Is the DH coming to the NL?

TC in Mississippi

CCS Staff
Joined:
Oct 22, 2014
Posts:
5,305
Liked Posts:
1,816
Jerry Crasnick ‏@jcrasnick 16h16 hours ago
Rob Manfred: No DH in NL for "foreseeable future.'' Says "vast majority'' of NL clubs like status quo. http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/1...eseeable-change-designated-hitter-rule-coming

I'm not terribly surprised. I think the fact that Manfred entertained it a week ago and now seemed to shut it down guarantees it gets talked about in earnest in the CBA talks really for the first time since Selig took over. I still think it's inevitable and we might be surprised but it probably won't happen this time around. The players are going to win a major battle though and I don't think it will be eliminating the QO so expanded rosters, in some form, are probably coming.
 

Parade_Rain

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Aug 23, 2012
Posts:
9,995
Liked Posts:
3,624
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Illinois Fighting Illini
I'm not terribly surprised. I think the fact that Manfred entertained it a week ago and now seemed to shut it down guarantees it gets talked about in earnest in the CBA talks really for the first time since Selig took over. I still think it's inevitable and we might be surprised but it probably won't happen this time around. The players are going to win a major battle though and I don't think it will be eliminating the QO so expanded rosters, in some form, are probably coming.
I think the NL ownership told him in private to shut his piehole.
 

CSF77

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 16, 2013
Posts:
18,661
Liked Posts:
2,845
Location:
San Diego
I still believe it had to do with paying another starter. Few teams have that luxury to just add 10 mil+ For a guy that sits on pine except 4 times a day.
 

beckdawg

Well-known member
Joined:
Oct 31, 2012
Posts:
11,750
Liked Posts:
3,741
I'm not terribly surprised. I think the fact that Manfred entertained it a week ago and now seemed to shut it down guarantees it gets talked about in earnest in the CBA talks really for the first time since Selig took over. I still think it's inevitable and we might be surprised but it probably won't happen this time around. The players are going to win a major battle though and I don't think it will be eliminating the QO so expanded rosters, in some form, are probably coming.

I'm not even sure that's the players biggest gripe. Given how loud Boras has been about manipulating service times and given he's more or less an arm of the MLBPA by association I'd have to imagine that's at the top of their agenda. I'm guessing that near the top of the owners agenda is some form of international draft. I'm a bit iffy saying that because obviously the rich teams love the current set up but the Dodgers have made a sham of the current system this period. Players are never going to want a draft just because free market always means more money for them. However, they rather routinely sell out their young players for other gains.

I suppose you could argue that they would likewise cave on the service time stuff but I think it's enough of a weird issue that the two sides could more or less trade concessions for the international draft and some changes to the service time to allow Bryant like players to appear in the majors when they are actually ready. I'm not 100% what that solution is but surely they could come to some mutually beneficial agreement on both.

As for the QO, I can see them tweaking it some but you basically have to have it. What they probably will end up doing is messing a bit with the draft slots so that losing a draft pick isn't such a big deal. If you recall prior to the draft slot system they teams either lost a first and a second round pick for "type A" FAs or just a second round pick for "type B" FAs. Teams cared less because there was no cap on spending. Obviously the owners scrapping that is unlikely but if you pushed up the value of slots such that losing a first round pick didn't kill your draft the future MLBPA people getting drafted get more money and it likely solves some of the issues with the QO from signing FA standpoint.

Regardless, as this pertains to the DH if they don't do it in this CBA then you're talking some where between 7-10 years probably before the next time it's discussed. Ultimately I think it's always going to be something that gets talked about but unless there is some major reason to push for it I don't see anything happening on it.
 

Parade_Rain

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Aug 23, 2012
Posts:
9,995
Liked Posts:
3,624
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Illinois Fighting Illini
Here's the view from Maddon's perspective-

http://espn.go.com/blog/chicago/cub...bs-joe-maddon-dh-not-likely-coming-to-nl-soon

...
“I like NL rules,” he said via text on Monday evening. “Always have. Never been worried about pitcher hitting or not.”

Remember, Maddon spent his entire baseball career in the AL until 2015, but one year was enough for him to embrace the NL style. He likes the different aspects of the pitcher batting -- and that includes Jon Lester, who is 4 for 98 at the plate in his career.

“It permits different components of strategy that will be eradicated,” Maddon said. “There may be an edge depending on how a team manages those differences.”
...
“For me, much more interesting in the dugout,” Maddon said.
...
 

CSF77

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 16, 2013
Posts:
18,661
Liked Posts:
2,845
Location:
San Diego
That said I prefer having each league having it's own identity. Other sports there is no difference in each conference. Which why they are not classified as leagues.
 

Parade_Rain

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Aug 23, 2012
Posts:
9,995
Liked Posts:
3,624
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Illinois Fighting Illini
I still believe it had to do with paying another starter. Few teams have that luxury to just add 10 mil+ For a guy that sits on pine except 4 times a day.
Very possibly. When you look at the run differential between the NL/AL games, one has to wonder if .20 rpg is worth an extra $150 mil of payroll for the NL teams.
 

TC in Mississippi

CCS Staff
Joined:
Oct 22, 2014
Posts:
5,305
Liked Posts:
1,816
I'm not even sure that's the players biggest gripe. Given how loud Boras has been about manipulating service times and given he's more or less an arm of the MLBPA by association I'd have to imagine that's at the top of their agenda. I'm guessing that near the top of the owners agenda is some form of international draft. I'm a bit iffy saying that because obviously the rich teams love the current set up but the Dodgers have made a sham of the current system this period. Players are never going to want a draft just because free market always means more money for them. However, they rather routinely sell out their young players for other gains.

I suppose you could argue that they would likewise cave on the service time stuff but I think it's enough of a weird issue that the two sides could more or less trade concessions for the international draft and some changes to the service time to allow Bryant like players to appear in the majors when they are actually ready. I'm not 100% what that solution is but surely they could come to some mutually beneficial agreement on both.

As for the QO, I can see them tweaking it some but you basically have to have it. What they probably will end up doing is messing a bit with the draft slots so that losing a draft pick isn't such a big deal. If you recall prior to the draft slot system they teams either lost a first and a second round pick for "type A" FAs or just a second round pick for "type B" FAs. Teams cared less because there was no cap on spending. Obviously the owners scrapping that is unlikely but if you pushed up the value of slots such that losing a first round pick didn't kill your draft the future MLBPA people getting drafted get more money and it likely solves some of the issues with the QO from signing FA standpoint.

Regardless, as this pertains to the DH if they don't do it in this CBA then you're talking some where between 7-10 years probably before the next time it's discussed. Ultimately I think it's always going to be something that gets talked about but unless there is some major reason to push for it I don't see anything happening on it.

There is no question that service time will be on the agenda for the MLBA. Putting it on the table was what the Bryant grievance was all about. The problem is that there is no real solution to the issue. No matter where you set that bar teams will find a way to work around it. I expect tweaks that ultimately will mean nothing. I suspect in the end the union will not want to waste to much capital on it.

I think you're dead on as far as the international draft goes. It's coming one way or another. The real issue is that with the rules of the Japanese and Korean leagues it will never be a true international draft but will unfortunately curtail some earning power of players from Cuba, the Dominican Republic and Venezuela. It will be good for the owners, not so great for the players and iffy in terms of how good it will be for the game, but there's no way the CBA doesn't include it.

The QO isn't going anywhere. I'm not sure I agree that you have to have it but the owners will dig in hard, and ultimately it doesn't matter that much to the MLBPA. The top players get their money QO or no QO as witnessed by Greinke, Samardzija and even Upton in the end. It hurts guys like Dexter Fowler who's numbers aren't sexy but should warrant a bigger deal than he's going to get but guys like that aren't enough of difference makers on their own to justify giving up a pick and big money. Ultimately though the MLBPA is going to look out for the big money guys first and again isn't going to waste a ton of capital on incremental salary increases from lower impact players. They're far more likely to push for a higher luxury tax threshold which they will almost certainly get.

In the larger scheme of things the DH is much less important than any of those issues. If there was something the owners really didn't want they could use it as a chip offered to the union but the players want enough things that they likely don't need that chip. If the MLBPA really wanted to dig in on QO's I think you might see this come up but my gut tells me they aren't going to push that hard on that front. I guess you never know though.
 

CSF77

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 16, 2013
Posts:
18,661
Liked Posts:
2,845
Location:
San Diego
QO is all about power over the union. They will not give it up
 

brett05

867-5309
Joined:
Apr 28, 2009
Posts:
27,226
Liked Posts:
4,579
Location:
Hell
I still believe it had to do with paying another starter. Few teams have that luxury to just add 10 mil+ For a guy that sits on pine except 4 times a day.

Very possibly. When you look at the run differential between the NL/AL games, one has to wonder if .20 rpg is worth an extra $150 mil of payroll for the NL teams.
There would be no increase in payroll. Money would be dispersed differently as they do in the AL.
 

TC in Mississippi

CCS Staff
Joined:
Oct 22, 2014
Posts:
5,305
Liked Posts:
1,816
QO is all about power over the union. They will not give it up

Nope. That's what I said. The owners are going to dig in hard on it which is why I think the DH was put out there as another chip. The QO and the international draft are 1 and 1A for the owners.
 

TC in Mississippi

CCS Staff
Joined:
Oct 22, 2014
Posts:
5,305
Liked Posts:
1,816
There would be no increase in payroll. Money would be dispersed differently as they do in the AL.

Agreed but because of lengths of contracts and long term planning it would likely take 5 year or so for that dispersion to really work in the NL. In the short term it would add payroll. A phase in would make sense would confuse fans. When it happens it will be immediate.
 

brett05

867-5309
Joined:
Apr 28, 2009
Posts:
27,226
Liked Posts:
4,579
Location:
Hell
That said I prefer having each league having it's own identity. Other sports there is no difference in each conference. Which why they are not classified as leagues.

I think you are playing semantics with the words "conference" and "league"
 

Diehardfan

Well-known member
Joined:
Jun 10, 2010
Posts:
9,601
Liked Posts:
6,985
Location:
Western Burbs
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
I think you are playing semantics with the words "conference" and "league"

Agreed. If he's talking 50 some years ago, he'd have a point. First the ALCS & the NLCS changed things, then the playoffs, wild cards and then finally the inter-league play put the two "league" thing to bed. They're called two leagues in name only these days.
 

Diehardfan

Well-known member
Joined:
Jun 10, 2010
Posts:
9,601
Liked Posts:
6,985
Location:
Western Burbs
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
Just read in the Herald this morning that moving up to the top of MLB's "to do" list is fixing the strike zone....as in raising it. The Commish actually praised the work of the umpires in implementing last year's strike zone. So apparently, ankle high strikes are something that was there by design. The guy who thought that was a good move should be shot on sight.
 

Parade_Rain

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Aug 23, 2012
Posts:
9,995
Liked Posts:
3,624
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Illinois Fighting Illini
I think you are playing semantics with the words "conference" and "league"
Unlike these other weakling professional sports, the game of baseball is steeped in tradition. People who aren't true fans of the game are more than happy to gloss over important details.
 

ijustposthere

Message Board Hero
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '20
Joined:
Aug 20, 2012
Posts:
34,144
Liked Posts:
26,284
Location:
Any-Town, USA
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
  1. Michigan Wolverines
  2. Purdue Boilermakers
I think you are playing semantics with the words "conference" and "league"

I'd expect a comment like this from someone who generally watches a strategically inferior league.
 

Top