Opening Day is less than 2 weeks away and my first game of the year will likely be in Philadelphia on April 17. I'd like to hit 4 ballparks this year, which will leave me with only 3 remaining. There is a real possibility of a lengthy lockout in 2027. The worst case scenario is a canceled season and I'd hate to see it come to that.
Let's start with recent changes:
Ghost runner on 2nd in extra innings.
I support that but I think I'd make it 1st for the 10th-11th innings. With a runner on 2nd, all it takes is a sac bunt and a fly ball to score a run. The plus side is we won't have any 18 inning marathons, which really tax the bullpen. I would not be opposed to a game being declared a tie after 15 innings in the regular season.
Universal DH.
I grew up in a National League market and opposed the DH until recently. It's more challenging to manage and teams will use their bench players. I'd probably still oppose the DH if the average pitcher could hit near .200 with an OPS around .500. As it is, the pitcher is usually almost an automatic out with a BA just over .100 and a 50 percent K rate. I hope that we see more 2 way players. I can think of several good hitting pitchers who could have been competent as a part time DH. This would allow an extra man on the bench if outfield is crowded.
A DH allows a veteran with bad wheels to extend his career if he can still hit and opens up a regular spot for a prospect blocked by a star player. I support this change. I also support the pitch clock to keep the time of games reasonable.
Draft Lottery:
Support with further reforms that I will discuss later. Let's say that there is a consensus once a decade type generational talent available in next year's draft. In order to get him, a team blatantly tanks by trading their best players for mid-level prospects who are 2-3 years away. They replace the real MLB talent with D-potential AAA scrubs in order to get the worst record in baseball. Now, imagine multiple teams doing the same thing. Players will try to win but management might not use their best relief pitchers in a close game. Tanking must be discouraged and a lottery is a good first step.
Playoffs- The new format is likely here to stay. I'm not a big fan. It's rare to see the best team win and a barely above .500 team can win it all by getting hot at the right time. In hockey and basketball, a sub .500 team made it as far as the Finals but lost in 6 games. I'd like to see 2 expansion teams to bring the number of teams to 32. I'd go back to 2 divisions per league. The division winner is guaranteed a spot then it's the next 2 best records. You have to be a very good team to make the playoffs.
That said, the current system is an improvement over the one and done wild card game. Pittsburgh got screwed 2 years in a row when they had to face a starting pitcher in the midst of one of the most dominant stretches in history.
Now on to further reforms:
Salary cap and floor- This is the big one and the arguments may not be negotiable on either side. After what happened this off-season when a very good but not all time great player got a 60 million AAV contract, YES I support a salary cap. In order to make it more palatable for the players, I would allow existing contracts to be grandfathered in. Thus, Juan Soto and Shohei's mega deals don't count against the cap but future contracts do. I'd also set the cap high so that few teams can reach it even with wild spending.
I'm not thrilled about a payroll floor. In that case, a 38 year old journeyman who is on his last legs will get one more big pay day just so a team hits the floor. In doing so, he blocks a prospect with B-potential while performing below league average. That said, if it's necessary to get a deal on a cap, so be it. IMO, a better idea is severe penalties for tanking. How about no 1st round pick and reduced revenue sharing after consecutive 100 loss seasons? I'd even go as far as to force an owner to sell if the team goes a decade without a winning season.
Several quality veteran free agents have gone unwanted in recent years. The attitude is that a $10-15MM signing might be worth maybe 3 extra wins. Instead of losing 97 games, they'll only lose 94 but still won't be competitive. That line of thought needs to be discouraged and is a good argument for a payroll floor.
Guaranteed Contracts:
I'm STRONGLY against that but the union is highly unlikely to budge on this issue. Two big contracts in Rendon and Bryant have been total wastes and nobody could have predicted that they'd fall off THIS badly at the time of the signing. I'm willing to meet halfway and allow a player to be released while collecting half of his salary.
Example: Angels release Pujols after a negative WAR season. They pay him $15MM instead of 30. If he's signed by another team for $5MM, Pujols collects $20MM. If he has a resurgence and a team thinks he's worth $20MM, Pujols still collects 30 but the Angels only have to pay 10. Fair enough?
Another big reform that I favor has to do with PEDs. If a player is suspended, their team should have the option to void the remainder of his contract. It's really not fair to juice up in your contract year, get caught next Spring then come back diminished while getting paid like a superstar.
Free Agency- As it stands now, teams have 6 years of control over their rookies no matter their age. I propose reforms favorable to the players here. Increase pre-arbitration salaries and minor league pay. If a player debuts after age 24, he gets a shot at free agency after 5 years, maybe even 4. A 21 year old phenom can get a big pay day when he hits free agency in his prime at 27. By contrast, a late bloomer is already on the wrong side of 30 probably won't get more than 4-5 years even with superior performances in the past.
