MLB Teams Fear League Will Pick Winners and Losers in Tech

In modern baseball, scouting isn’t just an eye test—it’s an arms race.

Whether fleshing out holes in a swing with motion capture or using high-speed cameras to find the next killer curveball, each MLB team seeks an edge by modernizing how it scouts and develops prospects. Teams regularly hire outside firms to obtain data straight from the ballpark, then deliver the info to front office staffers in an effort to gain an edge over their peers. 

That arms race will end next year. 

In 2026, MLB—not the teams—will have full control over who can provide that tech in the minors, handling all negotiations, approvals, installation, and distribution of a league-approved data package across MiLB parks. Information collected by third-party vendors will no longer be proprietary, but will instead be bundled by the league for distribution to all 30 clubs, a change that some teams and front office workers believe will suppress innovation and competition.

The looming changes to minor league scouting were first reported by The Athletic last week. Front Office Sports has since learned that MLB’s increased control over the $7 billion player tracking industry goes far beyond the minors. The league’s regulation of technology will also extend to who and what can operate at college, high school, and showcase events. 

An MLB spokesperson told FOS that the league has regulated amateur tech since 2020 and intends to “expand the current policy for 2026.” 

FOS spoke to several team executives, scouts, analysts, and tech vendors, all of whom spoke on the condition of anonymity because the organizations they work for didnʻt grant permission to discuss league policy changes.

The league has sought team input on which data and tech firms to include. But team employees who spoke to FOS were concerned about MLB giving itself the power to pick the winning and losing companies in a multi-billion-dollar tech boom. 

The league presented several companies to clubs in a closed-door session at the winter meetings earlier this month, and teams are now closely scrutinizing the firms under consideration. In the presentation, multiple sources say, the league repeatedly referenced one potential vendor: Infinite Sky, an artificial intelligence startup.

That company was founded in 2021 by MIT PhD and entrepreneur Ken Lazarus. According to its website, Infinite Sky uses machine learning to analyze video footage and measure pitcher biomechanics, evaluate ball speed and movement, and even forecast injury risk. 

Lazarus is the uncle of Morgan Sword, a powerful MLB executive seen as an inner-circle candidate to succeed Rob Manfred as the next commissioner. Sword is EVP of Baseball Operations, a major voice as MLB continues to take major leaps with new technology.

The 40-year-old Sword oversees all data and tech partnerships. That includes next year’s introduction of the Automated Ball-Strike System, known to fans as “robo-umps.” It also includes any potential deal with Infinite Sky.

A league spokesperson told FOS that Sword directed his staffers to evaluate the viability of Infinite Sky without his involvement, and that the league was “only considering vendors that have been identified by a significant number of Clubs as desired partners for amateur data.” The league confirmed to FOS that MLB has what it called a “non-exclusive evaluation contract” with Infinite Sky that gives the startup access to MLB data “for the sole purposes of evaluating the technology.” No decision has been made yet on a league deal, though Infinite Sky has separate deals with a handful of MLB teams. 

Lazarus married Sword’s aunt more than 30 years ago; Lazarus and Sword did not respond to several requests for comment. Three team sources said they were aware of Infinite Sky, but were not aware that Sword and Lazarus were related until told by FOS. 

“In a world where that [deal] happens, it would be very disappointing,” said one team executive who attended the closed-door meeting. “It would mean the commissionerʻs office isnʻt making decisions to help its clubs, but to help its preferred vendors.”

There are other potential issues with MLB’s tech and data bundle. Former Federal Trade Commission advisor Katherine Van Dyck told FOS the move would give MLB “enormous buying power” and “the ability to demand significant concessions” from potential vendors. 

“That can have outside effects, where the vendor tries to make up the losses by passing them on as higher prices for other customers,” said Van Dyck. She also noted that the move could bring MLB increased antitrust scrutiny.

Some in the sport believe that bundling vendor contracts could increase tech costs for some franchises and lead to teams cutting costs in-house.

“I can see there being motivation to hire fewer R&D staff because MLB is now controlling and theoretically cleaning the data,” said one staffer. 

The league has so far defended its increased control and bundling plan as an effort to democratize access to data and curbing exclusive access for bigger spenders. “MLB’s goal is to ensure equal access to data and a level playing field,” a league spokesperson told FOS. 

Van Dyck disagreed with the league’s assessment. 

“Different teams have different needs, and those needs will not be represented by MLB,” said Van Dyck, predicting the league could “easily force the teams into expensive bundled contracts with services and technology they don’t need or want and can’t afford.”