Peter Angelos

MLB kicks money to the Nationals to keep them from suing over the MASN deal


Jonah Keri has a great, in-depth story about the Orioles today. Specifically about their status as a team that rakes in money yet spends relatively little on payroll. He traces the arc of the team from the mid-90s to today, speaking with former Orioles officials and telling a really illuminating story about the team got to where it is. There’s a lot in there that we either didn’t know before or didn’t know quite as clearly.

There’s also a passage in the middle that discusses the Oriole’s TV partnership with the Nationals and the MASN regional sports network. Jonah explains it in detail, but the short version is that, while both the O’s and Nats get the same amount in rights fees from MASN, the Orioles own a much larger percentage of the network than the Nats do. The O’s reap huge profits — profits that are not subject to evenue-sharing — while the Nats get a relative pittance. Meanwhile, there’s a strong argument that the network’s subscription rates are undervalued, keeping even more money away from Washington.

At times there have been negotiations to change this arrangement and at times there have been threats of legal action by the Nationals to get a bigger piece of the pie. Keri reports, however, that there’s a good reason why no one has been sued yet:

For now, the MASN status quo remains. The Nationals aren’t completely helpless, though: According to a source close to the Washington franchise, MLB has sent the team an undisclosed sum every year to help bridge the gap, and to prevent the Lerners from taking matters to court, until the deal becomes more balanced.

That’s pretty astounding. It’s been pretty effective so far, sure, but it’s still pretty astounding. It’s also, one may assume, unsustainable. And in any case it is pretty telling of a system that is increasingly inequitable. If you own your network or struck your deal at just the right time, you’re flush. If not, you’re not. And if you’re flush you have a far greater ability to shield money from revenue sharing than the poor sisters are.

And that’s not very sustainable either.

Report: Yasiel Puig started a fight at a Miami nightclub

Yasiel Puig
1 Comment

When last we posted about Yasiel Puig it was to pass along a rumor that the best player on his team wants him off of it. If that was true — and if this report is true — then expect that sentiment to remain unchanged:

Obviously this report is vague and there has not been, say, a police report or other details to fill it in. Perhaps we’ll learn more, perhaps Puig was misbehaving perhaps he wasn’t.

As we wait for details, however, it’s probably worth reminding ourselves that Puig is coming off of a lost season in which he couldn’t stay healthy, so trading him for any sort of decent return at the moment isn’t super likely. Which leads us to some often overlooked but undeniable baseball wisdom: you can be a distraction if you’re effective and you can be ineffective if you’re a good guy. You really can’t be an ineffective distraction, however, and expect to hang around very long.

Are the Padres adding some yellow to their color scheme for 2016?

Tony Gwynn

We’ve written several times about how boring the Padres’ uniforms and color scheme is. And how that’s an even greater shame given how colorful they used to be. No, not all of their mustard and brown ensembles were great looking, but some were and at some point it’s better to miss boldly than to endure blandness.

Now comes a hint that the Padres may step a toe back into the world of bright colors. At least a little bit. A picture of a new Padres cap is making the rounds in which a new “sunshine yellow” color has been added to the blue and white:

This story from the Union-Tribune notes that the yellow also appears on the recently-unveiled 2016 All-Star Game logo, suggesting that the yellow in the cap could either be part of some  special All-Star-related gear or a new color to the normal Padres livery.

I still strongly advocate for the Padres to bring back the brown — and there are a multitude of design ideas which could do that in tasteful fashion — but for now any addition of some color would be a good thing.

Brett Lawrie “likely to be traded” by the A’s

Brett Lawrie

Oakland’s re-acquisition of infielder Jed Lowrie from Houston makes it “likely” that the A’s will now trade infielder Brett Lawrie, according to Susan Slusser of the San Francisco Chronicle.

Slusser says Lowrie’s arrival “all but ensures” both Lawrie and Danny Valencia are on the trading block, adding that Lawrie “is considered the better bet to be traded.”

Acquired last offseason from the Blue Jays in the Josh Donaldson trade, Lawrie hit .260 with 16 homers and a .706 OPS in 149 games while playing second base and third base. At age 25 he’s a solid player, but Lawrie has failed to live up to his perceived potential while hitting .263 with a .736 OPS in 494 career games.

At this point it sounds like the A’s plan to start Marcus Semien at shortstop and Lowrie at second base.

Gammons: The Red Sox could go $30-40 million higher on David Price than anyone else


Peter Gammons reports that the Red Sox are on a mission to sign David Price and that they will pay some serious money to get him. Gammons quotes one anonymous GM who says that he expects the Sox to “go $30-40 million above anyone else.”

The man calling the shots for the Sox is Dave Dombrowski and he knows Price well, of course, having traded for him in Detroit. But there is going to be serious competition for Price’s services with the Jays and Cubs, among many others, bidding for his services. It would be unusual for a team to outbid the competition by tens of millions as Gammons’ source suggests, but the dollars will be considerable regardless.