Proclivities wrote:
 

That graph is a lie. I was talking about the Colorado Rockies, and the chart shows they have a $3 beer. Maybe in a shot glass in the Rockpile on Tuesday afternoons. The only beers within 10 sections of my seats a couple of years ago were $14 Rolling Rocks, altho they were 24oz.

Oakland A's games (1980s) used to have a 32oz PAPER cup of Coors for $3. Impossible to drink before the cup dissolved, but I gave 'er a go.

 virwill7 wrote:
 
Yeah, everything is very expensive for all major sports any more - even minor league baseball.

 Proclivities wrote:
 

I took my boys to Dodger Stadium about 6-7 summers ago. A bottle of Heineken was $13. We went with the cheaper swill, which was about $8 a can, I think. Little plastic bottles of water were $5. It's just insanely expensive to eat and drink at a major sports venue. 

 ScottFromWyoming wrote:
 
Is that for "premium" beer (craft beers, imports, etc.)?  This chart shows lower prices but I assume it's just for Budweiser or Miller, etc.  I haven't been to a ML park in a while though.  I remember a period of time in the early-to-mid '80s, a pint cup of generic beer from a "tray" vendor cost more at Shea Stadium than it did at Yankee Stadium; I never knew why.

 cc_rider wrote:
 

lol lol $14

 zevon wrote:
 

It's a AAA rule too and let me tell you it sucks the fun out of an exciting game.

 buddy wrote:
 
Brutal.

I don't see why they can't have ANY fans in the stadiums. I mean, regular-season games aren't usually packed, right? Hire extra ushers to help with seat spacing. Add floor markers and additional food-service procedures/limited menus at the concession stands (where the real money is made. $10 for a beer?!)

But realistically, I think the 'rona has already spread so far, there's no way to really stop it anymore. Cases are skyrocketing in Texas, almost 5500 in one day. I think the best we can hope for is to slow it down enough to manage the medical resources.
c.

I guess one positive is that the Rockies may only lose 40 or so games.

I question whether a 60-game season is worth it. The Nats were 23-37 after 60 games last season. Then there is the real possibility that players will be sidelined for 14-day quarantines during the 60-game season. Or worse outcomes due to Coronavirus. 

Maybe  making the best out of a bad hand, but . . .

Apparently there won’t be any issue with telling pitchers not to slide...
looks like a 30 man roster for first 30 days, then it gets cut down. Not sure what sense that makes.
Extra innings starting with a runner on 2cd base is horse shit, that’s a slo pitch softball rule. What’s next, double bags at 1st base, 2 home plates and if you hit a line drive at the pitcher you’re out?  
 

 haresfur wrote:
 
The pitchers will do what they do. Tell Bumgarner to take it easy? Good luck.

It's just a ploy to get the DH in the NL anyway. I'm against it.

 ScottFromWyoming wrote:
 
So you tell your pitchers not to run so hard and never slide if it doesn't really matter, anyway.

 Red_Dragon wrote:
 
I have mentioned my fondness for the all star game since it is when I mourn my baseball-fan mom who died during the break.

I would be fine with some sort of replacement like an exhibition between the MLB rookies and the top minor league players who have not made it up. That would actually be a benefit for players who could use the exposure.

 cc_rider wrote:
 
Actually, you and I are on the hook for a lot of the stadium money.

Take a look at the wikipedia summary of Publically Funded Stadiums

No government finance wonk ever modeled a shutdown when putting together a financing offer to "keep" a team to support the local economy (mostly crap).   As governments face lost income and huge expenses...not having stadium and parking revenues hurts everyone.  The owners are in better shape to borrow at very low rates compared to a government.  

Many owners are probably making money while they don't have to pay player salaries.  It could result in a loss of value for the teams....but I doubt it.

 Red_Dragon wrote:
 
If MLB and the players' union don't get things settled soon, ALL the games may be abolished. What a bunch of crybabies.

In general I support the players over MLB. Owners have raked in billions in recent years, while salaries were generally flat. Lots of owners got over-leveraged in new stadiums and the like. Those loans are held by financial institutions that are not going to re-negotiate terms, 'rona or no 'rona. The owners can only put the screws on the players. Heaven forbid they take a personal financial hit, the way pretty much everyone else in the country has.

I usually skim the sports section, but lately it's had a lot of interesting content. MLB silliness, athlete protests and discussions (NASCAR, of all places!), owner/management/player gaffes, etc.
c.

 ScottFromWyoming wrote:
 
Exactly why the All-Star games should be abolished.

 Prodigal_SOB wrote:
 

I assume it's not Covid related, it's just that they don't want their spendy pitchers getting hurt running bases in an exhibition season.

 Prodigal_SOB wrote:
 
Collective bargaining agreement is up after 2021, and the animosity over this season doesn't bode well for the next negotiation.  There are well-founded concerns that they'll be out on strike in 2022....and that would be a really bad thing for them to do following this year's pandemic impact. 

The other reality is that baseball fills the space between the NBA and NFL.  If they have to compete with both in the fall...it's not going to be pretty.

Baseball isn't in a good place right now.

 ScottFromWyoming wrote: 
I didn't pay that much attention to the March agreement either thinking that we didn't know enough about the extent of the problem at that point for it to mean anything.  Perhaps I should have.  An ESPN article on the imposed settlement had a couple of lines that really made me wonder.
 
"The universal designated hitter likely would remain in place, as it's part of the health-and-safety protocol."

Can anyone here explain to me just what effect on health and safety the DH has?  And if that wasn't strange enough further down it went on to say:
 
" The players then delayed the vote again Sunday, sources said, after Manfred made late tweaks to the proposal, offering in an email to Clark to cancel expanded playoffs and the universal designated hitter for 2021 if 50 games weren't played in 2020."
 
I can't for the life of me figure out the logic of this or how 2021 got into the discussions.  Has anyone here followed this close enough to explain what's going to me?  I sure miss bokey.

 ScottFromWyoming wrote: 
No, I don’t know of any sort of plan for MLB TV. The free passes were handed out by T Mobile thank you rewards. I was already subscribed so I couldn’t take advantage. You have to be a T Mobile subscriber. I hope they do it again.
 Is there a plan to have larger rosters? It would seem sensible in a compressed season with few days off. The schedule will be interesting, hopefully like a dozen games vs each division rival and the rest close to home. No good reason for 3000 mile coast to coasters this year, no need at all for interleague.
hopefully we get a go today... Not a ton of time to finalize rosters.