suspensions-in-biogenesis-case-to-happen-before-grievance-heard&catid=30:mlb-news&Itemid=42