Weiner: the 50-100-lifetime suspension rules don’t apply to Biogenesis

35 Comments

We were really thrown a curveball earlier today when MLBPA head Michael Weiner, addressing the media, said that the penalties facing Biogenesis-implicated players are not ruled by the Joint Drug Agreement’s 50-game, 100-game, lifetime ban specifications.  When asked about why that was, Weiner pointed to the Commissioner’s “just cause” powers under the JDA.

Which seems odd to me because, as Wendy Thurm pointed out earlier today, the JDA says this about discipline:

A player who tests positive for a Performance Enhancing Substance, or otherwise violates the Program through the possession or use of a Performance Enhancing Substance, will be subject to the discipline set forth below. (emphasis mine) 1. First violation: 50-game suspension; 2. Second violation: 100-game suspension; 3. Third violation: Permanent suspension from Major League and Minor League Baseball.

That italicized language seems to say that the discipline regime applies whether it’s a testing positive or, as will be the case with Biogenesis, non-analytical positives, circumstantial evidence-based violations, etc. There’s nowhere else in the agreement which speaks to Commissioner discretion with respect to discipline beyond the mere words “just cause,” which again, seems to speak to the violation, not the discipline.

Could this be a negotiated thing? The union and the league having an understanding, either now or having had it always, about what might happen if they’re dealing with a non-testing-based violation? And no matter when it was decided that any amount of discipline could apply for such violations, could it not mean that some guys get less than 50 games? Some way more.

As an example: say a Biogenesis Player — let’s call him Theo Blonzalez — has very weak evidence against him in the documents and testimony, but that the league wants to discipline him anyway. Might they take this discretion and give him, say, a five game suspension? That might be a nice break for someone like Blonzalez who, otherwise, might be subject to an automatic 50, which would seem overly harsh. At the same time, might another player with stronger evidence against him — say Schmalex Rodriguez — be slapped with unlimited discipline even if it’s a first offense?

I don’t know what it means, frankly. But I find it fascinating. And it further underscores my suspicion that a lot more conversations are happening between the union and the league than we know about. And that, just maybe, it’s nowhere near as adversarial as we might think.

Max Scherzer reaches 300 strikeouts on the season

Rob Carr/Getty Images
Leave a comment

Nationals ace Max Scherzer struck out his 300th batter of the season on Tuesday night against the Marlins. Austin Dean was the victim, swinging and missing at a 3-2 curve for the second out in the seventh inning.

Scherzer’s 2018 is the seventh 300-strikeout season since 2000. The others: Chris Sale (308; 2017 Red Sox), Clayton Kershaw (301; 2015 Dodgers), Randy Johnson (334; 2002 Diamondbacks), Curt Schilling (316; 2002 Diamondbacks), Randy Johnson (372; 2001 Diamondbacks), Randy Johnson (347; 2000 Diamondbacks). It’s the 67th 300-strikeout season dating back to 1883.

At the conclusion of the seventh, Scherzer had held the Marlins to a run on four hits with no walks and 10 strikeouts. He entered the start 17-7 with a 2.57 ERA across 213 2/3 innings. Jacob deGrom will almost certainly win the NL Cy Young Award, but Scherzer’s 2018 has been outstanding.