What is going on with this team? - Situation later clarified by player

[Jopal78]

2 hours ago, craigharmann said:

Seriously? There’s cut throat, and there’s actually doing the right thing by people. When has another player, whether they’re in the team’s plans or not, EVER been cut because they needed Tommy John surgery? I can’t think of a time. 

Read his tweet carefully, sounds like the Brewers organization is paying  his medical bills and rehab (I thinks it’s illegal not to). He is upset he got cut on the date of his surgery, and that the union allows injured minor league players to be released.

He’s not in their plans now, or in the future so they released him, they don’t owe him anything. Sucks he tore his UCL while in the minors, otherwise he’d be on the big league DL with different rules and probably not get released until after the season.

[Brock Beauchamp]

49 minutes ago, Ron Robinsons Beard said:

Not that this team doesn't deserve ridicule this week, but perhaps this particular reason was misplaced?

Okay, that's really good to see.

[Fear The Chorizo]

Can this one be locked and put out of its misery, or at minimum have the thread title drastically altered so it doesn't come off as completely misleading?  Seems to be plenty of other threads for all the negative nancies to flock to lately that at least are based on more than some poster's interpretation of a tweet. 

[SoCalBrewfan]

It's disappointing but it has been clear for some time that the Brewers didn't think as highly of Barker as some fans did...seems there were a few times when he was passed over for promotion despite stellar minor league stats.  It would be good for him to have a fresh start, and I certainly wish him well.

Assigning malicious intent to the FO or owner seems unwarranted to me, especially after the update, but I guess once the pitchforks are lit and the torches are sharpened all bets are off.  

[Never Outhustled]

1 hour ago, Ron Robinsons Beard said:

Not that this team doesn't deserve ridicule this week, but perhaps this particular reason was misplaced?

It's cool that Barker was able to use social media to burn the Brewers for how they've always treated him, and then the Brewers contacted him to buy his silence.

[Never Outhustled]

12 minutes ago, Fear The Chorizo said:

Can this one be locked and put out of its misery, or at minimum have the thread title drastically altered so it doesn't come off as completely misleading?  Seems to be plenty of other threads for all the negative nancies to flock to lately that at least are based on more than some poster's interpretation of a tweet. 

So people that don't agree with you are Nancy's? Isn't the point of this site to share information and opinion?

[nate82]

8 minutes ago, Never Outhustled said:

It's cool that Barker was able to use social media to burn the Brewers for how they've always treated him, and then the Brewers contacted him to buy his silence.

I don't understand how you could even come to that conclusion it is like you read one thing and then interpreted it completely different.  

The more logical and believable situation is that there was a miss communication between the Brewers and Barker.  Please reread what he put in his second point.  I am not sure how you can interpret this any other way.  

[Never Outhustled]

31 minutes ago, nate82 said:

I don't understand how you could even come to that conclusion it is like you read one thing and then interpreted it completely different.  

The more logical and believable situation is that there was a miss communication between the Brewers and Barker.  Please reread what he put in his second point.  I am not sure how you can interpret this any other way.  

If you know the history between these 2, it would be naive to think the Brewers called Barker and said "please be nicer to us" and he said "sure, we've always had a good relationship, why not?"

Barker loudly fought for fair wages, something the Brewers were dead set against. 

[nate82]

Just now, Never Outhustled said:

If you know the history between these 2, it would be naive to think the Brewers called Barker and said "please be nicer to us" and he said "sure, we've always had a good relationship, why not?"

Barker loudly fought for fair wages, something the Brewers were dead set against. 

Again I don't think you even read what Barker put out on his tweet or you are not able to comprehend what he said in his two tweets.

The last part I doubt had anything to do with his release.  

[Never Outhustled]

9 minutes ago, nate82 said:

Again I don't think you even read what Barker put out on his tweet or you are not able to comprehend what he said in his two tweets.

The last part I doubt had anything to do with his release.  

I'm not gullible. The 2nd tweet was bought and paid for. I guarantee Barker would never do the Brewers a favor now that he's an ex employee when they fought while he was an employee. 

[jerichoholicninja]

I really doubt the Brewers give any amount of crap that some barely 4A nobody is shredding them on Twitter.

[brewers888]

7 hours ago, Never Outhustled said:

They've always crapped on Barker, likely because he fought for livable minor league wages.

Attanasio and Stearns have really revealed themselves this week, and what we're seeing isn't pretty.

I wouldn't be surprised if Stearns quit after the season. Being Attanasio's puppet has to be wearing thin. 

Better for Stearns to work for the criminal that owns the Mets.

[Oxy]

If the business relationship between Barker and the Brewers has always been contentious, then this totally makes sense.  If he was a good organizational soldier I bet there is a much higher likelihood of the Brewers keeping him on the 60 day IL (and 40 man) until the offseason started.  Just the way things work.

[stalton]

The Brewers organization have (in my opinion) gone above and beyond for the players.  Whether it was LoCain hitting his milestone, letting players leave early for births/medical issues (Hader, Shaw, Suter, etc) or even helping out with causes that the players believe in.

[Jim French Stepstool]

1 hour ago, jerichoholicninja said:

I really doubt the Brewers give any amount of crap that some barely 4A nobody is shredding them on Twitter.

Especially since he basically took it back.

[nate82]

Just now, Jim French Stepstool said:

Especially since he basically took it back.

I don't think he took anything back other than clarifying what he was saying. 

[Jim French Stepstool]

3 minutes ago, nate82 said:

I don't think he took anything back other than clarifying what he was saying. 

Yeah. That puts it better.

[Robocaller]

3 hours ago, Never Outhustled said:

I'm not gullible. The 2nd tweet was bought and paid for. I guarantee Barker would never do the Brewers a favor now that he's an ex employee when they fought while he was an employee. 

Any other conspiracy theories you want to share with us?

[Robocaller]

I reckon the Brewers were ready to cut bait with Barker long before this. They evaluated him as a AAAA pitcher with no future on the major league team. For all we know, they figured he'd be better served by him taking more control over his rehabilitation.
Do we even know he's losing money? Are AAA salaries guaranteed?

[UpandIn]

5 hours ago, Never Outhustled said:

If you know the history between these 2, it would be naive to think the Brewers called Barker and said "please be nicer to us" and he said "sure, we've always had a good relationship, why not?"

Barker loudly fought for fair wages, something the Brewers were dead set against. 

Yeah, I don't like the "just lock the thread," line of thought because it's negative, but...this seems like really misplaced anger. You really think this was some personal decision to just be vindictive vs Barker?

4 hours ago, Never Outhustled said:

I'm not gullible. The 2nd tweet was bought and paid for. I guarantee Barker would never do the Brewers a favor now that he's an ex employee when they fought while he was an employee. 

But THEN a day later they...bought a tweet?

I don't really see the difference here. Barker will get paid a 40 man wage for the duration of his injury or until he's a FA(end of this year), right?

So what exactly is there to "buy," and what do you think it would cost them?

This seems wild and like you're conflating your anger with the trades they made at the deadline with a procedural move for a guy who...just wasn't part of the Brewers future. 

[NBBrewFan]

8 minutes ago, UpandIn said:

Barker will get paid a 40 man wage for the duration of his injury or until he's a FA(end of this year), right?

Nope.  He will get his medical bills paid for, but he is a free agent.  No salary.  The issue he is trying to point out to the MLBPA is that he basically has no income and can't work because he's injured. I guess he can get unemployment for some time.

[Never Outhustled]

10 minutes ago, UpandIn said:

Yeah, I don't like the "just lock the thread," line of thought because it's negative, but...this seems like really misplaced anger. You really think this was some personal decision to just be vindictive vs Barker?

But THEN a day later they...bought a tweet?

I don't really see the difference here. Barker will get paid a 40 man wage for the duration of his injury or until he's a FA(end of this year), right?

So what exactly is there to "buy," and what do you think it would cost them?

This seems wild and like you're conflating your anger with the trades they made at the deadline with a procedural move for a guy who...just wasn't part of the Brewers future. 

Barker was no longer on the 40, so no, he won't be paid a 40 man wage. The Brewers pay for his rehab. That's it. 

 

So, it's not me conflating. Yes, I do think they were vindictive to Barker through out his career for vocally complaining about minor league pay. He was passed over for promotions at every level despite outstanding production. Think they could have waited until the day after surgery to release him? Of course they could have, but instead they did what they did.   

MLB was just hit with a $195 million dollar settlement because players like Barker brought eyes to a travesty. The Brewers got their revenge, and their PR nightmare continues. 

[Never Outhustled]

1 hour ago, Robocaller said:

I reckon the Brewers were ready to cut bait with Barker long before this. They evaluated him as a AAAA pitcher with no future on the major league team. For all we know, they figured he'd be better served by him taking more control over his rehabilitation.
Do we even know he's losing money? Are AAA salaries guaranteed?

No

[Hopper]

6 hours ago, Never Outhustled said:

So people that don't agree with you are Nancy's? Isn't the point of this site to share information and opinion?

Nope, there is a lot of this going on here lately.  Disagree with someone, get ridiculed.  People really have a hard time being able to accept that they are not always right, and there are differing OPINIONS than their own in this world.

[endaround]

1 hour ago, NBBrewFan said:

Nope.  He will get his medical bills paid for, but he is a free agent.  No salary.  The issue he is trying to point out to the MLBPA is that he basically has no income and can't work because he's injured. I guess he can get unemployment for some time.

He almost certainly can not get unemployment.  Most states exempt professional athletes from unemployment.  Of course they think of millionaire athletes when it occurs but the vast majority of professional athletes earn a pittance. Another way MiLB players are screwed.