This past Thursday, the Chicago Cubs placed relief pitcher Kerry Wood on the 15-day DL due to a blister on his throwing hand (or more likely a finger I'd suppose).
That in itself didn't really catch my eye, given Wood's injury history and the fact that I knew he had the issue and they hadn't been using him recently.
What caught my eye was the phrase in the report, "retroactive to July 14." This means that the 15 days started on July 14, making Wood eligible to return as soon as July 29. The day he was placed on the disabled list, to reiterate the first sentence, was July 24. Or, 10 days into the stint as far as the injury report is concerned.
I wondered if it was within regulations to place a player on the disabled list 10 days after he could have been and use the "retroactive." label. It turns out that 10 days is the limit as far as this maneuver goes.
- B/R Ticket Guide
I've seen a few days used with this retroactive label before, but I don't recall ever seeing anything beyond a week being used. Ten days just seems ridiculous. If a player is injured, he's injured. There's not much room for interpretation.
This sort of deception by the Cubs (and that's what it boils down to) is almost on par with what the NFL's New England Patriots and head coach Bill Belichick do with that league's weekly injury report. I can't even recall how many weeks running QB Tom Brady has been listed as "probable" with a shoulder injury.
Both of these scenarios demonstrate blatant and intentional abuse of the rules.
I think the Cubs knew they weren't going to use Wood until he was healthy and the blister issue was rectified. Under the rule in place, they could sit on him for 10 days and then put him on the disabled list for the remaining five.
You could say that hurt the Cubs, as they essentially lost a roster spot for that stretch of days if Wood was most likely not going to pitch and they didn't have another player to take that roster spot. This is another reason that the rule is a bad one.
The disabled list rule may need to be modified. Limiting the use of the "retroactive to" label to seven days back seems logical and, most importantly, fair to the rest of the teams competing for playoff spots, division titles, etc. It would also prevent teams from keeping what is effectively a "dead" roster spot any longer than a week.
comments (6) write a comment »
write a new comment
3 months ago
How does this hurt an opposing team? The rule is this way to benefit teams, not all injuries are as serious and evident at times. Woods blister could have healed correctly and had him back on the mound the first game after the All-Star break. Instead it took longer to heal, and their reason for putting him on the DL at all, was to get him some side work before returning.
I guess I am just not sure where this hurts an opposing team. When a team uses the "retroactive" they can only go back to the date that the player last had game action. In turn, the player has to spend atleast 5 days on the disabled list. No player on the DL can miss less than 15 days.
3 months ago
I just think it's deceiving to other teams. If a guy is hurt, within reason, put him on the DL. I think they new they had to DL Wood, but were holding off as long as rules will allow. I suppose it doesn't really hurt other teams, it really only hurts the Cubs in this case because they essentially had a roster spot that wasn't being used in game action when they could have had a healthy player during that 10 days. I just think it's deceiving to dress a guy with no intent on using him in a game for that long a period a time.
3 months ago
It is just not relevant. He may have only thrown ond day out of those 10. Actually, there has been only one save chance since the last time he pitched. So in his time off, Kerry may only have pitched in two games, just to keep him fresh. I just don't think it matters since bench players in baseball aren't necessarily used everyday. Some go a long time without playing, especially relief pitchers. Just my opinion though.
3 months ago
I guess it just caught my eye that he was DL'ed retroactive to so long beforehand, and may have only seemed relevant/deceiving to me.
3 months ago
Well the thing about it is if the Cubs need another arm in the bullpen they can have it for a few days until Wood is eligible to return from the DL.
3 months ago
I agree with Ricky. Having watched every Cubs game since the All Star break I know that Woody was questionable going into several games, but not completely unavailable until more recently. As of a few days ago, the Cubs revealed that a new treatment was being used on the blister and the team hoped it would make it unnecessary to DL him. Obviously the treatment didn't work quickly enough for it to be worth continuing to waste a roster spot with an unavailable player. I think allowing a team to place someone on the DL retroactively is beneficial to that team and in no way negatively affects their opponents. Seems a little weird to see that announcement, but if anything it's been bad for the team, not good.
write a new comment