Share 
Major League Baseball’s players union wants prop bets gone. The fight over how to get there is now a live issue in labor talks that could shape the sport’s next contract.
The MLBPA proposed banning all prop bets tied to individual players as part of ongoing CBA negotiations with MLB, according to ESPN’s David Purdum and Jeff Passan. The plan targets sportsbooks, daily fantasy platforms, and prediction markets alike, wiping out everything from home run props to strikeout totals, pregame or live.
Why Ban Prop Bets Now?
Prop bets put a single player’s stat line in the crosshairs of anyone who lost money on it. That creates a direct incentive for angry bettors to target players online, and in rare cases, in person.
The proposal follows a rough stretch for the league: two Cleveland Guardians pitchers were indicted last November on charges tied to an alleged pitch-rigging scheme built around first-pitch prop bets. That pushed MLB and its sportsbook partners to cap those wagers at $250 and pull them out of parlays.
What Else Is on the Table
The union isn’t just asking for a ban. It also wants:
- MLB to loosen restrictions that currently stop players from endorsing sportsbooks and prediction markets, a carve-out the NBA, NHL, and UFC already allow
- Players under betting investigation to go on administrative leave rather than face immediate discipline
- Players returning from gambling suspensions to get a 15-day unpaid rehab assignment in the minors on their way back
None of this is close to finalized. MLB has only said it will respond as talks continue, and the current CBA doesn’t expire until December 1st. If the two sides can’t agree, a lockout becomes a real possibility.
What a Ban Would Actually Do to the Industry
Prop bets aren’t a side dish anymore. Consider the numbers:
- Player props make up an estimated 20% to 30% of total handle on a given MLB game
- Same-game parlays, which lean heavily on individual props, generate an estimated 35% to 40% of sportsbook revenue nationally, up from under 20% five years ago
- More than 70% of same-game parlays include at least one individual stat market
Strip props out entirely and you’re not trimming a niche product. You’re gutting the highest-margin, fastest-growing part of the business.
That’s because props and parlays don’t just drive volume, they drive profit. A standard point-spread or total carries a house edge around 4.5%. Add player props and that edge climbs toward 7%. Layer in same-game parlay pricing, and the realized hold on a parlay ticket can run 20% to 30%. National sportsbook hold has already climbed from roughly 6-7% in 2021 to 9-11% by 2025, largely on the back of these higher-margin products.
So would a ban shrink handle? Almost certainly, at least in baseball. Bettors who build tickets around a hitter’s home run odds or a starter’s strikeout total would lose the product that hooked them in the first place. Some of that action wouldn’t migrate to moneylines and totals. It would just disappear, or shift to other sports that still offer props.
The more interesting question is what happens to the bettors who stick around. Fewer parlays built on individual props means fewer tickets priced at that 20%-plus hold. Push MLB bettors back toward straight bets and game lines, and their average loss rate actually improves, even as total dollars wagered on baseball drops.
It’s a case where a ban aimed at protecting players could, as a side effect, protect bettors’ wallets too. Sportsbooks lose a high-margin revenue stream. MLB likely takes a smaller cut of sportsbook partnerships tied to that volume, since those deals are often structured around total handle and engagement.
Would Other Leagues Follow?
There’s already a template forming. The NBA has spent the past two years tightening its relationship with prop and micro-betting markets, following the Jontay Porter betting scandal and a more recent federal investigation touching Malik Beasley. Commissioner Adam Silver has publicly acknowledged that some bet types are “problematic.”
The NCAA is lobbying regulators directly, asking the Indiana Gaming Commission to consider banning individual player prop bets on college athletes, arguing that unpaid or lightly compensated amateurs are even more exposed to harassment than pros.
If the MLBPA gets its ban and harassment complaints measurably drop, expect the NFLPA and NBPA to feel pressure from their own membership to push for something similar, especially around the biggest prop categories like quarterback passing yards or NBA player points. Sportsbooks would resist hardest there, since NFL and NBA props are the biggest prop-driven revenue generators in the industry.
But if MLB proves a full ban is workable without collapsing overall betting revenue, it hands every other players’ union a case study and a bargaining chip for their own next round of labor talks.
For now, this is a proposal on the table in a negotiation that runs through the fall. But it’s the clearest signal yet that the leagues most exposed to legal betting are starting to treat prop bets as a labor issue, not just a product line.
