Headlines

  • Rangers Option Josh Jung
  • Kevin Pillar Announces Retirement
  • Braves Place Spencer Schwellenbach On IL With Elbow Fracture
  • Braves Designate Alex Verdugo For Assignment
  • Giants Exercise 2026 Option On Manager Bob Melvin
  • Yordan Alvarez Shut Down Due To Setback With Hand Injury
  • Previous
  • Next
Register
Login
  • Hoops Rumors
  • Pro Football Rumors
  • Pro Hockey Rumors

MLB Trade Rumors

Remove Ads
  • Home
  • Teams
    • AL East
      • Baltimore Orioles
      • Boston Red Sox
      • New York Yankees
      • Tampa Bay Rays
      • Toronto Blue Jays
    • AL Central
      • Chicago White Sox
      • Cleveland Guardians
      • Detroit Tigers
      • Kansas City Royals
      • Minnesota Twins
    • AL West
      • Houston Astros
      • Los Angeles Angels
      • Oakland Athletics
      • Seattle Mariners
      • Texas Rangers
    • NL East
      • Atlanta Braves
      • Miami Marlins
      • New York Mets
      • Philadelphia Phillies
      • Washington Nationals
    • NL Central
      • Chicago Cubs
      • Cincinnati Reds
      • Milwaukee Brewers
      • Pittsburgh Pirates
      • St. Louis Cardinals
    • NL West
      • Arizona Diamondbacks
      • Colorado Rockies
      • Los Angeles Dodgers
      • San Diego Padres
      • San Francisco Giants
  • About
    • MLB Trade Rumors
    • Tim Dierkes
    • Writing team
    • Advertise
    • Archives
  • Contact
  • Tools
    • 2025 Trade Deadline Outlook Series
    • 2025-26 MLB Free Agent List
    • Contract Tracker
    • Transaction Tracker
    • Agency Database
  • NBA/NFL/NHL
    • Hoops Rumors
    • Pro Football Rumors
    • Pro Hockey Rumors
  • App
  • Chats
Go To Pro Hockey Rumors
Go To Hoops Rumors

Manfred Comments On Revenue Split, Offseason Pace

By Anthony Franco | July 2, 2025 at 10:40am CDT

The current collective bargaining agreement expires in less than 18 months. It’s widely expected there’ll be another offseason lockout and contentious round of labor negotiations after the CBA wraps on December 1, 2026. MLB commissioner Rob Manfred provided some hints at potential talking points in comments at an Investor Day event for the Braves last month (as covered by Mike Mazzeo of Sports Business Journal).

Manfred said he’s making an effort to pitch the league’s message directly to individual players. “I don’t think the leadership of (the MLBPA) is anxious to lead the way to change,” he stated. “So we need to energize the workforce in order to get them familiar with or supportive of the idea that maybe changing the system could be good for everybody.”

The commissioner suggested he’s seeking out players who find themselves at the lower end of the earning spectrum to stress the discrepancy in player salaries. “10% of our players earn 72% of the money,” he said, though he did not provide specifics at that event as to how the salary distribution was calculated. “So I usually try to avoid the high-earning guy at this point, and find a younger player and say ’if you’re one of the 10%, it’s a great deal. But if you’re the other 90, it ain’t so good.'”

Manfred went on to suggest that players have lost a significant chunk of revenue over the past handful of bargaining agreements. “My first deal where I was the chief negotiator in 2002, we were spending 63% of revenue on players,” he said. “Today, we spend about 47% on players. The math means you the players are getting a smaller and smaller percentage of each dollar, and, in fact, if we had a made a deal 10 years ago to share 50-50, you would’ve made $2.5 billion more than you made.”

Unsurprisingly, his comments were met with a sharp rebuke from the MLB Players Association. The union argued that Manfred is trying to weaken solidarity by pitting players against one another. MLBPA executive director Tony Clark told Evan Drellich of The Athletic that the commissioner’s quotes contained “misleading or downright false statements.” Clark added within his statement that MLB’s “stated plan is once again to try to divide players from each other and their union in service of a system that would add to the owners’ profits and franchise values.”

There’s a general expectation that the league will again try to get the Players Association to move off their longstanding firm refusal to entertain a salary cap. Some individual owners have publicly expressed a desire for a hard spending limit. Manfred did not specifically mention a desire for a cap at the mid-June investor event (though he alluded to it in his reference to a 50-50 revenue split). Earlier in the month, he told reporters at the owners meetings that MLB had made “no decisions” on what they’d propose when CBA talks begin (additional Sports Business Journal link).

It’s easy to see how the commissioner’s comments could lay the groundwork for a salary cap push. A cap system would almost certainly involve a corresponding salary floor. That’d limit top-end contracts while arguably increasing spending on lower-tier players, closing the gap in salary discrepancy which Manfred referenced.

The commissioner also opined that MLB free agency progresses too slowly. “Other sports, they have free agency, it’s about a month. There’s lots of bidders. It’s a great marketing opportunity for the sport,” he argued. “Players have their choice of where to go. All positive. Our free agency is like the Bataan Death March. It starts the day after the World Series and in February really, really good players are still wandering around the landscape.”

There’s certainly a case that there’d be greater entertainment value and fan interest in an early-offseason free agent bonanza. There’d be little to nothing of note in the second half of the winter, but leagues like the NFL, NBA and NHL all have a frenetic few days at the beginning of their offseasons that make for an exhilarating time for fans. MLB only approximated that in the lead-up to the 2022 lockout. Its free agency is otherwise much more drawn out — save for a few fairly hectic days at the early December Winter Meetings — and arguably less satisfying.

That said, the appeal for MLB in a quick-moving free agency goes beyond fan engagement. Other leagues’ offseason activity is compressed because they all operate with a cap/floor system. Teams have a much narrower budgetary range that they’re required to hit. There’s often a firm limit on a player’s contract length and salary. There’s limited opportunity for a bidding war for the top-tier free agents, so they’re less incentivized to wait out the market than they are under the MLB system.

Many of the entertainment benefits of a quicker offseason are the results of what would be a more favorable economic system for MLB. It’s unsurprising that the league would therefore place an emphasis on them while the MLBPA diminishes their importance. Manfred has spoken repeatedly about his interest in imposing an offseason free agent signing deadline that’d hopefully lead to a flood of activity not dissimilar from the in-season trade deadline. The union has been adamantly opposed, arguing that players would lose negotiating leverage with a ticking clock and would be squeezed into accepting lesser deals. Both the SBJ and Athletic columns are worth a full read for those interested in CBA issues.

Share 0 Retweet 0 Send via email0

Collective Bargaining Agreement

MLBTR Podcast: Depleted Mets’ Pitching, The Pirates Are Open For Business, And More!
Main
Braves Designate Alex Verdugo For Assignment
View Comments (141)
Post a Comment

141 Comments

  1. reflect

    9 hours ago

    “The current system isn’t good for you. So what if I offered you something even worse?”

    – Manfred.

    I’m all for both sides fighting for their own self-interests but I would prefer it happen without these disingenuous comments. Manfred is not trying to help the lowest-paid players. Nor should he be.. But he shouldn’t be pretending either.

    27
    Reply
    • MuleorAstroMule

      9 hours ago

      It’s funny how Manfred fails to mention how the league is who determines the minimum wage and how many years a player has to play at that salary, which is usually most, if not all, of a player’s career. The easiest fix to pay discrepancy would be to raise that amount and limit the years of team control. But for some strange reason I’m guessing the owners find that unpalatable.

      7
      Reply
      • Buck Bumble

        9 hours ago

        Wow are you telling me teams won’t like it if you decrease the number of years they can retain players? That is really bizarre and it’s totally shocking that they would think that

        3
        Reply
        • MuleorAstroMule

          9 hours ago

          Congratulations on both not picking up on the obvious sardonic nature of that and deciding to being a dick about it. Good job today.

          5
          Reply
        • Buck Bumble

          8 hours ago

          Guy gets called out for being dumb and gets defensive and backtracks saying it was just a joke

          Many such cases!

          2
          Reply
      • Poolhalljunkies

        9 hours ago

        Everything with regard to player salary and time etc is collectively bargained with the players union so stating the “the league” decides anything in that regard is a false statement since its only decided once the players agree

        6
        Reply
    • BlueSkies_LA

      8 hours ago

      A divide and conquer strategy, apparently. That’s bound to go over great with the players. Ultimately, all of MLB’s CBA proposals boil down to “stop us before we spend again.”

      5
      Reply
      • foppert3

        2 hours ago

        Of course. Did a great job as well. The 10%/72% is good, but the 63% down to 47% under the current stewardship is magnificent. Bobby is too good.
        Straight for the jugular. No wonder he is on $20m.

        Reply
        • BlueSkies_LA

          2 hours ago

          Um, what?

          Reply
        • foppert3

          2 hours ago

          Really ? You don’t understand that ? Did you try ?
          The divide and conquer is the only way to go. Of course that’s the method. I would
          be stunned if many a rank and file player is not thinking about the numbers he presented.
          Manfred is great at his job. It’s why he earns big coin.

          There we go. Best interpretation I’ve got. Hopefully you can decipher that one.

          Reply
        • BlueSkies_LA

          2 hours ago

          Really. I tried, honest. But it was so cryptic I gave up. Confusion happens.

          I certainly understand why Manfred keeps his job: He makes money for the owners. This is his only job — not that more than one in ten fans understands this.

          Reply
        • foppert3

          2 hours ago

          He is ruthless. Pinning that big of a % revenue drop on current union leadership is brutal. Love it !

          Reply
    • LordD99

      5 hours ago

      Hey players. Many of you are being screwed over by the owners I represent. I’ve helped them screw you over. But hear me out this time…

      1
      Reply
  2. Acoss1331

    9 hours ago

    I’m not sure I’d want a floor or a salary cap. I think it’s just a cop out to not spend by some of these owners.

    A faster free agency, I’m indifferent. What I’ve seen is players that sign late in the offseason that start the season in the minors getting their work in late, they don’t do good in the regular season. Having a full Spring Training is a necessity.

    Not related to the CBA, but MLB really needs to get rid of these stupid blackouts. On a personal level, that’s what’s annoying me the most about the sport.

    12
    Reply
    • King123

      9 hours ago

      Become a Reds, Pirates, Marlins, Rockies, Nationals, or White Sox fan and then tell us you don’t want a salary cap.

      7
      Reply
      • mrkinsm

        3 hours ago

        @King, I’m a Reds fan and I don’t want a salary cap. I want the owner to either spend more, or prove that he’s not making bank…(which is never going to happen). All caps do, is limit the amount workers make. They don’t force spending by the billionaires. .

        Reply
        • King123

          1 hour ago

          If the players were making pennies on the dollar then I might agree. But many players will be apart of the 1% when they retire. They’re not blue collar, middle class workers.

          Reply
    • King. Of. Cards

      9 hours ago

      A salary floor will make the small market teams spend. Sure they might take on bad salary in years where they are rebuilding like teams in the NBA do. But they will spend and that’s nothing but a good thing.

      5
      Reply
      • Skeptical

        8 hours ago

        “Nothing but a good thing”? Really? It isn’t as if teams spend more, more talent suddenly becomes available. If teams are forced to spend in a market with limited free agents, it only drives up the price of those free agents which the wealthiest teams can afford. Forcing teams to spend on free agents without a salary cap increases the price of free agents and does nothing, absolutely nothing, for the majority of players. Manfred may be ruining baseball, but he is right about the players association historically disproportionately focusing on the elite free agents.

        1
        Reply
        • King. Of. Cards

          8 hours ago

          You need a cap and a floor. Who said otherwise?

          1
          Reply
        • Darthyen

          8 hours ago

          But it still falls on the owners (big market or small) to decide whether or not to spend on said free agents. Each team only has 26 spots so if the wealthiest teams drive up the price of Soto to 700 mil+ then they are stuck with that. Do the Mets win the World Series this year? What if they don’t? Was it a waste? they are stuck with it either way.

          The other side to this is maybe a team like Pittsburgh should spend and sign an Ohtani, Think of the money they would make from having him. He then becomes an investment so maybe more teams should look at the bigger picture and stop making excuses for not spending. Look at Toronto who cried poor for years and now they spend like the big boys. they fill their stadium regularly and don’t even win…….but they are making money.

          Reply
        • websoulsurfer

          3 hours ago

          I agree that $700 million seems like a large sum of money, but that brings up a salient question. Do they have to win in Queens this season or at all to recoup their investment in Soto?

          Arte Moreno has said that signing Trout to that huge extension has paid dividends in terms of tickets sold. As Moreno put it, Trout puts “people in the seats” regardless of whether the team wins or not. Won’t Soto sell tickets and increase TV ratings?

          Reply
    • reflect

      9 hours ago

      Agreed. I have been an out-of-market Mets fan for a decade and I’ve given up on watching games. There are two teams where I live (Florida) which means twice as many blackouts. Plus one of those teams share a division so there are a lot of games. And then even more games are blacked out if they are on ESPN or something. So I would have to pay for both MLB.TV AND cable at over $100 per month, and then I STILL would not be guaranteed access to every Mets game.

      The system is insane. When there is a single reasonably priced place where I can sign up to watch games without arbitrary restrictions then I will gladly sign up.

      4
      Reply
      • King. Of. Cards

        9 hours ago

        What on earth are you talking about? You can get the MLB package and watch all the games. Its free with t mobile phone service has been for at least 5 years now. Free.

        Reply
        • benhen77

          9 hours ago

          Local RSN deals can still create blackouts for in-market games.

          2
          Reply
        • Acoss1331

          8 hours ago

          I do have T-Mobile and get the MLB package for free, but Cubs and White Sox games get blacked out for me, and that is unacceptable. I’m glad I don’t pay for MLB.tv or else I’d really be upset at this. There are people that do pay for the subscription and get blackouts, that’s very much anti-consumer.

          I do follow the Cubs alongside with the White Sox. They operate like a small market team because of Jerry Reinsdorf but that’s another issue. See, I don’t see Jerry and other small market owners doing a floor, especially when they’ve shown an extreme reluctance to spend at all, even to give extensions to proven home-grown players. I’m sorry, but I don’t trust billionaires, they’ve shown to be the biggest cry babies…

          1
          Reply
        • King. Of. Cards

          8 hours ago

          If you live in the blackout area then you have to get cable or whatever the Cubs do with their own network. I was responding to the other guy he isn’t getting blacked out he just isn’t trying hard enough to figure it out.

          A floor is needed. Its needed more than the cap is needed.

          Reply
        • CC Ryder

          7 hours ago

          Not being able to watch the White Sox is a bad thing?

          Reply
      • Lloyd Emerson

        6 hours ago

        I don’t pay for streaming services, or cable, or MLBTV, and I can watch every game every day for free (other than my standard internet subscription) through the wonder of the world wide web.

        Reply
    • Buck Bumble

      9 hours ago

      Buck Bumble’s league sources are telling me the cap and floor figures the league is pushing for are only about $190M and $110M respectively. No way the union will agree to that!

      There are legitimate reasons why they want a cap/floor and full revenue sharing — the league office is jealous of the NFL’s business model, growth, and parity over the past 35 years. But the problem with baseball’s growth is not a lack of competitive parity, it’s that the NFL’s on-field product is slop that greatly appeals to the lowest common denominator! The league has realized this to an extent, which is why they keep embracing gimmicks like the extra inning runner to manufacture contrived excitement in the late innings

      Fire Manfred and Clark and make 90s video game icon Buck Bumble the CEO of Baseball!

      4
      Reply
      • Pads Fans

        8 hours ago

        MLB has had greater parity than the NFL has had with both a greater percentage of different teams in the playoffs and a greater percentage of different teams winning the championship.

        In the NFL 100% of TV money is controlled by the league and evenly distributed to the teams. All other revenue other than stadium related earnings outside of NFL games has 100% revenue sharing. do you see the Yankees or Dodgers agreeing to that?

        The NFL has completely open books with their union so that players know exactly how much is being made by the team and the owner and guarantees that players get 50% of that revenue. Do you see MLB team owners agreeing to that?

        5
        Reply
        • Buck Bumble

          8 hours ago

          Doesn’t matter if the Yankees or Dodgers agree to centralize TV revenue, Manfred only needs approval from 23 owners (newsflash kid: they already have the votes). The small market owners are amenable to opening their books because it’ll show they’re actually losing money with the current revenue model

          I’m just relaying what someone high up in the league office that I know told me. What he told me has been corroborated by later reporting. All of your concerns with “do you think [x] will agree to that” are irrelevant because they were voted on and agreed upon before the season started

          3
          Reply
        • NyyfaninLAA land

          7 hours ago

          You’re assuming that won’t result in lawsuits from the high revenue clubs, who would likely demand at least payouts for the hit they would take to franchise values. Always find it funny that the revenue sharing proponents don’t mention the resulting shift in franchise valuation that teams are supposed to just accept?

          2
          Reply
        • Pads Fans

          7 hours ago

          Newsflash, if they had the votes it would have happened during the last CBA negotiations when the MLBPA actually offered a cap with a floor if the owners opened their books and instituted 100% revenue sharing.

          1
          Reply
        • Pads Fans

          7 hours ago

          Which is the reason that large market teams will never agree to it and many small market teams where the owners are raking in large profits every season under the current system will not either.

          1
          Reply
        • websoulsurfer

          2 hours ago

          Buck = Muted. Liars and trolls have no place in any discussion.

          Reply
        • foppert3

          40 mins ago

          Yeah. Seems obvious they have more than 8 owners who aren’t compromising on getting more payroll parity. So many fans started this year with their team having no hope. It’s no surprise.
          Manfred flagged a lockout ages ago. He knows where the votes are at.

          Reply
        • foppert3

          40 mins ago

          @buck

          Reply
        • foppert3

          8 mins ago

          Ha ha. Websoulsearcher muting him ? Really, Pads Fan ?
          You have got the multiple account dance working today !

          Reply
    • Rsox

      6 hours ago

      The floor makes teams spend, which in todays game no team should have less than a $150 million dollar payroll. I don’t see a cap being useful in MLB but a floor would keep the penny pinching, welfare recipient owners honest

      1
      Reply
  3. tj13

    9 hours ago

    Rob Manfred should forever be remembered as a spineless weasel. ALL these problems are management driven. If 72% of the money goes to 10% of the players that statistic makes this ALL on the teams handing all that money to a few players. How much money could have been reallocated to other players had they not given $1.5 BILLION to two players. Rob, get your owners under control before they run the league into the ground. BTW pace of play rules have nothing to do with money for players. According to you they’re now working harder for less money AND you’re going to lock them out. What a creep.

    13
    Reply
    • YaySports

      8 hours ago

      Hence a cap along with a floor to force spending….. Lot of ranting to still ignore the obvious answer right in front of you lol

      1
      Reply
      • Baseballisthebest

        8 hours ago

        A cap and floor cant happen without 100% revenue sharing. The big-market teams like the Yankees and Dodgers will never agree to that.

        4
        Reply
        • BlueSkies_LA

          4 hours ago

          With 100% revenue sharing no cap or floor would be needed.

          Reply
        • websoulsurfer

          3 hours ago

          BlueSkies, you would think that would be the case, but in the other 4 major sports in the US they had to institute both along with a guaranteed percentage going to the players in salaries and benefits.

          I guess there are always Nuttings and Fishers.

          Reply
        • BlueSkies_LA

          2 hours ago

          Combine it with rewarding the successful with higher rather than lower draft picks and more postseason revenue for the teams that qualify. Put the financial incentives in the right places and the results will follow.

          But this is all pie in the sky. MLB already has the financial system it wants.

          1
          Reply
        • YaySports

          48 mins ago

          Lmao, it’s not pie in the sky it’s delusional. If

          Reply
        • BlueSkies_LA

          41 mins ago

          I think you forgot to say something.

          Reply
      • NYCityRiddler

        6 hours ago

        I’m trying to stay away from the hard stuff…at least until the Holiday weekend, please, no more comrade manfred articles. Ahahahahahahaha!

        Reply
  4. baseballfan90

    9 hours ago

    Baseball really needs to have a hard salary cap and floor. Hope it comes to fruition in the next CBA.

    4
    Reply
    • For Love of the Game

      9 hours ago

      I’m pro free enterprise, which generally means pro-business and anti-union. However, Manfred failed to make a case for a salary cap. That 47% of revenue now goes to player salaries vs. 63% in 2002 suggests players may be underpaid collectively, not overpaid. They are, in fact, the product. A product with a 53% gross margin is spectacular (sorry for oversimplifying this a bit).

      Manfred should shut up, let the salary process move along, and focus on non-compensation problems so we can avoid a 2027 strike.

      6
      Reply
      • BlueSkies_LA

        4 hours ago

        Unions are the labor component of free enterprise, bud.

        1
        Reply
    • darkknight920

      8 hours ago

      The players would sacrifice the season(s) before they agree to a salary cap. Not saying they are right or wrong, but a salary cap is the one thing they would go to thermo-nuclear war over.

      3
      Reply
      • Skeptical

        8 hours ago

        Don’t be so sure about players willing to lose a season. The average major league career is 5.6 years. One in five position players last one season or less. If you’re good enough to make it, but not a star, losing one year of salary is huge, especially at the league minimum.

        2
        Reply
        • Pads Fans

          7 hours ago

          The MLBPA has put together a fund to cover approximately 25% of the total earnings per season of the players if another lockout happens. They have been planning for this since Bruce Meyer took over as lead negotiator for the union in 2019. From what I understand, they also took out insurance to cover lost income if the lockout goes beyond 2 months. The players that are to be paid first, are the younger and lower paid players and both Clark and Meyer have spoken about plans to take care of those players in need in the eventuality of a lockout by the owners. The union is prepared.

          2
          Reply
        • websoulsurfer

          1 hour ago

          Pads, that fund was at over $1 billion going into the last CBA negotiations. I would venture a guess that it has grown substantially since then. 5 years of investing that $1 billion would yield a much larger pot of money even if the players did not contribute more to it in the interim.

          Reply
    • YaySports

      8 hours ago

      They do. Ignore the union stooges that come out of the woodwork on this issue.

      Reply
      • Baseballisthebest

        8 hours ago

        YaySports is the burner account for MLB. Got it.

        2
        Reply
        • Pads Fans

          7 hours ago

          He has been around under many names over the years. He has me muted, so its not a new account, just a new moniker.

          Reply
        • YaySports

          40 mins ago

          What in the world are you talking about? lol. Tinfoil hat much?

          Reply
        • YaySports

          33 mins ago

          But yes they do need a cap and a floor. The players union as a whole isn’t bad but the leadership is pretty narrowly focused on a small group of players.

          Manfred and the owners aren’t the “good guys” by any means here but they have a point. The top 1% reaps 90% of the rewards they prioritize. He’s bad in his own way but it’s smart for Manfred to appeal to the majority of the league that’s not actually being represented. A cap and floor won’t help the next 700 million dollar deal but it’ll force the bad teams to spend significantly more which will help everybody else.

          1
          Reply
  5. Teamspirit

    9 hours ago

    Manfred is paid to do the owners bidding. That was abundantly clear during the last lockout. I don’t expect him to have gained any integrity over the years.

    12
    Reply
  6. Lou Sassoll

    9 hours ago

    Grown men playing a game and making more money than 99.9% of the population want more money so the fans have to pay more to see them play. When will it end?

    5
    Reply
    • pt57

      9 hours ago

      The owners aren’t going to give you a break on tickets just because payroll expenses go down. They‘ll price tickets to maximize profit.

      16
      Reply
      • Lou Sassoll

        9 hours ago

        That is true and I agree. The game has just skewed so far to the owners and players and less towards value for fans.

        1
        Reply
        • WadeBoggsWildRide

          7 hours ago

          What are average MLB tickets going for? How much is an NFL or NBA ticket. I am speaking without any knowledge but I would bet a baseball game is cheaper than either football or basketball.

          The only way for fans to lower prices is by boycotting the product. Unless an alternative product is introduced at a lower price.

          4
          Reply
    • Sabermetric Acolyte

      8 hours ago

      Owners want to pay their workers less money because they want to keep more for themselves?

      Not agreeing or disagreeing with you or striving to start up an old fight. But it’s really the same old call: Millionaires v. Billionaires. and the rest of us don’t care.

      Reply
  7. tj13

    9 hours ago

    The actual audacity to compare free agency where multiple millions of dollars exchange hands to the Bataan Death March is mind numbing. Get a freaking grip, man. Absolutely estranged from reality.

    16
    Reply
    • YankeesBleacherCreature

      9 hours ago

      Yes, what an asinine and disrespectful analogy from Manfred.

      13
      Reply
    • jdgoat

      9 hours ago

      That’s such a bad line. And there’s no way he just came up with that on the spot either lol

      4
      Reply
      • crise

        8 hours ago

        The fact that’s it’s such a bad line indicates that it really was made up on the spot. It’s both something I would say and also almost immediately think was a mistake.

        1
        Reply
    • Rsox

      6 hours ago

      Maybe Manfred is auditioning for a spot on “The View”…

      1
      Reply
    • ghostofmookiebetts

      5 hours ago

      If he said that in front of a WWII vet they’d knock his teeth out. Heck, I’d knock his teeth out for my grandfather.

      1
      Reply
  8. deuceball

    9 hours ago

    MLB has to be the #1 reason for the downfall of union work. Both sides see the petty arguing and constant fighting and say nope.

    Reply
    • WadeBoggsWildRide

      7 hours ago

      The downfall of union work is off shoring union jobs or importing non union (slave) labor. Unions generally only speed up this process by demanding more compensation than is profitable for business and (more recently) promoting the importation of non union labor.

      Reply
  9. hoof hearted

    9 hours ago

    1ST 30 day of free agency-teams that sign a qualifing FA dont’t lose a comp pick. Low spending teams that spend also get small $ of pool money(ex: the A’s last year spent big $).
    -mlpa should get rid of clark!

    1
    Reply
    • Pads Fans

      8 hours ago

      Why?

      3
      Reply
  10. Mikenmn

    9 hours ago

    The reason why younger players get paid less, on average, than older ones is that a type of salary cap already exists–it’s called Major League Minimums. Then toss in “years of team control” and “service time manipulation” and most of these guys can’t really cash in before they are around 30. I wouldn’t called the MLBPA skilled, but when MLB is really ready to negotiate on % of revenues and a genuine piece of them (not a piece of a piece) really ready to require revenue sharing recipients to spend, really ready to crack down on tanking…then, let the players earn what they can.

    5
    Reply
    • crise

      8 hours ago

      Instead of a fixed number, maybe make the MLB minimum based on last year’s revenue. That way the kids get a COLA-like raise and the floor floats with the league’s fortunes. Eg last year the revenue was $x.xx billion and There were y number of league minimum salary days paid out, so here’s the rate for next year. (That way they can’t just promote a herd of new guys for a week or two to inflate the number of names on the list,)

      Reply
      • Baseballisthebest

        8 hours ago

        Crise, that would work if 100% of a team’s revenue ran through MLB HQ, where there was a 100% revenue sharing, and where the union had complete access to the league and individual team finances.

        2
        Reply
  11. smaltzie

    9 hours ago

    Games have become unaffordable for most families. Stadiums are financed by the public. The first billion $$$ contract is probably less than 10 years away. Small market teams are non-competitive. All of this seems unsustainable.

    4
    Reply
    • Pads Fans

      8 hours ago

      San Diego, Tampa, Milwaukee, and Cleveland are small markets. They are all very competitive.

      MLB revenue as a whole keeps rising every year. Manfred said so himself in the talk referenced by this article.

      Its all VERY sustainable.

      6
      Reply
      • crise

        8 hours ago

        Meh, the RSN money still needs to be figured out. You can say things are fair, but when a lot of teams see their broadcast revenue drop from $50m to $5-10m while others still have their multi-billion dollar deals it’s not going to continue forever.

        Reply
        • websoulsurfer

          2 hours ago

          The RSN money does need to be figured out, but MLB literally invented streaming of live sporting events and for years did that for the NFL and NHL. They are handling the broadcasts for multiple teams including the Padres and those teams have seen no drop in TV related revenue and are still available on all the same TV outlets they were before. Pretty sure they can figure this stuff out.

          Reply
    • ham77

      7 hours ago

      Yes, games are expensive but it could be worse. You never hear complaints about how much it costs to take a family to an NFL game. You’d have to take out a second mortgage. But it’s the NFL, so it’s cool.

      3
      Reply
      • Baseballisthebest

        7 hours ago

        My 4 seats to Patriots games I paid a seat license plus $2800 per seat for the year and I don’t have premium seats.

        Reply
        • Pads Fans

          7 hours ago

          $280 per game per seat? How much was the seat license? How much do they pay in premium seats?

          Reply
      • Rsox

        6 hours ago

        I feel like planning a trip to an NFL game is like planning a trip to Disneyland, you know it’s going to be expensive but it’s like a once a year thing. A sport that plays on a daily basis for half the year is more like planning a trip to the movies…

        2
        Reply
  12. Joel from NY

    9 hours ago

    “…a frenetic few days at the beginning of their offseasons that make for an exhilarating time for fans.” I’m an avid baseball fan, but ahem, I get my “exhilaration” by other means. Maybe “entertaining” would be more accurate?

    3
    Reply
  13. Roguesaw2

    9 hours ago

    I wouldn’t be publicly telling my work force they’ve left billions on the table. Why wouldn’t you assume they’d hunker down and try to recoup that?

    5
    Reply
    • Pads Fans

      8 hours ago

      Manfred doesn’t realize he just gave the union ammunition against the owners in CBA negotiations.

      4
      Reply
      • foppert3

        2 hours ago

        lol. Oh dear. The baseball fan.
        Pretty sure Manfred is across his strategy and the possible ramifications.

        Reply
    • danm-6

      8 hours ago

      He’s trying to split the players against EACH OTHER. He’s trying to divide the union, which would ultimately work in management’s favor.

      2
      Reply
      • YankeesBleacherCreature

        8 hours ago

        The divide he’s trying to make is for the 3-5 year players going through arbitration and a possible bigger bonus pool for pre-arb guys. If the owners can have it their way, those players would make more while free agent contracts receive a cap limiting their potential earnings.

        1
        Reply
        • Pads Fans

          7 hours ago

          Easy fix if the owners agree to it. Eliminate service time manipulation. A day in the majors = 1 year of service time. Then in 4 years players hit free agency. Now younger players are getting paid more. Problem solved. Next!

          3
          Reply
  14. cbraves

    9 hours ago

    This is going to be the nail in the coffin for MLB.

    Reply
    • YankeesBleacherCreature

      8 hours ago

      That’s been said prior to every CBA dispute. Neither partues want to lose money in a possible strike. Baseball will once again resume in 2027.

      3
      Reply
  15. ohyeadam

    9 hours ago

    The owners are split, big/tiny teams like it the way it is while the middle ones are fed up not making money or being competitive

    1
    Reply
    • crise

      8 hours ago

      This.

      You can fix the floor by requiring any team that wants to receive revenue sharing to spend a certain amount. That’s the de facto floor that everyone will hit since so much of the money is pooled these days.

      You might be able to impose a ceiling by piling on even more punitive luxury taxes, but high=revenue teams will continue to pay them if they can gain a substantial edge by doing so.

      The basics of revenue definition and sharing will need to be handled for this to move ahead in a healthy manner. In 1994 big market owners caved and shared a lot more money then they ever had before and it led to an extended period of growth and parity in the game. It’ll take an even bigger act of faith on their part this time around.

      1
      Reply
  16. jdgoat

    9 hours ago

    You just have to look at NHL free agency which opened yesterday (or any year really) to see that the unions fears of players getting squeezed and having to accept lesser deals is false. It’s stupid money that gets thrown around every year which rarely turns out good long term. Granted NHL players make less, but it’d still be the same at a larger scale for MLB players.

    1
    Reply
    • Baseballisthebest

      8 hours ago

      The NHL has a different playing field so to speak.

      #1 – there is 100% revenue sharing. All the teams make the same amount of money.

      #2 – the finances of the league and the teams is openly shared with the union. A third party accounting firm does the reporting.

      #3 – the players are guaranteed 49-51% of total revenue of the sport.

      None of that is present in MLB where you have teams like the Yankees and Dodgers with 3 times the revenue of teams like the Rays and Brewers.

      Its a systemic issue that has to start with honesty from the team owners. We know exactly how much the players make in MLB and in all other major sports in North America we also know exactly how much the owners make. Revealing that information for every individual team and for jointly owned MLB corporations is the first step that has to happen.

      2
      Reply
  17. sad tormented neglected mariners fan

    9 hours ago

    I believe baseball needs a Roger goodell type of commissioner that isnt beholden to the owners or the players and isn’t afraid to change in order to grow the game

    Manfred is beholden to the owners and won’t solve the payroll problem, Adam silver is beholden to the players and lets them get super max extensions that cripple their teams, I don’t know what Gary Bettman does but the NHL hasn’t grown a ton

    Reply
  18. Luke Strong

    9 hours ago

    The current system is garbage- especially for the fans. Teams signing guys who are soon to become aging veterans to long deals that go on for years past their prime is just ridiculous and those deals often kill the franchise for years and years, long after the GM who made the bad contract is gone.

    Baseball cannot continue to allow all the top talent to wind up consolidated in a few markets, where those teams are outspending others by massive disparities.

    1
    Reply
    • ChuckyNJ

      7 hours ago

      Then you’ll love the Premier League where all the brand-name teams are always linked with the most in-demand players.

      Reply
  19. Pads Fans

    9 hours ago

    Of the money paid to employees of MLB itself, not individual teams, Manfred’s $25 million in salary ($17.5 million) and bonuses earned in 2021 as reported by Jeff Passan of ESPN in 2022 is roughly 50% of total MLB payroll according to reporting from Evan Drellich of the Athletic/New York Times in 2023.

    We don’t know exactly how much Manfred is being paid in his current 4 year contract extension that runs through January 25, 2029. It could be substantially more or exactly the same.

    5
    Reply
    • WadeBoggsWildRide

      7 hours ago

      Sounds like a non-profit!

      Reply
  20. Chuck from Uniontown

    9 hours ago

    Maybe they can get a salary cap/floor in place if they tie it to % of Revenue to make sure players always get a fair amount.

    The floor needs to be high though.

    3
    Reply
  21. ghostofmookiebetts

    9 hours ago

    Comparing an entertainment industry event with the brutal Bataan Death March is both disgusting and disrespectful.

    4
    Reply
  22. Pads Fans

    9 hours ago

    I love how Manfred says that MLB was spending 63% of revenue on players when in actuality player salaries were 37% of the revenue he himself reported MLB had earned the year he referenced. It has barely budged since then but went upward in this last CBA.

    While Manfred is trying to pit the younger players against the older ones, it is the teams and Manfred in particular that have fought to keep team control of the players for a longer period. In the last CBA the MLBPA gained huge amounts of money for younger players. The most in the history of the game.

    In the last two CBA negotiations the players offered a hard cap if the owners opened their books to the MLBPA and instituted a minimum payroll. The owners refused. The owners of MLB teams do not want you to know what they are making.

    Want to know how profitable MLB teams are? Look at the Braves and Blue Jays who have to report it as part of their shareholders report because they are owned by a publicly traded corporation. Not including revenue and costs associated with The Battery, the Braves had $570 million in revenue in 2023. To spend 50% on payroll they would have needed to have a CBT payroll which includes 40 man roster and benefits of $285 million. They were at $248 million.

    It is seriously hard to find a time when Manfred has said something that was 100% truth. In his current comments its hard to find any truth.

    9
    Reply
    • Acoss1331

      8 hours ago

      We’re going to get more shenanigans from MLB in the next CBA. A lockout is all but guaranteed.

      MLB has another problem they keep ignoring. Millennials and Gen Z don’t watch baseball. Baseball has become an old people sport. They need to course correct, else they’re going to keep losing potential new fans.

      5
      Reply
      • ChuckyNJ

        7 hours ago

        You’re confusing baseball with traditional (broadcast/cable) TV, which is collapsing more quickly than many expected.

        1
        Reply
    • WadeBoggsWildRide

      7 hours ago

      But the Pirates lose money! /s

      2
      Reply
  23. hiflew

    9 hours ago

    I honestly do not care if they lockout during the offseason. I will remain a fan as long as no actual games are impacted. I walked away from the game in 1994 for 4 years and that was when I was still young and idealistic. If it happens again, this cynical old man will not be fooled again.

    Reply
  24. bryce1344

    8 hours ago

    So the inequality in how wealth is distributed is ok for the top 1% he represents with the owners but is unfair for the players?

    2
    Reply
    • Baseballisthebest

      7 hours ago

      The MLB owners would not give up their years of team control over players in order to change how income is distributed to players. The MLBPA had to fight to get the gains they made for young players in the current CBA including sacrificing the much higher CBT thresholds the union had asked for originally in order to get the increase in minimums, bonuses for pre-arbitration players, and PPI incentives for teams to call up prospects and stop service time manipulation.

      3
      Reply
  25. darkknight920

    8 hours ago

    I find it interesting that college sports via the NIL and transfer portal have the unfettered free agency that professional sports league unions dream about.

    2
    Reply
    • WadeBoggsWildRide

      7 hours ago

      Are college players making the same kind of money as MLB or even MiLB? Serious question. If so colleges could start competing directly with “professional” leagues for talent. Then just stop requiring players even attend school. I never watched college sports because I don’t like slave labor. Those schools all receive government funding but somehow made more money than pro sports teams simply because pro sports teams were using them as a defacto minor leagues, which those teams also did not have to finance.

      1
      Reply
  26. Jubilation

    8 hours ago

    It is looking like MLBPA bringing the minor Leaguers into the union was a smart idea. A salary cap only benefits the owners.

    Manfred says nothing about the cheap ownership currently manning the helms of Oakland, Miami, Pittsburgh, White Sox.

    It looks like the owners are going to try and break the union again.

    5
    Reply
  27. yanks2323

    8 hours ago

    Wish Manfredo would enforce the bottom teams to spend their luxury tax monies on payroll!

    Reply
  28. martras

    8 hours ago

    Owners care about the product because that’s where all the money comes from. The MLBPA does not care about the product.

    I don’t know as I like Manfred trying to break the union up the way he’s going about it, but I also wish the union actually cared about the sport of baseball and the viability of the industry a little.

    1
    Reply
  29. Jason Hanselman

    8 hours ago

    Teams already retain virtually all players for a minimum of seven years, and it can extend further via injury or roster machinations. So codify the seven years and in return eliminate partial seasons of service. If you serve a day that counts as a year and one of your seven. Three league min, four escalating arb. Limiting instances where player service time is clearly being manipulated is a big improvement for players and if they are going to be up at any point it behooves teams to make that date sooner and to have more patience upon promotion. Players give very little compared to status quo.

    2
    Reply
  30. Sabermetric Acolyte

    8 hours ago

    Even if there is a salary cap we’ve already seen the way around it, deferred payments.

    I have no idea how it could be done but if MLBPA could so how take advantage of that then it would become a moot point.

    Reply
  31. norcalblue

    8 hours ago

    I will try this again, attempting to be a little more politically, correct. Hopefully this will get by the minister of culture on this site.

    Manfred is slime. Clark is incompetent and, it appears, self-dealing to the point of corrupt.

    My sense is that Manfred and the owners are doing Clark a favor with this tactic and it will backfire. The players will see through Manfred’s duplicity. Players know who Manfred works for and where his loyalty rests.

    Unlike the ignorant sheep in this country who cannot see that their corrupt leader has just sold them down the river with a fiscal policy bill that benefits elites; players see Manfred for the duplicitous tool that he is.

    6
    Reply
    • ghostofmookiebetts

      5 hours ago

      norcal- are you referring to the biggest transfer of wealth in history?

      Reply
  32. Bobby smac9

    8 hours ago

    MLB is a cash cow. How do we milk more from the cow? By listening and embracing Manfred and the greed that he expounds.

    1
    Reply
  33. Thornton Mellon

    8 hours ago

    First of all, no owner is losing money and none have less than a healthy profit. Otherwise, team valuations wouldn’t be spiraling upward along with a large line of eager owners-to-be whenever a team is up for sale. There are only more or less miserly owners. Rich people are good at making money. There would be zero rich people owning teams if they weren’t making profits hand over fist.

    The fact that their books aren’t ever open supports this. If any were losing money you would see the most detailed open books in the history of accounting.

    Parity in MLB is an illusion. Yes, some different WS winners year to year, but you have teams that will spend their way to sustained success versus those who feel a complete tear down to the studs and limited bursts of spending for a few years of competition before repeating. There are 30 teams in MLB, there are 20 teams going through different parts of their cycles. But do you see the Yankees, Dodgers, and Red Sox cycling down? No, if they have a bad year, they spend $200 million and recover instantly. Ask the A’s, White Sox, Orioles, Royals, Rockies, Marlins, etc. if they ever have down years. This definition of parity does not equal a level playing field.

    There needs to be a cap and floor. The players can have a greater share of the revenue overall. No hiding work-arounds in deferred salaries.

    NFL can be the model in some ways, but they had the opposite problem – hot rookie QB’s skewing the salaries. Like Jamarcus Russell landing a giant contract before taking his first snap and then being terrible. NFL now has a rookie salary scale that is still much more lucrative compared to MLB where often star rookies and early career players under $1-2M per year for several years then older mediocre players at $10M, $15M a year.

    But with Manfred’s style of posturing, I wouldn’t be too eager to put money on a 2027 season that is likely not to be played.

    5
    Reply
  34. its_happening

    7 hours ago

    If the players don’t fight for the game and opt to fight for more money, the fans will lose. This is not a choose owners vs players scenario; fans cannot get sucked into that narrative.

    Is the game better today than it was 10 years ago? 20 years ago? 30 years ago? What would make the game better? The changes made during the Manfred era have been drastic, almost radical, with some good changes and some bad. Would say more bad than good. If MLBPA fights for better change for a better game, the money will come with it.

    1
    Reply
  35. Baseballisthebest

    7 hours ago

    This is an interesting read on the fact that the stadium probably won’t be built in Las Vegas.

    Debacle in the desert: will the Athletics’ $1.75bn stadium on the Vegas Strip ever be built? | Athletics | The Guardian share.google/mCLglefq87rBH7brN

    5
    Reply
    • Pads Fans

      7 hours ago

      Wow! Rented machinery. Fisher hasn’t spent enough money to get the public funds with the deadline fast approaching. cost of the ballpark at $2 billion today and rising. Thanks for sharing that article.

      2
      Reply
  36. JeffyM

    7 hours ago

    If a salary cap is going to be inevitable, I think the answer for the players has to not only be a salary floor, but also an earlier path to free agency that is free of service time manipulation. Owners have shown they are no longer willing to pay players reaching free agency in their 30’s a premium, so the players need to get to free agency in their 20’s.

    Get players on an entry-level/rookie contract starting with their first season after being drafted. It can be a two-way deal, but service time starts immediately and eliminates holding players down to get an extra year or two. Maybe it’s a 7 year deal for players drafted while under 20 and a 5 year deal for those drafted after 20?

    Layer in restricted free agency instead of arbitration.

    1
    Reply
    • Old York

      7 hours ago

      @JeffyM

      Get rid of long-term contracts and go with what Bauer suggested as being 1-year contracts. Then the players get paid based on their performance in their peak years. If teams don’t want to pay up for prime years they can hire the 30s guys for peanuts.

      Reply
      • WadeBoggsWildRide

        6 hours ago

        If you got rid of long term contracts you would also have to get rid of team control entirely. It wouldn’t be cost effective for teams to develop players.

        1
        Reply
        • Old York

          6 hours ago

          @WadeBoggsWildRide

          I don’t think they’re developing them so much as just pushing them along. A lot of teams maintain the philosophy that they can burn the players and then move onto the next one.

          Reply
        • WadeBoggsWildRide

          6 hours ago

          Having the minors allows MLB greater control over the quality of product they put on the field. Also why they have a legal monopoly. Without some form of team control they would have to sign guys out of high school or college directly to the majors or for limited minors stints. I think it would reduce the quality of play. I am however pretty libertarian and don’t like the fact that they have a monopoly, that the union even exists, and that any form of team control exists.

          Reply
        • Old York

          6 hours ago

          @WadeBoggsWildRide

          I’d say they’re probably developing a small handful of kids who have the highest potential but most of the players are just minor league fodder to fill up the league. If they were actually developing all their players, you’d see a significant amount more talent than we see today, to the point that MLB would need to expand their league because we wouldn’t have enough teams for all the talent being developed.

          Reply
        • WadeBoggsWildRide

          6 hours ago

          I disagree. It behooves teams to develop talent to the utmost in house while they have cost control. Yes they have plenty of 40 man, AAAA, journeyman types but they act as “in case of emergency break glass” fillers to call up when a veteran is injured. This is also to keep the cost controlled youngsters they are trying to develop down in the minors longer in order not to “waste” control. I do wonder what the split is on a AAA team between “fillers” and true “potential talent”.

          1
          Reply
  37. 66TheNumberOfTheBest

    7 hours ago

    “Saying that there is something wrong with a few people getting all of the money while everyone else falls behind is unpatriotic, Pinko!!!”

    Reply
  38. CarolinaCubsandKush

    7 hours ago

    Billionaire owner class pitting the working class against each other. Where have I seen this before?…

    2
    Reply
    • Old York

      7 hours ago

      @CarolinaCubsandKush

      Billionaires are doing it to themselves. None of them need to pay up for any of those guys. Instead, they offer bloated contracts. If players don’t want to play in the MLB, they can go play in Japan or Korea.

      Reply
    • ghostofmookiebetts

      5 hours ago

      Carolina- somewhere big and beautiful I bet

      1
      Reply
  39. O'sSayCanYouSee

    5 hours ago

    No cap needed. Dilute the LA and NYC markets by putting expansion teams into those markets. Even if LA/NYC were chopped into 4ths, they would still be larger than almost all of the other markets.

    No cap. It doesn’t work (for fans or players…it works great for ownership).

    1
    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Please login to leave a reply.

Log in Register

    Top Stories

    Rangers Option Josh Jung

    Kevin Pillar Announces Retirement

    Braves Place Spencer Schwellenbach On IL With Elbow Fracture

    Braves Designate Alex Verdugo For Assignment

    Giants Exercise 2026 Option On Manager Bob Melvin

    Yordan Alvarez Shut Down Due To Setback With Hand Injury

    Astros Place Jeremy Peña On Injured List With Fractured Rib

    Tucker Barnhart To Retire

    Tyler Mahle To Be Sidelined Beyond Trade Deadline

    Reds Release Jeimer Candelario

    Dave Parker Passes Away

    Griffin Canning Diagnosed With Ruptured Achilles

    Pirates Reportedly Have Very Few Untouchable Players At Trade Deadline

    Griffin Canning Believed To Have Suffered Achilles Injury

    Mariners Looking For Corner Infield Bats; Ownership Willing To Bump Payroll

    Wander Franco Found Guilty Of Sexual Abuse

    Mariners Place Rowdy Tellez On Release Waivers

    Max Meyer To Undergo Season-Ending Hip Surgery

    Whit Merrifield Announces Retirement

    White Sox Sign Noah Syndergaard To Minor League Deal

    Recent

    Zach Pop Elects Free Agency

    MLB Announces 2025 All-Star Starting Hitters

    MLB Mailbag: Braves, Cubs, Sasaki, Angels, Volpe

    Diamondbacks Designate Kyle Nelson For Assignment

    Trade Deadline Outlook: Washington Nationals

    Astros Select Zack Short

    Rangers Option Josh Jung

    Kevin Pillar Announces Retirement

    Braves Place Spencer Schwellenbach On IL With Elbow Fracture

    Orioles Designate Matt Bowman For Assignment, Select Corbin Martin

    MLBTR Newsletter - Hot stove highlights in your inbox, five days a week

    Latest Rumors & News

    Latest Rumors & News

    • Sandy Alcantara Rumors
    • Luis Robert Rumors
    • Alex Bregman Rumors

     

    Trade Rumors App for iOS and Android App Store Google Play

    MLBTR Features

    MLBTR Features

    • Remove Ads, Support Our Writers
    • Front Office Originals
    • Front Office Fantasy Baseball
    • MLBTR Podcast
    • Trade Deadline Outlook Series
    • 2025-26 MLB Free Agent List
    • Contract Tracker
    • Transaction Tracker
    • Extension Tracker
    • Agency Database
    • MLBTR On Twitter
    • MLBTR On Facebook
    • Team Facebook Pages
    • How To Set Up Notifications For Breaking News
    • Hoops Rumors
    • Pro Football Rumors
    • Pro Hockey Rumors

    Rumors By Team

    • Angels Rumors
    • Astros Rumors
    • Athletics Rumors
    • Blue Jays Rumors
    • Braves Rumors
    • Brewers Rumors
    • Cardinals Rumors
    • Cubs Rumors
    • Diamondbacks Rumors
    • Dodgers Rumors
    • Giants Rumors
    • Guardians Rumors
    • Mariners Rumors
    • Marlins Rumors
    • Mets Rumors
    • Nationals Rumors
    • Orioles Rumors
    • Padres Rumors
    • Phillies Rumors
    • Pirates Rumors
    • Rangers Rumors
    • Rays Rumors
    • Red Sox Rumors
    • Reds Rumors
    • Rockies Rumors
    • Royals Rumors
    • Tigers Rumors
    • Twins Rumors
    • White Sox Rumors
    • Yankees Rumors

    Navigation

    • Sitemap
    • Archives
    • RSS/Twitter Feeds By Team

    MLBTR INFO

    • Advertise
    • About
    • Commenting Policy
    • Privacy Policy

    Connect

    • Contact Us
    • Twitter
    • Facebook
    • RSS Feed

    MLB Trade Rumors is not affiliated with Major League Baseball, MLB or MLB.com

    Do not Sell or Share My Personal Information

    hide arrows scroll to top

    Register

    Desktop Version | Switch To Mobile Version