The Padres plan to reinstate left-hander Jay Groome from the ineligible list and non-tender him today, reports Dennis Lin of The Athletic. Groome was one of four players serving a one-year ban for breaking MLB’s regulations about betting on baseball games. Groome’s bets were placed in 2020-21, when he was not on a 40-man roster. In its official press release at the time, the league noted that Groome wagered a total of $453 over the course of 30 bets — none pertaining to games he played or to games involving the Red Sox (his team at the time).
It’s an oddity of a transaction. Non-tenders are reserved for the offseason; any player on a roster in-season was already tendered a contract by his club over the winter or signed as a free agent. However, MLBTR has confirmed that because Groome was on the ineligible list in the offseason, he could not be tendered a contract or non-tendered. That decision had to wait until he was eligible for reinstatement. Today marks the expiration of the one-year bans on Groome, A’s right-hander Michael Kelly, D-backs lefty Andrew Saalfrank and Phillies infielder José Rodríguez. Groome is out of minor league options and hasn’t pitched in more than a year, making the decision straightforward for San Diego.
Because Groome is being non-tendered, he won’t have to pass through waivers. He’ll immediately become a free agent. He’s eligible to re-sign with the Padres on a minor league deal — not uncommon among non-tendered players, particularly pre-arbitration ones like Groome — but can also explore opportunities with any team around the league.
The now-26-year-old Groome was the 12th overall pick by the Red Sox in the 2016 draft. He was a consensus top-100 prospect in the sport for two years thereafter, despite injuries limiting his time on the mound. Groome wound up opening the 2018 season on the injured list due to a flexor strain, and five weeks later the team announced that he’d require Tommy John surgery. That cost him his entire 2018 season and limited him to just four minor league innings in 2019. The canceled minor league season in 2020 did no favors for the towering 6’6″ left-hander’s development.
By the time the 2021 season rolled around, Groome was nearly five years removed from being drafted but had only 66 professional innings under his belt. He wound up making 21 starts between High-A and Double-A, totaling 97 1/3 innings with a 4.81 ERA, a huge 32.3% strikeout rate and a solid 8.7% walk rate. He struggled considerably with men on base, leading to a 65% strand rate and that bloated ERA, but the bat-missing ability and command were impressive — particularly given the long layoff from pitching on a regular basis.
In 2022, Groome was beginning to look like a potential big league starter again. He piled up 144 innings in the minors, pitching to a combined 3.44 ERA. His 22.8% strikeout rate and 10.6% walk rate both needed some work, but he was healthy and putting up generally solid results. The Red Sox shipped him to the Padres as part of the trade that brought Eric Hosmer (at league-minimum salary) and prospects Corey Rosier and Max Ferguson to Boston.
Groome fared well down the stretch in ’22 with the Padres’ Triple-A club, but his 2023 season was a nightmare. He managed to make a full slate of 30 starts in Triple-A, but there weren’t many other positive takeaways. Groome was torched for an 8.55 earned run average, walked nearly 17% of his opponents and surrendered an average of 1.67 homers per nine frames. He plunked another four batters and tossed nine wild pitches. A four-seamer that used to sit 92-94 mph tanked and sat at 91 mph on the season, and by measure of Statcast, Groome threw only 42.5% of his pitches on the entire season within the strike zone.
Groome landed on the minor league injured list after pitching just five innings last year. He had not been activated by the time the suspension was announced. The Padres had been granted a fourth option year on Groome due to the injuries and canceled minor league season, but he exhausted that during the 2024 campaign. Because he’s out of minor league options, San Diego would’ve had to carry him on the big league roster or tender him a contract and immediately designate him for assignment upon reinstating him. They’re instead going the non-tender route, perhaps in hope of quickly re-signing to a minor league contract.
Oh man I forgot about this guy. Shame how he seemed to just tank, but at 26 maybe he has a little time left to figure something out.
Bullpen
He was on a gambling suspension.
Is it really that difficult to not bet on a sports league that you actually participate in?
I get the sentiment, but since he wasn’t on the 40, and this was presumably during the covid year, he maybe wasnt playing anywhere and definitely not near a major league team.
It’s such a small amount, and he was far enough away from the game that it doesn’t bother me.
I wasn’t espousing a moral judgement on the issue. His professional rights were still owned by the Red Sox whether he played or not. What sort of logic leads to even taking the chance on such a thing?
Its a stupid rule. Just because its a rule doesn’t make it a rule worth following.
Betting $453 is worth losing a year of your career?
Is betting $453 worth taking a year of a guys career away?
Like I said its a stupid rule.
The league can talk about how betting on baseball games is against the rules for players all they want, but when the league is so deeply and utterly in bed with multiple sports betting platforms, I can excuse a young guy for thinking maybe they’re not all that serious about enforcing it. Kind of like a parent telling their kid not to smoke and that smoking is bad for your health while smoking a pack a day.
You implicitly stated that the rule was not worth following. I’m not agreeing or disagreeing with whether it’s stupid or not. $453 vs. a year of your career and AAA pay seems like an obvious choice. I have a commercial driver’s license. I get tested for THC every year. What don’t I do because I don’t want to lose my license is consume anything with THC in it regardless of how much I may want to or how stupid I think the rule might be.
Joel – Rules are rules for a reason. If you want to play the game, you follow the rules. If you think it’s ok to pick and choose which rules to follow and which you don’t have to follow then how does that work with everyone picking and choosing to a point where you can’t even play the game because no one does what the rules say?
He doesn’t have to follow but he has to pay y he notice for not doing so.
Emotions and feelings are very welcome. Poor behaviors as a result of feelings and emotions are not.
Yeah stupid rules – hey, I want 4 strikes dammit because 3 is a stupid rule – you see my point?
If rules are rules then why on earth is betting on baseball suddenly ok for the rest of society?
Rules change. Many are wrong. Just like the weed laws which are in the process of changing nationwide this is a stupid rule. He didnt bet on his team he did nothing wrong.
If you are ok with people driving 10-20 tons of weight on the highway when high then that’s on you.
Weed stays in your system for 30 days. You can smoke a joint the night before wake up sober and do your job. This is what people who drink do and there are PLENTY of those guys driving trucks. Its a stupid rule because you aren’t testing for sobriety you are just seeing if they had any in the last month and that’s not relevant. Its a stupid rule.
Because we don’t play the sport for millions of dollars under a collective bargaining agreement with our union and the owners?
Seriously? You don’t get it or are you just being a troll?
Problem is there’s no definitive (in relation to alcohol) evaluation on weeds detrimental effects to your perception. Until such a test exist it will most likely be a banned substance for such things like driving commercially.
What about prescription drugs? You don’t think those effect perception? But because a doctor says its ok that makes it fine?
Stupid stupid rule.
“Taking a year of”..No one “took” anything away from this guy. By ignoring an obvious and well publicized gambling rule, he gave it away willingly with his actions and behavior.
There’s a standard for prescription drugs. You can lose your license for that too. Do you have any foundational baseline for enforcing driving under the influence?
There is no proof that driving high impairs you. None. Driving drunk does but not high. You want to know how I know this? Because I do it all the time dude. And I could ALWAYS pass a field sobriety test.
Joel – time to go back under your bridge now. It’s been quite and peaceful here for a while you were in custody.
“There is no proof that driving high”…Actually, there’s no actual “proof” that you’re an idiot, but I’m more than willing to bet the farm.
Thats the truth mlbfan. Who cares if someone popped a pill or smoked a joint if they aren’t actually impaired? It doesn’t matter except to the stupid company the other guy drives a truck for.
Kind of like a parent telling their kid not to smoke and that smoking is bad for your health while smoking a pack a day.
=========================
I don’t think so. It is more like your parent working in the marketing department for a cigarette company, and then telling you not to smoke.
Tell me you’re a rule follower without telling me you’re a rule follower.
He bet on baseball, so it was a really big deal.
“In March 2024, MLB learned from a legal sports betting operator that it had identified past baseball betting activity from accounts connected to multiple Major and Minor League players. MLB obtained data from that operator and other sportsbooks, including authentication data for bets. None of these players played in any game on which they placed a bet. Further, all of the players denied that they had any inside information relevant to the bets or that any of the baseball games they bet on were compromised or manipulated, and the betting data does not suggest that any outcomes in the baseball games on which they placed bets were compromised, influenced, or manipulated in any way. None of the players are appealing their discipline.
Under Major League Rule 21, “Any player, umpire, or Club or League official or employee, who shall bet any sum whatsoever upon any baseball game in connection with which the bettor has no duty to perform, shall be declared ineligible for one year.” Whereas, “Any player, umpire, or Club or League official or employee, who shall bet any sum whatsoever upon any baseball game in connection with which the bettor has a duty to perform, shall be declared permanently ineligible.”
So there it is.
“However, MLBTR has confirmed that because Groome was on the ineligible list in the offseason, he could not be tendered a contract or non-tendered. That decision had to wait until he was eligible for reinstatement.”
Was the same logic not also true for the other 3 guys? None of them were under contract for 2025 at the time the suspensions were handed down.
Since he’s now a free agent it seems the Padres have no better chance than any other team of resigning him to a minors contract. It’s hard to see a lot of interest coming from any team honestly.
Perhaps he can be Groomed to be a reliever?
I’ll see myself out.
Jonah Bride? Is that you?
The moral of this story? Always hire an interpreter just in case.
Free Groome!
If I were Groome I would probably head to a team that was willing to let me stretch out as a starter in AAA for the next couple of months, and try to angle in an opt out for August 1 if he’s not promoted to the bigs. He’s obviously going to need some ramp up time, and will need to kick off some rust. But if he can do that while also getting himself back on the market in August, he could make himself valuable.
They had to wait until he returned from gambling suspension. Glad to see they cut him loose.
What a dummy?
South Jersey guy. Interesting family.
There are 3 teams in the NL with a worse record than the braves
Groome has a lot of other baggage also.
Anyone that risks hi career to make $453 worth of wagers has absolutely no focus.
I seriously doubt those numbers are right. $453 over 30 bets is $15.10 per wager. How many people in here bothers to call their bookie to bet $15 on a game. The vig on a $15 bet is ~ $1.50. The bookie probably wouldn’t take your call.
Even 50 years, a $15 wager would be considered a little silly. Let alone enough to risk your career over.
Even 50 years ***ago***, in addition to agree between ‘people’ and ‘bothers’. This was sloppy even for an accountant, even on a Friday.
Guessing this was through something like draftkings or fanduel, so no need to call anybody, just click a button.
I live in a state without legal gambling, and my “bookie” has a similar website where you just click a couple buttons.
I bet small amounts all the time, guessing its pretty common.
Maybe. But it just doesn’t make any sense. Betting $15 on a game knowing that you could lose your job over it?
Yeah, obviously a dumb move, but I believe him, they likely know the exact amount because it was on a legal site.
Not sure if it was him, but 1 player from those suspensions said that he thought was allowed to bet because he wasnt playing with the minor league season cancelled.
Should have had an interpreter