In a significant development as collective bargaining negotiations heat up, the Major League Baseball Players Association (MLBPA) has proposed a ban on prop betting involving individual players. The move, reported Thursday by ESPN’s Jeff Passan, aims squarely at protecting players from the growing scourge of online harassment and threats by disgruntled gamblers.
For the casual fan who might enjoy a friendly wager on the outcome of a game or two, it’s worth understanding what this is all about. Player prop bets allow gamblers to wager on specific individual performances rather than the final score—like whether a pitcher will throw a strike on his first pitch, how many strikeouts a starter will record, or if a hitter will get a hit in his next at-bat. These bets exploded in popularity after the 2018 Supreme Court decision that opened the floodgates for widespread sports betting across the U.S.
While team-based betting has long been part of the sports landscape, the granular nature of props puts a target on individual athletes. A bad outing or even a routine play can lead to angry messages, doxxing, or worse from bettors who lost money. The MLBPA’s proposal seeks to eliminate these individual-focused wagers entirely, including those placed before or during games, through a joint lobbying effort with MLB directed at sportsbooks and daily fantasy operators.
This isn’t the first time gambling issues have surfaced in baseball recently. Last year, Cleveland Guardians pitchers Emmanuel Clase and Luis Ortiz faced investigations related to suspicious betting activity on specific pitches, highlighting vulnerabilities in the system. Similar concerns have rippled through other leagues, with the NBA and its players’ association expressing support for limits on props to curb manipulation risks and athlete abuse. MLB Commissioner Rob Manfred has also signaled openness to restrictions on certain “unnecessary” bets.
MLBPA Executive Director Tony Clark has previously voiced strong support for addressing prop bets, emphasizing player safety and the integrity of the sport. In the current proposal, the union is framing the issue as a player welfare priority during talks for a new collective bargaining agreement.
From a fan’s perspective, the integrity of the game is paramount. No one wants to watch a player and wonder if external pressures influenced their performance. While most athletes compete with the highest level of professionalism, the constant scrutiny enabled by real-time micro-betting can create an unhealthy environment. Ballparks have already implemented policies against betting-related abusive fan behavior, and in-stadium displays of player-specific betting odds are restricted.
Critics of a full ban point out enforcement challenges—offshore or unregulated markets could still offer such bets—but the MLBPA and MLB’s influence through partnerships, data licensing, and advertising could significantly reduce availability on major platforms like DraftKings and FanDuel. Many see this as a proactive step to protect the game before problems escalate further.
The rise of sports gambling has brought revenue to leagues but also new headaches. States have taken varied approaches, with some limiting or banning college sports props, and figures like Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine pushing for restrictions following MLB incidents. Scott Boras and other agents have echoed calls to eliminate these bets to safeguard player reputations.
As negotiations continue ahead of the CBA’s expiration, this proposal underscores the MLBPA’s focus on modern threats to its members.
Baseball has always adapted to changing times. If curbing individual prop bets helps shield players from undue pressure while preserving the excitement of the sport, it could be a win for everyone involved.
