MLB players’ excruciating restart dilemma may cause agita

More On: Coronavirus

Starting Tuesday, Major League Baseball and the Players Association will formally try to work out an agreement for a baseball season like no other. Within that high-stakes chess game, each side must work through internal differences of opinion to determine its policy. The players, in particular, must run a cost-benefit analysis like no other: How …

Starting Tuesday, Major League Baseball and the Players Association will formally try to work out an agreement for a baseball season like no other.

Within that high-stakes chess game, each side must work through internal differences of opinion to determine its policy. The players, in particular, must run a cost-benefit analysis like no other:

How much are they willing to put their health on the line in order to get back on the field? Just as in any large group, they’ll find a range of opinions.

“I’m willing to risk anything to play this game,” Paul DeJong, the Cardinals’ All-Star shortstop, told The Post on Monday. “Once we get some momentum going, the floodgates will open.”

On the other side of the spectrum, Nationals All-Star closer Sean Doolittle used his Twitter account on Monday to outline a series of concerns, which he led with this: “Bear with me, but it feels like we’ve zoomed past the most important aspect of any MLB restart plan: health protections for players, families, staff, stadium workers and the workforce it would require to resume a season.”

Reality check: Even if the players and owners agree on all terms regarding safety and payment — and to reiterate, finger-pointing on the financial front will be strictly prohibited — elected officials might not let them go through with it in the interest of public safety. These talks could turn into an exercise, a dry run for the end of this Basic Agreement next year.

Nevertheless, the two sides owe it to each other to engage in bona fide bargaining. And the players owe it to themselves to be especially diligent as they weigh the pro of their compensation against the con of potential health consequences. There naturally will be some disagreement, you’d hope respectful, on this calculation.

A biochemistry major at Illinois State and a bit of a Renaissance Man who enjoys classical music and is involved in multiple charitable endeavors, the 26-year-old DeJong, while stressing the importance of regular testing for the participants, believes the game should take the lead by getting back on the field.

“It’s just a matter of being smart with your decisions,” he said. “If you’re taking care of your body, it becomes a matter of how to stay healthy instead of how to not get sick.” He wouldn’t hesitate to crash into a catcher, he said, or withstand a runner trying to break up a double play at second base.

Doolittle, a University of Virginia product who likewise performs more than his share of charity work and community service and has been notably outspoken on many social issues, expressed reservations on Twitter about the long-term effects of COVID-19, including possible damage to the kidneys, intestines, liver and lungs, as well as possible fertility implications.

The 33-year-old added: “Hopefully these concerns will be addressed in MLB’s proposal, first and foremost: 1) what’s the plan to ethically acquire enough tests? 2) what’s the protocol if a player, staff member, or worker contracts the virus?

“We want to play. And we want everyone to stay safe.”

The players have dealt with such a matter, if one nowhere as large or historic, previously. In 2016, the Pirates and Marlins canceled a two-game series scheduled in Puerto Rico because enough players from both sides pushed against going due to a Zika virus outbreak at the time.

“We all want it back,” DeJong said of the game and life in general before everything shut down.

We’ll find out shortly enough how much all parties are willing to find common ground, both externally and internally, to at least put a return in the hands of government leaders.