60 day DL issue

[Derek4jc]

From what I'm noticing in an online league that I am in is that players on the 60 day DL are not gaining service time while on the DL. However according to the MLB's CBA, players on the 60 day DL are credited with service time.

[battists]

Originally Posted by Derek4jc

From what I'm noticing in an online league that I am in is that players on the 60 day DL are not gaining service time while on the DL. However according to the MLB's CBA, players on the 60 day DL are credited with service time.

Derek, it was my understanding that players on the 60-day DL do NOT accumulate service time. They only accumulate the time while on the 15-day DL.

I'm happy to log it, though, if you can find some corroborating evidence...

[MrWorkrate]

Steve,

I concur with Derek - it doesn't look like the CBA specifies which disabled list the player has to be on, although I could swear I remember reading somewhere that 15 day counted but 60 day didn't.

I'll look more later, but for right now, I'll say Derek's right.

[Nutlaw]

Players on the 60-day DL aren't counted as being on the 40-man roster, right? I believe that means that they don't accrue service time.

[MrWorkrate]

Originally Posted by Nutlaw

Players on the 60-day DL aren't counted as being on the 40-man roster, right? I believe that means that they don't accrue service time.

That's why I'm thinking otherwise, but this is what I have so far that leans towards the "counting" cause:

Originally Posted by the 2003-2006 CBA

ARTICLE XXI—Credited Major League Service

A. Definition

Those Player rights expressly set forth in the Basic Agreement for
which a Player’s eligibility is dependent upon credited Major League
service will be determined as follows:

(1) One full day of Major League service will be credited for
each day of the championship season a Player is on a Major League
Club’s Active List. A total of 172 days of Major League credited
service will constitute one full year of credited service. A Player
may not be credited with more than one year of credited service, 172
days, in one championship season. Major League service will be
computed commencing with the date of the first regularly scheduled
championship season game, through and including the date of the
last regularly scheduled championship season game. This rule shall
apply uniformly to all Players and all Clubs notwithstanding differences
in a particular Club’s schedule.

(2) For purposes of calculating credited service, a Player will be
considered to be on a Club’s Active List if:
(a) placed on a disciplinary suspension by a Club, the Vice
President, On-Field Operations or the Commissioner, or on the
Disabled List;
(b) called to active military duty for up to two years or if called
to emergency duty by the National Guard for a period of up to
thirty days.

[Astros Fan in Cali]

It has always been my understanding that the only benefit of having a player on the 60 day DL as opposed to the 15 day DL is that a player on the 60 day DL did not count against the 40-man roster limit. As the post form MrWorkrate indicates, the language does not sepcify which version of the DL a player is on.

Also keep in mind that major leaguers are often moved to the 60 day DL from the 15 day DL on a rather frequent basis to open up a spot on the 40-man. There would need to be language to deal with accrual of service time if it changed under that scenario and there isn't.

Finally, I can't imagine the union would ever agree that a player on the 60 day DL did not accumulate service time. Can you imagine the posible abuse by franchises who didn't want to los their superstar to free agency at the end of the season?

[bp_]

Originally Posted by Astros Fan in Cali

Finally, I can't imagine the union would ever agree that a player on the 60 day DL did not accumulate service time. Can you imagine the posible abuse by franchises who didn't want to los their superstar to free agency at the end of the season?

It's a good point but I'd still like to see some official text regarding this.

[MrWorkrate]

Originally Posted by bp_

It's a good point but I'd still like to see some official text regarding this.

I think the point here is that we have the text that says that it would (or at least would imply) that it counts - we're just trying to find something that specificly states that time on the 60 doesn't.

Again, I can swear I remember hearing something in the past that it did NOT count, however I can't find anything to prove that. Bear in mind that the 60 day DL is only meant to be used in cases of emergency and can only (at least in MLB) be used if the 40 man roster has already been filled. Usually in thise cases, the player has already been placed on the 15 day DL, and when a roster spot was made necessary because of the 40 man being full, a player was moved form the 15 to the 60 instead of outrighting a player off the 40 man to accomodate the team.

[battists]

Well, it's enough for me to log it, certainly.

TT # 2387.

Thanks,

Steve

[tysok]

Best I can come up with is an article from ESPN:
http://espn.go.com/mlb/s/transanctionsprimer.html

"There are two Disabled Lists, the 15-day and 60-day. The only real difference between them is that players on the 60-day DL -- sometimes called the Emergency DL -- don't count against a team's 40-man roster."

Seems if time spent on the 60 day didn't count as service time it would be a "real" difference.

[Nutlaw]

Nothing official, but a site that seems to corroborate the original poster's assertion:

http://www.mlb4u.com/wiki/index.php/Service_time

Most sites seem to indicate that either DL counts towards service time, though there are plenty of people who seem to think otherwise. The only thing that I could find was that staying on the 60-day DL for an entire season doesn't count towards rookie eligibility, apparently.

[MrWorkrate]

The thing with the 60 day DL is that it is how it's being described - an "emergency" DL. It's technically only there as a last case senerio to make room on the 40 man roster if the amount of injuries on the roster necessitate it.

If a player in April needs Tommy John surgery and will be out 18 months, the player is put on the 15 day DL, not the 60 day DL, despite the fact that the player will be out for more than 60 days.

In essence, the disabled list should only really be looked upon as one list. A player who is hurt can be put on this list. Doing so opens up a spot on the 25 man roster for someone who can play in his place. The player who is removed from the 25 man roster due to injury without demotion or using an option year must not play in the majors for 15 days. This player must be diagnosed by a doctor that he is, in fact, injured.

In the event that the team needs to put a player on the 25 man roster and he is not currently on the 40 man roster AND there is no room on the 40 man roster, only THEN can the team put a player on the 60 day DL (usually a player who has already been placed on the 15 day DL previously).

The only real circumstance where a player might be placed on the 60 day DL immedately from the active roster is if the player has a catastrophic injury and the 40 man roster is filled already.

See, since a player is already on the 15 day DL 99% of the time when he's placed on the 60 day DL (and gaining service time), there's no reason why a player should suddenly stop gaining service time just because he was put on a DL for a different minimum length of stay. A player can suffer a season ending injury in April and never leave the 15 day DL if the team's 40 man roster never hits 40 men.

It's along that same reasoning why a player who is on the DL cannot be demoted; when a player is on the DL (whether it be 15 or 60), they were put there from the major league (25 man) roster and accumulating service time. Demoting them would imply that they should stop accumulating service time through no fault of their own - generally, the player is injured while in service to the major league team, and he was injured in the line of duty. Taking away that service time just because he's physically unable to play would never be stood for by the players association.

[endgame]

Slightly tangential, but didn't one of those CBA or MLB Agreement documents indicate that in order to utilize the 60-Day DL option the 40-Man needed to be full? I might be mixing up research here, but just curious if you recall. Or was this the issue you'd emailed your in-the-know contact about?

[tysok]

Originally Posted by endgame

Slightly tangential, but didn't one of those CBA or MLB Agreement documents indicate that in order to utilize the 60-Day DL option the 40-Man needed to be full? I might be mixing up research here, but just curious if you recall. Or was this the issue you'd emailed your in-the-know contact about?

Yes. The only way you can assign a player to the 60-day DL in reality is if the 40-man roster is full.

[Derek4jc]

This is probably something else that should be logged then, the "only can use it with a full 40" rule. Though I guess the point would be moot if the players were just given service time.

[battists]

The issue of players on the 60-day DL not accumulating service time has been fixed in the latest build. Players now accumulate service time while on the 60-day DL.