Getty Images

The Mets are going to play Michael Conforto in center field. This is probably not a good idea


Due to leg injuries, both the Mets and Yoenis Cespedes would prefer it if Cespedes played left field, not center. Curtis Granderson, once a pretty good center fielder, is way past his sell date at that position as a regular, even if he fills in there once in a while. He hasn’t played the position regularly since 2012, even though he played it last night. Juan Lagares is still hanging around, but his bat just isn’t up to snuff to play every day.

So who plays center for the Mets? Looks like it’s going to be Michael Conforto. From the Daily News:

Tuesday afternoon, Conforto was out on the field at Wrigley early working with outfield coach Tom Goodwin on playing center field.

“He’s going to be OK,” Goodwin said. “Whenever we put him out there, I think he’s going to be fine.”

This is all characterized by Terry Collins as easing Conforto into center field slowly — giving him those pregame practice reps rather than just dropping him in there — but he’s likely to be manning the position in actual battle this weekend against the Marlins, so it’s basically like dropping him in there. This after him playing all but one of his 109 major league games in left field. He likewise never played center in the minors. Last night was his first night in right in the big leagues. Now the move to center, possibly as early as Friday.

Most of us aren’t anything approaching defensive experts ourselves, but has anyone watched Conforto play and think “yeah, he could handle center?” Not me. The Mets do have people who are qualified experts when it comes to where ballplayers should play and they think that. I suppose we should give them the benefit of the doubt.

Still: Conforto is 25-years-old and has been playing professionally since he was 21. If you’re cast as a corner guy at the age of 21 it means no one, ever, saw you as a center fielder. Now they do. I guess we’ll see.


MLBPA: MLB’s ‘demand for additional concessions was resoundingly rejected’

Rob Manfred and Tony Clark
LG Patterson/MLB via Getty Images

On Thursday evening, the Major League Baseball Players Association released a statement regarding ongoing negotiations between the owners and the union. The two sides continue to hash out details concerning a 2020 season. The owners want a shorter season, around 50 games. The union recently proposed a 114-game season that also offered the possibility of salary deferrals.

MLBPA executive director Tony Clark said that the union held a conference call that included the Executive Board and MLBPA player leaders. They “resoundingly rejected” the league’s “demand for additional concessions.”

The full statement:

In this time of unprecedented suffering at home and abroad, Players want nothing more than to get back to work and provide baseball fans with the game we all love. But we cannot do this alone.

Earlier this week, Major League Baseball communicated its intention to schedule a dramatically shortened 2020 season unless Players negotiate salary concessions. The concessions being sought are in addition to billions in Player salary reductions that have already been agreed upon.

This threat came in response to an Association proposal aimed at charting a path forward. Among other things, Players proposed more games, two years of expanded playoffs, salary deferrals in the event of a 2020 playoff cancellation, and the exploration of additional jewel events and broadcast enhancements aimed at creatively bringing our Players to the fans while simultaneously increasing the value of our product. Rather than engage, the league replied it will shorten the season unless Players agree to further salary reductions.

Earlier today we held a conference call of the Association’s Executive Board and several other MLBPA Player leaders. The overwhelming consensus of the Board is that Players are ready to report, ready to get back on the field, and they are willing to do so under unprecedented conditions that could affect the health and safety of not just themselves, but their families as well. The league’s demand for additional concessions was resoundingly rejected.

Important work remains to be done in order to safely resume the season. We stand ready to complete that work and look forward to getting back on the field.

As per the current agreement signed in March, if there is a 2020 season, players will be paid on a prorated basis. Thus, fewer games means the players get paid less and the owners save more. MLB has threatened to unilaterally set a 2020 season in motion if the two sides cannot come to terms. It should come as no surprise that the union has responded strongly on both fronts.

There have been varying reports in recent days over the confidence in a 2020 season happening. The MLBPA’s statement tonight doesn’t move the needle any; it simply affirms that the union remains steadfast in its goal to avoid a second significant cut in salaries.

As I see it, the ball is in the owners’ court. The owners can strongarm the players into a short season, saving money but significantly increasing the odds of a big fight in upcoming collective bargaining agreement negotiations. Or the owners can eat more of a financial loss, agreeing to a longer season than they feel is comfortable. The latter would have the double benefit of not damaging overall perception of the sport and would not disrupt labor peace going forward.

The MLBPA statement included a declaration that the players are “ready to report, ready to get back on the field, and they are willing to do so under unprecedented conditions.” If there is no 2020 season, we will have only the owners to blame, not the players.

Update: Cardinals pitcher Jack Flaherty, who has been quite vocal on social media about these negotiations, chimed in: