There is no guarantee that the Wilpons will be able to keep control of the Mets

10 Comments

Forgive me if I’m not optimistic about the Wilpons’ chances of finding “strategic partners” who will gladly fork over millions in exchange for a minority share of the team, leaving the Wilpons in control. Why am I skeptical? Because the last time a baseball owner was in deep financial trouble and sought minority investors, it didn’t quite turn out the way he planned:

“I’ve been quietly looking for minority investors to come back into the ownership of the Rangers as a way to be prudent in a bad economy,” [Tom] Hicks said. “I’m doing the same thing with the Stars. At the end of the day, I’ll still have 51-to-60 percent of the ballclub and have new partners. That doesn’t change anything.

A little less than a year later Tom Hicks was being squeezed out completely while Mark Cuban and Chuck Greenberg fought tooth-and-nail for total control of the Texas Rangers.

It’s just a simple fact of investment life:  minority shares in non-public entities are not worth anything close to what a controlling interest is worth.  Perhaps the Mets, who likely have a much better potential cashflow than most teams, will still be an attractive investment who is merely interested in saying they own a piece of the team.  But if the Rangers example is any indication, there aren’t a whole hell of a lot of people who want to be silent partners when the majority owner asking for a handout is in financial distress.

The Mets are an extremely valuable property. Their owners are in financial trouble.  This is what most savvy investors call “an opportunity.”  It strains credulity to think that people won’t make some offers for control of the Mets that the Wilpons find awfully hard to refuse.

Report: MLB could fine the Angels $2 million for failure to report Tyler Skaggs’ drug use

Getty Images
Leave a comment

T.J. Quinn of ESPN is reporting that Major League Baseball could fine the Los Angeles Angels up to $2 million “if Major League Baseball determines that team employees were told of Tyler Skaggs’ opioid use prior to his July 1 death and didn’t inform the commissioner’s office.”

The fine would be pursuant to the terms of the Joint Drug Agreement which affirmatively requires any team employee who isn’t a player to inform the Commissioner’s Office of “any evidence or reason to believe that a Player … has used, possessed or distributed any substance prohibited” by MLB.

As was reported last weekend, Eric Kay, the Angels Director of Communications, told DEA agents that he and at least one other high-ranking Angels official knew of Skaggs’ opioid use. The Angels have denied any knowledge of Skaggs’ use, and the other then-Angels employee Kay named, current Hall of Fame President Tim Mead deny that he know as well, but Kay’s admission that he knew — he in fact claims he purchased drugs for and did drugs with Skaggs — would, if true, constitute team knowledge. Major League Baseball would, of course, want to make its own determination of whether or not Kay was being truthful when he told DEA agents what his lawyer says he told them.

Which raises the question of why, apart from a strong desire to get in criminal jeopardy for lying to DEA agents, Kay would admit through his lawyer that he lied to DEA agents. Still, the process is the process, so giving MLB a little time here is probably not harming anyone.

As for a $2 million fine? Well, it cuts a number of ways. On the one hand, that’s a lot of money. On the other hand, (a) a man is dead; and (b) $2 million is what the Angels’ DH or center fielder makes in about 11 minutes so how much would such a fine really sting?

On the third hand, my God, what else can be done here? No matter what happened in the case of Skaggs’ death, this is not a situation anyone in either the Commissioner’s Office nor the MLBPA truly contemplated when the JDA was drafted. We live in a world of horrors at times, and by their very nature, horrors involve that which it is not expected and for which there can be no adequate, pre-negotiated remedy. It’s a bad story all around, no matter what happens.

Still, it would be notable for Major League Baseball to fine any team under the “teams must report players they suspect used banned substances” rule. Because, based on what I have heard, knowledge of players who use banned substances — which includes marijuana, cocaine, opioids and other non-PED illegal drugs — and which have not been reported to MLB is both commonplace and considerable.

But that’s a topic for another day. Perhaps tomorrow.