Ian Desmond’s PED idea: make players play for 50 games without pay

25 Comments

Interesting PED discussion involving Nationals players in this Amanda Comak story at the Washington Times. They’re talking about the increased or altered PED penalties, noting some of the inherent problems in the system and how to best address them. Ian Desmond — admitting at the outset that he’s just sort of riffing — has a novel idea:

Desmond, prefacing the idea as “unpolished,” described a scenario in which a player would lose 50 games worth of pay but be required to stay with his team and have the opportunity to play.

“It’s the manager’s discretion, if he thinks the player is performing, then he plays. If not, he’s on the bench, but he’s around,” Desmondexplained. “Your face is in front of the camera, you have to deal with your teammates, and if you don’t play up to your potential, then if you hit free agency, people are going to see a true evaluation of you.

Obviously problematic and likely unworkable. But his broader comments after that, and the comments of Drew Storen, do point out what seems to be something significant: there’s shame and ego and all sorts of things tied up in players’ decision to use PEDs. And that focusing so much on the severity of the penalty may not get at the problem the way people think. Guys who use think they’ll never get caught, so 50 games or even 100 games may not be enough.  Guys who take PEDs aren’t necessarily twirling their mustaches at the prospect of gaming the system, they’re insecure in their abilities and are looking at the easiest way to live up to the hype or to cash in or whatever. When thinking about how to solve the problem, those motivations should be considered.

I guess the biggest takeaway from this, and from other articles about the prospect of enhanced PED penalties is that the players are thinking about this stuff. And that, shockingly, they have better insight into the psychology of a cheating player than do baseball writers, WADA and the like.  And as such, it’s probably worth listening to them before mindlessly jacking up the penalties and banning people for life.

The Cards dealt Stephen Piscotty to the A’s, in part, so he could be near his ailing mother

Getty Images
6 Comments

Last night we wrote about the rumored deal between the Cardinals and the Athletics for Stephen Piscotty. The deal is now official, with Piscotty going to Oakland for minor leaguers Yairo Munoz and Max Schrock.

Something else emerged about the deal today: a big reason why St. Louis traded Piscotty to Oakland as opposed to another team was so that he could be near his mother, who was diagnosed with Lou Gehrig’s disease last May. Piscotty and his family are from Pleasanton, California, about 35 miles from Oakland.

Here’s Cardinals GM John Mozeliak:

This was certainly a baseball trade — Piscotty became expendable for the Cardinals after they acquired Marcell Ozuna yesterday — but it was one which could’ve been made with any team with a couple of red or white chip prospects. That Mozeliak considered Piscotty’s personal situation in making the deal with the A’s is a credit to him and his staff.

The 26-year-old Piscotty hit .235 with nine homers and 39 RBIs in 107 games last season. He has hit .268 with 38 homers and 163 RBIs in 2+ major league seasons. He agreed to a six-year, $33.5 million contract extension last spring.

As for the prospects in return: Munoz, 22, hit .300 with 13 homers and 68 RBIs this year for Double-A Midland and Triple-A Nashville. Schrock, 23, batted .321 with seven homers and 46 RBIs for Midland, and was a Texas League All-Star.