MLB Suspends Operations, Starting This Afternoon

[DigitalRock]

 

Spanish FLU mortality rate....2%

 

Covid -19 3.4%... as of a few days ago

 

Covid will come down though as many mild cases are not reported..but point is..Covid is just as deadly, the big diff is..modern medicine, modern coordination, communication, quarantine procedures, progress...,eams it won;t be near as bad overall.

[DigitalRock]

The statistics are not incorrect. You're taking two different statistics and comparing them directly to one another. One uses it's denominator as the world population and one uses it's denominator as the number of infected.

 

This is from the WHO's website:

 

"the 1918 influenza pandemic known colloquially as “Spanish flu.” The intensity and speed with which it struck were almost unimaginable – infecting one-third of the Earth’s population, which at the time was about 500 million people."

 

https://www.who.int/influenza/pandemic-influenza-an-evolving-challenge/en/

 

Here's from the CDC:

 

"It is estimated that about 500 million people or one-third of the world’s population became infected with this virus. The number of deaths was estimated to be at least 50 million worldwide"

 

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-resources/1918-pandemic-h1n1.html

 

Both state unequivocally that the death rate was at or above 10%. This isn't complicated. 50 million is the numerator and 500 million is the denominator. You get a percentage. For Covid19 the numerator is about 8000 and the denominator is unknown, but not less than 200,000.

 

To make a baseball analogy, you're essentially saying this:

 

Ben Revere is a better hitter than Mike Trout because Revere's slugging percentage is .343 while Trout's batting average is .305. You would have to be incredibly stupid to deny this. The numbers are right on fangraphs. Are you going to deny them?

 

The SAME CDC and WHo have the mortality rate as 2.5 % which I already posted LOLOL.

m";

 

The death toll is estimated to have been anywhere from 17 million to 50 million. why are you going with the high number? Or right to spin a narrative.

 

No one knows exactly as the death range is unknown but everyone, CDC, WHO have the death rate listed as 2.5 - 3 %..that's a fact.

 

https://www.wired.com/story/covid-19-is-nothing-like-the-spanish-flu/

 

 

"Both newspapers and scientific journals frequently state three facts about the Spanish flu: It infected 500 million people (nearly one-third of the world population at the time); it killed between 50 and 100 million people; and it had a case fatality rate of 2.5 percent"

 

How many more articles will you ignore that state the mortality rate is 2.5-3%?

 

What part of case fatality rate of 2.5% don;t you understand? I have posted about 10 different sources lol.

 

 

 

More information for you.

 

https://www.vox.com/2020/3/9/21164957/covid-19-spanish-flu-mortality-rate-death-rate

 

You are literally taking the highest non confirmed, not proven estimate as fact.....most reports state way less than 50 million died, 17-20 million is what newer studies state. But keep ignoring the facts. I science there is a rule, you only deal in factual proven numbers...Recent studies have the total deaths way lower but still , in the millions (17-20) 50 million is not even close to have been proven...

 

I will concede that is is most likely higher than 2.5 though, but I deal in facts, it is not 10% either. 2.5-4% is a good range.

 

Covid sits a 3.4 % currently..... will prob end up lower due to mild cases not being reported.

 

Also you keep ignoring a big factor...it is not 1918, if Covid was spreading in 1918 it would be far deadlier than then in 2020, which is common sense, which maybe you lack? So direct comparisons are dumb to begin with. They are both deadly. The world is far more advanced now than 2020.

 

You keep posting out of date information:

 

https://ourworldindata.org/spanish-flu-largest-influenza-pandemic-in-history

 

QUOTE:

 

The widely cited study by Johnson and Mueller (2002) arrives at a much higher estimate of 50 million global deaths. But the authors suggest that this could be an underestimation and that the true death toll was as high as 100 million.7

 

The more recent study by Spreeuwenberg et al. (2018) concluded that earlier estimates have been too high. Their own estimate is 17.4 million deaths"

 

Newer estimates have deaths around 17 million.....there is a reason 2.5% is listed all over the place (Which I posed numerous sources) as the mortality rate.

 

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19453486

 

Mortality rate in Europe for Spanish Flu:

 

Mortality burden of the 1918-1919 influenza pandemic in Europe.

Ansart S1, Pelat C, Boelle PY, Carrat F, Flahault A, Valleron AJ.

Author information

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

The origin and estimated death toll of the 1918-1919 epidemic are still debated. Europe, one of the candidate sites for pandemic emergence, has detailed pandemic mortality information.

 

OBJECTIVE:

To determine the mortality impact of the 1918 pandemic in 14 European countries, accounting for approximately three-quarters of the European population (250 million in 1918).

 

METHODS:

We analyzed monthly all-cause civilian mortality rates in the 14 countries, accounting for approximately three-quarters of the European population (250 million in 1918). A periodic regression model was applied to estimate excess mortality from 1906 to 1922. Using the 1906-1917 data as a training set, the method provided a non-epidemic baseline for 1918-1922. Excess mortality was the mortality observed above this baseline. It represents the upper bound of the mortality attributable to the flu pandemic.

 

RESULTS:

Our analysis suggests that 2.64 million excess deaths occurred in Europe during the period when Spanish flu was circulating. The method provided space variation of the excess mortality: the highest and lowest cumulative excess/predicted mortality ratios were observed in Italy (+172%) and Finland (+33%). Excess-death curves showed high synchrony in 1918-1919 with peak mortality occurring in all countries during a 2-month window (Oct-Nov 1918).

 

CONCLUSIONS:

During the Spanish flu, the excess mortality was 1.1% of the European population. Our study highlights the synchrony of the mortality waves in the different countries, which pleads against a European origin of the pandemic, as was sometimes hypothesized.

 

 

 

 

 

https://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=228841

 

 

 

QUOTE:

 

Mortality Rate May Be Similar for Coronavirus (COVID-19)

The death rate of Spanish influenza was vastly greater than the average seasonal flu, Dr. Taubenberger said. The case-fatality rate is estimated to have been greater than 2.5%. This means for every 100 recognized cases, on average more than two and a half people died. By comparison, he says, the fatality rate in subsequent flu pandemics has been less than .1%.

 

Comparisons are hard to determine. Since new information about COVID-19 is calculated by different organizations and governments in different ways, much work remains to determine the disease's true case-fatality rate. But one JAMA study published in February estimates the case-fatality rate at 2.3%, nearly identical to Spanish flu estimates.

 

 

 

 

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/09/health/coronavirus-is-very-different-from-the-spanish-flu-of-1918-heres-how.html

 

 

QUOTE:

 

"With a case fatality rate of at least 2.5 percent, the 1918 flu was far more deadly than ordinary flu, and it was so infectious that it spread widely, which meant the number of deaths soared."

 

 

It's hilarious you keep saying I am wrong...I am not the one who came up with these figures, yoo are arguing against the wider medical community...I am just posting sources.....

 

 

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3291398/

 

 

Case-fatality rates were >2.5%, compared to <0.1% in other influenza pandemics

 

This is from the National Library of Medicine.

 

I'll call them and tell them Grant from Bluejays Message board says they have t all wrong...

Edited March 19, 2020 by DigitalRock

[DigitalRock]

asdjodjkdapodkqwd

[DigitalRock]

Math must not be your strong suit. That numerator / denominator talk must have gone right over your head.

 

Ill call CDC, Medical Institute tell them they are wrong, did you just like not read anything I posted? Clearly not, it's all explained there........go read, educate. Go read the articles. I am not the one saying the what the mortality rate is, I am just forwarding the info from legit sources....., again, it's all in the articles I posted..

 

On another note: Update on Covid-19

 

The new coronavirus has killed more than 8,700 people, which is about 4% of the 214,000 confirmed cases, making for a shocking death rate.

 

This will go down, most likely but it's still a nasty one

[Spanky99]

Ill call CDC, Medical Institute tell them they are wrong, did you just like not read anything I posted? Clearly not, it's all explained there........go read, educate. Go read the articles. I am not the one saying the what the mortality rate is, I am just forwarding the info from legit sources....., again, it's all in the articles I posted..

 

On another note: Update on Covid-19

 

The new coronavirus has killed more than 8,700 people, which is about 4% of the 214,000 confirmed cases, making for a shocking death rate.

 

This will go down, most likely but it's still a nasty one

 

Holy f*** someone delete these, turds

[Deadpool]

"Both newspapers and scientific journals frequently state three facts about the Spanish flu: It infected 500 million people (nearly one-third of the world population at the time); it killed between 50 and 100 million people; and it had a case fatality rate of 2.5 percent"

 

The math here is off wildly. If it infected 500,000,000 people and had a case fatality rate of 2.5%, it would have killed 12,500,000 (which, you'll note, is lower than even the lowest estimate provided). If it infected 500 million people and killed between 50,000,000 and 100,000,000 people, it would have had a case fatality rate of between 10 and 20%

 

Both of these things cannot be true.

 

The confusion here is "case fatality rate" (Case fatality rate is calculated by dividing the number of deaths from a specified disease over a defined period of time by the number of individuals diagnosed with the disease during that time; the resulting ratio is then multiplied by 100 to yield a percentage*) with global mortality rate (...number of deaths serves as the numerator for both measures, mortality rate is calculated by dividing the number of deaths by the population at risk during a certain time frame.*)

 

The global mortality rate of Spanish Flu was between 1 and 6%, the case fatality rate was between 3.4% and 20%

 

The current global mortality rate of Covid-19 is 0.000126% (though, that will absolutely climb and the final number won't be known until the whole thing is over...). The current case fatality rate is ~4.15% (this number is obviously high because deaths are easy to count, while we don't have enough tests globally to accurately determine the number of cases)

 

*( https://www.britannica.com/science/case-fatality-rate )

 

Editing to add that while I did the math myself here, I read the Wired article that was quoted afterwards, and he actually did the same math as me and came to similar conclusions (he ruled out the extremes and came to this conclusion "we find that a reasonable estimate for the global case fatality rate of the Spanish flu is 6 to 8 percent. To be clear, this means that 6 to 8 percent of those who were infected died. Global mortality of the Spanish flu—which is to say, the proportion of all people everywhere (infected and uninfected alike) who died from the disease—was probably between 2 and 4 percent."). He also adds "Johns Hopkins University epidemiologist Jennifer Leigh recently told The Los Angeles Times that the overall [case] fatality rate for Spanish flu may have been closer to 10 percent."

 

This is why it's important to read the whole article, rather than cherry picking one line to back up your argument.

Edited March 19, 2020 by Deadpool

[Bobthe4th]

[Grant77]

I wish you luck in this conversation, Deadpool. I've said the same thing a few times with no success and I'm tired of doing it.

 

Nobody who is literate could be bad enough at math to believe what he says. There's obviously another reason for his misinformation campaign, whatever that may be.

[Jimcanuck]

I wish you luck in this conversation, Deadpool. I've said the same thing a few times with no success and I'm tired of doing it.

 

Nobody who is literate could be bad enough at math to believe what he says. There's obviously another reason for his misinformation campaign, whatever that may be.

 

Hey Grant do you still believe the coronavirus is very sensitive to heat and humidity?

[DigitalRock]

I wish you luck in this conversation, Deadpool. I've said the same thing a few times with no success and I'm tired of doing it.

 

Nobody who is literate could be bad enough at math to believe what he says. There's obviously another reason for his misinformation campaign, whatever that may be.

 

But, but but...Warm weather and Humidity, her der;

 

https://www.ctvnews.ca/health/coronavirus/africa-sees-extremely-rapid-evolution-of-pandemic-un-says-1.4859662

[DigitalRock]

"Both newspapers and scientific journals frequently state three facts about the Spanish flu: It infected 500 million people (nearly one-third of the world population at the time); it killed between 50 and 100 million people; and it had a case fatality rate of 2.5 percent"

 

The math here is off wildly. If it infected 500,000,000 people and had a case fatality rate of 2.5%, it would have killed 12,500,000 (which, you'll note, is lower than even the lowest estimate provided). If it infected 500 million people and killed between 50,000,000 and 100,000,000 people, it would have had a case fatality rate of between 10 and 20%

 

Both of these things cannot be true.

 

The confusion here is "case fatality rate" (Case fatality rate is calculated by dividing the number of deaths from a specified disease over a defined period of time by the number of individuals diagnosed with the disease during that time; the resulting ratio is then multiplied by 100 to yield a percentage*) with global mortality rate (...number of deaths serves as the numerator for both measures, mortality rate is calculated by dividing the number of deaths by the population at risk during a certain time frame.*)

 

The global mortality rate of Spanish Flu was between 1 and 6%, the case fatality rate was between 3.4% and 20%

 

The current global mortality rate of Covid-19 is 0.000126% (though, that will absolutely climb and the final number won't be known until the whole thing is over...). The current case fatality rate is ~4.15% (this number is obviously high because deaths are easy to count, while we don't have enough tests globally to accurately determine the number of cases)

 

*( https://www.britannica.com/science/case-fatality-rate )

 

Editing to add that while I did the math myself here, I read the Wired article that was quoted afterwards, and he actually did the same math as me and came to similar conclusions (he ruled out the extremes and came to this conclusion "we find that a reasonable estimate for the global case fatality rate of the Spanish flu is 6 to 8 percent. To be clear, this means that 6 to 8 percent of those who were infected died. Global mortality of the Spanish flu—which is to say, the proportion of all people everywhere (infected and uninfected alike) who died from the disease—was probably between 2 and 4 percent."). He also adds "Johns Hopkins University epidemiologist Jennifer Leigh recently told The Los Angeles Times that the overall [case] fatality rate for Spanish flu may have been closer to 10 percent."

 

This is why it's important to read the whole article, rather than cherry picking one line to back up your argument.

 

I've posted about 15 different sources that show a Fatality rate of 2.5-3 percent, you "Cherry pick" the stats that go into hypotheticals....you do you though, siding with " warm and humidity" grant prob not smart. You choose one article and ignored about 15 others, that all come to the same conclusion...The CDC even has 2.5% as the fatality rate for Spanish flu.... If you knew anything about science, they only trust real proven data....

 

Also: "The global mortality rate of Spanish Flu was between 1 and 6%, the case fatality rate was between 3.4% and 20%"

 

That range is ridiculous which only shows how unreliable this data is, more recent studies have the total deaths way lower, which I explained several times, you totally didn't read or ignored.

 

Maybe close to ten percent..maybe..in science maybes do not exist, and most studies which I have provided over a dozen sources have come to the conclusion it was more in the 2.5 -3 percent range...with better modelling techniques.

 

I'll repeat as well....this is 2020, we are far better equipped now to handle a deadly disease, comparing spanish flu and covid without factoring in the 102 year difference...if covid hhit in 1918 it would be devastating.

[Deadpool]

I've posted about 15 different sources that show a Fatality rate of 2.5-3 percent, you "Cherry pick" the stats that go into hypotheticals....you do you though, siding with " warm and humidity" grant prob not smart. You choose one article and ignored about 15 others, that all come to the same conclusion...The CDC even has 2.5% as the fatality rate for Spanish flu.... If you knew anything about science, they only trust real proven data....

 

Also: "The global mortality rate of Spanish Flu was between 1 and 6%, the case fatality rate was between 3.4% and 20%"

 

That range is ridiculous which only shows how unreliable this data is, more recent studies have the total deaths way lower, which I explained several times, you totally didn't read or ignored.

 

Maybe close to ten percent..maybe..in science maybes do not exist, and most studies which I have provided over a dozen sources have come to the conclusion it was more in the 2.5 -3 percent range...with better modelling techniques.

 

I'll repeat as well....this is 2020, we are far better equipped now to handle a deadly disease, comparing spanish flu and covid without factoring in the 102 year difference...if covid hhit in 1918 it would be devastating.

 

Dude, math shows that you are wrong.

 

I'm not arguing that medical science hasn't improved in 100 years, that's a stupid argument that nobody is making. You are mathematically wrong when you are posting numbers, which are math, and about which you are incorrect.

 

Even with the lowest possible death toll, your "2.5-3%" number is off. The LOWEST it could possibly be is 3.5% That is 100% the absolute bottom, that's assuming only 17M deaths, which is from one single study which is a MASSIVE outlier from every single other study done on the subject. That's not disputing your raw data, that's taking the raw data you provided and doing math to it. Trust me, take your numbers and use a calculator, and then ask someone who knows how to use a calculator to do it for you.

 

My range of 3.4% to 20% is based on the death toll range (which you admitted and provided) of 17-100M deaths, and using tricky 4th grade math, turning that into a range of 3.4% to 20%. If the death toll was 17M (unlikely, but I'm humouring you) and 500M people were infected (1/3 of the global population, which seems to not be a number that is in much dispute). then 17,000,000/500,000,000 * 100 = X

 

Where X = 3.4

 

You're f***ing wrong. Period.

[Grant77]

I don't say this lightly after something like 17 years of posting, but Digitalrock may be the stupidest person in the history of the Blue Jays message board. Even the dogg and his dozens of personalities, for those who may remember, seemed to understand that he was seen as a joke. This guy though, I'm not sure.

[Brownie19]

I'm pretty sure he continues to confuse 'case mortality rate' and 'global mortality rate'...

[DigitalRock]

Ir's obvious people like GrAnt and others are simple and have no clue how to use critical thinking.

 

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200325-covid-19-the-history-of-pandemics

 

The Life expectancy in 1918 was.....29...

 

Life expectancy today is mid 70's. An infection could kill you in 1918, penicillin was not even discovered until 1928..Covid in 1918 would decimate as bad as Spanish flu, comparing death rates from 100 years ago is stupid to begin with.

 

Unfortunately the WHO, has a budget similar to a single large hosipital. Yet they are tasked to defend the planets 7.8 billion citizens from histories biggest killer, disease and viruses. Despite warnings from doctors, scientists that we were not prepared and taking it serious, governments largely ignored all warnings despite Infectious disease being the single biggest threat to humanity, killing far more than wars, etc...

 

Spanish flu killing as many as it did was as much to do with medicine being so far worst in 1918 then it is today. This article pretty much sums up how different it was then.

[DigitalRock]

I don't say this lightly after something like 17 years of posting, but Digitalrock may be the stupidest person in the history of the Blue Jays message board. Even the dogg and his dozens of personalities, for those who may remember, seemed to understand that he was seen as a joke. This guy though, I'm not sure.

 

Heat and humidity grant,,, why are you not working for the WHO bro? Life expectancy in 1918 was 29 lol, at comparing today to 100 years ago, an infection would kill you in 1918. You are a moron, that's ok many people are. The fact is no one really knows the death rate of Spanish flu, the numbers are massive guesses and vary, but most places have ot at 2.5 %, as I have posted about `15 sources. Use a bit of critical thinking, you think Covid would not kill millions in 1918, than you are the dumbest person on the Internet. Stop comparing death rates from 1918 when life expectancy was 29, to today, it's an apples and oranges comparison...read, educate, good article I posted above.

 

Cases are rising in Africa, Australia, all warm countries heat as not slowed it down at all. HEAT AND HUMIDITY HER DER.

[Spanky99]

Holy f***, lol.

[Beans]

Cases are rising in Africa, Australia, all warm countries heat as not slowed it down at all. HEAT AND HUMIDITY HER DER.

 

As they enter the fall season south of the equator, because the seasons are reversed down there.

[John_Havok]

Heat and humidity grant,,, why are you not working for the WHO bro? Life expectancy in 1918 was 29 lol, at comparing today to 100 years ago, an infection would kill you in 1918. You are a moron, that's ok many people are. The fact is no one really knows the death rate of Spanish flu, the numbers are massive guesses and vary, but most places have ot at 2.5 %, as I have posted about `15 sources. Use a bit of critical thinking, you think Covid would not kill millions in 1918, than you are the dumbest person on the Internet. Stop comparing death rates from 1918 when life expectancy was 29, to today, it's an apples and oranges comparison...read, educate, good article I posted above.

 

Cases are rising in Africa, Australia, all warm countries heat as not slowed it down at all. HEAT AND HUMIDITY HER DER.

 

Life expectancy in 1918 was sure as f*** not 29. I don’t even need to look it up to know that’s garbage.

[Jimcanuck]

Life expectancy in 1918 was sure as f*** not 29. I don’t even need to look it up to know that’s garbage.

 

In the USA it was 36.6 years for men, 42.2 years for women. Impact of WWI and the Spanish Flu.

 

University of Berkeley https://u.demog.berkeley.edu/~andrew/1918/figure2.html

 

Worldwide an average life expectancy in 1918 of 29 yrs is not implausible, but this was an anomaly as the data shows.

[Spanky99]

In the USA it was 36.6 years for men, 42.2 years for women. Impact of WWI and the Spanish Flu.

 

University of Berkeley https://u.demog.berkeley.edu/~andrew/1918/figure2.html

 

Worldwide an average life expectancy in 1918 of 29 yrs is not implausible, but this was an anomaly as the data shows.

 

Jim, you f***ing crack me up.

 

Golf, lol.

[Krylian]

Jim, you f***ing crack me up.

 

Golf, lol.

[EastCoaster]

You can pretty much write off the 2020 baseball season right now it's inevitable with what been happening now and especially in the US where is world's hot bed of the pandemic. The predictions for the US death toll is between 100,000 to 200,000 nobody will feel safe anymore going anywhere not before a vaccine is develop sometime next year. Yesterday 6.6 mil Americans filed for unemployment the world economy is going to get hit hard with many uncertainties for many people.

[glory]

Hypothetically, if 2020 is lost, what would be the significant ramifications for the Jays?

 

- Bichette becomes controllable through 2026 instead of 2025, so luckily don't lose a year on him.

 

- Lose a year on both Vlad and Biggio who will remain controllable through 2025 due to 2019 service time carrying over. Lose a year on Jansen as well, who I think is going to be better offensively when games begin again.

 

- Won't be able to trade Giles.

 

- Pearson shouldn't throw another pitch in the minors at this point. A shortened 2020 means they can limit his innings in the Majors, and a cancelled 2020 season means he'll be on the 40 man prior to 2021 anyway so just let him develop/build stamina in the Majors. There are only so many bullets on a 102 mph arm.

 

- Ryu would get a full year off, but come back when he's 34. Not sure if that's good or bad given his injury history and age.

 

- Our next wave of prospects are all in low A to A+ (SWR, Groshans, Moreno, Kirk, Martinez, Manoah, etc). They all lose a season of development, and with losing a year of Vlad, that means the timelines become all screwed up. There might be a lag now between the Vlad years and the next wave, depending on development timing.

[burlingtonbandit]

Hypothetically, if 2020 is lost, what would be the significant ramifications for the Jays?

 

- Bichette becomes controllable through 2026 instead of 2025, so luckily don't lose a year on him.

 

- Lose a year on both Vlad and Biggio who will remain controllable through 2025 due to 2019 service time carrying over. Lose a year on Jansen as well, who I think is going to be better offensively when games begin again.

 

- Won't be able to trade Giles.

 

- Pearson shouldn't throw another pitch in the minors at this point. A shortened 2020 means they can limit his innings in the Majors, and a cancelled 2020 season means he'll be on the 40 man prior to 2021 anyway so just let him develop/build stamina in the Majors. There are only so many bullets on a 102 mph arm.

 

- Ryu would get a full year off, but come back when he's 34. Not sure if that's good or bad given his injury history and age.

 

- Our next wave of prospects are all in low A to A+ (SWR, Groshans, Moreno, Kirk, Martinez, Manoah, etc). They all lose a season of development, and with losing a year of Vlad, that means the timelines become all screwed up. There might be a lag now between the Vlad years and the next wave, depending on development timing.

 

This affects every team in MLB though so its not like its really a disadvantage to the Jays. The orgs/players with good resources can continue to develop players skills during this epedemic. Bo Bichette has a batting cage in his house so its not like he is just going to sit around on the couch all day.

[P2F]

Hypothetically, if 2020 is lost, what would be the significant ramifications for the Jays?

 

- Bichette becomes controllable through 2026 instead of 2025, so luckily don't lose a year on him.

 

- Lose a year on both Vlad and Biggio who will remain controllable through 2025 due to 2019 service time carrying over. Lose a year on Jansen as well, who I think is going to be better offensively when games begin again.

 

- Won't be able to trade Giles.

 

- Pearson shouldn't throw another pitch in the minors at this point. A shortened 2020 means they can limit his innings in the Majors, and a cancelled 2020 season means he'll be on the 40 man prior to 2021 anyway so just let him develop/build stamina in the Majors. There are only so many bullets on a 102 mph arm.

 

- Ryu would get a full year off, but come back when he's 34. Not sure if that's good or bad given his injury history and age.

 

- Our next wave of prospects are all in low A to A+ (SWR, Groshans, Moreno, Kirk, Martinez, Manoah, etc). They all lose a season of development, and with losing a year of Vlad, that means the timelines become all screwed up. There might be a lag now between the Vlad years and the next wave, depending on development timing.

 

https://www.radioscouts.com/lost-season-service-time-for-the-blue-jays/

[Beans]

 

Jim Edmonds: “If you don’t feel good, go to the doctor or go to the emergency room if you can’t breathe. That’s what happened to me.” ... “They didn’t want to test me, and I forced them to take me into the emergency room, and, lo and behold, pneumonia and the virus. So, don’t take it lightly, take care of yourselves. There’s no medicine, there’s no nothing, but rest, and that’s all I’ve been doing.”

[Beans]

Some players are open to taking the field with masks on, if it means they can play ball.

 

https://www.sportsnet.ca/baseball/mlb/masks-field-diamondbacks-ahmed-ready-games-can-played/

[glory]

This affects every team in MLB though so its not like its really a disadvantage to the Jays. The orgs/players with good resources can continue to develop players skills during this epedemic. Bo Bichette has a batting cage in his house so its not like he is just going to sit around on the couch all day.

 

Of course every team will face this issue, I was just looking at it from the Jays perspective. I'm not worried about Vlad/Bo/Biggio in terms of development, more so the lower minors players who live off food stamps and don't get to face live batters/pitchers all season. Whatever plan the Jays had as far as sprinkling in a Manoah or SWR into the 2021-22 teams might be altered now. Again, same issue every team will have, but who cares about other teams!!??

[EastCoaster]

Some players are open to taking the field with masks on, if it means they can play ball.

 

https://www.sportsnet.ca/baseball/mlb/masks-field-diamondbacks-ahmed-ready-games-can-played/

 

Mask where in the hell would they get them while there's a shortage for medical staff at many hospitals I'm sure the MLB wouldn't be a priority for getting supplies. No revenues for the owners as the stadium would be empty under the large gathering rules implemented by the governments. This season baseball is done whether they like it or not.