PDA

View Full Version : Another Player (Edinson Volquez of the Reds) Soon to be Suspended


Vestigio
04-20-2010, 12:50 PM
http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/04/a-major-league-ped-suspension-is-imminent.html.php


Rumors were that it was a New York player, but those were shot down. They are now saying that the player in question is a "semi-big" name pitcher.

Who do you guys think is going to fall?

doublem23
04-20-2010, 12:57 PM
Better not be Peavy

sox1970
04-20-2010, 12:57 PM
Better not be Peavy

That was my thought. He does worship Roger Clemens.

DSpivack
04-20-2010, 12:58 PM
Punto!

GoGoCrede
04-20-2010, 12:59 PM
I'm nervous....when will it be announced?

Vestigio
04-20-2010, 01:02 PM
I would consider Peavy to be a big name player. Zambrano on the other hand :leer: :cool:

TheOldRoman
04-20-2010, 01:03 PM
Better not be PeavyI would say Peavy is more than a "semi" big name pitcher. Then again, he now plays in a desolate park in the shadows of the loveable Cubsies!

veeter
04-20-2010, 01:03 PM
Shot in the dark...Carl Pavano.

Vestigio
04-20-2010, 01:03 PM
I'm nervous....when will it be announced?

Possibly within the week

GoGoCrede
04-20-2010, 01:05 PM
Could it be Javy? The speculation is going to drive me nuts.

I'm going to keep naming players I don't like. :)

doublem23
04-20-2010, 01:08 PM
Huston Street?

Great for Oakland, struggled since leaving, seems to fit the bill.

102605
04-20-2010, 01:11 PM
Update says National League pitcher.

Phew!

GoGoCrede
04-20-2010, 01:13 PM
Update says National League pitcher.

Phew!

Good, now I can enjoy the speculation.

pythons007
04-20-2010, 01:13 PM
Felipe Lopez!! He does have 2 IP.

TheOldRoman
04-20-2010, 01:18 PM
Huston Street?

Great for Oakland, struggled since leaving, seems to fit the bill.Actually, he was great with Oakland, then struggled before they traded him. He was great again with the Rockies last year.

However, you may be on to something. Espcially with the Oakland part.

doublem23
04-20-2010, 01:19 PM
Update says National League pitcher.

Phew!

Well the last baseless name I'll throw out there is Oswalt. Well known in baseball circles, virtually unknown outside, and spent a lot of time with Pettitte and Clemens, maybe they shared their secret to longevity with him.

LoveYourSuit
04-20-2010, 01:24 PM
Good, now I can enjoy the speculation.


lol
:rolling:

soxfanatlanta
04-20-2010, 01:24 PM
Why in the hell does this crap keep getting "leaked" to the media? It's ridiculous.

LoveYourSuit
04-20-2010, 01:26 PM
Chris Carpenter is my guess.

JermaineDye05
04-20-2010, 01:59 PM
It doesn't say it's a starter. I could see it being someone like Billy Wagner.

Nellie_Fox
04-20-2010, 02:42 PM
I really dislike these threads where player after player gets publicly slandered based on nothing more than someone's suspicion.

DirtySox
04-20-2010, 02:58 PM
http://a1.twimg.com/profile_images/190827556/jon_heyman_normal.jpg (http://twitter.com/SI_JonHeyman) SI_JonHeyman (http://twitter.com/SI_JonHeyman)
reds pitcher edinson volquez suspended 50 games for PEDs. story up on si.com soon.

JermaineDye05
04-20-2010, 03:03 PM
http://a1.twimg.com/profile_images/190827556/jon_heyman_normal.jpg (http://twitter.com/SI_JonHeyman) SI_JonHeyman (http://twitter.com/SI_JonHeyman)
reds pitcher edinson volquez suspended 50 games for PEDs. story up on si.com soon.

Wow, that's a pretty big name IMO. He was so good for them. It makes sense though considering his injury problems last season.

He was one of the best fantasy guys I ever picked up on a hunch.

Is this failed drug test from this season/last season/a while back?

Boondock Saint
04-20-2010, 03:03 PM
http://a1.twimg.com/profile_images/190827556/jon_heyman_normal.jpg (http://twitter.com/SI_JonHeyman) SI_JonHeyman (http://twitter.com/SI_JonHeyman)
reds pitcher edinson volquez suspended 50 games for PEDs. story up on si.com soon.

Wow. That's pretty big.

DirtySox
04-20-2010, 03:05 PM
Wow, that's a pretty big name IMO. He was so good for them. It makes sense though considering his injury problems last season.

He was one of the best fantasy guys I ever picked up on a hunch.

Is this failed drug test from this season/last season/a while back?

He had Tommy John surgery in the offseason. He was hoping on returning at some point this year, but that remained to be seen. I wonder how serving the suspension works with a player who is currently injured.

JermaineDye05
04-20-2010, 03:10 PM
He had Tommy John surgery in the offseason. He was hoping on returning at some point this year, but that remained to be seen. I wonder how serving the suspension works with a player who is currently injured.

I believe it doesn't start until the player comes back. So once he's back from the DL, he has to serve the suspension.

DirtySox
04-20-2010, 03:11 PM
I believe it doesn't start until the player comes back. So once he's back from the DL, he has to serve the suspension.

Right. But can they get away with taking him off the DL even if he isn't at 100% just to get the suspension served? Loopholes?

JermaineDye05
04-20-2010, 03:11 PM
The good thing for the Reds is that it's a pitcher so he'd be missing like 10 starts. Granted, he's great when he's on. However, it's better they lose him for 50 games than a guy like Bruce or Votto.

khan
04-20-2010, 03:13 PM
I really dislike these threads where player after player gets publicly slandered based on nothing more than someone's suspicion.

Umm.... Isn't "slander" in verbal form, whereas "libel" would be in written form?

Therefore, you'd state "publicly libelled" in your statement, correct?


Also, I don't give a rip. **** them. These worthless pieces of **** protected each other during the steroid era, so they're now getting what they deserve. Also, wasting an iota of pity on a professional athlete is a ****ing waste of time, in my opinion. You might be better off saving your pity for the orphans of the Haiti, but that's just me.

Again: **** the ballplayers, even if they are "slandered." Their silence bought a FEW some semblance of innocence, but they as a group bought guilt.

DirtySox
04-20-2010, 03:14 PM
I don't think the Reds had high hopes for him pitching this year. It should be interesting to see how this plays out and when the suspension actually begins.

DirtySox
04-20-2010, 03:18 PM
apparently, edinson volquez can serve his 50-game susp. While on dl. So it may cost him only 50 games pay, and the #reds (http://twitter.com/search?q=%23reds) nothing. 7 minutes ago (http://twitter.com/ed_price/status/12532498965) via tweetdeck (http://www.tweetdeck.com/)

Guess he doesn't have to be off the DL.

PorkChopExpress
04-20-2010, 03:20 PM
Right. But can they get away with taking him off the DL even if he isn't at 100% just to get the suspension served? Loopholes?

I think if he comes off the DL, then someone else has to come off the 25 man roster so they lose a player if they do that. Correct me if I'm wrong those in the know.

If they could handle a 24 man roster for 50 games, then maybe it's worth it.

EDIT: nevermind.

JermaineDye05
04-20-2010, 03:22 PM
That just doesn't make sense to me. I especially don't like the idea that pitchers can serve a suspension in a game they don't even play in. If you're gonna give him a 50 game suspension then it should be served in games that he'd actually be playing in. To me if you give a starter a 5 game suspension and he misses just 1 start as a result, I consider that just a 1 game suspension. However, I understand that it can be complicated with the call ups/send downs so it's not really logical to do that.

soxinem1
04-20-2010, 03:29 PM
That just doesn't make sense to me. I especially don't like the idea that pitchers can serve a suspension in a game they don't even play in. If you're gonna give him a 50 game suspension then it should be served in games that he'd actually be playing in. To me if you give a starter a 5 game suspension and he misses just 1 start as a result, I consider that just a 1 game suspension. However, I understand that it can be complicated with the call ups/send downs so it's not really logical to do that.

The major league DL counts as service time, thus Volquez will be serving his suspension immediately. Since he will not be back in 50 games anyway, it will not matter.

But CIN must be happy, even though Volquez was not making big $$$$, he cannot be paid during that time. So they actually save money with him being suspended while rehabbing.
That just doesn't make sense to me. I especially don't like the idea that pitchers can serve a suspension in a game they don't even play in. If you're gonna give him a 50 game suspension then it should be served in games that he'd actually be playing in. To me if you give a starter a 5 game suspension and he misses just 1 start as a result, I consider that just a 1 game suspension. However, I understand that it can be complicated with the call ups/send downs so it's not really logical to do that.

This policy definitely tilts toward the position player, except high-appearance relivers or closers.

True, if a starting P gets a 50-game hit, he loses about 9-11 starts. If a position player gets the same penalty, he can lose up to 50 games.

doublem23
04-20-2010, 03:33 PM
That just doesn't make sense to me. I especially don't like the idea that pitchers can serve a suspension in a game they don't even play in. If you're gonna give him a 50 game suspension then it should be served in games that he'd actually be playing in. To me if you give a starter a 5 game suspension and he misses just 1 start as a result, I consider that just a 1 game suspension. However, I understand that it can be complicated with the call ups/send downs so it's not really logical to do that.

The big punishment with the suspensions is the pay. Not 100% sure how the MLB figures these things out, but if they base their yearly pay on 162 games, then a 50 game suspension just cost Mr. Volquez 1/3 of is paycheck for the year.

DumpJerry
04-20-2010, 03:36 PM
Umm.... Isn't "slander" in verbal form, whereas "libel" would be in written form?

Therefore, you'd state "publicly libelled" in your statement, correct?
Huh? Slander is not a thought kept to oneself, so slander and libel are both statements made in "public."

Nellie_Fox
04-20-2010, 04:58 PM
Umm.... Isn't "slander" in verbal form, whereas "libel" would be in written form?

Therefore, you'd state "publicly libelled" in your statement, correct?I have no idea what the legal definition is. I've never taken a course in torts; haven't needed to. However, the dictionary definition for regular, everyday usage includes any defamatory statement.


Also, I don't give a rip. **** them. These worthless pieces of **** protected each other during the steroid era, so they're now getting what they deserve. Also, wasting an iota of pity on a professional athlete is a ****ing waste of time, in my opinion. You might be better off saving your pity for the orphans of the Haiti, but that's just me.

Again: **** the ballplayers, even if they are "slandered." Their silence bought a FEW some semblance of innocence, but they as a group bought guilt.Wow. That's all I can say. Since they may or may not have known, it's okay for them to be falsely accused of doing it themselves? Why are you still a fan?

Huh? Slander is not a thought kept to oneself, so slander and libel are both statements made in "public."Since Dump is a licensed attorney, and has doubtless taken torts, I'll let him handle the definition part.

That doesn't mean that I still don't object to people naming players as possible roiders based only on suspicion. I don't think they deserve to have their names dragged through the mud on message boards just for the curiosity of the posters.

decolores9628
04-20-2010, 06:58 PM
Volquez from the Reds

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=5119303

october23sp
04-20-2010, 07:02 PM
Volquez from the Reds

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=5119303

He got traded to the Twins in MLB 10: The Show, and I lost to him, do I get that game back?

khan
04-20-2010, 09:30 PM
I have no idea what the legal definition is. I've never taken a course in torts; haven't needed to. However, the dictionary definition for regular, everyday usage includes any defamatory statement.
And this is why I posed it as a question. You ARE, after all, a college professor, are you not?


Wow. That's all I can say. Since they may or may not have known, it's okay for them to be falsely accused of doing it themselves? Why are you still a fan?
1. If you HONESTLY are naive enough to think that "they may or may have not known," you're kidding yourself. Even a blind, drunk monkey could have seen the incredulous changes in Bonds, McGwire, Gagne, and any of the other cheats.
2. There's a HUGE difference between being a fan of the game, and a fan of a player. The former is for grown-ups, while the latter is for children. Since you and I are WELL BEYOND childhood, blind belief in the player is about as logical as blind belief in the Easter Bunny.


Since Dump is a licensed attorney, and has doubtless taken torts, I'll let him handle the definition part.
Which is why I asked a question about it.

That doesn't mean that I still don't object to people naming players as possible roiders based only on suspicion. I don't think they deserve to have their names dragged through the mud on message boards just for the curiosity of the posters.
Again, they had occasion to speak out about it. Frank Thomas did. Protecting the cheats was cowardly, at best. Do you disagree?

Or are you more of a fan of the player, rather than the game?

Frontman
04-20-2010, 10:09 PM
The players union; through protecting themselves, and Bud Selig, protecting the game, gave the fans the perfect "guilty until proven innocent" enviroment.

But, since we now want to include what is legal/not legal. Let's FOLLOW THE LAWS OF THE U.S.A. THEN.

Let's arrest, try, and see if we can convict all those who test positive for obtaining, owning, and using ILLEGAL drugs.

That 50 game suspension looks a lot better than federal jail time now, doesn't it?

UChicagoHP
04-21-2010, 12:35 AM
This suspension is a joke...it ABSOLUTELY should not begin untill he is added to the active roster. Don't like the Reds gaming the system somewhat here...not cool, imo...

Then again, I do agree the true punishment is the lack of a paycheck, but I'm sure EV has more than enough in the bank. Some would argue the Reds shouldn't be punished, but the player...wierd situation, eh?

Nellie_Fox
04-21-2010, 01:23 AM
And this is why I posed it as a question. You ARE, after all, a college professor, are you not?I am not a law professor; I'm a law-enforcement/public administration professor. Tort law has nothing to do with either. And the fact remains that there is a definition of slander that is broader than the legal definition. I'm not going to argue with you about this any more, since all you're doing is telling me that MY OPINION is wrong.

pearso66
04-21-2010, 09:01 PM
He got traded to the Twins in MLB 10: The Show, and I lost to him, do I get that game back?

That's hilarious, he's on the Twins in my MLB 10 also.