Owners, Players Reach New CBA

FRIDAY, 2:42pm: The sides will announce the deal Tuesday, according to Rosenthal, who says the delay appears to be logistical (Twitter links).

THURSDAY, 6:58pm: The deal is "really, really close," tweets Buster Olney of ESPN.com, who adds that it's not done yet but the announcement is close.

6:35pm: There is a "conceptual agreement" for the new labor deal, hears Jon Heyman of SI.com, but there are still some specific details to finalize, such as a draft tax (Twitter).

6:01pm: The owners and players have settled on a new, five-year collective bargaining agreement which will be officially announced on Monday, a source tells Ken Rosenthal of FOXSports.com (Twitter links).

Among the expected changes, according to the Associated Press: The newly sold Astros will join the American League in 2013, and Interleague Play will go on throughout the season to account for the odd number of teams in each league. Five teams will make the postseason from each league, perhaps as soon as in 2012.

We learned yesterday that the old compensation system for free agents should remain in place for this offseason, although some will change immediately, according to Rosenthal.


132 Responses to Owners, Players Reach New CBA Leave a Reply

  1. 55saveslives 4 years ago

    NBA Sucks!

    • chico65 4 years ago

      Billy Hunter and DeMaurice Smith should be taking lessons

      • John 4 years ago

        Notes?

      • Really you tell me what Smith did wrong.As far as i know the only sport to not have their championship not played in a season was MLB back in 1994.I love baseball but that is a fact

        • John 4 years ago

          You’re joking right?

          • If Hunter and Smith suck than Bud Selig and Donald Fehr really suck

          • The_BiRDS 4 years ago

            Nothing sucks more than the NBA.. what a joke

          • I am more of a college basketball fan but i cant say the NBA is a joke.It is not what it use to be but i can’t say it is a joke.Now the owners and players still not coming to an agreement is a big joke

          • Phillies_Aces35 4 years ago

            It’s a joke. It’s entertaining, but it’s a joke. If you don’t have 2 stars you have no chance of going to the playoffs.

          • wickedkevin 4 years ago

            A.  You only need one star.  Lebron on Cavs.
            b.  That would be true if half the league did not make the playoffs.

          • Phillies_Aces35 4 years ago

            One star, fine, I’ll agree with that.

          • more than half the league
            8/15 teams from each league make it. That’s TOO MANY.

          • The_BiRDS 4 years ago

            College Basket is no joke.. NBA is a bunch of millionaires jumping around playing for themselves. 

          • kurt hartel 4 years ago

            bud aka butt selig is kinda old, he made what like 17 mil last year or whatever….the guy jerks the chains hes just a puppet, he has no balls. does he even know anything about baseball

        • FLASE the NHL didn’t have a season in 04-05. 

        • NHL 2004-2005 Season

        • Lanidrac 4 years ago

          The NHL lost a whole season.  Even the ’94 baseball strike wasn’t that long.

        • UncleCharles 4 years ago

          Millions of Canadians now hate you.

  2. Nice!

  3. InLeylandWeTrust 4 years ago

    Nice work! I wouldn’t be able to handle a cancelled season…

    • I was dreading it after seeing the NBA. I don’t think I could take another MLB season being ripped from us.

    • wrestlingcritic 4 years ago

      I’d be catatonic

  4. Looks like the Cubs will reach the playoffs before we have another NBA season.

  5. Gregory 4 years ago

    No surprise here. And with the expanded playoffs, teams like the Jays have a better chance of making the playoffs (although it helps the Yanks and Red Sox as well..)

    • The AL East could have 3 teams in the playoffs. Talk about competitive balance. 

      • hey, if they’re the best three teams, then tough luck. And I’m a Dodger fan, so no East Coast homer here

  6. Gregory 4 years ago

    While MLB players are getting ready for the upcoming season, NBA players continue to fight with the owners..

  7. monkeyspanked 4 years ago

    NBA take note.  It’s called an AGREEMENT!

  8. The_BiRDS 4 years ago

    Among the expected changes, according to the Associated Press: The Astros will join the American League. Five teams will make the postseason from each league, Beer will finally be sold at decent prices, and Interleague Play will be extended into September.

    • Dave 4 years ago

      The Yankees will also be guaranteed a playoff spot as well as a first and second round bye in order to keep the ratings for the World Series up.  

    • Dale Latimer 4 years ago

      Keep wishing on the beer…

  9. not_brooks 4 years ago

    Can’t wait to see the matchups during the September pennant races!

    Phillies vs. Orioles, Rangers vs. Pirates, D-Backs vs. Royals

    Oh, wait…

    • I would vote Cal Ripken to be the next commish.

      • The_BiRDS 4 years ago

        I guess… he would never call in sick.

      • Crucisnh 4 years ago

        Somehow, I don’t think you’ll be seeing any ex-players as the commissioner.  After all, it’s the owners, not the players, that vote for the commish.

        • johnsilver 4 years ago

          Got them close already.. Joe Torre, Yankee Bob Watson… Both players.. Maybe from the 60/70’s..But players nevertheless.

  10. The New Age Outlaws 4 years ago

    I don’t agree with almost any of the changes, but the important part is there will be baseball for the next three years.

  11. wrestlingcritic 4 years ago

    I like the ideas of Extended Interleague play. I wonder how many games there will be and if it will start in 2012? Wish Astros were coming over next year, but I like the move in the interest of fairness. Good going all around.

    • 30 interleague games. And it will start in 2013 when the Astros move over. The scheduling should work out like this: 

      18 games against each division opponent, 72 games;

      6 games against each non-division opponent in the same league, 60 games;

      3 games against each opponent in the geographically corresponding division in the other league, eg NL West vs AL West, 15 games;

      3 games against each opponent in one of the other two divisions in the other league, rotating every other year, eg NL West vs. AL Central one year and AL East the next, 15 games.

    • If this move was truly in the name of fairness, then a team like the Milwaukee Brewers, who have a long history of being an AL franchise would move to the AL rather than the Astros. 

      • Lanidrac 4 years ago

        You forget that Selig is a former Brewers owner. Now that they’ve had it both ways, I think Selig likes his team playing the more strategic NL style of baseball.

  12. Karkat 4 years ago

    Am I the only one dreading the details of this?

  13. Duke15 4 years ago

    The expected one game playoff round HAS to be between the worst AL wild card and worst NL wild card right???

    • Dylan 4 years ago

      Huh? How would that work? Then u have a extra team in one league.

    • proof2006 4 years ago

      how would that make sense or even work. It will obviously be between the 2 nl wild cards and the 2 al wildcards. each winner will advance to their respective division series.

    • The_BiRDS 4 years ago

      Im assuming thats just a name and you did not attend Duke

      • Duke15 4 years ago

        I know it wouldn’t work out in a traditional playoff format… But now there is hardly any merit to actually winning the wild card. The fifth best team in each league is pretty watered down… Now we’re saying that the team with the 4th best record can lose its playoff season in one game? Doesn’t seem to make much sense.

        I didn’t actually think thats how it would work, I just don’t like the fact that a 4th place finish is now diluted to the point that they might not see a playoff series. Now all of a sudden if you don’t win your division your chances at a playoff run are a crapshoot. Not a fan.

        • The_BiRDS 4 years ago

          No I agree.. but AL playing the NL for a wildcard spot and as the first round of the playoffs is… for lack of a better term gobbledygook

        • kingoriole 4 years ago

          While it adds a team that might not merit inclusion, it strengthens the division winners advantage in the playoffs. Before a wild card was just as advantageous in the playoffs as winning your division. So it essentially strengthens two races (3rd vs. 4th, and 5th vs. 6th) while weakening one (4th vs. 5th).
          It also opens the playoffs with two one-game-eliminations. Building mucho excitement.

          Excellent move.

          • Duke15 4 years ago

            The problem here is that the competition is not evenly distributed across divisions. The AL East should have two playoff teams pretty much every year. So now the second place team in that division, even though it dominates the season (and the 1st place race is close, usually), now has its chances cut in half.

            The best part about the wild card originally was that it fixes the disparity amongst divisions by allowing the next most deserving team to make the playoffs. This is a brutal move. I think more will agree when they see the twins beating up on the softies in the AL central and the Sox and Yanks are killing each other for one spot.

          • kingoriole 4 years ago

            Lack of competition distribution would argue for an extra wild card, not against. Because there are 3 powerhouses in the East with another sleeping giant, an extra wild card helps that fact, not hurts it.

            The argument against the wildcard moving down to the 4 seed and adding a play-in game assumes the wildcard is often the second best team in the league, when it clearly isn’t usually the case.

            2011 both wild cards were 4th.
            2010 wildcards were 2nd and 4th.
            2009 both wildcards were 3rd.
            2008 both wildcards were 3rd.
            2007 wildcards were 2nd (tied first) and 4th.
            2006 both wildcards were 3rd.

            12 wildcards. Four 4th place, six 3rd place, and only two 2nd place finishers. Also the crux of this argument isn’t even that their eliminated, just that they have to play a play-in game. So now either the Sox or Yankees will have a single game elimination every year in October. Sounds exciting.

          • Duke15 4 years ago

            I first think it is a mistake to takes a teams raw record as a gauge. There were four .500 teams in the AL East last year. Four.  Playing 72 games (about) per year within the division takes a huge toll on those teams records.

            But even still, you cite 5 non last place teams, to four 4th placers  (also nice job stopping arbitrarily at 2006 when you have another 2nd and 3rd, and another 2nd and 3rd in ’05 and ’04). Now your telling me that the MAJORITY of the recent wild card winning teams would have been chalking up there chances to a playoff run at the craps table.

            I’m not debating “excitement,” here. Obviously, a one game playoff to decide your season is as intense as it gets. But this is as good as elimination of a wild card because any team can win one game. Its absolutely ludicrous to have your deserving season hang in balance on one game. The division series is garbage as it is with it being 5 games…

  14. bruce buschmann 4 years ago

    Why are they moving the Astros instead of returning the Brewers to the AL?

    • The_BiRDS 4 years ago

      Cheaper flights

    • John McFadin 4 years ago

      Selig would never let his beloved Brewers change back to the AL.

    • The actual reason is that owners have veto power over a move, but since Crane is an incoming owner, the league put the screws to him and basically made a move a condition of his approval.

      • Crucisnh 4 years ago

        Very true.  There are other reasons, but this is a huge one.

  15. Is there a fried chicken, beer, and video games clause/provision in the new deal?

  16. essmeier 4 years ago

    Great.  That means no work stoppage.  Now we have to find a way to:

    Keep the Astros in the National League
    Get rid of constant interleague play (or eliminate it altogether)
    Get rid of all wild card teams
    Get rid of the designated hitter
    Get rid of Bud Selig

    Work remains….

    • FacelessGeneralManager 4 years ago

      Ummm, wow. So basically redo this CBA.

    • Jeff 4 years ago

      2 expansion teams in the AL, maybe the Astros back, 4 8-team divisions 14 in own division 8 in the others, and ban the DH.

      Easy solution.

      • or contract two teams so the rosters aren’t watered down with guys like Chin-Lung Hu and Jason Pridie, to name a few from the Mets

    • Oh I see you want to go back to 1945? Why not go all the way and ban minorities from playing again. Come on man. 

    • Crucisnh 4 years ago

      I agree with disliking constant interleague play.  However, the wild card has been a complete success.  I wouldn’t have added another wildcard.  It’s been just fine as is.

      Don’t worry about Selig.  He’s supposedly retiring after next season.

      • kingoriole 4 years ago

        The wildcard playoff game will be a huge success too.

        Constant interleague in exchange for teams in-division playing the exact same schedule is a great trade. The inherent unfairness of the interleague scheduling the past few years is a great thing to get rid of.

  17. avpisano 4 years ago

    Good glad its not the NBA!  Players union acting a fool!

  18. notsureifsrs 4 years ago

    no agreement < this agreement < getting kicked in the shin < an agreement that didn't suck

  19. MFH 4 years ago

    Can I assume the new CBA doesn’t have anything regarding HGH testing?

  20. Well that was easier than the NBA…

  21. corey23 4 years ago

    Hey Bud, can you please resolve the A’s stadium issue now that you have taken care of every other possible thing first?

    Sincerely,

    All A’s fans

    • wickedkevin 4 years ago

      Move the Rays first!

      • Crucisnh 4 years ago

        No, the A’s deserve to have their stadium dispute resolved first.  Selig’s left them dangling for something like a couple of years.  The Rays have a stadium and a lease on it that runs for another 15 or so years.  Sure, it’d be nice for them to get a better stadium or a more supportive city.  But the A’s lease on their current park is about to run out (if it hasn’t already).  They need an answer from Selig … NOW.

        • johnsilver 4 years ago

          Ever play cards? When one is holding a bad hand, you throw it into the discard pile.

          Just what could Selig do in order to force CA and the county to spend tax payer dollars to build a stadium btw? Isn’t CA facing the biggest deficit shortage per capita in the nation as it is?

          Why would/should SF give up any of it’s “turf” and agree to split any of it’s fan base even if the A’s could manage some how (miracle?) to find private investors to build a new stadium at San Jose?

          Seems to me this is one thing Selig has played exactly right.. Waiting for the A’s to implode on themselves.

          • Crucisnh 4 years ago

            A. Why should SF give up its turf?  For starters because the A’s gave it
            to them in an act of generosity years ago so that the Giants could
            build themselves a park in San Jose.  Sane Jose was originally, A’s
            “turf”.

            B. I think that MLB should tell the Giants and A’s that their combined
            media market should be treated the same as all other 2 team media
            markets.  That is, you share it equally.

            C. The point isn’t about anyone “forcing” the state or county to spend
            anything.  It’s about settling the aforementioned dispute, one way or
            the other.  And for the record, Selig could just say “no”.  The A’s
            might not like it, but at least they’d have a decision.  The problem is
            that Selig’s left them hanging for a couple or more years on this stupid
            question.  And that’s unacceptable.

          • johnsilver 4 years ago

            As far as I know.. Selig has never..Ever granted upon himself (as much as he wish he could) the power to:

            Force any municipality to choke down the cost of a stadium, nor find a way to sustain funding of a team deep in the red.

            What is currently happening to the Athletics is no different than a business that loses support and needs to close it doors, or find new funding. In this case, the Athletics are up against the Giants and an area of exclusitivity agreement and they would be infringing on their territory **IF** they could even get funding for a stadium, which in the dire straits of CA budgetary concerns is a low probability chance regardless.

            That is why I think Selig, with this sole instance has played this perfectly by allowing this to play out perfectly.

            **NOW**… If there came up some possibility..Along with locale in another area, where a stadium became available and could be built over the next couple of years? Say Vancouver? Maybe even Mexico City as an outside the box chance? That would solve the entire problem, but Oakland? San Jose? That is playing a dead man’s hand.

          • Guest 4 years ago

            John, you are evading the point. The question here is NOT about forcing any city to pay for a ball park!!!

            The POINT is entirely about the media rights issue!!! Address the REAL question!!!

          • Crucisnh 4 years ago

            Again, you evade the REAL point, by ignoring it until your 3rd paragraph. You also fail to avoid the fact that the A’s actually may already have funding for a park in San Jose, IF the rights issue would be settled (in their favor, of course).

            The matter could also be settled (unsatisfactorily for the A’s, of course) if Selig would say “no”.

            Selig is NOT playing this perfectly. He’s acting like he WANTS to drive the A’s out of business, rather than acting in the best interest of the sport. If he doesn’t want to side with the A’s on the rights issue, then all he has to do is say “no”, and the A’s can move on from there.

            Frankly, I think that Selig has acted cowardly and idiotically on this.

          • johnsilver 4 years ago

            We have had many amicable chats in the past and maybe i was a tad “loud” in my 1st and I apologize if it came across as such…
            It all boils down to what the Giants have controlled in the past and what they are willing to relinquish in the future as far as media rights are concerned in that regard. Even in the Atletics, long ago might have had them and agreed to give them to SF..We are talking many years back and not a huge market that is capable of supporting 2 teams like NY baseball wise and Selig realizes this.

            Is there a population capable of supporting it? yes, would it support both? probably doubtful and he knows that currently SF is making it fine and to split that market with 1 team currently doing well (SFG) with 2 teams, that would possibly end up with mediocrity is not progress.

            That is of course entirely beside the entire funding of the stadium, which I do not regard as a sure thing by a long shot.

            The Athletics in Oakland are done, they will wither on the vine, unless/when either Selig, or the incoming commish finds a city to support them and I am in the crowd who thinks this is the thinking all along. Magowan is never going to allow the Athletics into his area and cut down on his “turf” when his has finally gotten out of Candlestick park and built a fanbase, PLUS joined the “big boys” of MLB.

            Vancouver, or another city awaits the Athletics.

          • Crucisnh 4 years ago

            John, I personally don’t care if the A’s stay in the SF/OAK market or not. I don’t even care which way Selig decides on this issue. I only think that the A’s and their fans deserve an answer … one way or the other … so that the team can move on. Remember that they actually (or supposedly) have a plan to build a p[ark in San Jose in place and perhaps even a funding plan. But until the rights issue is settled, the A’s and San Jose cannot go forward.

            Regardless …

            I think that the SF/OAK market may be a bit on the small side to support 2 teams. It is the smallest market to have 2 teams.

            I tend to agree that the A’s are probably done in Oakland. The city seems entirely unwilling to work with the team at all.

            As for another city, I was thinking that Portland would seem like the logical west coast choice. Isn’t Vancouver a little on the close side to Seattle?

      • easy solution for both of them…pay for your own damned stadiums

        • Crucisnh 4 years ago

          JoeV, the A’s problem is less about how to pay for their own stadium than it is about an question about media market rights that Selig refuses to make a decision on.  

  22. Guest 4 years ago

    year-long interleague? seriously? dragging EVERYTHING out doesn’t improve baseball, selig.  one of the things i like about baseball is that there are two very different leagues that play very different versions of the game.  getting them to play each other all year long just destroys some of the intrigue of the world series, which, in my mind, is a nice culmination, a showdown between leagues.  i’m probably being overly dramatic, but i don’t see this as a positive thing.

    • Kurisu Rg 4 years ago

      That helps the players and I wouldn’t be surprised if they were the ones who pushed for it: Year-long interleague = bigger need of DHs for NL clubs = more opportunities for one-dimensional players.

  23. It is great they have a deal but a 5 year deal is very short for any sports league

    • Yea, but it keeps things current as opposed to signing a 15 year agreement.

      • Crucisnh 4 years ago

        Yeah, that’s almost certainly why they don’t lock themselves into longer deals.

  24. MB923 4 years ago

    So in regards to the 2 wild cards, let me get this straight 
     
    Let’s say the Red Sox win the first wild card spot in the 155th game and let’s say they finish with 95 wins. The Angels get the 2nd wild card spot at the 160th game of the season and they finish the season with 89 wins (6 games back). What the heck is the point of the wild card winners playing the rest of the entire season if the only game that matters is 1 game at the end?  
     
    I like the idea of 2 WC spots, but make that a Best of 3. Having that all come down to 1 game is ridiculous

  25. Guest 4 years ago

    What is it about having evenly distributed teams in each league that forces 162 games of interleague?  I like that it was a minor slice of the season.  made it unique.  maybe i’m missing something obvious, but why is that not still possible?

    • Crucisnh 4 years ago

      (slaps self on head.)

      Come on, blurba.  Seriously, you couldn’t figure this one out for yourself?
      .
      .
      .
      .
      .
      .
      .
      .
      If you have an odd number of teams in each league, there will be 7 pairs of teams (per league) playing each other.  And there’ll be one team per league without someone else to play from their own league on any given night.  So, those two teams have to play each other.  This is the problem with having a 15/15 team alignment, constant interleague play.

      • Guest 4 years ago

        you still could just limit the number of games played against the other league and not worry about every team playing every other team, though.  there’s no reason you can’t just play interleague for less than a month and limit each team to one series against each team in their companion division in the other league’s division, for instance (al east would only play nl east, etc).  that’d be five teams in each division and each team would be able to pair up with one of five teams in the “opposing” division.  each team gets one three game series against each team in the other league, meaning they’d play 15 games.  there’s no reason you’d be FORCED to play more than that.

        • Crucisnh 4 years ago

          I don’t mean to be rude, but you are seriously clueless. It’s obvious to anyone with a functioning brain that constant interleague play is an AUTOMATIC consequence of having the 15/15 team alignment. There is no avoiding it. PERIOD!!!!

          There are 15 teams in each league. FIFTEEN, as in an ODD number. If the first 14 teams in the NL are playing against each other on a given night (7 games), who does the 15th NL team play that night? The answer is that they have to play the “15th” team from the AL, i.e the AL team that doesn’t have another AL team to play that night.

          This is amazingly obvious and simple, and yet you cannot see it. It’s as obvious as the color of the sky. If you have an odd number of teams in each league, then every night 1 team from each league will have no one from their own league to play and will have to play a team from the other team.

          There is no avoiding it. Get with the program!!!

          • Guest 4 years ago

            Hm. Yea, I still don’t get it.  Could you re-word?  Something like a pie-graph might be useful.  Really, anything with bright colors.

            Edit: Wait, so you’re saying the “15th” team won’t be allowed to play? That’s not right. I’d be upset if I was the players.

          • Crucisnh 4 years ago

            Blurba, no, I didn’t say that the “15th” team wouldn’t be allowed to play. My point was that there would be no team (from the same league) FOR them to play on a given day. The only thing left for them to play is the 15th team from the other league.

            Why are you having so much trouble understanding this amazingly SIMPLE thing?

          • Guest 4 years ago

            Gotcha, for a second there I thought you were saying that they’d have to play interleague all season.

          • Crucisnh 4 years ago

            Oh, no, no. The key phrase is “on any given day”. On Monday, the 15th teams might be the Red Sox and the Mets that don’t have in-league teams to match up against, and end up playing each other. But come Friday, it might be the Orioles and the Reds who end up having to play each other.

            This is just a mathematical fact. With 15 teams in a league, only 14 of them can be playing against each other on a given day. It’s sort of like a game of musical chairs. 15 teams and 14 chairs for the AL, and another 15 teams and 14 chairs for the NL. And on a given day, the AL team and the NL team without chairs end up playing each other. If there were 32 teams in MLB (16 per league) this would be a total non-issue.

            Anyways, beyond this simple fact, I have no idea what the IL schedules will look like. I only know that on a given day, there will either ban an IL game, or those 2 “15th teams” have an off day.

          • Guest 4 years ago

             I still don’t get why they won’t let the 15th team play.

          • Guest 4 years ago

             Also, I just pulled out my TI-83.  15 divided by 2 is 7.5.  That means
            there’d be half a team out there playing against a full team.  How in
            the world do they expect people to pay to go see half of a team? 
            Especially in this economy!  This is surely a recipe for disaster.

          • Crucisnh 4 years ago

            Who are they going to play within their own league, if the first 14 teams are already playing each other?

          • Guest 4 years ago

            They’d be forced to use the half team that I mentioned above, of course.  Maybe they could add two more leagues.  That way, we’d have an even number of “15th” teams (4 of them)  and no one has be told they can’t play baseball.  I did the calculations.  Everything checks out.  That way, they don’t have to tell the players that they can’t play baseball.  The last thing we need is for baseball to start fielding half-teams and to anger the people that play the game.  In the end, I think you’re right, though.  Year long interleague is just not necessary.

          • Crucisnh 4 years ago

            The simplest solution is to either add or contract 2 teams so that MLB would have 2 leagues with an even number of teams.

          • Guest 4 years ago

             That makes no sense at all.  What about the teams that are only allowed to use half of their team?  I’d rather just say, “Hey, guys, you get the day off.  Go have taco night with your family.”  Everyone loves tacos.  God, I want tacos right now.

          • Crucisnh 4 years ago

            Bulrba, I don’t know how old you are, but it’s utterly beyond me how you cannot understand this simple issue. Anyone older than a 6th grader should be able to understand these really super basic concepts.

            If you have 32 teams, 16 per league, that’s 8 games per league. No forced IL play. 28 teams, 14 per league amounts to 7 games per league.

            There’s no “half-teams” bull excrement!!!

          • Guest 4 years ago

            God, I love this website :)

          • Guest 4 years ago

            Relax a little, man.  Just wanted to see how long I could string you along.  Haha.  No hard feelings.  Just had to kill some boredom.  However, it’s Friday and its 5:00.  I’m out!

          • Guest 4 years ago

            I’m not amused. I don’t take kindly to such deceitfulness.

  26. nickm8839 4 years ago

    while they’re making changes, i think they need to have either both leagues have the DH or have neither leagues have the DH…i dont think that it makes any sense to have both of the leagues have different systems, especially if interleague play is going to happen all season

    • cyberboo 4 years ago

      You are right.  Now that interleague play would be universal, the NL needs to adopt the DH rule for the pitchers.  Does it detract from the game – No, because managers will still manage their teams in the same way.  The DH rule would never be eliminated, because the players union wouldn’t allow it to happen.  They would be throwing 30 players out of work and when have you ever seen a union destroying jobs.  They would vote for the inclusion of 30 new jobs. 

      It would balance both leagues, where right now, there is disparity between the leagues.  The NL pitchers have experience hitting and the AL pitchers don’t.  It also adds more excitement to the NL, where right now many pitchers pad their stats, because they walk the #8 hitter to retire the pitcher in the #9 slot.  Let the pitchers actually earn 27 outs every game, instead of the current 23, because the pitcher hits .048 on most teams or they are glorified bunters to move runners along. 

      It also reduces the risk of injury.  Name one fan that wants to see their 20 game winner get hit by a pitch and can’t throw in the post season due to a broken arm or worse.  Name one fan that wants to see their 20 game winner break his leg on the basepaths trying to run.  I’m sure the Yankees were really happy to see their 18 game winner out of baseball for two years due to an injury on the basepaths.  it also allows pitchers to go deeper in games, proving just how good they are.  Anyone can pitch five innings, get pinch hit for, and have an excellent bullpen pad his stats.   Let him pitch eight innings and then see if he wins or loses games on his own, with little help from the bullpens like the AL does.  Shields, Halladay, Lee built their stamina by pitching nine innings in the AL.  They didn’t have to worry about pitching and leaving the game, because the manager pinch hit for them in a tied or losing game in the sixth inning. 

  27. Guest 4 years ago

    And Farnsworth is a black belt.

  28. Those same intelligent players you speak about took their bag of balls home in 1994.Never say never in life my friend

  29. Evan 4 years ago

    i seen him spear a KC royal one time back in like 03

  30. FunkyTime 4 years ago

    Chauncey Billups was a star, just an underrated one.  It really showed with how far the Pistons dropped after they traded him.  They made 6 straight conference finals with him.

    Rasheed, Ben Wallace, and Rip Hamilton also made a bunch of all-star teams.

    They didn’t have a true superstar, but they had some star players. And one of the best starting 5s in the league.

  31. What are you talking about?!? Hockey is just as popular as Basketball in this country, maybe not where you are from but wherever I’ve been I see a ton of hockey jerseys. Just because YOU don’t like hockey doesn’t make it a major sport. I hate basketball with every fibre of my being, from every level from peewee to pro, but it’s still a major US sport. 

    EDIT: In the past 10 years hockey has flourished in places that they thought would never have hockey. Places like Nashville, Carolina, San Jose, Phenix, Tampa Bay and even Dallas-Fort Worth so stop drawing conclusions from your own personal feelings.

Leave a Reply