Owners Looking to Bust the Union
major-league-baseball-union-coronavirus
Last edited by moonslav59; 05-27-2020 at 05:13 PM.
Sox 4 Ever
I'd gladly trade 2020 for less power for the players union. In fact, I'd be willing to lose multiple seasons if we could get a salary cap, do something about the teams that don't spend any $ at all, and stop giving out long guaranteed contracts. I dream of a day when guys like Panda, Price, and Pedroia can get cut for minimal cap penalty. I hate how teams get handcuffed by contracts and refuse to move on. It's frustrating as all hell. Almost as frustrating as all these stars that end up costing teams $100 million on the backend of their careers when they can barely walk. As much as I want Mookie back, the last 3-5 of his deal just won't be worth it...
What is crazy is the A's owner, who is a billionaire, wasn't willing to pay his minor leaguers $400 a week, which in a lot of states isn't even half of what unemployment is paying these days due to the Coronavirus.
It doesn't sound like a deal is close and I wouldn't be surprised if a season doesn't happen at all at this point.
No one is forcing teams to give out those contracts. I'm fine with the players getting paid guaranteed most as for most of them it evens out as they begin their career young and dominant for pennies. For example, Rafael Devers was an MVP candidate for 600k a year last season.There is no way the players begin getting less power, especially when the owners are all making and are worth absurd amounts of money.
I get all that and I'm certainly not on the owners side. The lack of a cap also doesn't help. I can't imagine being a KC fan knowing that all the good players you draft will walk because you can't match what the big market teams can pay. It makes the whole idea of fair competition a joke.
As for contracts, you are right sometimes it works out with drafted players they way overperform their rookie contract, but that doesn't Help all FA signings that turn into Pablo, etc. It also doesn't help when you can't adjust after a few years. Take Porcello for example, he should have been given option to take a pay cut or be cut going into last year with how awful he was the previous two years. Or Pedroia who is eating up a ton of $ to be off the roster. What about the Sale situation. His contract could turn into a disaster and there's nothing we can do.
Its easier for a big market team like the Sox to survive a few bad big contracts, but smaller markets can't survive it. When Chris Davis happens to a smaller market team, it can be disastrous.
Of course if they went to a cap, the guaranteed contracts could become absolute disasters for some teams.
I just want parity and the best players on the field. Salaries shouldn't factor into playing time, yet we all know it does. You never see the $30 million aging slugger end up on the bench to the better player... You should.
I was always a baseball fan first and foremost, but watching how sports like the NFL operates with a cap, contracts, etc, it makes the MLB less and less interesting to watch. MLB is dying outside of the big markets, I wonder why...
Agree 100%. Also, I am worried about this season. Players obviously want to play (with a few exceptions, due to health and family concerns). Owners? I don't know: all the statements I've seen from them are about revenue losses. I wonder what the financial calculations are (1) a lost season vs. (2) a half season paying acc. to the players' proposal. If those figures are anywhere within shouting distance of each other, I fear the owners would take the losses for a lost season, in part to show what bad-asses they are. (If they were running a 'business' rather than working on a 'hobby' this might be different.)
No, it doesn't sound like a deal is close, but I would be surprised if the two sides don't work something out. They both know how bad it will look if the season doesn't get played because of disagreements over money.
Personally, I like the thinking that the players who make more are the ones who take the bigger hit. They can afford it. MLB's first proposal might be asking the players to give up too much (though I would not feel the least bit bad for Trout if he only makes $70K per game), but it is the first offer and this is a negotiation. The players need to make a reasonable counter offer and the owners need to make the compromise.
Merloni said it best: Right now I don't like either side very much.
IMO the bigger issue is the message the players and owners are sending to the public and fans in particular. That message is, "We're a bunch of millionaires playing baseball and a bunch of multi-millionaires (or in some cases billionaires) who own the teams and we are so greedy that we're unwilling to come to a reasonable compromise so we can continue to provide entertainment to you folks who aren't nearly as well off as we are."
Posters here don't represent the general public since we're rabid baseball fans, and we're sick of it. How well do you think this is playing with the casual fan? MLB should be very careful. They may very well be killing this goose that keeps laying golden eggs.
It's a mere moment in a man's life between the All-Star game and the Old Timer's game.
-Vin Scully
I completely agree Dewey. I have said that I don't really care who gets the money between the owners and the players. None of them really need it. What doesn't sit well with me is how they come across as being completely unplugged from what is happening to so many people during this pandemic. There are people who literally cannot feed their children, there are workers making minimum wage who are sleeping in their garages for fear of infecting their families, and the list goes on, and these guys are complaining about making only $2.5 mil for 4 months of work. Give me a break.
People need the return of sports to help them feel some sense of normalcy and renewed hope. Don't screw this up baseball.