Add new comment

As you know, Dr. D spends more time on morality, ethics, and philosophy than the average bear.  Where does he come down on The Great Beltre WBC kerfuffle?

.....................

On the one hand, Americans have a tough time relating to how nationalistic Latin countries are, especially about sports.  It is berrrrrry, berry important to the fans, that their MLB heroes show them loyalty.  You'll see even established ML stars go home and play winter ball, and it's because of a "paises unidos" mentality that sees failure to do so as almost traitorous.

What could we compare it to in America? ....hmmm... I don't know; it would be kind of like Ken Griffey Jr. absorbing all the adulation Seattle had to offer, for 10 or 12 years, and then leaving for the Angels, and then when asked about it, saying, "Seattle?  Who gives a rip about Seattle?  Hey, we had some laughs, let's leave it at that." 

Or Edgar taking a job with the A's and saying weird stuff about us.... or ARod signing with Texas and saying on the second day "I want to go into the HOF in a Rangers cap."

Um, I thought we had something between us there, kitten...

It's LEGAL, but it's lowlife.  It spits on the real human emotions you had going as you grew up.

So the Latin players' connection to their countries is not to be cast away lightly.

................................

On the other hand, Adrian Beltre accepted an offer of $11,000,000 per year from the Seattle Mariners, and that kind of obligates him to provide the services he sold them.  ... the Mariners deal occurred before this WBC deal presented itself, so in a sense you have a guy with an opportunity to marry a second wife.

In any conflict between the Mariners' interests and any other interests, we have to remember that Beltre has already accepted his money.  His services to the Mariners are paid for already.   If I've sold my house, it doesn't matter how much my son wants to live in it.  I've taken another man's money and given my word.

................................

We can see the ethical conflict in clearer focus if we ask this question:  Okay, go play in the WBC, but if you're injured, will you give the money back?

And that extends to "if your thumb deteriorates and you can't provide the LEVEL of performance we bought," will you give the money back.

If that were the situation, Adrian Beltre would absolutely decline to play in the WBC, period.   If playing in the WBC risked the money he is taking from the Mariners, he would not play.  If it's Beltre's money on the line, the fans could take a hike.  Since it's the Mariners' money on the line, he (and all WBC'ers) are arguing that the fans are the #1 consideration?

And that makes the ethical compass easy to read here.  Beltre is asking to put the WBC first, while being paid as though he were putting the Mariners first.  He's willing to risk the M's money, but not his own.  That's not fair.

........................................

*There's a complicating factor here, which is MLB's expectations of the Mariners, which we'll leave alone for the moment.

.......................................

The Mariners have not only the right, but the moral high ground here.

They have been polite, and gracious, about the WBC generally, no doubt because they understand about the nationalism and about the fans in those countries -- many of whom eat dirt for dinner and who have little else in life but their sports.

But let's UNDERSTAND that the Mariners are being polite.  If they choose to be more assertive about it, they have my support.  I'm sure they'll sleep better knowing that.  :- )

Cheers,

Dr D