Not everyone is happy about home plate collisions being taken away

135 Comments

Nick Cafardo of the Boston Globe is not a fan of the new rule banning home plate collisions. Indeed he’s so incensed that he decided to mock the idea of protecting athletes whose health and career are put at risk as a result of them:

One of the game’s biggest stars — Buster Posey — suffered a nearly career-ending knee injury as a result of a collision with then-Marlins outfielder Scott Cousins in May of 2011, therefore we must protect catchers? … Baseball is seeking to ban collisions that have happened since Abner Doubleday invented baseball. What are we doing here? … David Ross and Alex Avila suffered concussions as the result of foul balls off their masks during the 2013 season. Are we banning foul balls soon? … This is sport. This is athleticism. And now we’re taking it away?

Given that Cafardo apparently doesn’t even know the first thing about Posey’s injury — note: it was not his knee — I’m not sure how he’s any sort of expert on this, but that’s tenure for you. He also got the effective date of the rule wrong — it’s 2014 if the union approves it, 2015 if they don’t — but those are just details.

I take greater issue with Cafardo’s fighting straw men and overall faulty logic. No, because Major League Baseball is trying to eliminate injuries from one kind of play it does not mean that all potential hazards must and will be eliminated and no one is suggesting such a thing. No, because catastrophic injuries are rare does not mean they are not serious and in need of some form of address. And the “taking it away” thing. Taking what away? From who? He argues in his column that the rules already do much to limit such collisions and that that should be enough, so he should be happy if all such collisions are gone, right?

In the course of his column Cafardo quotes several managers about home plate collisions and notes that reasonable people can be of two minds about this rule. Too bad that, rather than acknowledge the multiple sides of the matter when he asserted his own opinion, he chose to be cavalier and dismissive about a subject that has very real personal health and career consequences for the players being barreled into at home plate all season.

Red Sox want to trade Jackie Bradley Jr.

Julio Aguilar/Getty Images
Leave a comment

Pete Abraham of the Boston Globe reports that the Red Sox are actively trying to trade outfielder Jackie Bradley Jr. In fact, the Mets were discussing such a trade with the Mets before they ultimately acquired Jake Marisnick from the Astros last week.

The Red Sox have made it no secret that they plan to reduce payroll. They’re currently above $218 million, about $10 million above the competitive balance tax threshold. Bradley is projected to earn $11.5 million in his third and final year of arbitration eligibility.

While Bradley continued to play above-average defense, his offense has left a bit to be desired. He has an aggregate adjusted OPS of 90 over the past three seasons (100 is average), matching his mark of 90 in 2019 specifically. Bradley hit .225/.317/.421 with 21 home runs, 62 RBI, and 69 runs scored in 567 plate appearances.

Since an acquiring team would likely be on the hook for most or all of Bradley’s salary, the Red Sox wouldn’t get much in return in a trade. With the Mets out of the picture, the Cubs and Diamondbacks are a couple of teams that could match up with the Red Sox on a trade involving Bradley.