Take It Up With the Union

With Spring Training games getting started across Florida and Arizona, we're getting our first glimpse of other players' feelings on the Astros' sign-stealing controversy.  They're pretty much universally angry, which was to be expected.  But their anger at MLB (and Commissioner Rob Manfred) is misdirected.

MLB's investigation determined that it was mostly a player-driven scheme, but Manfred stopped short of punishing individual players or even naming those responsible (other than Carlos Beltran).  Instead, he limited his discipline to the organization as a whole, suspending GM Jeff Luhnow and Manager A.J. Hinch (both of whom were later fired), taking away four draft picks, and issuing a hefty fine.  Some opposing players feel like that isn't enough.  They want Astros players to face suspensions, too.

Except there's one problem with that.  Manfred was never going to be able to suspend any individual players!  That was a non-starter with the Union, which MLBPA Exective Director Tony Clark has confirmed.  So, Manfred offered the players immunity in exchange for their honest testimony.  He wasn't really left with any other choice.  But it also helped him get to the bottom of everything a lot quicker.

Remember how long it took for the Mitchell Report to come out?  Part of the reason for that was because of all the legal jostling he had to do to get to the truth.  Players were under no obligation to talk to George Mitchell, and even those who did were reluctant to tell the whole story (or throw anybody under the bus).  It wasn't until Congress got involved that MLB forced the issue.

It's also worth noting that no player named in the Mitchell Report was suspended for anything mentioned in the report.  Mark McGwire was ridiculed for saying, "I'm not here to talk about the past," but MLB essentially said the same thing.  The Mitchell Report was the starting point for MLB's Joint Drug Policy.  Anything that happened before that wasn't subject to the Joint Drug Policy.  Anything that happened after was.

Similar situation here.  Any discipline the Commissioner doled out would've been challenged by the MLBPA.  After all, that's the job of a labor union--to look out for the best interest of its members.  And that's something any dues-paying member would want their union to do for them.  (Just look at how good the NFLPA is at that.  They file a grievance in almost every case.  It's pretty much expected.)

So, if the other players don't like the fact that Astros players weren't suspended, their issue shouldn't be with Major League Baseball.  It should be with their own Union!  Because it wasn't Manfred's decision to give the Astros immunity.  It was the MLBPA's.  He just went along with it (which, agree with it or not, was probably the right move--for both sides).  And, again, if the shoe was on the other foot, they'd want the Union to go to bat for them!

Which is why I'm really getting tired of other players acting all holier than thou and saying how they'd "never do such a thing."  It's easy to say that as an outsider, but none of them know how they would've acted in the same situation.  Because very few people believe the Astros were the only team that had such a scheme going.  They just happened to get caught (and who's to say if that even would've happened without Mike Fiers)!  And they're all now viewed as "cheaters" by the majority of fans and opposing players, and that's not going to go away anytime soon!

Just as ludicrous is the suggestion that the Astros should be stripped of their 2017 World Series title.  You can't rewrite history.  The games were played, and they won them.  Did the sign stealing affect the outcomes of those games?  Most likely.  But we can't say the Astros wouldn't have won them anyway.  Cheating or not, that team was pretty damn good!  (And Verlander wasn't striking people out because the Astros hitters knew what was coming.)

Of course, MLB's refusal to strip Houston of its title is part of what's made people so angry.  The Dodgers and Yankees understandably feel the most cheated.  And the Astros aren't helping themselves with their complete lack of contrition, which makes you think they'd do it all again if the situation presented itself.  After all, the whole reason they did it was to win a World Series.  Which is exactly what they did.  And since that trophy won't be taken away from them, the organization probably thinks it was all worth it.

Since suspensions weren't issues and opposing players are understandably upset with what happened in Houston, you can bet teams will take it up with the Astros on the field this season.  Oddsmakers are setting over-unders on how many Astros batters will be hit by a pitch this season, and Dusty Baker has already asked for some sort of blanket warning to all pitchers about throwing at Houston batters.  Which MLB has been wise not to comment on.  At least not yet.

Frankly, MLB should stay out of it.  They know opposing players are frustrated and are probably expecting them to take their shot.  I think they should let them, within reason.  Head hunting is still a no-no, but if you want to throw behind Alex Bregman or hit Jose Altuve in the back, go ahead!  Make your point, then move on!  A blanket warning to every pitcher who faces the Astros is not the answer.  Because you need to let them have that outlet. 

Imagine if MLB did issue that blanket warning Dusty Baker wants.  You have 29 teams that are pissed off at one team.  What kind of a message does it send to those other 29 teams if their pitchers are subject to automatic ejection and suspension when the Astros cheated and got off scot-free!? 

The Astros have to know it's coming.  That's why they want to be "protected."  I say shut up and take it like men!  Especially because you deserve it!  And if suspensions are issued to pitchers who throw at Astros hitters, the MLBPA had better have their back.  Just like they had every one of the Astros' backs.  Which is how the whole situation got to this point in the first place!