Moneyball: MLB Players Return From Injuries Faster When Contracts Are About To Expire

ANN ARBOR, Mich. — When a star player limps off the field, fans typically wonder how bad the injury is and how long the player will be out. But a new study suggests another question matters too: how many years are left on his contract? Researchers found that Major League Baseball players on expiring contracts return from injuries noticeably faster than their teammates with long-term security. It’s a pattern shaped by the business of the game as much as the injuries themselves.

Take Aaron Judge and Shohei Ohtani. After signing a nine-year, $360 million contract with the New York Yankees in 2022, Judge was limited to just 106 games in 2023 with a toe injury. Meanwhile, Ohtani, playing out his final contract year, appeared in 135 games while dealing with multiple ailments and still went on to win the Most Valuable Player award.

This analysis of nearly a decade of MLB data suggests these contrasts aren’t coincidence. Players in contract years consistently spend fewer games on the injured list, according to research published in Economic Inquiry by University of Michigan sport management scholar Richard Paulsen.

The Numbers Behind the Pattern

Paulsen analyzed 4,125 player-seasons from 2009 to 2017, focusing on athletes with at least three years of MLB experience. That cutoff matters because younger players typically work under club-controlled deals rather than multi-year contracts.

Across the sample, the average player missed 22 games a season due to injury. But those in the final year of a contract missed about five fewer games than when they had multiple years left. For players on one-year contracts, the gap widened to nearly nine fewer games.

The models accounted for age, performance, position, league, and other factors that might explain differences. The pattern held firm: the closer players get to free agency, the faster they return.

Why Contract Status Shapes Injury Decisions

Baseball’s guaranteed contracts mean players get paid whether they’re healthy or hurt. But the incentives aren’t the same for everyone.

For players locked into long-term deals, teams have reason to be cautious. Preserving health today protects years of future performance. But for a player whose contract ends in a few months, there’s less incentive to take the long view. Teams may focus more on immediate wins than on safeguarding someone who could be wearing another uniform next season.

Players themselves also feel the pressure. In contract years, availability is currency. A reputation for being “injury prone” can depress market value, while showing up—aches and all—signals durability to future employers. Paulsen’s study found the effect strongest among lower-performing players, who may fear that missed time could erase their chances of landing another deal.

Both Teams and Players Share Responsibility

The study’s results point to contributions from both sides. Teams clearly have financial incentives not to overinvest in the long-term health of someone about to leave. Players, meanwhile, may hide injuries or accelerate recoveries to avoid looking fragile.

Previous research backs this up: missing games in a contract year has been shown to shorten the length of the next contract. For fringe players especially, that risk looms large.

Paulsen also tested whether teams offered extra protection to certain players, such as giving them more appearances at designated hitter to reduce wear and tear. The results showed no significant evidence that teams systematically used this strategy to shield contract-year players.

Economics Meets Athlete Health

The findings illustrate how business incentives can ripple into medical decisions. Teams protect players differently based not just on the injury itself, but on contract value and years remaining. Players with higher salaries, for example, missed more games due to injury, suggesting that teams treated them more cautiously as valuable long-term assets.

This dynamic resembles what economists call a moral hazard problem: the party making choices about risk (the team) doesn’t necessarily bear all the long-term costs. If a player suffers lingering damage from playing hurt, those consequences follow the athlete (and perhaps his next employer) more than the team that put him back on the field.

A Systemic Tension

The intersection of health care and business isn’t unique to baseball. Team doctors face conflicts of interest, employed by organizations that benefit financially from players returning as quickly as possible. In early 2024, a head physician for an MLB team publicly criticized the league’s handling of pitcher injuries, blaming management decisions. That rare public pushback highlights how medical and economic pressures collide in professional sports.

Sports medicine experts have long cautioned that rushing athletes back can transform minor injuries into career-threatening ones, particularly for pitchers dealing with elbow and shoulder problems. The study’s data-driven results reinforce those concerns, showing how contract status adds another layer of pressure to already fraught decisions.

Beyond the Ballpark

While baseball provides uniquely detailed public records of injuries, Paulsen argues the same forces play out in other workplaces. Temporary employees across industries consistently receive fewer safety resources and less training than permanent staff. They also face stronger pressure to “tough it out,” whether that means working through illness on a factory floor, skipping doctor’s visits in the gig economy, or avoiding sick leave in an office setting.

The lesson is the same: when short-term economic incentives outweigh long-term care, worker health often loses. For MLB players, that can mean shorter careers and bigger risks. For everyone else, it can mean untreated injuries, preventable illness, and higher long-term costs for both workers and employers.

---