Update (9:31 PM EST): Cano does not have a concussion, Ryan Divish of the Seattle Times reports. He’s day-to-day with a contusion on his forehead.
Mariners second baseman Robinson Cano was hit in the head with an errant warmup throw from an Angels infielder before the start of the bottom of the seventh inning of Saturday’s road game against the Angels. He was standing against the railing in the dugout at the time. With a big knot on his forehead, Cano was lifted from the game and replaced at second base by Willie Bloomquist.
On Twitter, Shannon Drayer of 710 AM KIRO said that Cano looked “very shaky” as he was being examined by the team trainer in the dugout. Cano is undergoing concussion protocol, Drayer notes, and the Mariners will proceed from there.
Cano was 0-for-3 on the evening before departing. He has yet to gather any momentum this season, currently batting .244/.281/.352 with four home runs and 24 RBI in 303 plate appearances.
We’ve heard the back and forth between players and owners on money, on safety, on the size and the shape of the season. But not until now have we heard just how little baseball Major League Baseball and its owners actually want: 48 games.
That’s all they want, at least if they have to, as agreed, pay players their prorated salaries on a per-game basis. That’s the report from ESPN’s Jeff Passan, who writes this morning on the state of the current negotiations.
Passan’s article has a lot more than that. It contains a number of financial calculations about how much teams say they stand to lose per game played under any given scenario. That said, given the near total opacity when it comes to owner finances, we have no real way to evaluate the claims. The players have a bit more access to league financials, but even they are reported to be unsatisfied with what the owners have shared in that regard. So, while interesting, nothing Passan presents there is really convincing. It stakes out the positions of the parties but doesn’t really tell us much about the merits.
Which is to say that a 48-game schedule sounds like either (a) a bluff aimed at getting the players to offer financial concessions; or (b) a declaration from the owners that they’d prefer almost no baseball if it means that they have to lose any money. The whole “we’ll happily take the benefits of a good market but won’t bother if there’s a chance we might lose money” approach I’ve lambasted in this space before.
We’ll see soon which it is.