Universal DH still up in the air

[denarded]

How is it that MLB can't figure out Universal DH or not? Not fair to players. Not fair to teams. Not fair to the Twins signing Cruz. If MLB can't get this figured out there is no way we have baseball after labor negotiations after next season. Manfred is a joke. I'm just pointing this out before both points become front page news (not that most fans are aware of this) I'll step off my soapbox now

[tony&rodney]

The obvious point well put by denarded. The talent on the field is strong. The communication between the moving parts, less so. Baseball/MLB needs to devise a better system of analysis for creatively promoting their product. What works for corporate NFL may require a separate approach from summer MLB.

The DH decision should be done yesterday/today/ no later than tomorrow. A very poor tactic for the public to appreciate and poor economics as well. Ii's not a viable negotiation tool unless the consumer agrees. The strength of each individual club is dependent on the success of each of its parts. Fans are interested in improvements and future entertainment, not an impractical failure to have the rules of the games in place a year in advance at a minimum. So yes, MLB needs to get its **** together.

[TopGunn#22]

You guys are spot on.  MLB is dawdling on this for no good reason.  DH or no DH ??  Make a decision !

Inaction helps NO ONE !!!

[dxpavelka]

 

How is it that MLB can't figure out Universal DH or not? Not fair to players. Not fair to teams. Not fair to the Twins signing Cruz. If MLB can't get this figured out there is no way we have baseball after labor negotiations after next season. Manfred is a joke. I'm just pointing this out before both points become front page news (not that most fans are aware of this) I'll step off my soapbox now

We're really not in any different spot than we've been in 46 of  the last 47 years.  However, since you insist, I'll fix it.  All clubs are free to use or not use the DH in any manner they choose.  If NL clubs want to not use it in games between themselves, so be it.  If AL clubs wish to use it in ALL games so be it.  Problem solved.

[denarded]

 

We're really not in any different spot than we've been in 46 of  the last 47 years.  However, since you insist, I'll fix it.  All clubs are free to use or not use the DH in any manner they choose.  If NL clubs want to not use it in games between themselves, so be it.  If AL clubs wish to use it in ALL games so be it.  Problem solved.

You're missing the point. We can't sign Cruz until he establishes his value on the open market. MLB is not saying what the open market is. My point is not about wether the DH should be in the game for both leagues, it's why can't they just say what it is so teams can evaluate their needs

[High heat]

Having a NL DH in 2020 all comes down to, is spring training starting on time and are we play 162 or not.  If we have a shortened season or if we get a limited or no spring training  the NL DH is on the table to keep pitchers healthy.  

 

NL DH all comes down to teams $, NL owners dont want to pay veteran everyday players and give more mediocre to quality bat first vets the chance to extend there MLB career.  They also dont want there pitchers getting injured.  If you say "plan on not having a NL DH in 2021" teams get to save the $ and use a rotation of already rostered players if they decide to go with the NL DH because of shortened season or big pitcher injury risks (short or no ST) Owners arent openly implementing NL DH without getting something in return from the MLB PA.     

[Doctor Gast]

It's like High Heat said, basically it's politics (I hate politics on all & every level). The players want universal DH & the owners want to leverage this so they can delay the season                (which the players don't want)         until the vaccine frees up the fan in the stadium. So it's an impasse & nothing will be done unless ownership sweetens the deal. I personally wish that nothing is done so we have a better chance of landing Cruz. That said; nothing will be decided until the very end when there is no choice. So we have to have patience but if there is a  deal that can't wait we must strike & let the chips fall where they may. 

If at the end there is no universal DH, great! we can sign Cruz if there is universal DH, so be it, will lose Cruz but that can free up some $ to upgrade some where else other than DH 

[tony&rodney]

Both teams and players need to know and prepare for rule changes. This is true whether it involves the DH or strike zone. Rules should be set at least 12 months prior to the scheduled start to a new season.

Can you imagine the NBA changing back to only 2 point shots the week before the season begins. Of course, this is. a different sport and just an example, but the failure of baseball to set their rules is poor.

Set the roster size, declare if this restricts number of pitchers on roster, set the IL, make a call on the DH, and announce any and all changes by March 15th for the following competitive schedule. So the 2022 season has EVERYTHING set by March 15, 2021. Enough of amateur hour in MLB. This also includes any decisions on revenue sharing, payroll tax, or matching contracts; everything set a year in advance.

[bobs]

  The whole thing is just a microcosm of what's wrong with MLB.

[adjacent]

 

Having a NL DH in 2020 all comes down to, is spring training starting on time and are we play 162 or not.  If we have a shortened season or if we get a limited or no spring training  the NL DH is on the table to keep pitchers healthy.  

 

NL DH all comes down to teams $, NL owners dont want to pay veteran everyday players and give more mediocre to quality bat first vets the chance to extend there MLB career.  They also dont want there pitchers getting injured.  If you say "plan on not having a NL DH in 2021" teams get to save the $ and use a rotation of already rostered players if they decide to go with the NL DH because of shortened season or big pitcher injury risks (short or no ST) Owners arent openly implementing NL DH without getting something in return from the MLB PA.     

Which is the same as they wnat to have the cake and eat it too. One way or the other

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Having a NL DH in 2020 all comes down to, is spring training starting on time and are we play 162 or not.  If we have a shortened season or if we get a limited or no spring training  the NL DH is on the table to keep pitchers healthy.  

 

NL DH all comes down to teams $, NL owners dont want to pay veteran everyday players and give more mediocre to quality bat first vets the chance to extend there MLB career.  They also dont want there pitchers getting injured.  If you say "plan on not having a NL DH in 2021" teams get to save the $ and use a rotation of already rostered players if they decide to go with the NL DH because of shortened season or big pitcher injury risks (short or no ST) Owners arent openly implementing NL DH without getting something in return from the MLB PA.     

Actually, I think everybody wants a universal DH, which makes this even worse.

 

The only thing holding back owners is that adding a universal DH will cost money and owners won't agree to anything that costs money until they extract a pound of flesh from the players in return.

 

Which is why we've ended up in these terrible situations time and time again, almost always to the detriment of the game itself. The players are far from guilt-free but it's the owners that always seem eager to burn down the game tomorrow if it makes them a buck today.

 

History is not going to be kind to Rob Manfred's tenure as commissioner. If owners want to use the DH for leverage, there's a time and place to do that: the next CBA negotiations. The time and place isn't in the middle of a pandemic, blowing hot and cold on a daily basis about a fundamental rule of the game as teams try to prepare for a new season.

[TheLeviathan]

It's preposterous this wasn't decided in a 30 second conversation of mutual interest and the best interest of the game.

 

#Whybaseballisdying

[old nurse]

 

Which is the same as they wnat to have the cake and eat it too. One way or the other

That would be both sides

[twinfan]

MLB has several issues to resolve and discuss going forward including the DH. It is clear that the NL doesn't want it or it would have been adopted by now. There is also the issues of the shift and the pitch clock- among others. I would hope that Cruz would want to sign back with us but understand his hesitentcy. Hopefully he'll sign for 20 million for each of the next 2 years. But would we want to pay that? The idea of using the DH being a team choice won't work. It would be the same as adopting it universally because who is going to want a pitcher to bat vs a hitter.

 

Now- on to the designated runner. Wouldn't that be exciting?

[specialiststeve]

Respectfully most of you are missing the point that this is a negotiation issue.

 

Players clearly want as it will keep older players around and will have higher salary. So.... owners are going to negotiate something coming back. Has been this way for many years.... not worth getting upset about.

 

Pretty clear that the universal DH will be here .... just what is it worth to the players... both sides are accountable on this one.... 

[Brock Beauchamp]

Respectfully most of you are missing the point that this is a negotiation issue.

 

Players clearly want as it will keep older players around and will have higher salary. So.... owners are going to negotiate something coming back. Has been this way for many years.... not worth getting upset about.

 

Pretty clear that the universal DH will be here .... just what is it worth to the players... both sides are accountable on this one....

How are both sides accountable for this? The MLBPA would agree to it in a heartbeat, it’s the owners that keep shifting and being nebulous about it.

 

Again, if the owners want to use the DH as a negotiating chip, the time and place to do that is the upcoming CBA negotiations, not the middle of some random offseason.

[TheLeviathan]

 

MLB has several issues to resolve and discuss going forward including the DH. It is clear that the NL doesn't want it or it would have been adopted by now. There is also the issues of the shift and the pitch clock- among others. I would hope that Cruz would want to sign back with us but understand his hesitentcy. Hopefully he'll sign for 20 million for each of the next 2 years. But would we want to pay that? The idea of using the DH being a team choice won't work. It would be the same as adopting it universally because who is going to want a pitcher to bat vs a hitter.

 

Now- on to the designated runner. Wouldn't that be exciting?

 

I'm not sure there really is much NL opposition anymore.  That seemed to die out over the last few years as high price-tag pitchers took silly injuries at the plate and/or running the bases.  As Brock said, this mostly seems to be about the owners having no idea what they're doing. 

 

If they don't have a clear consensus....then stick with the status quo.  Or just go with it without the pound of flesh from the MLBPA.  Going back and forth on it without any clear reason why or communication to the MLBPA is just baffling.  

[Greglw3]

This is just a guess but since I’ve been following baseball heavily from the inception of the DH until now, it strikes me that the NL is hugely attached to the DH and doesn’t want to give it up. Imagine clinging to a paradigm where a hapless pitcher bats rather than someone that can hit for 47 years!!!

 

That might be where the holdup is.

[specialiststeve]

 

How are both sides accountable for this? The MLBPA would agree to it in a heartbeat, it’s the owners that keep shifting and being nebulous about it.

Again, if the owners want to use the DH as a negotiating chip, the time and place to do that is the upcoming CBA negotiations, not the middle of some random offseason.

 

So the players get the DH and  add more salary for older players..... and the owners get what? Sorry... give and take is what it is all about... You are right that the time would be the upcoming CBA... do the players want to wait until after the season or are they willing to give something up now? I believe the players will see the long-term advantage and give something.... or wait until after the season... and negotiate the next CBA... and give something..... 

[prouster]

So the players get the DH and add more salary for older players..... and the owners get what?

An on-field product that people want to pay to watch.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

So the players get the DH and  add more salary for older players..... and the owners get what? Sorry... give and take is what it is all about... You are right that the time would be the upcoming CBA... do the players want to wait until after the season or are they willing to give something up now? I believe the players will see the long-term advantage and give something.... or wait until after the season... and negotiate the next CBA... and give something..... 

Except the owners are the ones dallying with a rule change at all... in the middle of a pandemic with loads of uncertainty. 

 

Oh, and let's not forget that they *also* haven't established a playoff format, roster size, or a host of other important things... and we're all of six weeks from pitchers and catchers reporting.

 

I really don't understand how anyone could look at this situation and be angry at anyone other than the owners. This entire mess is their fault because they had two legitimate options that wouldn't damage the game as teams prepare for a season:

 

1. Don't do anything, wait until next offseason's CBA negotiations

2. Declare rule changes promptly and, for the love of god, don't try to bargain for that pound of flesh from the MLBPA into January and February

 

Instead, we're getting... this. Again. Just like last season when I think first pitch of the season had already taken place when MLB announced postseason expansion.

 

I mean, come on. Who defends this garbage?

[denarded]

 

 

Again, if the owners want to use the DH as a negotiating chip, the time and place to do that is the upcoming CBA negotiations, not the middle of some random offseason.

 

Thank you, Brock. That was the point I was trying to make in this post.

[TheLeviathan]

 

An on-field product that people want to pay to watch.

 

Plus protecting 200M assets they pay to pitch, not hit and run.

[specialiststeve]

 

An on-field product that people want to pay to watch.

 

It is always about money guys... not trying to "defend" anyone as both sides are accountable. Want the DH? Players give something back... give and take... that is how this works. This is not anything new. 

 

 

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

It is always about money guys... not trying to "defend" anyone as both sides are accountable. Want the DH? Players give something back... give and take... that is how this works. This is not anything new. 

In case you missed my previous post that's literally five-ish posts above this:

 

"I really don't understand how anyone could look at this situation and be angry at anyone other than the owners. This entire mess is their fault because they had two legitimate options that wouldn't damage the game as teams prepare for a season:

 

1. Don't do anything, wait until next offseason's CBA negotiations

2. Declare rule changes promptly and, for the love of god, don't try to bargain for that pound of flesh from the MLBPA into January and February"

[specialiststeve]

 

In case you missed my previous post that's literally five-ish posts above this:

 

"I really don't understand how anyone could look at this situation and be angry at anyone other than the owners. This entire mess is their fault because they had two legitimate options that wouldn't damage the game as teams prepare for a season:

 

1. Don't do anything, wait until next offseason's CBA negotiations

2. Declare rule changes promptly and, for the love of god, don't try to bargain for that pound of flesh from the MLBPA into January and February"

 

If # 1 is just  stating that there will be no DH this year and will be negotiated at the next CBA.. that is what I have been saying... or if players want it now will have to give something back now... Not rocket science it is just business negotiations...  

 

Not sure why it all on the owners though.... players union has their part.... All they have to say is we will wait until the CBA and it is all done..... or say we are willing to do ____________...... that is it. Again both parties are liable in the situation. 

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

If # 1 is just  stating that there will be no DH this year and will be negotiated at the next CBA.. that is what I have been saying... or if players want it now will have to give something back now... Not rocket science it is just business negotiations...  

 

Not sure why it all on the owners though.... players union has their part.... All they have to say is we will wait until the CBA and it is all done..... or say we are willing to do ____________...... that is it. Again both parties are liable in the situation. 

Both parties do not share equal liability, as the MLBPA has no power to instigate a rules change outside of negotiating it into the CBA. Only owners (MLB) have the ability to propose a rules change.

[specialiststeve]

 

Both parties do not share equal liability, as the MLBPA has no power to instigate a rules change outside of negotiating it into the CBA. Only owners (MLB) have the ability to propose a rules change.

According to Bob Nightengale of USA Today, MLB commissioner Rob Manfred informed clubs on a conference call Monday that they "should be preparing for spring training to start on time in February and to plan on a full 162-game season being played."
Major League Baseball and its 30 ownership groups had been hoping to delay the start of the 2021 season to allow more time for players, personnel, and fans to be vaccinated, but the MLBPA has roundly rejected any new discussions about additional pay cuts that would come along with another shortened schedule. Maybe this conference call will spur a little more movement on the free agent market, as about 88 percent of available free agents remain unsigned with just over a month to go until the opening of camps in Florida and Arizona.

SOURCE: USA Today

 

 

Ding... ding... there is your bargaining issue... players give up a bit of the season so owners save some money and the DH arrives.... quit pro quo.... 

[tony&rodney]

We all get that MLB wants the players to back off from the cba as currently devised, but the fact remains that at this time baseball (commish/owners) is playing with the integrity of the game. 

Teams cannot build their rosters until there is clarity on the rules. This affects roster construction and the players' preparation. Does every team go to the playoffs, do we play high school rules again for a full season, and so on. MLBPA needs to demand two full years notice of changes to the game before rule changes appear in their next cba. Until the playing rules are set for the entire year, teams will be dangling and hedging on their decisions. Pinch runners and re-entry in every inning - better sign a track star and so on. Of course, that is ridiculous but so are the other amateur hour changes.

I'm fine with rule changes if they are put in place twenty-four months preceding an opening day. This allows for owners, management, and players to adjust and hopefully place the best product on the field.

I listened to the first Twins game and have followed baseball way too intently my entire life, but I'm quite frustrated by the angling with rules currently on display. My opinion is that this adversely affects the quality of play and turns fans off. I can sit in my chair or boat with the radio off too. Town ball becomes a more appealing option as well.

[Vanimal46]

 

The latest update is it’s not happening because expanded playoffs were a package deal for it to be approved.