JoeC

Basically this is my exact sentiment.

I'm not saying I want to see them miss games at all. I'm just saying that with the way that things are going, and the level of mistrust (and apparent preparation by the union to hunker down in the long run while providing some form of payment to the players from the Rainy Day fund) is at a point where the players' association isn't afraid to keep going past a deadline that they think isn't real.

I'm not sure I agree with the last statement, but I do share your opinion that we'll blow right past the deadline. The players will call the owners' bluff... only to realize that the owners aren't bluffing.

My radical ideas: 1. Force umpires to announce certain calls over the PA (such as after replays). 2. Also encourage umpires to announce over the PA the exact reason (with direct quotes, if needed) why a player / manager / coach / staff member was ejected. Also, in the "crazy marketing gimmick" category, make umpires wear body cams. Along with (2) above, have umpires release body cam footage of each ejection.

I do not / did not. Still doesn't change my response to your characterization of no player being underpaid.

The issue that they're after is to protect the guys who get a few cups of coffee, never to get a sniff of the big leagues again. I don't know what the numbers are, but I would venture to guess that the vast majority of players get < 1 year of service time in their lifetimes. I'm sorry, but making foodstamp money playing 5+ years in the minors, then finally "making it" and making a quarter of a million dollars over the course of 3 years until you run out of options and get released.... then get cast out into the "real world" where none of the skills that you've been honing for the past 25 years have any real value? I'll disagree with you and say those guys are underpaid.

NCAA is also much more selective. A 16-seed is still one of the top 15% of teams in the country. I believe the NCAA tournament criteria is set at 1 entrant per 6.5 teams or something similar... so even though the tournament is huge, it's still small compared to the team pool at large.

March 12. MLBPA publicly agrees on March 13 for some reason.

Yeah, just making the point that costs are skyrocketing constantly, and it's just a constant in professional sports.

I'm 37. I'm not old.

Yeah... because we were all heaping praise at how affordable going to the ballpark has been, and how stable the pricing has been for years now.

If I were JR the only way I'd allow the guy on my team is if: 1) He were paid the entirety of his 2021 salary by the Dodgers and released from his contract 2) He agreed to sign for a league minimum 3) He understood he was on a short leash, and management wasn't afraid to pull the trigger. ...that is to say, it ain't happening....

Here in Detroit, April ball (well, opening day week at least) is sacred.

With a potential salary floor I for one am looking forward to seeing a 40-year-old player with 3 years / $150MM left on his contract sit on the 60-day IL of the Pirates or Marlins for the last years of his career... NHL style.

Also true. And by "security," you mean "show me your ID. Now let me help you with your bags." Still a pain in the ass to have to travel though... even if chartered flights are a breeze.

Speaking as someone who does a lot of traveling (typically 75K ~ 100K miles per non-pandemic year)... any bit of travel reduction helps, first class or not.

Of the "bottom" 10 teams, 9 of them are in either the AL Central or NL Central. The Royals were the only Central team not to be in the "bottom" 10, and the Phillies were the only non-Central team represented in the "bottom."

I'm personally a fan of a solution for the NHL playoffs proposed by Down Goes Brown. Basically you count the wins (or won-loss record) starting the day after each team is mathematically eliminated from the playoffs. So if you're eliminated on August 30th, you tally up the wins starting August 31 for your team. If the next team is eliminated on September 3rd, then you have a 3- (or 4-) game head start on them to tally up more wins. It incentivizes tanking earlier (and thus still encouraging deadline dealing) maybe, but it will also incentivize teams to actually play to win if they want to get the top picks. Not sure how you'd do it in MLB where it's based off of winning percentage (as opposed to wins / "points"), but it would give the worst teams a better chance while giving them something to play for.

True. Also probably helps teams with "blocked" prospects find an avenue toward everyday roles more quickly.

Would it have been more on the owners' minds, or on the players' minds? Markets for players like Castellanos just went way up.

Not a bad move to acquire a legitimate "not a hole in the lineup" guy with solid D. Seems like a fittingly mediocre move about which to make my first post.