San Diego Padres v Cincinnati Reds - Game Two

Paul Daugherty wants Joey Votto to play hurt

32 Comments

When people say things like, “I’m not a doctor, but…” it’s usually followed up by medical advice you should 100 percent never follow. That’s applicable in Paul Daugherty’s latest column for the Cincinnati Enquirer in which he criticizes Votto for taking too long to recuperate from his strained quadriceps.

Slagging Votto isn’t new for Daugherty. Just on this site, we have covered him slagging reliever Aroldis Chapman, starter Homer Bailey, and Votto on multiple occasions, even going so far as to say Brandon Phillips is better. So what’s the offense this time? Daugherty writes:

We outsiders don’t know much. We who aren’t doctors aren’t qualified to comment on the extent of an injury, or on anyone’s pain or ability to withstand it. That’s speculation, and that’s not fair.

[…]

We only know what we see. Here’s what I see:

Daugherty then recounts Mike Leake and Jay Bruce playing through injuries. Likely as a result of his stiff neck, Leake has been ineffective as of late, allowing five runs to the Giants on Thursday, and four to the Diamondbacks in his previous start. Bruce entered this afternoon’s game against the Phillies with a .440 OPS in 46 plate appearances since returning from the disabled list after undergoing knee surgery. Who cares about effectiveness as long as you’re toughing it out like a true Team Player?

Daugherty goes on:

To be clear: Votto didn’t want to go on the disabled list. Price says he’s the one responsible for keeping Votto on the mend, instead of in the lineup. And Votto’s durability isn’t suspect: He played in all 162 last year, and in 161 two years before that. But how healthy is healthy enough, and when does Votto get there?

Believe what you want. I believe if Votto insisted on playing, he would be playing. Superstars call shots everywhere, even in little places like Cincinnati. A manager is not going to say no to that guy, nor should he. Especially when the guy in question is as valuable as Votto is.

At least Daugherty has changed his tune on Votto’s value, having called Phillips the Reds’ MVP instead of Votto last July, citing RBI and batting average with runners in scoring position. Daugherty essentially calls both Votto and manager Bryan Price liars based on a gut feeling.

Lastly:

Like it or not, the sports ethos is to play with pain. Teammates respect it, owners expect it. It’s almost a given. Pain is in the contract. Even in early June, few players are in perfect health. By August, no one is.

Categorically incorrect on multiple levels. Where is this ethos? Why is there a disabled list? If Votto played hurt and was consequently ineffective — like teammate Bruce — Daugherty would be the first penning a column complaining that Votto was selfish and caring only about his individual stats, and that he should have thought about the team first by going on the disabled list.

Playing through an injury is almost always a bad idea. Athletes will overcompensate for their weakness in one area by over-exerting in another area, which puts them at an increased risk of further injuring themselves. Their performance declines. Opponents know how to take advantage of an injured player. For instance, with a quadriceps injury, Votto won’t be able to generate as much power with his legs, so pitchers will be much more willing to pitch him inside and over the plate than usual.

It’s not clear what Daugherty’s motive is for all of these hit pieces against Votto. Maybe Votto was rude to him once, or he’s playing to the lowest common denominators in the Reds fan base. What is clear is that his criticism of Votto over the last few years has been almost entirely baseless and at this point it seems obsessive. Also, as a rule of thumb, writers or fans who criticize an athlete’s pain threshold should be required to present a history of all the times they called out of work or missed school due to a tummy ache.

Adams homers in 16th to lift Cardinals over Dodgers 4-3

adams
Getty Images
2 Comments

ST. LOUIS — Matt Adams homered in the 16th inning to lead the Cardinals to a 4-3 win over the Los Angeles Dodgers on Friday night for St. Louis’ season-best fifth straight victory.

It was the second consecutive game that the Cardinals won in their final at-bat. They beat the Padres on Thursday after scoring a run in the ninth inning.

Adams homer came with one out off Bud Norris (5-9), who gave up six runs as a starter in an 8-1 loss at Washington on Wednesday.

Seth Maness (1-2) picked up the win with a scoreless inning of relief for St. Louis, which was playing its longest game of the season.

Jedd Gyorko hit a two-out homer off closer Kenley Jansen in the ninth to tie the game 3-3.

Justin Turner and Howie Kendrick homered for the Dodgers. Los Angeles has lost four of six. The red-hot Turner has seven homers and 17 RBI this month. He hit two homers in a 6-3 win over Washington on Thursday.

Turner blasted his career-high 18th homer of the season off Seung Hwan Oh in the ninth to break a 2-2 tie.

Corey Seager had four hits and drove in the first run of the game. He had hit in seven successive at-bats before flying out in the ninth.

Kendrick’s solo shot in the sixth tied the game 2-2. He has hit in 14 successive games trying Colorado’s Charlie Blackmon for the longest current streak in the majors.

Los Angeles starter Brandon McCarthy allowed one hit and two runs over 6 1-3 innings, the longest of his four starts this season. He left with leg cramps. McCarthy struck out four and walked three.

St. Louis starter Michael Wacha allowed two runs on 10 hits in six innings. He struck out four and walked one.

Dodgers reliever Adam Liberatore recorded his 28th successive scoreless outing by retiring two of four batters in the seventh. He has not allowed a run in 41 of 42 appearances this season.

Minor League Players’ Wage Suit against Major League Baseball suffers a huge setback

The judge's gavel is seen in court room 422 of the New York Supreme Court at 60 Centre Street February 3, 2012. REUTERS/Chip East
7 Comments

A judge handed minor leaguers looking to hold Major League Baseball liable for underpaying and exploiting them a huge setback today, ruling that the case cannot go forward as a class action. Minor leaguers who want to sue over their pay and treatment still can, but they’ll have to do it individually. The ruling saps the minor leaguers of their leverage, as Major League Baseball would likely be able to fend off individual cases which, by themselves, might only amount to several thousand dollars per claim.

The background: in 2014, former Miami Marlins player Aaron Senne sued Major League Baseball, Bud Selig, and three major league clubs claiming that minor leaguers are underpaid and exploited in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act. He was later joined by former Royals minor leaguer Michael Liberto and Giants farmhand Oliver Odle. Eventually others joined and the suit had been expanded to 22 teams as defendants.

The upshot of the case is that, while the minor league season lasts only part of the year, players are required to do all sorts of things outside of merely playing games for which they are not compensated. Training, meetings, appearances and the like. When all of that time is added up, the players claim, their already low salaries are effectively far below minimum wage in violation of the law. Major League Baseball has countered this by claiming that minor leaguers are basically part time seasonal workers — like landscapers and pool boys — who are not subject to federal labor laws.

Last year the judge gave the case conditional certification, allowing the players to try to establish that it should go forward as a class action. This would streamline the case from the plaintiffs’ perspective and give them the power of collective action by asserting hundreds or more similar cases into one proceeding. The judge’s ruling today, however, was that the cases really weren’t factually similar and thus collective action was not appropriate because figuring out how many hours each player worked and what was required of him varied too greatly among the players.

From his order:

“The difficulties associated with determining what activities constitute ‘work’ in the context of winter training are compounded by the fact that there appear to be no official records documenting these activities. Because it may be impossible to determine from official records the types of conditioning activities in which the players engaged, membership in the state classes based on winter training would depend largely upon the players’ ability to remember, with a reasonable amount of detail, what they did during the off-season (often for multiple years and for many, several years in the past) to stay fit.”

The judge said that, in light of this, each case would be unique and would require “individualized inquiries” to find damages and liability. That phrase –“individualized inquiries” — constitutes magic words which sink would-be class actions. If a company overcharges all of its customers by $8 due to an error repeated a million times, it’s easy to look at one set of facts and judge them together. If you had to look at a million different wrongs, that’s no class action. And so it is not a class action for the players.

As many courts who have dealt with these sorts of cases have noted, for many plaintiffs, a class action is the only practical method of adjudicating Fair Labor Standards Act cases because individual plaintiffs are frequently unable to bear the costs of separate trials. They are, by definition, (allegedly) exploited workers. They’re not going to be able to pay legal costs and fight off a multi-billion dollar business in order to collect the few thousand dollars they were underpaid. At the same time, however, the defendants have rights too and, if the facts of each players’ treatment truly differ (e.g. the Yankees make their minor leaguers do more than the Brewers do) it’s not fair to bind one defendant’s defense to the acts of another.

So, where does this leave the players? Not dead. Not yet, at least. Their claims have not been dismissed on the merits. They have only been denied the right to act collectively. The individual plaintiffs can now file separate lawsuits against their former employers and Major League Baseball under the same theories. It would be harder to land a big blow in such a scenario, but if enough do, it could end up being death by a thousand cuts for the clubs and the league. Their legal fees might go up and, eventually, if they lose enough of these cases, more might be filed. There are a lot of former minor leaguers, after all, and once there’s some blood in the water, more of them — and their lawyers — may enter the frenzy. Decertification is certainly a win for the league right now, but it’s not necessarily a permanent win.

There are likewise some other quasi-collective forms this case could take such as multi-district litigation in which the cases, while individual, are coordinated in a loose fashion. That could lead to some efficiencies for suing players even if it’s not as robust as a class action.

We’ve written quite a bit about minor league pay and treatment in this space by now, so you probably know where we stand on it. We believe that minor leaguers are exploited and underpaid and we believe that Major League Baseball has been happy to exploit and underpay them for some time. Ultimately we believe that this state of affairs cannot and will not persist and that eventually, somehow, baseball will either see fit to pay its workers fairly or, more likely, will be forced to do so by a court or by collective bargaining of some fashion.

Today, however, was a big setback for the minor leaguers. Today’s ruling will give Major League Baseball and its clubs more time and more comfort in which to underpay them. There’s no doubt about it.