MLB players sound off on shifts, strikes and steroids

After decades of labor peace and undeniable prosperity, Major League Baseball players have experienced a tumultuous few years.

An aggressive commissioner has threatened to unilaterally alter the way the game is played. Analytics and an overwhelming data revolution have strengthened the sport in many ways but reduced more players to fungible assets.

And a winter free agent freeze-out that depressed the salaries of All-Stars and drove other veterans out of the game altogether put stars and scrubs alike in an untenable spot. After all, nobody sympathizes with a workforce that averages $4.4 million in salary — yet that salary has remained flat even as industry revenue approaches $11 billion.

With that in mind, USA TODAY set

out to gauge the mind-set of the major leaguer amid this period of transition. We polled 63 players representing 18 teams and six countries — from former MVPs, to perennial All-Stars, to minimum-wage players on the fringe of the roster. Not all players answered all questions, and some were granted anonymity to further expound on topics without fear of recrimination.

The upshot?

Tension between players and MLB’s central office remains palpable, and players seem, more than ever, ready to fight come 2021, when the collective bargaining agreement expires.

While many players embrace analytics, there remains a significant resistance to wholesale change. And all that anger they direct at umpires? It turns out they have a soft spot for the men in blue.

The 10 questions answered by a diverse cross section of major leaguers:

1. Are pace-of-play changes working? (49 responded)

After MLB Commissioner Rob Manfred and MLBPA executive director Tony Clark avoided an impasse and agreed on measures to speed up the game — most notably limiting the number of mound visits to six per nine innings — the average time of a nine-inning game is 2 hours, 59 minutes, down six minutes from the record-long 3:05 mark last year.

Truly speeding up the game might require more dire measures.

“Play seven innings, and you can put an asterisk next to the records,” says Nationals right fielder Bryce Harper, the

2015 National League MVP. “If you have (Jacob) deGrom and (Max) Scherzer and they throw a shutout, you may have

1:20, 1:30 game. You play at 7:05, you’re going to be out of the place by 9:30. Put the kids back to bed and get ready for school.

“I think the game of baseball is great, but that’s just the way it’s going to go nowadays. There are a lot of asterisks and other things in other sports.”

Twenty-eight players said the changes were working, with 21 opposed; among some, this relatively innocuous question revealed underlying tensions.

“Asking if pace of play changes are working,” remarked one NL veteran, “assumes there was a problem in the first place.”

2. Should limits be placed on defensive shifts? (62 responded)

The overwhelming “no” response, from 54 respondents, perhaps epitomizes players’ desire for MLB’s central office to butt out of the game. Since essentially his first day in office in January

2015, Manfred has encouraged the idea of limiting shifts to help stimulate offense. At last week’s owners meetings, he indicated there is growing momentum to regulate shifts, and his competition committee remains in the analysis and discussion stage.

Players want almost no part of that, even hitters whose line drives often end up in the glove of an infielder positioned halfway closer to the outfield wall than to home plate.

“If you don’t like it, hit it the other way,” Rays infielder Matt Duffy says. “It’s why we’re big-leaguers; we can make adjustments.”

Indeed, many players found the concept of regulating intellectual property distasteful.

3. Is the so-called “lack of action” — fewer balls in play due to a heavy amount of walks and strikeouts — a problem? (59 responded)

In our most overwhelming response, and one that could significantly vary from fans’ sentiment, 55 players are unconcerned by today’s game of “three true outcomes” — a walk, homer or strikeout — that results in fewer balls in play.

4. Should pine tar or other substances be legalized to help pitchers grip the ball? (50 responded)

Call this the Trevor Bauer Conun- drum. The Indians right-hander’s tweets last month were interpreted by some as insinuating that pitchers get a bump in spin rate when they join the Astros because of use of pine tar or other foreign substances.

Pitchers skirt the rules and use pine tar, Bullfrog sunscreen or other substances to gain a grip on the ball when the weather is cold or steamy; its use is widely acknowledged, and our respondents seem to be OK with that.

Of note, 23 of the 40 yes respondents were position players, willing to cede the pitcher a possible advantage in exchange for the comfort of a 100 mph pitch having greater control. Many answers came with caveats:

❚ Only if the substance doesn’t improve pitchers’ spin rates.

❚ Yes, but go back to a ball that’s easier to grip.

❚ Yes, but make the ball consistent from park-to-park in regard to how they are rubbed up and prepared.

❚ Yes, so long as it is a universal substance, stored on the back of the mound with the rosin bag.

5. Should the season be shortened?

(55 responded)

Fatigue, lousy weather, poor earlyand late-season crowds, brutal turnarounds due to national TV obligations — there’s no shortage of reasons to cut the season back from 162 games. But 45 of the 55 players responding don’t want to reduce the grind, even in an amphetamine-free environment.

“If I could play 365 days a year, including Christmas, I would,” said one player, who perhaps not surprisingly had played in just 41 of his team’s 79 games when he was asked the question.

Those preferring a shortened schedule envision a higher level of play, fewer injuries and better game conditions. Some acknowledge that perhaps baseball has too much product and it couldn’t hurt to cut it down some, even if that meant a corresponding cut out of player salaries.

6. Is potential revenue and interest generated by state-run gambling worth the risk? (24 responded)

Many players weren’t fully aware of the implications created by the Supreme Court’s decision to allow individual states to control sports betting. The

24 were largely in favor, perhaps a byproduct that MLB is nearly 30 years removed from its last major betting scandal, involving Reds manager Pete Rose.

7. Is a strike necessary in 2021 to regain losses incurred in previous CBAs? (26 responded)

Naturally, the strong wording gave many respondents pause, given three years remain until the next round of collective bargaining. Yet many of those who politely declined to answer indicated that in the absence of change, they are prepared to walk out if necessary.

Of the 17 yes respondents, three are players significantly impacted by last winter’s free agent freeze.

8. Would you accept a computerized strike zone in place of umpires?

(50 responded)

It happens every day: An umpire calls a borderline ball or strike, and social media lights up with screen shots of pitch trackers showing the ball a hair in or out of the strike zone. Inevitably, we hear the cry for robot umps, clearly the only avenue to correct these injustices.

Well, despite tensions that remain between player and ump, there’s little desire to eradicate the human element behind the plate, as 43 respondents want to save the umpires.

Many respondents speak of tradition and umps being “part of the game.” Others doubt the 100% accuracy of pitchtracking technology and the significant chance it could penalize hitter or pitcher based on how particular pitches move.

“My sinker bounces in the dirt but registers as a strike,” one All-Star pitcher says. “So it’d be good for me, but probably not fair.”

9. The strike zone is: A, just fine; B, should be bigger; C, should be smaller.

(43 responded)

Again, an area of the game that could be subject to tinkering registers little complaint with players. Even as hitters are headed for their worst cumulative batting average ever, just four of the 23 hitters who responded think the zone is due for some shrinkage.

“What is the strike zone? That’s my question,” Padres first baseman Eric Hosmer says. “I’d like to see a little more accountability for the umpire. I know a lot of these guys are trying their best and doing what they can, but I just think of the work we put in on the opposing pitcher and on ourselves. I definitely think there are times you get cheated.”

10. Performance-enhancing drug use in baseball is: A, rampant; B, more common than you think; C, accurately reflected in the number of positive tests? (42 responded)

The sensitive subject prompted onethird of our respondents to decline to comment. While few, if any, doubt that PED use exists beyond the five positive tests and 80-game suspensions doled out by MLB this season, a vast majority believe most cheats are caught.

Some 13 years after testing with penalties was enacted, the player population sounds genuine in its desire for a clean sport while acknowledging that cheating will always exist.