I saw in the sports transactions section of my newspaper a few days ago that the Baltimore Orioles activated Albert Belle from the 60-day DL.
Now, Belle has, for all intents and purposes, retired, due to an injury. The Orioles have to keep him on the payroll and put him on the 60 day DL so as to be able to collect insurance payments for his inability to play. Since a player on the 60 day DL does not count against the 40 man roster, this is the wisest thing for the Orioles to do – and they have done so for the last two years or so.
So, why would the Orioles activate Belle from the DL (causing him to take up a roster spot) when he is never going to play again? To protect him in the Rule V draft? I don’t think so. They’d love for someone to take Belle off their hands (the insurance payments don’t completely cover the salary Belle is drawing). Besides, what GM in their right mind would take a player who can never play again anyway?
So, what other reason could the Orioles have for activating Belle?
The best part is, if you go into the Camden Yards gift shop, there are tons of Belle merchandise, that no one will ever buy. Belle jerseys, hatpins, t-shirts, caps, etc. It costs about a quarter of what the other stuff costs, but I can’t imagine anyone in their right mind ever buying any of it. They should just give it to charity.
2007 sure looks like a heck of a class. I reckon we could start a nice little great debate about who from each of the classes listed actually deserves to make it.
Well, it’s limited by the number of players on the ballot and the fact that each elector can only choose 10 players in one year. A player must get 75% of the vote to be elected.
Limiting the list only to those members voted in by the Baseball Writers Association (which is the group dealing with the 75% limit), the only year that 5 people were elected was the first year of the hall (1936). There are a couple of 4 player years, but they are predominantly limited to 2-3 players voted in by the BWA.
Back to the insurance question and the 60-day DL, I wonder if MLB forces teams to activate players from the 60-day DL and put them back on the roster in order to make the teams have to pay some sort of penalty for carrying dead weight on the roster.
It’s not much of one, but at least the front office has to file some paper work.
Good question. I’ve always wanted to get my hands on a copy of the “GM Rules” (for lack of knowing what they are actually called), but have so far been unsuccessful.
The penalty could come in who they have to bump off the 40 man roster to put the disabled player on, if they then end up losing someone they would rather keep.