Report: Drug policy changes will bar players from postseason, even if they’ve served their suspensions

77 Comments

Yesterday, when looking at reports of the changes to the Joint Drug Agreement, I said that the increased penalties and testing protocols didn’t seem draconian. The latest report on the changes could change my mind about that.

Christine Brennan reports that the policy — not yet finalized — will bar from the postseason any player who was disciplined for PED use during the regular season, even if the player has already served his suspension and has returned to action. Meaning that a first-time offender can receive an 80-game suspension in April, return to the team in late June, play for the team for the final three months of the season, and then still be ineligible for postseason play.

This, I feel, is extreme for two reasons. First, it crosses the line from a penalization of the player to a penalization of the team. Clean players’ chances to advance in the playoffs will potentially be harmed through no fault of their own and front offices, likewise blameless, will be forced to scramble to fill holes despite not having any ineligible players. This despite a drug violation that could be a year old or more.

Second, this penalty may serve as a defacto order that a player be released or hidden on the DL with fake injuries. Again, if the timing is just right, and a potential playoff team has a guy coming back from a first-time PED suspension, there will be a strong incentive to release the guy or trade him to non-contender or stash him on the disabled list in order to obtain roster space for players who won’t be ineligible for the playoffs. It’s a backdoor way to add uneven discipline (players on playoff teams will be punished more than players on losing teams), in the form of incentivizing roster chicanery.

If the players want this, well, no one can stop them. But by allowing drug discipline to bleed over into team construction issues is to surrender a good bit of power and job security. Two issues players fought for for decades separate and apart from the drug penalty context. It could serve as a Trojan Horse by which the owners can sneak into areas of labor relations long since settled by the union separate and apart from the drug penalty context. Why not add pension provisions to drug penalties? Have drug penalties affect service time and free agency? Maybe guys suspended for drugs will be forced to have different travel accommodations. All of that would certainly represent a get tough attitude on drug cheats.

And all of it, like this proposed playoff suspension, would serve to undermine decades of union gains for reasons that have almost nothing to do with labor relations.

Jim Crane thought the heat over sign-stealing would blow over by spring training

Getty Images
14 Comments

The Astros’ sign-stealing story broke in November, a steady drumbeat of coverage of it lasted through December and into January, when Rob Manfred’s report came out about it. The report was damning and, in its wake, Houston’s manager and general manger were both suspended and then fired.

After that a steady stream of media reports came out which not only made the whole affair seem even worse than Manfred’s report suggested, but which also suggested that, on some level, Major League Baseball had bungled it all and it was even worse than it had first seemed.

Rather than Manfred and the Astros putting this all behind them, the story grew. As it grew, both the Red Sox and Mets fired their managers and, in a few isolated media appearances, Astros’ players seemed ill-prepared for questions on it all. Once spring training began the Astros made even worse public appearances and, for the past week and change, each day has given us a new player or three angrily speaking out about how mad they are at the Astros and how poorly they’ve handled all of this.

Why have they handled it so poorly? As always, look to poor leadership:

Guess not.

In other news, Crane was — and I am not making this up — recently named the Houston Sports Executive of the Year. An award he has totally, totally earned, right?