Major League Baseball’s collective bargaining agreement is set to expire in December, but commissioner Rob Manfred said Sunday that he expects a new CBA in place by the end of the postseason, according to Brian MacPherson of the Providence Journal (Twitter link). “Both parties still have significant issues on the table,” added Manfred, but he doesn’t believe those concerns are enough for either side to rip up the agreement and start negotiations from scratch (via Sportsnet’s Ben Nicholson-Smith, on Twitter).
Manfred, who’s in Boston on Sunday for Red Sox designated hitter David Ortiz’s final regular-season game, also addressed several other important topics:
- After acquiring left-hander Drew Pomeranz from the Padres for top pitching prospect Anderson Espinoza in July, questions arose in August over whether San Diego was completely honest about Pomeranz’s medical information. It turned out the Padres didn’t reveal that Pomeranz was taking anti-inflammatory medication for his elbow at the time of the deal. Then, when MLB handed Padres general manager A.J. Preller a 30-day suspension in September, Red Sox chairman Tom Werner expressed displeasure with the commissioner’s office, saying, “We felt that some wrong was committed and that it’s important to have a level playing field. The Padres didn’t play on it.” Interestingly, the league gave the Red Sox the opportunity to undo the trade in early August, Manfred revealed, but the non-waiver deadline had already passed by then. Moreover, there was no way for the league to compensate the Red Sox, the commissioner stated. As a result, Boston turned down the offer and kept Pomeranz (Twitter links via MacPherson and Pete Abraham of the Boston Globe). The 27-year-old has scuffled since the trade and is currently dealing with left forearm soreness.
- Whether the Padres fire Preller for his questionable practices is up to them, not the league, according to Manfred (via Dennis Lin of the San Diego Union-Tribune). “I felt that that Mr. Preller behaved inappropriately in the situation. He behaved inappropriately to the detriment of two clubs,” said Manfred. “And I thought that a publicly announced suspension of 30 days, which is the longest suspension of a front-office person in 70 years, was a firm statement of our view on how he had behaved or, in this case, misbehaved.” As of Sept. 17, the Padres’ front office was reportedly split on Preller, who, in addition to crossing the Red Sox, didn’t disclose all available medical information in a July trade with the Marlins. As a result, the Preller-led Padres reversed part of what was a large transaction that centered on Andrew Cashner. Ultimately, the Padres re-acquired right-hander Colin Rea from Miami and sent pitching prospect Luis Castillo back to the Marlins. That came after Rea left his sole Marlins start with an elbow injury. Rea is now attempting to stave off Tommy John surgery.
- Ortiz was among 104 major leaguers who tested positive for performance-enhancing substances in 2003, but Manfred downplayed that. The list didn’t distinguish therapeutic use exemptions from PEDs, per Manfred, who called it “unfair” and “wrong” that the positive test might negatively affect Ortiz’s legacy (Twitter links via MacPherson and Alex Speier of the Boston Globe).
How does Preller still have a job? From his spending spree that backfired to this debacle I don’t see how anyone has confidence in him. Go ahead and back him up by saying he did nothing wrong with the medical info but far as I know he is the only GM ever called out and suspended for his behavior.
Yeah amazing he still has a job, isn’t it? I think it points to an incredibly weak front office. Fowler and Dee have made a lot of mistakes in their short time in SD. As a Padres fan, it’s embarrassing.
Agreed Preller is a cancer on the Padre Organization but their front office is very weak and disorganized. No leadership.
Doesn’t matter the the test back in ’03 was BS. If people don’t like Ortiz they have a guilty-until=proven innocent attitude toward him. No such thing as benefit of the doubt.
I don’t have any particularly strong feelings about Ortiz in 2003 but the idea that any of these guys deserve the benefit of the doubt is somewhat offensive to anyone that cared about baseball in the 1990s and went through the PED crisis watching one childhood hero after another turn out to be a dirtbag.
30 days is pretty stiff for what was done if look back compared to some past owners of the game who NEVER were suspended over various things they did.. Some baseball wise, some not.. here are a few..
One sinful owner was indicted (and charged with a felony) for his part in the 1974 Watergate hearings.. NO discipline by baseball and owned a particular team for 40 years..
Another owner during the 70’s tried to sell all of his valuable pieces to the highest bidder, rather than trade them. Sued the owner when was denied. Then took team trophies for himself after finally being forced out of the game as personal property rather than leaving with the team.
Could list more jokesters.. One was in LA few years back, another in Arlington.. Where were the suspensions?
Baseball wasn’t quite the same 40 years ago. Yes, Steinbrenner should have been kicked out of the game. I believe also, and I am a Padres fan, that Preller should be on his last chance. Guy has been suspended twice by MLB for doing things that are illegal. He’s on thin ice, as he should be.
Sorry John but Steinbrenner wound up suspended for over a year
Was he? I honestly don’t remember and that was during the time was seriously into the game big time.. Georgie was making nearly every move himself then and He signed Catfish Hunter on 12/31/74.. When exactly was the suspension served? he went bigger time on FA starting the next off season and he didn’t let his GM’s make the call.. Had his hand prints and mouth all over everything.. That suspension would have meant he couldn’t do anything FO/personnel related.
Just curious, not doubting, I do forget some, tho generally few years later when was in the USN.
Boohoo Boston! If the f’-kin Yankees did what San Diego is said to have done, Yankees would skate away unnoticed. Hey, Werner, if you still owned the Padres, you would have done the very same thing. Go cry to someone who cares
You are one cranky dude…
He did worse, when his team conspired to reduce the bonuses of international players by carteling their offers in order to cheat the International portion of the CBA. He took advantage of a MUCH more at risk group. Werner didnt do his homework and go burned, What Preller did was epically dishonest, but Werner is a huge hypocrite and from his statement lacks any semblance of selfawareness.
Werner and his little cabal of owners are some of the most crooked people ever to infest the game of baseball so it’s truly precious to hear his self-righteous complaining about Pomeranz.
Werner would not have done what Preller did. No one but Preller and the Padres would do that. If the Yankees did it they would be nailed as well so cry me a river Padres backers
So by saying that the list didnt account for therapeutic use, is he saying ortiz was using back then. Better yet, does he still have an exemption, because that would perfectly explain how hes hit over .300 w/ almost 40 homeruns at 40 years old. If he does, thats the b.s., because it has clearly given him a leg up on competition at an age people normally break down, especially someone who is as “physically fit” as he is.
Yeah. That was a bad joke.
He was taking PEDs but he might have had a medical excuse?
Are you kidding me? Anyone with a legit excuse would have provided that information instead of having their legacy tarnished.
No, he’s saying the testing was unreliable. Obviously.
It’s been said by everyone involved that the testing was unreliable and the results simply cannot be counted on as accurate.
If he used back then he’d be more apt to break down earlier.
“Unfair and wrong to impact Ortiz’s legacy.” Well, then, the league has spoken. And, by extension, anyone on that list needs to be afforded the same treatment. Let’s put the issue to bed them. If the only place you appear in on the 2003 list, Manfred absolves you.
What about Rafael Palmeiro’s legacy?
Pamleiro’s test was 2005. Manfred needs to absolve the 2003 group, since MLB has built a marketing campaign around Ortiz. It’s Ortiz’s legacy that Manfred wants to protect,
Based on the leagues love affair for Ortiz. It wouldn’t shock me if they covered up any failed drug tests for Ortiz.
Oh i guarantee you they did. Ortiz has gone on the record saying hes taken over 80 test, you’re only required to take 2 a year. 12 years/2 per year is 28 plus a few randoms does not 80 make. Do you know what does require more tests. A failed test.
Plus manny was on the same list and on the red sox, you know who else joined the sox in 2003, jeremy giambi who was known to do a steroid or two as well. Ever wonder how ramirez could hit so well, but once traded from sox he didnt do a season without a failed test.
The league and the mlbpa have both disavowed the 2003 tests because of what they have both called “false positives” as well as contaminated specimens and double results. According to reports a some players tested negative AND positive. There ended up with more results than players tested! It was a poorly handled disaster. Not that it should be any surprise since it was the very first test of it’s kind in the sport. It resembles nothing like the testing that happens now
All of this is old news too! This was beaten to death 7-8 years ago! The only people who want to hang their hats on this test as it pertains to Ortiz are people who know it’s the only possible black mark on his legacy and don’t mind being a bit dishonest about what it was.
The fact that the testing was debunked long ago clearly doesn’t matter to the less that truthful crowd.
Right………….and Tom Brady didn’t deflate those footballs.
Yes. They will keep on testing him over and over knowing tjat if it comes up positive they’d just bury it. Seems counterproductive.
Then why would he admit to taking that many tests, when he would never take anywhere near that number if he was completely clean
That’s dumb.
Good counter
According to the CBA, a player is tested once during the offseason, once at the end of spring training, at least twice during the regular season (the small bit of this you have pointed out), and once at the beginning of the postseason (if his team reached the playoffs). That’s 5 times a year… minimum for a player reaching the playoffs. A player also cannot refuse a random test, regardless how many times they have been tested that year. This has been the case since 2010. 7 years at 5 times a year is 35. Minus the 5 years the RedSox did not make the playoffs and you’re back to 30… minimum. Let’s also not forget that the sports physical a player takes when signing a new contract includes a drug test. Also, due to insurance purposes, most players placed on the DL tend to be drug tested.
I don’t believe Ortiz was ever tested 80 times, but 40 sounds quite probable.
That would be nice if you had the slightest shred of evidence. Since you don’t, you’ll stop now.
Yes why would if it somehow makes him look guilty? He’s a top hitter in MLB. Of course they test him a lot. They’re not going to test Brock Holt a lot. Although he hit 4 times his average amount of home runs this year. Maybe they should.
Btw, realize 28 is wrong must’ve swiped it while going across screen
Not true
This is definitely a candidate for stupidest internet comment of 2016. Congratulations! Hope you win!
How so
You think it’s plausible that MLB would cover up failed tests?
You trying to edge this guy out of the running now?
You have two guys who joined the red sox at the same time in 2003. One was known to take steroids. All of a sudden ortiz comes from obscurity to hit 174 homers from 03-06 with 54 in 2006, the report was published in 2007. The three highest hr totals he has had since then 35,37,38 at the ages of 38,39,40.
Look at Ortiz’s numbers in MN. He didn’t come out of obscurity.
He hit 20 hrs as a bench player in MN.
They platooned him at 1B and never gave him a shot.
That’s the weakest, know nothing About Ortiz argument that every hater goes
For… unless they actually looked up his career. Because that is 100% incorrect.
Maybe you want to look up his hr% and ab/hr numbers from when he went to the twins to the red sox, both numbers went in opposite directions.
ARod failed 3 tests before any were made public. IRod failed a test which didn’t come out to the public until years after he retired. Manny Ramirez failed two tests before his first failed test was reported. Yes, it’s very easy to be skeptical of the MLB’s intent on this issue, since it was in bed with the PED abusers for well over 15 years.
No other player has ever come out of obscurity.
Or how bout the fact that mitchell was actually under employment w/ the red sox when the league hired him to do his investigation. Absolutely no conflict of interest there
So Boston could have rescinded the trade but didn’t, and Ortiz can take PEDs for therapeutic needs…. I guess whining does work kiddies
Way to not understand English!! Great job!
Listen and think before babbling…
Boston made the deal for Pomeranz ok?? The non waiver deadline was over when the cance to get Espinoza back.. They Could NOT make another deal then free and clear, like BEFORE the non waiver deadline.. IF… they took Espinoza back!
Had Preller not lied? chances are Dombrowski wouldn’t have paid such a high price, or gone elsewhere for a starter.
THAT is why the uproar, anyone just has to think, not babble aimlessly like so many here are regarding the entire situation.
This is quite hilarious coming from you. You have more run on posts that show an obvious ax to grind than anyone else here.
It makes sense on why not take back the Sox best pitching kid after it was found out preller lied. It’s a slam dunk. I can’t see why anyone would dispute it!
They couldn’t go out and get another SP now that the non waiver deadline had past.
I’d have taken him back regardless.. Fact? Never made the deal to begin with and rolled the dice. I never have trusted junk balling lefties at fenway, other than Bill Lee in my over 50y as a fan. Even the good ones they developed sent elsewhere (Tudor, Ojeda) struggled at Boston. Only the power guys (Hurst) worked well at fenway.
Preller didn’t lie…..he chose not to disclose every pill put into a players mouth.
Anti inflammatories could be Alleve for Gwynns sake!
Ortiz does not have a TUE currently. The TUE mostly covers amphetamines like Adderall and Ritalin, which a lot of maor leaguers take for ADD or related symptoms. Ortiz doesn’t take any of these things according to MLB
MLB’s handling of David Ortiz is a joke. He should have suffered the same fate as ARod. And Palmiero, McGwire and Sosa to name a few more.
What fate was that? Palmeiro was supended after testing positive. Ortiz, Sosa, McGwire never did, although McGwire and ARod both admitted to using PEDs. If you have some proof that Ortiz used I’d love to see it (and no, “he’s good” isn’t proof.) You do know that he’s been tested at least 100 times since 2004, right?
The tested 100 times is according to Ortiz. Take that with a grain of salt. An article last year came out (from a Boston writer Dan Schanaussey) said that is only possible if a player has previously failed a test.
So it is not possible that Ortiz is tested more than anyone else.
Why?
Except they have confirmed positive tests and Ortiz doesn’t. But don’t let facts get in the way of you mindless frothing hatred of the man.
better pay for minor leaguers or teams should provide dorms and foods.
vote bonds in!
I agree, when you have the most home runs in major league history, even without the steroids, he likely would have been close. At the age of like 50, he outslugged a Giancarlo Stanton and Christian Yelich in their primes.
Exactly. PEDs don’t turn a scrub into the all time home run leader and should-be HOFer. He still probably would have hit 600-675.
No, it only turned a guy whose career high was 46 at the age of 28 into a 73 HR-hitter at the age of 36 despite multiple knee and hip issues. It only turned a guy who had been hitting HR at a 1/19.7 PA pace into a guy hitting them at a 1/12.8PA pace. The man hit more HR after the age of 32 than he did before… despite several major health issues.
Without PEDs, Bonds would not have played beyond the age of 36. Without PEDs, Bonds would not have hit 40 HR again after 1997.. when he was beginning to naturally decline. He might have reached 525-530 HR for his career… not 600 or more.
All of that said, I believe Bonds was HoF worthy before the obvious signs of PEDs began popping up in 2000. I’m on the fence of him ever being elected, though.
It kind of seems like Manfred is voicing his opinions a little here. If he is saying it is unfair that the 03 test is affecting Ortiz’s legacy and that it might not have been positive, than shouldn’t he say that it’s unfair and may not have been positive for all of the players that were affected by it? Also, he shouldn’t be saying “Mr. Preller” is misbehaving and all that stuff.
Looks to me Preller acted badly, then the Red Sox went to Manfred to sweeten the deal. When Manfred wouldn’t give them more than the opportunity to reverse the deal, they kept Pomeranz (which tells you that they likely thought they got a more than fair price in the first place.) Manfred did punish Preller, But the whole incident is fascinating. What differentiated this deal from the 5 or 6 other complaints–besides the identity of the team complaining? I had hoped Manfred would move towards a more level playing field and away from the Selig legacy. Perhaps that was wishful thinking.
I sort of hate “sweeten the deal” comments like this. As if there’s ever been precident of that happening.
Even if we take the stance the Red Sox are over reacting (maybe they are since they did in the end just let it go), let’s not pretend they seriously believed they would ever get more than a reversal of the trade.
Wouldn’t be surprised if Preller is fired. Teams will think twice before dealing with the Padres. They’ve been active quite a bit recently too.
Since the Red Sox didn’t reverse the deal, maybe that means they are over exaggerating the seriousness of this “injury”. Pomeranz is going to be an important piece next year, so why would they still be using him if he were hurt anyways?
The Red Sox are the pinnacle of integrity in baseball, you’re talking crazy
Oh wait
Well, the landscape now is dramatically different from when they dealt for him. Since they can’t trade for a different pitcher, and have a post season this year to worry about, I’m not sure if it’s fair to look at their actions without taking into account how much different the situation is now vs. when the deal was made.