I am surprised Ricketts could scrape up the funds to send that email out.In case anyone is interested in ticket refund status, we were supposed to go to Wrigley to see the Sox later this month. I got this from the Cubs today
I am surprised Ricketts could scrape up the funds to send that email out.In case anyone is interested in ticket refund status, we were supposed to go to Wrigley to see the Sox later this month. I got this from the Cubs today
View: https://twitter.com/Joelsherman1/status/1270054914383917056MLB’s latest proposal gave the union a deadline of Wednesday to reach agreement on a 76-game season. The inference: each few days is going to keep lowering the number of games believed possible by MLB until it gets to that 48-54 range for full prorated salaries.
Normally, playoff games are not included as part of players' salary. Their final paid day of work is the final game of the regular season. Playoff compensation is entirely in the form of bonuses. That is why owners are reducing the regular season while increasing the post-season at the same time. That's where they make their money.So instead of 162 games plus max 12% more games (20) @ full salary, MLB is suggesting 50 games plus max 52% more games (26) for 1/3 salary? Maybe it’s not 26, maybe it’s 24, but I think there’s a proposal for an extra round.
If nothing else if was the MLBPA I would want each playoff series to count as 5 or 6 games worth of full salary for each player involved.
Yes. The commissioner has the unilateral power to say when the season starts and ends.I know this has been discussed a bit, but has it been confirmed that the earlier agreement that guaranteed full prorated salaries to players also gives MLB complete control over how many games are played? I'm losing track of where these negotiations have been.
Right. That’s why I am saying that in this case I would demand that playoff games get included in the prorated salaries.Normally, playoff games are not included as part of players' salary. Their final paid day of work is the final game of the regular season. Playoff compensation is entirely in the form of bonuses. That is why owners are reducing the regular season while increasing the post-season at the same time. That's where they make their money.
This is laughably bad. 16 teams and 3 game series'? No thanks, just come back next year.lol. I can't take this seriously if this is what happens
View: https://twitter.com/Joelsherman1/status/1270047397205487623
Largely agree, though in a 50-60 game sample with no inter division match-ups and huge rosters I don't think we'll have any clear picture on which teams were great and which teams were mediocre.Expanding the playoffs is defensible in that it can offset some of the quirky inequities of the greatly-shortened regular season. Plus, having to successfully navigate through multiple extended playoff rounds helps get you to a deserving champion (if not the very best team this season). BUT, putting in miniseries in the playoffs just maximizes the chances you get a quite mediocre champion at the end of the tourney.
The expanded playoffs are all about the $$$$ that the owners don't have to share as much with the players.Largely agree, though in a 50-60 game sample with no inter division match-ups and huge rosters I don't think we'll have any clear picture on which teams were great and which teams were mediocre.
I'm fine with the expanded playoffs as a "one" year test drive thing for that reason. It's obviously a gimmick to get as any eyes as possible on as many meaningful (in this context) games as possible. If the fans love it then it's something to think about down the line.
There was a lot of opposition to the WC game but it's hard to deny those games are a ton of fun and these are mini versions of those.
Worse than Bettman? Nobody was worse than John Zieglar... not sure if you follow hockey.. I still think Bowie Kuhn was the worst commissioner in baseball history.Manfred is rapidly gaining on Selig as the worst Commissioner of my lifetime. If he fully spits the bit here and they play 50 games with some kind of ridiculous post-season, that'll probably lock him in for me. And that's before he rolls out whatever ridiculous rules changes he has in mind for the future.
Agreed 100%. The NBA and NHL were near the end of their seasons when it all shut down. Financially they had a lot less to figure out since the majority of the year's salaries were already paid. Re-starting for them is just a matter of deciding the best way to sort out the final few teams to make the post-season since they lost the last few weeks of the regular season.Eh. Baseball is poorly positioned with regard to both the timing of the season and the status of the current CBA to deal with a global pandemic.
I dont think it is Manfred's fault that some owners are apparently reluctant to lose money this year.
Hopefully he can salvage some small part of this season. Regardless, he mostly gets a pass from me. I think he was dealt a tougher hand compared to other professional sports leagues.
I agree with the last two paragraphs, but disagree with the first one. I see no downside to more baseball, of any length, of any peculiarity, if the players agree to do it (if they are comfortable with health/safety and compensation). Hell, make it World Cup style, have round robins followed by knockouts for all I care.Don't we at this point just have to write off the 2020 baseball season? Regardless of what they do at this point, this is going to be a bastardized season that will produce a deeply asterisked champion.
As a Red Sox fan they can decide this year's champion by throwing darts at a wall for all I care - as long as enough games are played to allow the team to go into 2021 with a reset luxury tax. If they end up having gotten real assets in return for one barely-played season of Mookie, *and* reset their luxury tax, *and* gotten much of Chris Sale's healing done during this season that's going to be looked at as a gimmicky novelty song in the annals of baseball history, 2020 will have been a fantastic success for the team no matter how ridiculous the season format ends up.
Instead of what was expected to be a lost season, the Red Sox will have inadvertently completed a ton of rebuilding in a season that's barely going to count for any team anyway.
I totally agree. Not only do I not see any downside to whatever they end up deciding to do, the only downside I see is not doing anything and forcing the Red Sox to go through another year of financial austerity. Whatever plan gets the Red Sox a reset luxury tax is a massive positive for the team, no matter how silly it looks.I agree with the last two paragraphs, but disagree with the first one. I see no downside to more baseball, of any length, of any peculiarity, if the players agree to do it (if they are comfortable with health/safety and compensation). Hell, make it World Cup style, have round robins followed by knockouts for all I care.
I agree with @SirPsychoSquints - I don't want to scrap the season. But also I think this could end up being a dream scenario for the Red Sox for all the reasons you mentioned. Sale gets needed surgery that costs him as little actual baseball time as possible, resetting the luxury tax, getting assets for Mookie....and the cost being one bizarre pandemic gimmick season where, let's be honest, if they go to some sort of weird format, the Sox actually still have a chance?Don't we at this point just have to write off the 2020 baseball season? Regardless of what they do at this point, this is going to be a bastardized season that will produce a deeply asterisked champion.
As a Red Sox fan they can decide this year's champion by throwing darts at a wall for all I care - as long as enough games are played to allow the team to go into 2021 with a reset luxury tax. If they end up having gotten real assets in return for one barely-played season of Mookie, *and* reset their luxury tax, *and* gotten much of Chris Sale's healing done during this season that's going to be looked at as a gimmicky novelty song in the annals of baseball history, 2020 will have been a fantastic success for the team no matter how ridiculous the season format ends up.
Instead of what was expected to be a lost season, the Red Sox will have inadvertently completed a ton of rebuilding in a season that's barely going to count for any team anyway.
The fact that it is somewhat of a crapshoot season is literally the worst reason to tank.I actually hope the Sox tank whatever season exists. Treat it like extended spring training. The team wouldn't be good anyways. Finish last and get draft capital and reset the luxury tax
no, it isn't. This season you need tons of depth along the pitching staff. The Sox have like four major league caliber pitchers capable of pitching more than an inning effectively. Tank city. It's ok to go 0-48. Who would really care? Get the first pick. reset the luxury tax.The fact that it is somewhat of a crapshoot season is literally the worst reason to tank.
“They wouldn’t be good anyways” when they are probably a playoff team in a year when a just fairly ok team might win the whole thing.. ...is.....an odd comment.
With no fans it’s not like tanking will affect attendance.no, it isn't. This season you need tons of depth along the pitching staff. The Sox have like four major league caliber pitchers capable of pitching more than an inning effectively. Tank city. It's ok to go 0-48. Who would really care? Get the first pick. reset the luxury tax.
There’s blame to be meted out, of course, and I put the lion’s share on the owners. To borrow a much-used phrase, they are trying to socialize their losses after being perfectly content to privatize their gains. They have employed a divide-and-conquer strategy that ignores the fact that the people they are trying to divide and conquer are also their product — the ones they will ask their fans to embrace when this is all over. It’s as if Nabisco embarked on a campaign to paint Oreos as mushy and ill-tasting — and then expected consumers to pick up a few cartons.
The players are holding firmly to the fact they already negotiated an agreement to have their salary prorated over the season, however long it turns out to be. The owners are trying to impose cuts well beyond that, on the grounds that the financial losses for games in fan-free stadiums will be “biblical,” in the words of Cubs owner Tom Ricketts.
Excuse me for having trouble summoning much sympathy for the cash-flow problems of a man whose family’s net worth was pegged at $1.8 billion by Forbes, and who has control of one of the flagship franchises in all of pro sports. I’m reminded of the declaration that then-Blue Jays president (and later president and COO of MLB) Paul Beeston regretted ever saying: “I can turn a $4 million profit into a $2 million loss and get every national accounting firm to agree with me.”
Pennywise and pound foolish, they can save money year to year but IMO it is putting the value of their clubs at serious risk (longer-term) and deeply endangering the sport. It seems quite stupid to me.
Guessing this means that if nothing is agreed to by the end of the weekend, the negotiations will end and either the season will be cancelled or the owners will force the 50 game season and we'll see if the players agree to play.LA Times reporting that the season is starting July 10 (which seems aggressively soon -- are they just assuming that all of the players, especially the pitchers, have been working out all this time?). They just need to determine how many games will be played.
The players SHOULD have been working out all this time. They're professionals. This is their job, their livelihood. If they haven't been, shame on them.LA Times reporting that the season is starting July 10 (which seems aggressively soon -- are they just assuming that all of the players, especially the pitchers, have been working out all this time?). They just need to determine how many games will be played.
They are going to let players opt out of playing the season, if there is one. The player wouldn't get paid or get any service time though.I have moved to the position that they shouldn't play this season. If Covid-19 gets spread through a teams locker room it can affect the players for the rest of their careers/lives.
How would they handle a player refusing to play because they have a vulnerable family member?
If I was a player I would push the owners to be present for every game and take on the same health risks as the players. This would certainly change the dynamic of the negotiations.
https://elemental.medium.com/the-long-term-health-impacts-of-being-infected-with-the-coronavirus-d3a03f3cb6e8
They don't have an argument against a 50 game season. They have an argument against reducing their per-game salary. The owners are the ones trying to negotiate something different than the current agreement - they want expanded playoffs. In exchange for this, the players are offering a longer season (at the same per-game salary, which would increase their income).The players SHOULD have been working out all this time. They're professionals. This is their job, their livelihood. If they haven't been, shame on them.
Maybe I've missed it, but what's the players' argument against a 50-game season (assume all 50 games' pay is pro-rated)? I know it's weird, but what in the world ISN'T weird right now? Playing in front of no fans will be weird. Playing in a centralized location will be weird. Everything about it will be weird. But wouldn't they rather get paid for 50 games than for no games? Wouldn't they rather play SOME baseball (I presume they still love the sport, right?) than NO baseball?
Why wouldn't the players be ok with expanded playoffs? That means more players have a shot at winning a championship and it means more money (playoff shares). Unless the owners are looking to have expanded playoffs and not pay the players for it. Clearly I'm not understanding all this, which is fine. I'll just wait to see what happens.They don't have an argument against a 50 game season. They have an argument against reducing their per-game salary. The owners are the ones trying to negotiate something different than the current agreement - they want expanded playoffs. In exchange for this, the players are offering a longer season (at the same per-game salary, which would increase their income).
Players don't get anywhere near the normal paychecks during the playoffs.Why wouldn't the players be ok with expanded playoffs? That means more players have a shot at winning a championship and it means more money (playoff shares). Unless the owners are looking to have expanded playoffs and not pay the players for it. Clearly I'm not understanding all this, which is fine. I'll just wait to see what happens.
Why wouldn't the players be ok with expanded playoffs? That means more players have a shot at winning a championship and it means more money (playoff shares). Unless the owners are looking to have expanded playoffs and not pay the players for it. Clearly I'm not understanding all this, which is fine. I'll just wait to see what happens.
Right. The owners want expanded playoffs to increase their revenue, but they don't want more regular season games to increase the players' income.Players don't get anywhere near the normal paychecks during the playoffs.
Players don't get paychecks during the playoffs, period. They earn a share of post-season bonuses. That can be a hefty chunk of change (a full individual share for the Nationals last year was roughly $382K. That's the biggest share there's ever been. And obviously the shares are smaller for the teams that don't advance. It's a respectable chunk of change, but not necessarily significant to guys making eight figures per season in salary.Players don't get anywhere near the normal paychecks during the playoffs.
To state the obvious, this is so players don't have an incentive to elongate a series. Black Sox stuff.Players don't get paychecks during the playoffs, period. They earn a share of post-season bonuses. That can be a hefty chunk of change (a full individual share for the Nationals last year was roughly $382K. That's the biggest share there's ever been. And obviously the shares are smaller for the teams that don't advance. It's a respectable chunk of change, but not necessarily significant to guys making eight figures per season in salary.
The rub is how the bonuses are derived. The players' bonus pools are derived from 50% of the gate for wildcard games, and 60% of the gate in subsequent series. Also, for series, only the minimum number of games are used...3 for the LDS, 4 for LCS and WS...so if a series goes more than the minimum, the owners get 100% of the gate on those games (so no player has ever been paid for a Game 7). If there are no fans, there's no gate.
Absolutely.To state the obvious, this is so players don't have an incentive to elongate a series. Black Sox stuff.