DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Bleacher Bums Forum
HTML https://bbf.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Archives
*****************************************************
#Post#: 312803--------------------------------------------------
Re: Cubs Draft 2017
By: CUBluejays Date: June 10, 2017, 3:49 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I'm not going to speak for state medical associations, because
their discisons can be to complicated. I would never refer a
patient to another doctor with that type of conviction no matter
how excellent they are. I'm comfortable with the standard that
you abuse children that you shouldn't be a MLB player even if
you are Mike Trout good.
#Post#: 312806--------------------------------------------------
Re: Cubs Draft 2017
By: Reb Date: June 10, 2017, 4:13 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=CUBluejays link=topic=488.msg312803#msg312803
date=1497127767]
I'm not going to speak for state medical associations, because
their discisons can be to complicated. I would never refer a
patient to another doctor with that type of conviction no matter
how excellent they are. I'm comfortable with the standard that
you abuse children that you shouldn't be a MLB player even if
you are Mike Trout good.
[/quote]
The guy was legally a child too. That's why it's complicated.
Professionals refer or don't refer to a specialist based on all
kinds of subjective considerations, personal and otherwise. What
matters on the question of "ruining a career" is the
determination of the state governing body as whether the person
is fit--- not whether one doctor wants to refer him. The latter
is irrelevant.
As I said before, MLB has a PR element, as it should. It's a
business. My own view is that MLB probably would use very
similar criteria to those I posted above to determine
eligibility. If he's eligible after applying all that, you are
in a dream world if you think no clubs would sign a "Mike Trout
good" player.
Assuming remorse, etc, think most Cubs fans would accept this
guy as a TORP, Trout-like player.
#Post#: 312807--------------------------------------------------
Re: Cubs Draft 2017
By: Reb Date: June 10, 2017, 4:33 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Then there's the case of Josh Lueke. See link below if you don't
know his story.
Seems like if Lueke pitched in majors, maybe the kid gets a
chance at some point. Maybe he has to go independent route
first, if not drafted or signed. If he's a Trout-like TORP, he
will be signed eventually. Could have to pass a high bar to get
a chance.
HTML http://deadspin.com/josh-lueke-is-a-rapist-pass-it-on-1566010458
#Post#: 312814--------------------------------------------------
Re: Cubs Draft 2017
By: Jes Beard Date: June 10, 2017, 7:42 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=DUSTY link=topic=488.msg312801#msg312801
date=1497126937]
No player is good enough to drag around that baggage.
He'd get raped in prison for it.
[/quote]
YOU would get raped in prison, just for being you.
#Post#: 312816--------------------------------------------------
Re: Cubs Draft 2017
By: Jes Beard Date: June 10, 2017, 7:51 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Reb link=topic=488.msg312807#msg312807
date=1497130417]
Then there's the case of Josh Lueke. See link below if you don't
know his story.
Seems like if Lueke pitched in majors, maybe the kid gets a
chance at some point. Maybe he has to go independent route
first, if not drafted or signed. If he's a Trout-like TORP, he
will be signed eventually. Could have to pass a high bar to get
a chance.
HTML http://deadspin.com/josh-lueke-is-a-rapist-pass-it-on-1566010458
[/quote]
if Lueke only pled guilty to false imprisonment, and the
prosecution accepted that plea, it would appear that the
prosecution was not comfortable with prosecuting him on that
charge. In other words, while his guilty please means you can
legally safely and conclusively say he falsely imprisoned the
woman.... that is quite a stretch from rape, and it is entirely
possible that the prosecution could not even have gotten a
conviction for that if it had gone to trial and that he was
guilty of nothing, but accepted a plea agreement because it
entirely eliminated the prospect of a rape conviction and a long
prison sentence.
#Post#: 312819--------------------------------------------------
Re: Cubs Draft 2017
By: chgojhawk Date: June 10, 2017, 8:04 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Jes Beard link=topic=488.msg312816#msg312816
date=1497142279]
if Lueke only pled guilty to false imprisonment, and the
prosecution accepted that plea, it would appear that the
prosecution was not comfortable with prosecuting him on that
charge. In other words, while his guilty please means you can
legally safely and conclusively say he falsely imprisoned the
woman.... that is quite a stretch from ****, and it is entirely
possible that the prosecution could not even have gotten a
conviction for that if it had gone to trial and that he was
guilty of nothing, but accepted a plea agreement because it
entirely eliminated the prospect of a **** conviction and a long
prison sentence.
[/quote]
I suppose that is one way of looking at it. Another would be
that the plea bargain took into account a lack of background
(I'm guessing) and not wanting to tag a person with no
background with a rape charge. I have had clients plead to
charges that didn't resemble the original charges. It wasn't
due to a lack of evidence. It was due to working out a
resolution where all parties felt that they were getting a
reasonable disposition.
#Post#: 312821--------------------------------------------------
Re: Cubs Draft 2017
By: craig Date: June 10, 2017, 8:39 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=CUBluejays link=topic=488.msg312735#msg312735
date=1497097624]
I was listening to the Cubs Talk Podcast and they were talking
to Matt Dorey. Dorey mentioned that they like the college
pitching in the first round, but those players may not make it
to their first pick. If that didn't work out he mentioned fall
back options and that the Cubs have done work on high school
pitching looking for present stuff, athletic, control, etc...
They still consider college hitting less risky, that it is not a
great year for those players and they don't expect them to make
it to there pick. ...[/quote]
Thanks, Blue. Every one of these makes it sound likely that
they'll use perhaps both picks,or at least one, on pitching.
1. Encouraging that they like the college pitching in round
one.
2. If college pitcher(s) they like fall to them, that might be
nice $$-wise. Little go-back-to-school leverage. Don't think a
college pick is going to be able to leverage them over slot.
3. Given varying priorities and evals, nobody's boards are the
same. Odds pretty good that one or more guys on Cubs top-20
will still be on board at 27. Can't assume, but "don't expect
him to make it to their pick" guys sometimes do, so who knows?
If a hitter is surprisingly there, who knows?
4. As Law suggested, having two picks certainly gives them some
freedom to offer well over slot, if need be. Still, if HS
pitchers are "fallback", are they going to want to superslot
significantly on a fallback? May be that if they take a college
guy, slot will work. And if a HS "fallback" won't take slot,
perhaps they'd go for some other "fallback" who will?
#Post#: 312822--------------------------------------------------
Re: Cubs Draft 2017
By: Jes Beard Date: June 10, 2017, 8:44 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Those considerations are far more often addressed in sentencing
that in either charging or in plea agreements. I am not saying
that it doesn't happen, just that such things are more commonly
addressed in sentencing, while the primary factor in plea
agreements is the combination of the likelihood of conviction at
trial and of the sentence faced on conviction.
#Post#: 312826--------------------------------------------------
Re: Cubs Draft 2017
By: davep Date: June 10, 2017, 9:29 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
There are separate issues involved with the pitcher about to
enter the draft, and the situation with Russell.
With Russell, there are allegations about illegal behavior. He
has not been convicted of anything, and as far as I know, he has
not even been charged with anything. I do not believe that a
sports team or the MLB should make itself judge and jury in a
legal case, and they should take no official action until such
time as a conviction happens. If there is not enough evidence
for the legal system to convict, private institutions should not
try to punish in their place. Any contracts already in place
should be fulfilled as if the allegations had not been made.
After the end of the contract, any team can take allegations,
rumors, etc. into account when deciding whether or not to try to
sign the player. Public relations is a reasonable factor to
consider when deciding whether or not you want someone on your
team.
In the case of the kid entering the draft, he has been
convicted, and he has been punished. It is not for baseball to
officially add to that punishment. However, as in the case of
the free agent, any team can decide for themselves if they want
to draft him, taking into account the character of the player,
and the public relations problems that might come along with the
player. But that should be a decision of each individual
player, not a decision of MLB.
#Post#: 312833--------------------------------------------------
Re: Cubs Draft 2017
By: Reb Date: June 10, 2017, 11:58 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=davep link=topic=488.msg312826#msg312826
date=1497148153]
There are separate issues involved with the pitcher about to
enter the draft, and the situation with Russell.
.....In the case of the kid entering the draft, he has been
convicted, and he has been punished. It is not for baseball to
officially add to that punishment. However, as in the case of
the free agent, any team can decide for themselves if they want
to draft him, taking into account the character of the player,
and the public relations problems that might come along with the
player. But that should be a decision of each individual
player, not a decision of MLB.
[/quote]
MLB is an association with member clubs. MLB has a Constitution,
agreed to by the member clubs, that goes back to at least 1921.
It gives the Commissioner broad authority. See link below. At
Sec. 3(d), the constitution confers on the Commissioner
authority to take punitive action including "temporary or
permanent ineligibility of a player." So, MLB absolutely has a
stake regarding this issue. Clubs agreed to that almost a
century ago. They conferred on the Commissioner certain
management decisions that bind the assiciation members.
Government has the power to incarcerate folks as a punishment.
That is a very special form of punishment and that's why there
are special protections and rules. That power is very different
than that of a private association like MLB to govern itself and
formulate rules of conduct. Whatever MLB does, it's not another
layer of "punishment" but a wholly different animal. MLB can't
put anybody in jail. So, whatever they do or don't do, the state
legal process is only relevant to the extent MLB deems it
relevant.
Guessing the Commissioner will not get involved pre-draft here.
Maybe the issue will be moot if nobody drafts/signs the kid.
But, if signed, there will be some kind of MLB review.
If he's rehabilitated and remorseful, guessing MLB won't ban
him. But, it will get a close look--if he signs.
HTML https://ipmall.law.unh.edu/sites/default/files/hosted_resources/SportsEntLaw_Institute/League%20Constitutions%20&%20Bylaws/MLConsititutionJune2005Update.pdf
*****************************************************
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page