This story is unavailable.

I’m kind of surprised GMs don’t figure that at league-minimum salaries, go ahead and see who can “take it” with high numbers of innings while they’re young, and who can’t. Better than restricting the innings of a guy with a 7, 8, or 9-digit contract.

Do we expect this to lead to union grievances somehow?

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.