As I understand it, her ruling in the baseball suit appeal, like her ruling in many other appeals, was basically procedural. The appeals courts seldom (if ever?) attempt to retry lower court cases. Their role is, at least usually, to determine whether proper legal procedures were followed in the lower-court cases -- e.g., whether a fair trial was had. Sometimes when a case is brought before them, their ruling is as to whether the plaintiff has "standing" to bring the case. Anyway, it's often not on substantive issues.
Her ruling in the baseball case doesn't necessarily reflect on her evaluation of the relative merits of the players v. the owners/managers of baseball teams.