World Baseball Classic vs injuries

[Snapolit1]

Originally Posted by seanofjapan

All apologies to Mets fans, but are we supposed to debate the merits of spring training every time a guy gets injured during that too? Because that is where he would have been without the WBC, and his chance of getting injured would have been about the same.

With all due respect, that's obviously false. He didn't get injured throwing a ball or swinging a bat. He was injured in a raucous celebration that would not concievably have happened in a spring training game.

[Snapolit1]

It is beyond silly to have a fever pitch international tournament falling in the middle of spring training. An accident that is no longer waiting to happen.

There guys are paid a Kings ranson to play in MLB. The fact that they love the tournment is really besides the point.

[packs]

Couldn't he have just been a little more careful? I don't see why there isn't some personal responsibility involved in this. This isn't the first time someone has gotten hurt doing something like this. Kendrys Morales broke his leg jumping onto home plate too.

Diaz is at fault in my opinion. Yes, it was a freak accident. But he also chose to celebrate that way when he could have just give some people hugs and been happy about it.

[Shoeless Moe]

Who cares?

The owner of the Mets shits money.

They will pick someone else up, either now or at the trade deadline.

Closers are perhaps the easiest piece to replace. Many bad teams will have a good closer, just grab one......and hopefully bleed the Mets of their Prospects.

[seanofjapan]

Originally Posted by Snapolit1

With all due respect, that's obviously false. He didn't get injured throwing a ball or swinging a bat. He was injured in a raucous celebration that would not concievably have happened in a spring training game.

With all due respect, that is some deep level nitpicking there.

What are players supposed to do by that standard? Spend all their time off field in a health spa with a bunch of pillows strapped to themselves with every movement approved by a team trainer?

Also, your statement itself is false, players suffer non-playing related injuries during spring training all the time. And yeah, they sometimes even celebrate stuff, or pull pranks, or do other stupid shit that gets themselves injured.

[BobbyStrawberry]

Maybe it's time they found a way to celebrate that doesn't involve jumping up and down in a circle? I don't believe they do this in basketball or football. Seems like flat-footed high fives and chest bumps would get the job done

[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 …”

Originally Posted by seanofjapan

With all due respect, that is some deep level nitpicking there.

What are players supposed to do by that standard? Spend all their time off field in a health spa with a bunch of pillows strapped to themselves with every movement approved by a team trainer?

Also, your statement itself is false, players suffer non-playing related injuries during spring training all the time. And yeah, they sometimes even celebrate stuff, or pull pranks, or do other stupid shit that gets themselves injured.

[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.

[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.