Tony Clark Helping to Destroy Baseball

[G-Fafif]

Players Association director, ex-Met and apparent traitor to civilized behavior Tony Clark greasing the skids for the DH to...I can't even say it.

[Edgy MD]

That's a disappointing article.

Clark seems to support it. Why? Did you ask him?

The owners seem to support it. Why? Anybody?

The players. Same deal. They "seem" to be coming around on it. Well, give me something.

WHO DO I GOTTA CALL?!

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

Clark strikes me as an especially ineffective Union chief. The owners must love him.

[Guest d'Kong76]

@r_j_anderson wrote: With the All-Star Game taking place Tuesday night, this is a good occasion to revisit one of the sport's most fun arguments: whether the National League should institute the designated hitter.

One of the sport's most-fun arguments is actually whether the American League
should abandon the designated hitter.

[Edgy MD]

John Cougar Lunchbucket wrote: Clark strikes me as an especially ineffective Union chief. The owners must love him.

Exceptionally so.

I mean, he's tall and leaderly and talks well enough, but he seems to be three moves behind.

[Frayed Knot]

I think the owners -- or at least Manfred -- are kind of frustrated with Clark. He seems to be reluctant to commit to any of their suggestions.

Manfred was on ESPN's PTI today and, when asked what he would impose if he could do so unilaterally, his answer was the pitch clock and would do so for less than the 20 seconds currently being discussed.
The implication was that the players' side is reluctant to even concede to 20 just as they were last winter to any other pace of play mechanism.
It almost seems like Clark is being contradictory because he thinks that's the role he supposed to play.

[Guest 41Forever]

Clark's comments in this Nightengale post are even more curious.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/mlb/allstar/2018/07/17/mlb-shifts-labor-management-tension/791834002/

Clark never specifically threatened a strike, or a work stoppage before the 2021 collective bargaining agreement expires but made it clear he’s not about to stand by and watch an encore of last year’s slow free-agent market. “What we experienced last offseason was a direct attack on free agency,’’ Clark said, “which had been the bedrock of our economic system. If that’s the case, we’re going to have difficult decisions to make.’’

Last season, big players still got big money and ended up on rosters by the time the season started, right?

[Edgy MD]

A lot of them ended up on rosters, but what they got was, relatively, bupkis.

[metirish]

I would not at all be happy with the DH in the NL....very little distinguishes the NL form the AL now anyway but ...I know I saw Manford on TV a while back saying no DH in the NL.....let's see

[Guest 41Forever]

Edgy MD wrote: A lot of them ended up on rosters, but what they got was, relatively, bupkis.

Unless there is evidence of collusion again -- and I don't think Clark has presented any -- they players got what the market bore for their services. It works in their favor when a stud player signs a deal for $30 million a year. Not so much when there are middling players who want a lot when people writing the checks can get the same production for less money. Clark can also look at the role of agents in prolonging the signing process.

[Edgy MD]

Well, it doesn't get me anywhere, but I'll repeat my assertion that the market is loaded with artificial restrictions that continues to erode baseball's middle class.

[seawolf17]

G-Fafif wrote: Players Association director, ex-Met and apparent traitor to civilized behavior Tony Clark greasing the skids for the DH to...I can't even say it.

BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO[/bigpurple]

[Centerfield]

What he said. Except purpler and bigger.

[Guest 41Forever]

Edgy MD wrote: Well, it doesn't get me anywhere, but I'll repeat my assertion that the market is loaded with artificial restrictions that continues to erode baseball's middle class.

Good point. It's a free market that's not really free in a lot of ways.