MLB players survey: Sounding off on umps, shifts, steroids - and whether to strike back

Show Caption Hide Caption Bryce Harper's slump could cost him millions in MLB free agency SportsPulse: MLB insider Bob Nightengale on why Bryce Harper's hitting slump isn't just hurting the Washington Nationals' offense but could also hurt his wallet come free agency.

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 revenues approach $11 billion.

With that in mind, USA TODAY Sports set out to gauge the mindset 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? Turns out they have a soft spot for the men in blue.

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

1. Are pace-of-play changes working? (49 of 63 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 set last year.

Truly speeding up the game may 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 NL 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 nowawdays. 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 National League veteran, “assumes there was a problem in the first place.”

2. Should limits be placed on defensive shifts? (62 of 63 responded)

The overwhelming “no” response - from 54 of 62 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 that 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 home plate.

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

Indeed, many players found the concept of regulating intellectual property distasteful. Washington Nationals catcher Matt Wieters was among those against minimizing shifts, but did have one suggestion: Force infielders to remain in the same sequence in shifts – in other words, no flip-flopping the shortstop and third baseman to maintain continuity on a potential double-play pivot.

3. Is the so-called "lack of action" - fewer balls in play due to a heavy amount of walks and strikeouts - a problem? (59 of 63 responded)

In our most overwhelming response – and one that could significantly vary from fans’ sentiment – 55 of 59 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 of 63 responded)

Call this the Trevor Bauer Conundrum. 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 Houston 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 of those 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 of 63 responded)

Fatigue, lousy weather, poor early- and 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 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 of 63 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 that responded were largely in favor, perhaps a byproduct that MLB is now nearly 30 years removed from its last major betting scandal, involving Cincinnati Reds manager Pete Rose.

7. Is a strike necessary in 2021 to regain losses incurred in previous CBAs? (26 of 63 responded)

Naturally, the strong wording gave many respondents pause, given that 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. Five more will enter the free agent market this year or the year after.

8. Would you accept a computerized strike zone in place of umpires? (50 of 63 responded)

It happens every night: An umpire calls a borderline ball or strike, and social media lights up with screenshots 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 grave injustices.

Well, despite tensions that remain between player and ump, there’s little desire to eradicate the human element behind the plate, as 43 of 50 players want to save the umpires.

Many respondents speak of tradition and umps being “part of the game.” Others, however, doubt the 100% accuracy of pitch-tracking 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,” says one All-Star pitcher. “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 of 63 responded)

Once 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," says Padres first baseman Eric Hosmer. "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 up there."

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 of 63 responded)

The sensitive subject prompted one-third of our respondents to decline comment. And 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.