Collusion not likely, but definitely possible

4 Comments

Following the 1985, 1986 and 1987 seasons, the owners colluded against
the players in order to short-circuit the competitive bidding process
for free agents. Arbitrators ruled that the owners violated the
collective bargaining agreement not one, not two, but three times, and
as result, they ended up agreeing to pay the players some $280 million
and many were instantly made free agents again. If you believe former
commissioner Fay Vincent, the 1990s expansion was designed to raise
money to pay the fines.

You’d think, then, that the owners wouldn’t do that again. Many agents, however, think otherwise:

As Michael Weiner prepares to take over from Donald Fehr as head of
the players’ association, several agents are pushing the union to file
a collusion grievance against teams over their behavior during the
free-agent market last winter.

“There’s a general level of suspicion in the air,” said Jeff Borris,
an agent whose clients include Barry Bonds, Brian Fuentes and Jason
Isringhausen . . . Halfway through the season, agents also are worried
about collusion because no major players eligible for free agency have
agreed to contract extensions.

“There are too many things that need to be explained,” said Seth
Levinson, who represented nearly a dozen free agents following the 2008
season. “In my experience, there are no coincidences in a monopoly.”

It would be easy to rail against the owners for going back to their old
tricks again, but such an accusation — if one ever formally comes —
had better be mindful of the state of the economy, which is bad, and
the state of smart baseball thinking, which has gone sharply away from
the idea of building through veteran free agents. Simply put, there are
many factors which explain the state of the free agent market that
don’t require the existence of a conspiracy.

At the same time, it could be too easy to take such reasoning too
far. Why? Because collusion in baseball is not just a thing of the
1980s. From the article:

As part of the latest collective bargaining agreement in 2006,
players and owners settled potential claims that management may have
conspired against free agents following the 2002 and 2003 seasons. The
settlement, made with no admission of guilt, called for a lump-sum $12
million payment from money already earmarked for players to settle
unfiled claims of collusive activity along with other pending
grievances.

Hard to say what happened in 2002 and 2003, but it’s worth noting that
owners tend to not want to simply part with $12 million for no reason.
Well, at least no reason that doesn’t involve the Royals and Jose
Guillen. Whatever the case, it’s possible something untoward was going
on back then, and because of it, it’s not prudent to simply dismiss
these latest allegations as agent-looniness or player greed, as many
will be inclined to do given the state of the economy.

The Braves are banning outside food. And they’re probably lying about why they’re doing it.

Leave a comment

Here’s a thing a lot of people don’t realize: there are a lot of ballparks that allow you to bring in outside food.

Not all of them, but a lot do. They don’t publicize it, obviously, because they want you to buy their expensive food, but if you go to the concessions policy page on most team’s websites, you can get the scoop. It often lists “soft-sided coolers” under “permitted items,” which is code for “yes, you can bring your own food in.” Some may specifically limit THAT to sealed plastic water bottles, but for the most part, if you can bring soft-sided coolers into the park, that means it’s OK to bring in grandma’s potato salad and a few sandwiches. They may check your coolers, of course, to make sure you’re not bringing in alcohol or whatever.

The Atlanta Braves have always allowed food into the ballpark. But thats going to change in shiny new Sun Trust Park. The AJC reports that the Braves have announced a new policy via which ticket holders will not be allowed to bring in outside food. Exceptions will be made for infant food and for special dietary restriction items.

Which, OK, it’s their park and their rules. If they want to cut out the PB&J for junior and force you to buy him a $9 “kids pack” — or if they want you to forego grandma’s potato salad to buy that pork chop sandwich we mentioned yesterday — that’s their choice. Everything else about the Braves new stadium has been about extracting money from fans, so why not the concessions policy too?

My beef with this is less about the policy. It’s about their stated reason for it:

The changes are a result of tighter security being put into place this season throughout the league, said the Braves spokesperson.

This, as the French say, is horses**t.

We know it is because not all teams are prohibiting outside food. If there are tighter security measures across the board, other teams are implementing them without the food restriction. Even the Yankees, who take security theater to extreme heights as it is, are still allowing fans to bring in their own food.

The Braves, I strongly suspect, are using these measures as an excuse to cut down on competition for their concessions. Which, like I said, go for it. Just be honest about what you’re doing and stop blaming “tightened security” for your cash grab.

Yadier Molina says Adam Jones “has to apologize to the Puerto Rican people”

Getty Images
13 Comments

After the U.S. won the World Baseball Classic on Wednesday night, Adam Jones told a reporter that he and his teammates were motivated in part by the fact that Puerto Rico already had championship t-shirts printed up and plans for a parade/celebration in Puerto Rico in place beforehand.

Which, OK, whatever you need to motivate you, Adam, but all of that seems complicated by the fact that (a) ALL teams playing for a championship have pre-printed gear, thus enabling them to be put on moments after the final out; and (b) Puerto Rico’s celebration plans were not contingent on winning or losing. In fact, they went ahead and had a parade/celebration even though they lost. The WBC was a big deal to them in ways it simply wasn’t to the U.S., so it makes sense.

Yadier Molina of Team Puerto Rico did not take kindly to Jones’ comments. He tells ESPN Deportes this:

“Adam Jones … is talking about things he doesn’t know about,” Molina told ESPN. “He really has to get informed because he shouldn’t have said those comments, let alone in public and mocking the way [preparations] were made . . . He has to apologize to the Puerto Rican people,” Molina said. “Obviously, you wanted to win; he didn’t know what this means to [our] people.”

Kind of a messy little controversy, eh?

My feeling about it is that Jones probably didn’t know the whole story about Puerto Rico’s plans and misinterpreted celebration for arrogance. I also suspect that most players motivate themselves in all manner of irrational ways like this, but we just don’t hear about it all that much. Jones can do whatever he wants to psych himself up, but it changes the equation a bit when you talk about it to the press. Perceived slights that an athlete uses internally can seem petty once exposed to the light of day.

Either way: Jones does not have a reputation for being insulting or disrespectful, so I seriously doubt that was his intent here. I also think that, while Molina has a right to be miffed, the “he must apologize to the Puerto Rican people” thing is laying it on a bit thick. Maybe Jones can just text Molina and some P.R. players and say he was sorry, followed by a “we’re all good, man” and this can end? That makes the most sense.

If not, well, the Orioles do play the Cardinals in an interleague series this summer, so maybe we’ll see some fireworks.