The Oakland Athletics lose Eric Chavez for the rest of the season:
Eric Chavez is headed for another back surgery and won’t return in 2009 for the Oakland Athletics.
The six-time Gold Glove third baseman, on the 60-day disabled list with a herniated disk and strained right forearm, is scheduled to have the operation June 23, performed by Dr. Robert Watkins. This will be his second back surgery and fifth operation overall since Sept. 5, 2007.
At what point do you just walk away? I know Randy Johnson went through multiple back surgeries, but those at least worked. These are of course, competitive players, but maybe the best thing for Eric and the Athletics is for Chavez to give up on baseball and be happy with a healthy life. At this point, how much is he going to contribute to a team? His retirement would give the A’s a chance to move on.
Posted by David Pinto at 4:14 pm | Injuries | Permalink | 5 Comments
Comments
Leave a Reply
June 14th, 2009 @ 5:47 pm
What’s left on his contract? Does he lose the rest of it if he retires?
June 14th, 2009 @ 5:53 pm
@rbj: 2010 Is the last year of his contract. I don’t know what happens if he retires, but all baseball contracts are guaranteed. If they don’t get paid if they retire, then he’d forfeit $12 million.
June 14th, 2009 @ 6:32 pm
He probably won’t get paid if he retires. It reminds me of the Albert Belle situation some years ago in Baltimore – Belle had a career ending injury with a couple of years left on his contract. Because he didn’t retire, the Orioles were forced to use a 40 man roster spot for him for all the years he had left so that insurance would pay for most of his contract. If they’d released him, they’d have had to pay it all themselves.
June 14th, 2009 @ 6:35 pm
Thanks David. For $12 million, I’d certainly go through another back surgery/rehab. Of course, if the team would shell out the money anyhow, then retire. It would free up a roster spot (though he’d be on the 60 day DL list, which doesn’t count for the 40 man roster, correct?) Looks like he has the requisite 10 years in for the pension as well.
June 14th, 2009 @ 8:11 pm
@rbj: I wonder if the union would object if the A’s tried to pay him to retire? My guess is yes.