Getty Images

Johnny Cueto leaves his rehab start with forearm tightness

5 Comments

Giants starter Johnny Cueto has suffered from nagging blister issues which put him on the disabled list. They also prevented the Giants from shopping Cueto at the trade deadline. If he was healthy, he might’ve gotten them a much-needed haul of prospects. Last night, though, Cueto was making a rehab start in San Jose, with an eye toward returning to the Giants rotation this weekend.

It didn’t go well: Cueto was removed from his rehab start because of forearm tightness. He’ll be examined today, but this is certainly not a good sign.

Cueto has a record of 6-7, a 4.59 ERA and a K/BB ratio of 103/41 in 115.2 innings. It’s a far cry from his excellent 2016 season. Cueto can opt-out from his six-year, $130 million contract this winter, but with the way things are going, it’d be malpractice if his agent suggested it.

Report: MLB owners want a 48-game season

Getty Images
5 Comments

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.