Prince Fielder Retires

[wsnydes]

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2016/08/prince-fielder-likely-to-announce-retirement.html

 

In more retirement news, it appears that the neck injury has ended Prince Fielder's career.  

 

[HitInAPinch]

2nd neck injury in the last couple years.  Sadly, at age 32, his career is done.................

[SweetOne69]

While it is sad that his career is over prematurely, I'm pissed that he isn't going to officially retire so that he can bilk Texas and Detroit out of $96M over the next 4 years.

 

It sucks that he is able to get paid while not being able to fulfill his side of the bargain.  I agree that the team should have to pay the contract when the release a player (A-Rod for example) as they are the ones breaching the contract.  But when it the player that breaches due to the inability to play there should be some recourse for the team.

 

Since the current CBA is about to expire I bet this situation is going to come up in the bargaining negotiations.

[Willihammer]

Pretty shocking. He used to be such an ironman. Evidently the Rangers have said the neck isn't related to his weight either.

[Mike Sixel]

 

While it is sad that his career is over prematurely, I'm pissed that he isn't going to officially retire so that he can bilk Texas and Detroit out of $96M over the next 4 years.

 

It sucks that he is able to get paid while not being able to fulfill his side of the bargain.  I agree that the team should have to pay the contract when the release a player (A-Rod for example) as they are the ones breaching the contract.  But when it the player that breaches due to the inability to play there should be some recourse for the team.

 

Since the current CBA is about to expire I bet this situation is going to come up in the bargaining negotiations.

 

so, wait, a player (employee) gets injured on the job, and he shouldn't get paid his contract? Wow.

[Squirrel]

 

so, wait, a player (employee) gets injured on the job, and he shouldn't get paid his contract? Wow.

Yeah ... whatever happened to workman's comp?

[Vanimal46]

That was a sad press conference to watch. Press conferences are always harder to listen to when it's injuries taking them out of the game they love. 

[Minniman]

 

so, wait, a player (employee) gets injured on the job, and he shouldn't get paid his contract? Wow.

 

$96 million?

 

No.

 

[Squirrel]

$96 million?

 

No.

While yes, I get it. It's a lot of money for not doing what they are being paid to do. But was there a contingency in his contract that said, 'Unless he gets a career-ending injury ...' it technically is money he is owed. I don't begrudge him that. Long-term contacts are a risk. But unless there was a contingency in his contract to specify exceptions, it's legally binding.

[Mr. Brooks]

While yes, I get it. It's a lot of money for not doing what they are being paid to do. But was there a contingency in his contract that said, 'Unless he gets a career-ending injury ...' it technically is money he is owed. I don't begrudge him that. Long-term contacts are a risk. But unless there was a contingency in his contract to specify exceptions, it's legally binding.

Unless a team can prove an injury was from non baseball related activities.

And I don't think we have any reason to believe this to be the case here.

[Squirrel]

Unless a team can prove an injury was from non baseball related activities.

And I don't think we have any reason to believe this to be the case here.

Well, yeah, I was making that assumption when I said that.

[SweetOne69]

If an employee gets injured at work and is unable to perform his contract, he would be given a severance package. He wouldn't be awarded the full value of his contract.

[Craig Arko]

If an employee gets injured at work and is unable to perform his contract, he would be given a severance package. He wouldn't be awarded the full value of his contract.

I would think that depends on the terms of the contract. And if the Rangers had recourse, they would have exercised it.

 

Or do we think they'll be paying him out of the kindness of their hearts?

[TheLeviathan]

The man earned the contract he was given and he gets to collect.   Pretty simple.

 

I'm sure he'd prefer to be on the field earning it.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

While it is sad that his career is over prematurely, I'm pissed that he isn't going to officially retire so that he can bilk Texas and Detroit out of $96M over the next 4 years.

 

It sucks that he is able to get paid while not being able to fulfill his side of the bargain.  I agree that the team should have to pay the contract when the release a player (A-Rod for example) as they are the ones breaching the contract.  But when it the player that breaches due to the inability to play there should be some recourse for the team.

 

Since the current CBA is about to expire I bet this situation is going to come up in the bargaining negotiations.

Insurance is paying for part of the contract now.

 

I doubt it is a contentious issue between owners and players, these are pretty rare cases (expensive players getting permanent medical prohibition from ever playing again).  Albert Belle?  15 years ago.  Puckett?  20 years ago.  And of course, insurance helped those teams too:

 

https://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-62632688.html

 

99% of injured baseball players can rehab and attempt to play again, rendering your complaint moot.

[Mike Sixel]

 

$96 million?

 

No.

 

why not? If it was you or me, and we had a contract that said we'd get paid, say, 200K, would that be ok? Why is this any different?

[Minniman]

 

While yes, I get it. It's a lot of money for not doing what they are being paid to do. But was there a contingency in his contract that said, 'Unless he gets a career-ending injury ...' it technically is money he is owed. I don't begrudge him that. Long-term contacts are a risk. But unless there was a contingency in his contract to specify exceptions, it's legally binding.

 

If he plays.

 

The Twins could bat him ninth and force him to play catcher. That is part of the contract too.

 

Where in his contract does it state he can decide not to play and still get paid?

 

 

why not? If it was you or me, and we had a contract that said we'd get paid, say, 200K, would that be ok? Why is this any different?

 

Sure, if Mauer plays, he should get paid.

 

If he walks away for his own reasons, no.

 

To be legally binding, contracts must have benefits and obligations for both parties.

 

[Vanimal46]

 

If he plays.

 

The Twins could bat him ninth and force him to play catcher. That is part of the contract too.

 

Where in his contract does it state he can decide not to play and still get paid?

 

 

 

Sure, if Mauer plays, he should get paid.

 

If he walks away for his own reasons, no.

 

To be legally binding, contracts must have benefits and obligations for both parties.

Fielder didn't walk away for his own reasons, though. Unless I'm mistaken, he's no longer medically cleared to play baseball anymore. 

[wsnydes]

 

If he plays.

 

The Twins could bat him ninth and force him to play catcher. That is part of the contract too.

 

Where in his contract does it state he can decide not to play and still get paid?

 

 

 

Sure, if Mauer plays, he should get paid.

 

If he walks away for his own reasons, no.

 

To be legally binding, contracts must have benefits and obligations for both parties.

Where a player bats in the order or plays on the field is not stipulated or a part of a player's contract.

 

He didn't "decide not to play" as you've stated.  Due to injuries sustained due to his occupation, he is medically unable to continue playing.  That is why contracts, especially large ones, are insured by franchises.  He technically isn't retired, he's medically unable to perform.  If he simply retired, he would not be getting paid unless otherwise agreed upon by both parties to do so.

 

To be legally binding, a contract only has to be agreed upon by both parties.  Benefits and obligations are moot if both parties agree to it.

 

Contracts in sports are risky for both parties by nature.  The team takes the risk that the player is injured and can no longer play at the level when the contract was signed, or even at all as in this case.  The team signed the contract, they're obliged to pay the remainder in this case.  

[Squirrel]

If he plays.

 

The Twins could bat him ninth and force him to play catcher. That is part of the contract too.

 

Where in his contract does it state he can decide not to play and still get paid?

 

 

 

 

Sure, if Mauer plays, he should get paid.

 

If he walks away for his own reasons, no.

 

To be legally binding, contracts must have benefits and obligations for both parties.

Whoa ... he didn't just walk away. This is equivalent to workman's comp. He suffered a career-ending, work-related injury. This wasn't due to him being negligent or related to any off-field activity. You stated that as if Fielder just willfully said 'Well, I've just decided I'm just not going to play anymore for no reason, so pay me anyway' which is NOT the case. If I suffered a work-related injury, my employers would be still obligated to pay me. Short term I'd go on sick leave; long term I'd go on disability.

[twinsnorth49]

 

If he plays.

 

The Twins could bat him ninth and force him to play catcher. That is part of the contract too.

 

Where in his contract does it state he can decide not to play and still get paid?

 

 

 

Sure, if Mauer plays, he should get paid.

 

If he walks away for his own reasons, no.

 

To be legally binding, contracts must have benefits and obligations for both parties.

Did you read the article? Seems pretty straight forward, especially by pro sports standards.

He didn't just decide not to play, he can't, and here's what the contract stipulates.

 

Nonetheless, the end of Fielder’s career comes as a bit of a jolt. He’s only 32, and he’s under contract through 2020 at $24MM per year. Given that Fielder is medically unable to play and not technically retiring, the Rangers will still owe him $9MM per season through 2020, with $6MM annually coming from the Tigers (as per the terms of the trade that brought Fielder to Texas) and $9MM coming via insurance payments due to Fielder’s inability to play. He’ll also remain on Texas’ 40-man roster each offseason through the end of his deal, though the club will be able to free up room during the season by placing him on the 60-day DL.

 

 

 I think your last sentence meant to read " To be legally binding , contracts must have benefits and obligations mutually agreed upon by both parties". 

 

Seems that's the case here.

[tobi0040]

so, wait, a player (employee) gets injured on the job, and he shouldn't get paid his contract? Wow.

How do you know he wasn't injured doing a triathalon?

[Mike Sixel]

 

How do you know he wasn't injured doing a triathalon?

 

That actually doesn't matter......and funny, btw.

[tobi0040]

It is real interesting because he had this rivalry with his Dad and they apparently didn’t get along very well. They both ended with 319 HR. Cecil was a few days from 35 when he played his last game while Prince was only 32.

 

Prince had a better career. .887 OPS and 134 OPS+ versus .827 and 119 OPS+ for Cecil.

 

The other interesting thing is both had two thirds of their WAR eroded by defense but played most of their innings at 1B. Price was +32 and – 21. Cecil was +20 and -12 according to BRef. Cecil played about a third of the time at DH while Prince about 15 percent. I find it really hard to believe these teams had a worse defensive option hitting DH.

[Minniman]

I understand you guys think this is like workman's comp. There is no way anyone gets their entire salary paid by workman's comp.

 

If injured on the job in Texas, you would receive the average of your weekly wages for the 13 weeks prior to your date of accident multiplied by 2/3 with a maximum of $895 per week.

 

Did Prince have AFLAC to cover the other $8.95 million per year?

 

Of course, Prince could go on Social Security disability if he cannot work at all. I doubt he will get the $9 million per year from that.

 

We have Fielder bilking the system here, as would Mauer if he retired from game related injuries. I believe players should receive benefits, but I do believe they deserve their entire contracts to be paid.

 

MLB players get too much and NFL players get too little.

[Craig Arko]

At this point the remaining option would be to write the Rangers a letter (better cc MLB and the MLBPA on it) explaining to them why they shouldn't pay up.

 

There ain't jack any of us can or will do about it. It's not our dough.

[Bark's Lounge]

Instead of bitching about his contract and the money he will collect, I would like to give a salute to Prince Fielder for a tremendous career. As a baseball fan, I am bummed out he can no longer go on at a fairly youthful age. 50HR's at the ripe old age of 23, he seemed decently athletic for a guy who was 6' and 280lbs.

 

IMO he was a much better player than his dad and I wish he was able to continue his career. Sure, he had his flaws as all players do, but he was fun to watch in the batters box, and fun to watch carrying the load he has chugging around the bases in an impressive way.

[Craig Arko]

I remember quite well the inside the park homer he hit at the Dome on a ball misplayed by Lew Ford.