World Baseball Classic vs injuries

[seanofjapan]

Originally Posted by Snapolit1

Ok, so by that logic if a player is injured hang gliding, or crashes a motorcycle, or is stabbed in the back visiting a crack house, we should say “well, gee, hey it’s possible he might have gotten seriously injured on the field that day …”

Well, you aren’t arguing that baseball players shouldn’t be doing gratuitously dangerous things like visiting crack houses (which most would agree is sensible). Rather you are arguing that baseball players shouldn’t be playing in…baseball games.

That seems a stretch to me.

[Snapolit1]

Originally Posted by seanofjapan

Well, you aren’t arguing that baseball players shouldn’t be doing gratuitously dangerous things like visiting crack houses (which most would agree is sensible). Rather you are arguing that baseball players shouldn’t be playing in…baseball games.

That seems a stretch to me.

Baseball players who are coming back from a 4 month vacation and are purportedly getting ready for their season to start should not all of a sudden be whisked away and be thrown into a high stakes, highly competitive, intense international tournament.

Amazing to me there hasn't been a catastrophic injury before.

I wonder how the response would be if the player who was not out for the year was Ohtani or Trout . . . and not a (lol) NY Met.

[Snapolit1]

I think the WBC is a great thing for baseball to expand and develop fans around the world. I think having it in spring training is idiocy. I realize players might be tired and not want to do it when the season ends. I am not rooting against it generally, but just don't see how you do timing wise.

[seanofjapan]

Originally Posted by Snapolit1

I think the WBC is a great thing for baseball to expand and develop fans around the world. I think having it in spring training is idiocy. I realize players might be tired and not want to do it when the season ends. I am not rooting against it generally, but just don't see how you do timing wise.

Yeah, if its just the timing you object to then your argument makes a lot more sense. Thanks for the clarification.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Snapolit1

Baseball players who are coming back from a 4 month vacation and are purportedly getting ready for their season to start should not all of a sudden be whisked away and be thrown into a high stakes, highly competitive, intense international tournament.

Amazing to me there hasn't been a catastrophic injury before.

I wonder how the response would be if the player who was not out for the year was Ohtani or Trout . . . and not a (lol) NY Met.

It's a non contact sport, remember? These aren't weekend warriors anyhow, these are professional athletes who train year round. This was just a freakish thing, could have happened any time. I see no reason to move the WBC.

[Smarti5051]

This seems like alot of argument over a truly freak injury. I don't think the viability of the WBC should hinge on whether a player could potentially suffer a non-game related injury. If you are a Mets fan, I can understand being frustrated, but to suggest the WBC is the cause of an increase in serious player injuries seems like a stretch.

In a sense, the WBC is the same thing as Spring Training. They are playing baseball. They are trying to be successful. The managers are well aware of their MLB commitments and limit their innings to minimize injuries (just like the managers do in the Spring Training games).

It would be interesting to see what percentage of MLB WBC players have sustained injuries limiting their availability for regular season MLB games and compare that to the percentage of MLB players participating in Spring Training that have sustained the same injuries. My guess is that over the past decade, the numbers are fairly comparable.

[Jim65]

Saying a player could be hurt doing ... isn't a fair argument. The fact is Diaz was hurt in WBC, not Spring training or working out or slicing a bagel. I don't blame the WBC, but these players, especially pitchers are playing full speed when they should be getting ready for the season. Its a disaster waiting to happen when you see pitchers like Ohtani throwing 102 MPH during March.

[nolemmings]

Originally Posted by Jim65

Saying a player could be hurt doing ... isn't a fair argument. The fact is Diaz was hurt in WBC, not Spring training or working out or slicing a bagel. I don't blame the WBC, but these players, especially pitchers are playing full speed when they should be getting ready for the season. Its a disaster waiting to happen when you see pitchers like Ohtani throwing 102 MPH during March.

The US staff is basically made up of guys who do not throw that hard, or at least who do not rely on the hard stuff. The same can be said of other teams in the tournament if you exclude late inning relievers who are only out there for a short time. And BTW, Ohtani hit 99 mph in his Spring debut for the Angels last year when there was no WBC. https://www.japantimes.co.jp/sports/...i-mound-debut/

Look, risk is always going to be there, but then again so is the chance of freak injury. These guys want to play in the WBC, and are given ample notice to prepare for something other than a leisurely, gradual training regimen. Some even play Winter ball as well. Having attended two of the WBC games this week, I welcome the tournament. On an unrelated note, it is really no more expensive and in fact sometimes cheaper to see these games than it is to watch the Cactus League games, with of course the quality of play much better.

[Snapolit1]

It can be a great tournament and the timing can be terrible. Both things can be true.

[carlsonjok]

Originally Posted by seanofjapan

Rather you are arguing that baseball players shouldn’t be playing in…baseball games.

This seems to me to be a bit of an oversimplification. Yes, he is a baseball player who was injured as a result of playing in a baseball game. But, you are overlooking that he is baseball player under contract to play baseball for a specific baseball team and he was injured playing in a game for someone other than that team. Given the salary that these guys pull down, I don't think it is unreasonable to expect that they will refrain from engaging in activities/behaviors that could reasonably jeopardize their ability to perform under their contract.

To be sure, that wouldn't be, in and of itself, reason to ban participating in these types of tournaments. What tips it over the edge for me is that there is something of a moral hazard issue at play. Injured players still get paid. Teams that employ injured players likely have insurance to cover their salary losses during the injury. Who isn't covered in this scenario? The fans who ostensibly pay for all of this. Now, I get that there is a lot of second order effects that accrue to the players/teams, but at the top level, players and teams are still indemnified in a way that fans aren't.

[seanofjapan]

Originally Posted by carlsonjok

This seems to me to be a bit of an oversimplification. Yes, he is a baseball player who was injured as a result of playing in a baseball game. But, you are overlooking that he is baseball player under contract to play baseball for a specific baseball team and he was injured playing in a game for someone other than that team. Given the salary that these guys pull down, I don't think it is unreasonable to expect that they will refrain from engaging in activities/behaviors that could reasonably jeopardize their ability to perform under their contract.

To be sure, that wouldn't be, in and of itself, reason to ban participating in these types of tournaments. What tips it over the edge for me is that there is something of a moral hazard issue at play. Injured players still get paid. Teams that employ injured players likely have insurance to cover their salary losses during the injury. Who isn't covered in this scenario? The fans who ostensibly pay for all of this. Now, I get that there is a lot of second order effects that accrue to the players/teams, but at the top level, players and teams are still indemnified in a way that fans aren't.

I don’t see moral hazard being an issue here. Moral hazard is about poorly aligned incentives. No player has any incentive to behave recklessly just because they are insured. Yup, they’ll still get paid, and the team will be covered, but the player will still suffer significant losses. The injury could affect their abilities and severely dampen their marketability long term. Time lost to injury often turns HOF careers into Hall of Very Good careers. They can also lose endorsement opportunities and a lot of other things. In short, even with insurance, players have strong incentives to avoid injury, and teams also have obvious incentives to keep their players healthy despite insurance.

Fans? Yeah, it sucks if a player on your team gets injured, but cancelling the WBC would also harm fans. Not the same set of fans of course (most fans of specific WBC teams like Puerto Rico aren’t Mets fans, and vice versa) but still, baseball fans.

Its also not true that fans aren’t indemnified, they are the stakeholder with the least at stake financially and the easiest way of protecting themselves. Fans always have the option of exit. If your team sucks due to injuries, you can just not buy tickets to see games, not buy team merch, etc. Fans have diverse lives and investments, while players and teams have much more specific, non diversified investment in the team.

What you are really complaining about is that fans suffer from disappointment that their team will not play as well as they otherwise would, but this feeling isn’t something one would normally expect to be compensated for.

[carlsonjok]

Originally Posted by seanofjapan

I don’t see moral hazard being an issue here. Moral hazard is about poorly aligned incentives. No player has any incentive to behave recklessly just because they are insured.

That is, literally, the definition of moral hazard.

Screenshot 2023-03-17 212500.jpg

Players who face the loss of their income by being injured in activities unrelated to their direct employment are considerably less likely to play outside their contract. I have a hard time understanding how you can think differently

Yup, they’ll still get paid, and the team will be covered, but the player will still suffer significant losses. The injury could affect their abilities and severely dampen their marketability long term. Time lost to injury often turns HOF careers into Hall of Very Good careers. They can also lose endorsement opportunities and a lot of other things. In short, even with insurance, players have strong incentives to avoid injury, and teams also have obvious incentives to keep their players healthy despite insurance.

Those sound like second order effects. I guess I was remiss in not mentioning them?

Fans? Yeah, it sucks if a player on your team gets injured, but cancelling the WBC would also harm fans. Not the same set of fans of course (most fans of specific WBC teams like Puerto Rico aren’t Mets fans, and vice versa) but still, baseball fans.

I never said anything about cancelling the WBC.

Its also not true that fans aren’t indemnified, they are the stakeholder with the least at stake financially and the easiest way of protecting themselves. Fans always have the option of exit. If your team sucks due to injuries, you can just not buy tickets to see games, not buy team merch, etc. Fans have diverse lives and investments, while players and teams have much more specific, non diversified investment in the team.

I can almost guarantee any season ticket holder or corporate sponsor that wants a refund because the season is over before it started is going to be really disappointed with the team's response.

What you are really complaining about is that fans suffer from disappointment that their team will not play as well as they otherwise would, but this feeling isn’t something one would normally expect to be compensated for.

Exactly my point. Any investment made is a sunk cost.

[mrreality68]

MLB insurance is covering his salary while he cannot play.
So Diaz gets paid, Mets payroll goes down by approx 17 mill (not counting the luxury tax), and the Mets have to do without or the GM has to try and trade for a solid closer.
It was freak accident, no one’s fault, not the fault of WBC but regardless it does suck

[ALR-bishop]

Ted— that is a wonderful card

[Snapolit1]

Altuve looks to possibly have suffered a hand injury in a WBC game tonight.

https://www.mlb.com/news/jose-altuve...seball-classic

But I guess he could have hurt his hand at spring training too, so no issue.

[Republicaninmass]

Originally Posted by ALR-bishop

Ted— that is a wonderful card

Thank you Al. I couldn't pass that up.

[seanofjapan]

Originally Posted by carlsonjok

That is, literally, the definition of moral hazard.

Er, yes, you are right, I did correctly describe moral hazard. Not sure I understand the point of quoting the definition.

Originally Posted by carlsonjok

Players who face the loss of their income by being injured in activities unrelated to their direct employment are considerably less likely to play outside their contract. I have a hard time understanding how you can think differently

You are proposing a model of behavior that simply ignores those second order effects. I'm saying those things are important to actually understanding the decision making of a player.

Yes, all else being equal a player who knows their income is assured would be less risk-averse that one who doesn't. But in reality all that stuff I was talking about - risk of loss of future income, desire to have a good/great career, risk of loss of numerous other financial incentives, etc - likely outweigh that. I sincerely doubt Diaz was thinking, or was subliminally influenced by the idea of "Hey, my income is insured, so screw everything I'm going to engage in risky celebrations that I wouldn't if it weren't".

Originally Posted by carlsonjok

I never said anything about cancelling the WBC.

Correct me if I'm mistaken, but the principle you are arguing in favor of is that no player who plays for one team under contract should ever participate in any other baseball events like the WBC. This would pretty much eliminate 95% of the guys playing from the tournament and make it completely unworkable.

Originally Posted by carlsonjok

I can almost guarantee any season ticket holder or corporate sponsor that wants a refund because the season is over before it started is going to be really disappointed with the team's response.

Not sure that I buy that the interests of season ticket holders and corporate sponsors are representative of "fans" in general.

[RCMcKenzie]

As long as Astros do not play in it, I like the event. I hope in the future, after this Altuve injury, the Astros advise their players to stand down and rest up for the real season.

I'd rather see the USA play Josh Reddick in RF and win 6-3, instead of boat-racing and mercy-ruling everyone 15-2.

I like Mexico tonight. I'm surprised they are not the favorites. Mexico played a much tougher bracket to get this far.

[RCMcKenzie]

It was a good game yesterday. Japan sports a nice team. I was glad when Mexico pulled Urquidy. I hope he's okay.

WBC is somewhat of a Tampa Bay-like product with all the bullpen games. I'll be watching tonight. I hope Kyle Tucker and Ryan Pressley are also watching, and not playing.