Texsox

Balta convinced me here as well.

I agree with Balta.

So what would the owners have done on their own?

This is 100% on the owners. They can't hide behind their hand picked commissioner who works for them. He didn't just lock out players and refuse to negotiate on his own. He's not trying to bridge a deal. He's a cardboard cutout the owners want to hide behind.

I think he's a weak commissioner who only does what the owners allow him to do. A commissioner with some power could have moved this along months ago.

So he is a strong leader the owners are behind. Earlier people called him a puppet of the owners. I stand corrected.

I believe the votes blocking deals are a bigger deal.

What will a nuclear weapon do more effectively? Isn't Russian wanting to occupy the land after the war? Far different than the US bombing and staying away for decades

I haven't read any analysis that Russia would need anything more than conventional weapons to neutralize Ukraine's military. If they can "win" this without nuclear weapons I think they will continue that route. Perhaps it's a preemptive move in case the US does get involved. Then they would need nuclear. I just can't see him trying to draw the US into the invasion. But crazy people do crazy things.

How much autonomy do you think he has? I'm guessing it's micro levels. He's just a cardboard cutout MLB stands behind. I hope MLB rewards him with a nice bonus at the end. He's a worker just like the players. He doesn't own anything in the fight.

Think of it like a huddle in football. You need space to review the proposals and work on your counter offer without the other side hearing your plans.

I agree that free agency destroyed competitiveness in baseball, exactly like the owners predicted. For competitive reasons free agency was a bad idea. But the players fought for it and they won. Now teams just buy their starting line up. The baseball draft is twenty rounds long. I believe the Liam's of the world moving teams has 1000 times the impact of some sixth round pick. Players want to play in the MLB. Multiple first round picks could choose Pittsburgh to get to the majors quicker. Why stay blocked by All Stars. So what should a player have to do to achieve free agency? Currently it requires paying off their drafting debts by working years at minimum wage. Is that fair to players while teams take in millions of profits? Are you ok with teams doing everything they can to keep player control, and competitive balance in the league? Service time manipulation seems fine for competitive balance.

So y'all are OK with free agents as long as the players gives their owners a few years of service at a couple hundred dollars a week in the minors and a couple years at minimum wage in MLB?

That's how free agency works. I guess we can keep accepting the buy your freedom through labor approach of the current system.

Then how about keeping the 5 round draft? Forty was ridiculous. I can't believe anyone thinks someone in the eighth round getting to choose what organization they play for is going to change the competitive balance of the league.

If you are a top shortstop prospect are you going to sign with the Padres? Dodgers? I agree free agency is the biggest reason we have non competitive teams. But it is veteran, MLB ready players at their prime that is the problem. Some third round shortstop picking an organization that he has the best chance to advance in, or has a knack for developing shortstops, isn't going to be as big an issue as Seager moving.

That's what we have now. Players IN THEIR PRIME go to the teams offering the highest contracts. Which fans support because MLB owners are making too much money now. I doubt we'll ever see the end of free agents. But if that's your wish, more power to you. It would be nice if players were drafted and stayed with one team throughout their careers unless the team decides to trade them. That would restore the competitive balance we had pre Curt Flood. But free agency is here to stay. Once a player is nearing their prime they can dump the team that drafted them and move on to a team with the most money, as you say.

Because it will kill competitive balance. So unproven talent years away from a MLB lineup if they ever get there being able to choose which organization they want to play for is bad. Proven MLB All Star talent being able to choose which organization they play for is OK? Which really has a bigger impact on competitive balance? But I'm sure the owners appreciate your support.

Are you against free agency?

No I don't. Explain it to me. Are you against free agency in general or do players have to earn it by playing for ridiculously low wages for a few years while owners rake in huge profits?

So why is that part of the CBA?

It says you posted this 20 minutes ago. I assume you were convinced weeks ago.

I'd be fine with a May to August regular season and finish the playoffs by October 7th.

Are MiLB players even a part of the union?

Why would it hurt the competitive balance? Players could go to an organization where they have the best chance at advancing to MLB. Why would someone join the Dodgers if their path is blocked by an All Star? But if they are drafted by LA their career is blocked.