Ervin Santana banned for the playoffs?

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Otherwise you get absurdity like the Peterson situation, where the penalty term is undisclosed and everyone wanders around confused for close to a year. It's a bad solution. Set the punishment length however long you like but once a guy is done with his punishment, he's done with his punishment.

The Peterson situation was completely different.  MLB's PED policy is quite open and clear -- it simply includes a ban on any potential postseason participation that year.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

He's not eligible for game 163 either, which is double-stupid since they count it as a regular season game for the record books.

Have you confirmed that somewhere?  I've only seen it referenced as postseason play (which would presumably include the new wild-card game, but not a Twins 2008-2009 style tiebreaker), although it's possibly that the technical language of the rule is different.

[jokin]

 

Not sure why we are debating the rule, it is the rule.......the OP has a great question, "should this change the roster construction/trade decisions?". It's a great question, and I think the answer is "no". With Berrios and others in the wings, I think they should role with Santana and not worry about other players on or off the roster. I think.

 

That said, it is does beg the question "does Berrios need to come up sooner, to see if he's ready for the playoffs" than they otherwise would plan.

 

And he'll somehow have to leapfrog over a half a dozen other prospective SPs that they have to evaluate first (Milone, Duffey, Rogers, Dean, Meyer?, + the MLB SP that Santana replaces in July)

[Otto von Ballpark]

Also, did postseason games previously count toward suspension time served?  That seemed to be the case for Melky Cabrera in 2012, so that might be an additional change with the new rule.

 

And that too levels the field among those suspended for PED use -- why should Melky Cabrera become eligible to return in October 2012 (and thus be eligible for opening day 2013), but a player suspended on the same day from a non-playoff team have to wait upwards of a month into the following season?

[jokin]

 

Have you confirmed that somewhere?  I've only seen it referenced as postseason play (which would presumably include the new wild-card game, but not a Twins 2008-2009 style tiebreaker), although it's possibly that the technical language of the rule is different.

 

If Game 163 is counted in the stats as a regular season game, it doesn't seem likely that the post-season suspension rules would apply.  (And wouldn't Santana be the perfect guy to throw in the Game 163 scenario?)

[SwainZag]

 

I might be a mob of one, but Ervin Santana and every cheater like him is loathesome to me. I will not enjoy his return to the team.

 

I am going to assume that you are just loathing having Eddie Rosario on this team then?  

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

If Game 163 is counted in the stats as a regular season game, it doesn't seem likely that the post-season suspension rules would apply.  (And wouldn't Santana be the perfect guy to throw in the Game 163 scenario?)

Yes to your parenthetical question, I was thinking the same thing.  Although it's possible the technical language of the rule includes any games scheduled after the conclusion of the 162 game regular season.

[Blake]

I'd like to know why the Twins didn't drug test Santana. Or, if the Twins did test Santana, how did they miss the steroids?

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

I am going to assume that you are just loathing having Eddie Rosario on this team then?  

I can't speak for the original poster, but I don't think all rule breakers are equal cheaters.  Unless Eddie Rosario was trying to gain a competitive advantage by being more "mellow."

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

I'd like to know why the Twins didn't drug test Santana. Or, if the Twins did test Santana, how did they miss the steroids?

I don't think teams can drug test players on their own, that's all handled through the collective bargaining agreement.

[SweetOne69]

 

I might be a mob of one, but Ervin Santana and every cheater like him is loathesome to me. I will not enjoy his return to the team.

 

We don't know that Santana is/was a cheater.  We do know that he was an idiot. 

 

All 4 major league players that got busted were either from the DR or played in the DR this winter.  There was an article that came out about the time of Santana's suspension depicting the various "magic elixirs" that players take while down there to get/stay healthy and many times the players have no idea what is all in the elixir just that it is B12 based.  My guess is that someone's variation of this years elixir contained the banned substance.

 

[jimbo92107]

I was thinking about Santana's post-season ban a couple days ago. Suddenly I remembered that the Twins have a lot of pitching depth. Tommy Milone is stewing in Rochester, and there are at least a couple other guys that might fill in for Santana when he exits.

 

How about this scenario: When Santana arrives, put him in the rotation, replacing either Pelfrey or May. The replaced starter bumps a reliever out of the bullpen, either Tonkin or Duensing. Having a starter in the pen gives the Twins a long reliever to take pressure off the starters, in case one of them has a short start.

 

If the Twins actually make the playoffs, That's when Santana goes away. Meanwhile, the bullpen guy comes back into the rotation, replaced by...get this...Tommy Milone. Same deal as before, you stash a starter in the pen, so you have a long reliever or spot starter who's a legit starter.

 

It's actually what the Twins are doing right now with Milone, stashing him in AAA in case a starter gets hurt or fails to perform. People call Milone a "fifth starter," but on the Twins, it really doesn't matter. You just need pitchers that keep the team in games, and Milone is one of those guys.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

If the Twins actually make the playoffs, That's when Santana goes away. Meanwhile, the bullpen guy comes back into the rotation, replaced by...get this...Tommy Milone.

I presume that if they make the postseason, they can go down to a 4 man rotation with the extra off days. So Santana may not need a replacement at that point.

[Whammy]

Here's the rule that I saw (Regarding game 163)

 

-------------------------

A Player who began serving a 162-
game suspension for a violation involving a Performance Enhancing
Substance on the first day of a championship season also will be
ineligible to participate in any tie-breaker games during that season
after the completion of his suspension.

--------------------------

 

So, I was incorrect.... the 163rd game ban was for those who were suspended for the ENTIRE 162 game regular season (not the 80 game suspension). They would also be ineligible for that postseason, but the language was added to close a potential minor loophole.

[Kwak]

I think a better question than Santana banned from the Playoffs? is:  "What should be done when Santana is no longer suspended?"  The entire rotation is succeeding beyond expectation--including the expected (hoped?) performance by Santana.  A strong case can be made to make no change in the rotation and place Santana in the bullpen come July.

[SwainZag]

Can Santana "rehab" from a suspension?  Does he have any options left?  You would imagine they would want to get him in some sort of game before throwing him in there are the Major League level.

[Rosterman]

It's like when you suspend a player 3, 5, 7 games. A batter misses 7 games. A starting pitcher misses two games at the most. A reliever might miss 3-4 games.

[h2oface]

 

And he'll (Berrios) somehow have to leapfrog over a half a dozen other prospective SPs that they have to evaluate first (Milone, Duffey, Rogers, Dean, Meyer?, + the MLB SP that Santana replaces in July)

I would hope what he is doing is part of the evaluation. I would hope is Berrios is ready and can do the job, that it would not matter at all who he jumps. Same with any of the other pitchers. Assemble the best team, regardless of age or experience or who may feel they are next in line. 

[jokin]

 

Can Santana "rehab" from a suspension?  Does he have any options left?  You would imagine they would want to get him in some sort of game before throwing him in there are the Major League level.

 

He is allowed 16 days in the minors to get ready, which means he'll be pitching probably 4 games for Rochester starting just past the mid-point of June.  Plus, he's already throwing in some EST games.

[h2oface]

The change of the rule on suspensions was announced on Friday, March 28.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/29/sports/baseball/suspended-players-now-ineligible-for-playoffs.html?_r=0

 

The players association was also behind this change in the ruling.

 

Peralta and Cruz returned from their suspensions in time to participate in the playoffs, which angered some of their colleagues. (new union head Tony) Clark said the union membership wanted to make sure “a player is not coming back and affecting a change in the postseason as a result of the decision that particular player made earlier in the year.”

 

A week later, April 3, the Santana suspension was announced. This was before the current season, which started on Sunday, April 5. Santana tested positive well before the rule changed, not after, and during the offseason. We don't know exactly when he tested positive, but it had to be well before (and hopefully, it was after the signing, as MLB letting him resign knowing he has tested positive would seem to be some kind of wrong, to me). Couldn't Santana's suspension have been announced before the ruling, if in fact MLB knew they were going to suspend him, and already had the results? Should the Twins legal team have contested the punishment being changed after the 'crime', for this particular instance, and propose the punishment be enforced with the previous rule, the rule that was in effect when the event happened? Can they still? Is off season earlier in the current year, or its own special time period that needs clarified? It seems there are several things that can be questioned about how this all went down.

 

 

[h2oface]

Young Eddie Rosario needs cut some slack.

It always amazes me that alcohol drinkers see themselves different than marijuana users. Sure, in more unevolved states it is still draconianly illegal, but in a few years, we will be looking at the whole thing like a bad prohibition period as silly as alcohol was, and maybe worse because of how it has criminalized peaceful citizens, and has created and filled a very broken prison system that is supplemented by private prisons for hire. Those who drive after drinking (even a couple) are much more dangerous than the weed smokers, and they do it all the time, always telling themselves they are fine to drive, and rarely considering that the car they pilot is now a 65 mph weapon to kill innocent people on the public streets they drive. 

[blairpaul715]

 

I don't understand the purpose of renewing the ban after they've already come back. What's so special about the playoffs anyway? The team. Not a single player. But the fact of the matter is that we're doing really good without Ervin Santana...so should we worry too much? I don't know. But he's still going to be suspended, and that's wrong, whether it helps or hurts the team. Imagine somebody who served time in prison for whatever, got out, got their life back on track...and then had to serve "playoffs" time to remind them that they had to behave. How ridiculous would that be?!

Um, sex offenders, and rightfully so.

[blairpaul715]

 

 

Is off season earlier in the current year, or its own special time period that needs clarified?

I might be wrong, but i thought the new baseball year started after the end of the World Series

[h2oface]

 

I might be wrong, but i thought the new baseball year started after the end of the World Series

The end of the world series activates free agency and other types of contractual things, but it seems a stretch to be able to call it the start of the new season. Maybe so....... but MLB doesn't charge us for the season until later.....   (it was at the start of the season, but starting two years ago it was charged around the start of spring training). I still see it as changing the punishment after the incident. I see the offseason as the offseason, too. Or maybe the line of demarcation can be the start of spring training? I think it should be addressed, though.If players are not under contract to be performing and not under team supervision, I can't see how it can be considered the start of the new season.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

The change of the rule on suspensions was announced on Friday, March 28.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/29/sports/baseball/suspended-players-now-ineligible-for-playoffs.html?_r=0

 

The players association was also behind this change in the ruling.

 

Peralta and Cruz returned from their suspensions in time to participate in the playoffs, which angered some of their colleagues. (new union head Tony) Clark said the union membership wanted to make sure “a player is not coming back and affecting a change in the postseason as a result of the decision that particular player made earlier in the year.”

 

A week later, April 3, the Santana suspension was announced. 

 

You've got your years wrong.  The rule change was announced in March 2014 (largely in reaction to the Biogenesis suspensions of 2013).  Santanta was suspended in April 2015.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

I think a better question than Santana banned from the Playoffs? is:  "What should be done when Santana is no longer suspended?"  The entire rotation is succeeding beyond expectation--including the expected (hoped?) performance by Santana.  A strong case can be made to make no change in the rotation and place Santana in the bullpen come July.

I don't think the entire rotation is exceeding Santana's expected performance, unless you cherry-pick their best recent starts, particularly for May, Nolasco, and Hughes.  It's rather unlikely that all five of the current group remain fully healthy AND average that high level of performance (7 innings, 3 runs or less) for the next month-plus.

[Linus]

 

I don't think the entire rotation is exceeding Santana's expected performance, unless you cherry-pick their best recent starts, particularly for May, Nolasco, and Hughes.  It's rather unlikely that all five of the current group remain fully healthy AND average that high level of performance (7 innings, 3 runs or less) for the next month-plus.

This.  At this point, Santana would likely be our best pitcher, unless Hughes regains last year's form.  Despite his improved pitching, I am not at all worried what happens to Mike Pelfrey (or Nolasco for that matter).

[Thrylos]

Non-issue

 

5.56 ERA, 22.2 IP, 9 BB, 14 K, 1.324 WHIP

 

Santana's career post-season line.

 

Also, who do you take off the starting rotation to plug in Santana?   If you look at FIP and WAR the worst Twins' starter right now is Hughes.  Would you move Hughes to the pen for Santana?   Nope.  Santana made his bed and he should sleep in it.   Unless something drastically changes, he looks good as the long man off the pen right now...

 

 

Yes the steroids rules hurt the teams.  There should be a rule allowing teams to void the users' contract.  The Union has been vocal against steroid users because they feel that it hurts legitimate players (and it does.)  Let them put their $ where their mouths are...

[dxpavelka]

 

MLB probably has little desire for the broadcasters and media to have prime time playoff games be filled with talk about steroid cheats, which of course would happen when Santana takes the mound in October.

If he contributes to us making the playoffs and he DOESN'T take the mound its going to be a bigger story.

[dxpavelka]

 

Non-issue

 

5.56 ERA, 22.2 IP, 9 BB, 14 K, 1.324 WHIP

 

Santana's career post-season line.

 

Also, who do you take off the starting rotation to plug in Santana?   If you look at FIP and WAR the worst Twins' starter right now is Hughes.  Would you move Hughes to the pen for Santana?   Nope.  Santana made his bed and he should sleep in it.   Unless something drastically changes, he looks good as the long man off the pen right now...

 

 

Yes the steroids rules hurt the teams.  There should be a rule allowing teams to void the users' contract.  The Union has been vocal against steroid users because they feel that it hurts legitimate players (and it does.)  Let them put their $ where their mouths are...

22 innings pitched is an insignificant sample size and means nothing.