The Mainboard MLB Lockout Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
70,745
If the owners really want an international draft that badly, they should offer to go up even more on the CBT. Again, this is not actual money, it is just the right for owners to spend more money without being penalized for it, and even another $20M higher every year (I am not suggesting this) would be much lower than it should be given revenues and inflation since the previous CBAs.
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
46,278
I can imagine the storylines now. Ukraine burning, gas prices at all time high, senate focused on baseball.
Nah. They can do many things at once. And this won’t be a complicated/drawn out debate like some other bills where those bills were the main/singular focus for a few weeks). It’s also one of the few times congress may have this debate over their anti trust status while the owners have actually locked the players out and may actually be bipartisan (for different reasons)
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
90,032
Oregon
Nah. They can do many things at once. And this won’t be a complicated/drawn out debate like some other bills where those bills were the main/singular focus for a few weeks). It’s also one of the few times congress may have this debate over their anti trust status while the owners have actually locked the players out and may actually be bipartisan (for different reasons)
I'd rathe Judiciary focus on the SCOTUS nomination rather than a fight between millionaires and billionaires
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
70,745
I'd rathe Judiciary focus on the SCOTUS nomination rather than a fight between millionaires and billionaires
Agreed but the majority of the players are not millionaires while every owner is a billionaire, this phrase is misleading propaganda IMO.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
70,745
The previous CBA cost Shohei Ohtani maybe $200M on his first deal, I have him making around $14M in his first 5 MLB seasons (through 2022), FA after 2023. It's truly remarkable that billionaire Arte Moreno could get that kind of gift handed to him and still vote against raising the CBT (one of the 4 in the 25-4 vote last week). I hope Ohtani goes elsewhere and eviscerates cheapo Arte in his press conference (he will not but he should).

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2017/12/shohei-ohtani-underpaid/548027/
 

Ale Xander

Hamilton
SoSH Member
Oct 31, 2013
72,567
I'd rathe Judiciary focus on the SCOTUS nomination rather than a fight between millionaires and billionaires
What about a billionaire corporation and regular folk?

Forgive the diversion, but speaking of anti-trust, after SCOTUS and baseball, maybe judiciary can revisit the Live Nation consent decree LN keeps violating.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
70,745
Oh, I forgot about this part, the players said a while back that if the season is not 162 games, they will not approve the playoffs going from 10 to 12 teams this season (Both sides are agreed on 12 currently, not 14).

"With the possibility of 162 games becoming more remote, the talks could stall. The players are expected to seek full salaries. The owners may not concede. But without full pay, the MLBPA has vowed to not authorize the expansion of the playoffs — a revenue boon for the owners that is part of both proposals. "

https://theathletic.com/3174208/2022/03/09/mccullough-the-mlb-lockout-hasnt-ended-if-it-doesnt-soon-it-might-get-worse/
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
70,745
Who's excited for 5 inning tripleheaders to get to 162? The way baseball was always meant to be.
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
46,278
Who's excited for 5 inning tripleheaders to get to 162? The way baseball was always meant to be.
MLBPA would rather no season than be forced to do that I reckon. It’s an injury disaster waiting to happen.
Oh, I forgot about this part, the players said a while back that if the season is not 162 games, they will not approve the playoffs going from 10 to 12 teams this season (Both sides are agreed on 12 currently, not 14).



"With the possibility of 162 games becoming more remote, the talks could stall. The players are expected to seek full salaries. The owners may not concede. But without full pay, the MLBPA has vowed to not authorize the expansion of the playoffs — a revenue boon for the owners that is part of both proposals. "


https://theathletic.com/3174208/2022/03/09/mccullough-the-mlb-lockout-hasnt-ended-if-it-doesnt-soon-it-might-get-worse/
Also. If it actually gets to this point, I actually think the government will get involved. As if we thought it was a shitshow now, just wait until the owners refuse to pay them a full seasons salary because the calendar will make it impossible to play 162 games. (A Problem created by none other than the owners themselves) when they waited 6 damn weeks after locking the players out to even begin negotiating.

i bet they regret that now. (Or maybe not if their entire goal is to actually break the union)

ie: We may see a repeat of the 94 season
https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2021/12/02/sonia-sotomayor-baseball-work-stoppage/
In 1995, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor — then, at age 40, the youngest of the 38 federal judges in the Southern District of New York — helped rescue baseball from further ruin by issuing an injunction two days before the sport’s owners planned to open the season with replacement players. Sotomayor’s decision restored the status quo of baseball’s previous economic system and led the players to end their 7½-month strike, which had forced the cancellation of the 1994 World Series.
“Some say that Judge Sotomayor saved baseball,” President Barack Obama said when he nominated Sotomayor to the high court 14 years later.
Obama’s suggestion may be hyperbole, but there’s no denying Sotomayor’s part in saving the 1995 season and ushering in baseball’s longest period of labor peace since the formation of the players’ union in 1966.
“She had a major role in ending the strike,” said Dan Silverman, who, as regional director of the National Labor Relations Board’s New York office in 1995, filed the board’s petition for an injunction. “She understood the issues, she handled it brilliantly, and she did it in a timely fashion.”
 
Last edited:

Didot Fromager

New Member
Apr 23, 2010
31
Eh. This may actually spook the owners a bit. As the chair of the judiciary committee he is the one that oversees MLB’s anti trust exemption
Edit @jon abbey as a matter of fact there are already two bills that were introduced (house and senate) that if passed would remove their anti trust exemption.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/1111/all-info
Could someone who has more knowledge of how the anti-trust exemption affects baseball either give us a primer on it or point out a couple of links to explore? I can easily envision how it would affect the relationship of clubs to various government agencies, media companies, advertisers, etc. but I'm having trouble imagining how it would affect the relationship with players or the game itself. Could Elon Musk decide he wants a baseball team, build a stadium somewhere, recruit topflight MLB players and start playing games with the Yankees and Dodgers? Would the MLBPA negotiate 30 (or however many) separate contracts? Would revenue sharing become illegal? Would the draft be illegal?

The antitrust exemption seems so iconic but what could actually happen if it went away?
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,504
Could someone who has more knowledge of how the anti-trust exemption affects baseball either give us a primer on it or point out a couple of links to explore? I can easily envision how it would affect the relationship of clubs to various government agencies, media companies, advertisers, etc. but I'm having trouble imagining how it would affect the relationship with players or the game itself. Could Elon Musk decide he wants a baseball team, build a stadium somewhere, recruit topflight MLB players and start playing games with the Yankees and Dodgers? Would the MLBPA negotiate 30 (or however many) separate contracts? Would revenue sharing become illegal? Would the draft be illegal?

The antitrust exemption seems so iconic but what could actually happen if it went away?
IMO nothing material would change. Professional sports have survived antitrust challenges in both the US and EU because their business requires the teams to work together. I posted one link upthread. Here's another that's more ditectly on point: Baseball’s Antitrust Exemption: Its Practical Effect | FanGraphs Baseball . This says:

All told, then, in many of the most important respects, MLB operates in exactly the same manner as the other U.S. professional sports leagues, despite being the only one of the four to enjoy widespread antitrust immunity. Part of the reason for this is that federal antitrust law has, arguably, failed to effectively regulate U.S. sports leagues. Sports leagues are relatively unusual economic entities, in which independently owned, competing businesses inherently must work together closely to ensure their own continued survival.
These traits have made it difficult for courts to apply antitrust law – which typically seeks to prevent competing firms from colluding together – to the sports industry. Indeed, courts have historically been reluctant to use antitrust law to meaningfully change any of the four leagues’ business models, such as by requiring them to expand their number of teams or substantially alter their television broadcasting practices.
As a result, even if baseball’s antitrust exemption were to be repealed, the loss of immunity would not have a significant effect on MLB’s operations in most respects
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,504
The previous CBA cost Shohei Ohtani maybe $200M on his first deal, I have him making around $14M in his first 5 MLB seasons (through 2022), FA after 2023. It's truly remarkable that billionaire Arte Moreno could get that kind of gift handed to him and still vote against raising the CBT (one of the 4 in the 25-4 vote last week). I hope Ohtani goes elsewhere and eviscerates cheapo Arte in his press conference (he will not but he should).

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2017/12/shohei-ohtani-underpaid/548027/
So what? Trout was underpaid more than that and Betts was underpaid by the same amount. Why the Biggest Contract in Sports History Is Actually a Good Deal - InsideHook . Conversely, Chris Davis was overpaid by more than a hundred million dollars.

And I love this quote from the article: "That really, what this means is that an owner who’s never done anything gets all of the money. You have this small number of people, typically older white males who’ve never done anything, are being handed over money that other people are making. Shouldn’t that bother people to some extent?”" If it's so easy to own a baseball team, let's all do it!

I don't know why you have so much vitriol against the owners. To me, the real reason the Otanis and Betts are underpaid is because the MLBPA has sold out prospects for the likes of Chris Davis. And frankly if fans didn't shell out for overpriced tickets, hot dogs, beers, and merchandise - that would be the best way to get back at the owners.

BTW, the article lost credibility to me when it said that players' share of revenues was 36% in 2015. Apparently the author is so angry that he can't see facts. That's not particularly useful IMO but YMMV.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
70,745
I don't know why you have so much vitriol against the owners.
Because having money is not a special skill, because the average franchise value is up a billion and a half dollars since purchase, because there is literally zero financial risk in owning a MLB franchise, because despite that they are trying to chisel the players out of anything close to their fair value, players who are the actual product and who if they are lucky will have a handful of years to earn real money.

But actually all of that is more or less business as usual for asshole billionaires, it's the lack of respect for the players that are the actual sport that makes me see red, I think.

To me, the real reason the Otanis and Betts are underpaid is because the MLBPA has sold out prospects for the likes of Chris Davis.
True, but it never had to be one or the other, MLB forced this choice as they are trying to force further choices now.

And frankly if fans didn't shell out for overpriced tickets, hot dogs, beers, and merchandise - that would be the best way to get back at the owners.
Agreed on this, I have not attended a MLB game since 2013 and had no plans to do so again even before Covid.
 

Yo La Tengo

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 21, 2005
913
Interesting that our primary focus is on the money with little discussion of the rule changes. And I get, no games without a deal. I haven't seen much discussion about the MLBPA agreeing changes starting in 2023 that would allow MLB to ban defensive shifts, implement a pitch clock, and enlarge the bases.

Any appetite for a new thread on approved and suggested ways to improve the game?
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
70,745
Interesting that our primary focus is on the money with little discussion of the rule changes. And I get, no games without a deal. I haven't seen much discussion about the MLBPA agreeing changes starting in 2023 that would allow MLB to ban defensive shifts, implement a pitch clock, and enlarge the bases.

Any appetite for a new thread on approved and suggested ways to improve the game?
I think it's hard to talk about those until knowing more precisely what they entail, but this existing thread would be a good place to do so whenever:

https://sonsofsamhorn.net/index.php?threads/baseball-is-broken-on-the-field-proposed-rule-changes-attendance-etc.23672/
 

Lose Remerswaal

Experiencing Furry Panic
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Interesting that our primary focus is on the money with little discussion of the rule changes. And I get, no games without a deal. I haven't seen much discussion about the MLBPA agreeing changes starting in 2023 that would allow MLB to ban defensive shifts, implement a pitch clock, and enlarge the bases.

Any appetite for a new thread on approved and suggested ways to improve the game?
I don't think the MLBPA cares much about the rule changes other than maybe the Robo-ump and tight pitch clocks. The other things (shifts, bigger bases, etc) are just things to negotiate with. Robo-ump and pitch clocks affect individual players and how they play the game. Banning shifts and bigger bases affects everyone equally (maybe a little different for base stealers but not as specific) and I doubt the players care if suddenly they can't shift as the other teams can't shift, too.
 

Minneapolis Millers

Wants you to please think of the Twins fans!
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
4,753
Twin Cities


Agreed on this, I have not attended a MLB game since 2013 and had no plans to do so again even before Covid.
Now THIS I find interesting, and maybe worthy of its own thread. How many fans on this board don’t attend games, and why? And is that limited to MLB or other levels as well?

For me, going to a ballpark, in beautiful weather, and watching a game I love, with no time constraints, is one of life’s pleasures. (Now, I do appreciate those ballparks that allow you to bring your own food, because it is NOT pleasurable to blow $12 on a beer and $15 on a sandwich.) But I still enjoy attending baseball games far more than any other sport, and even go to more games than, say, movies in a theater (Pre-pandemic; the last two years has thrown everything off). I was/am certainly looking forward to going to games again this spring/summer - MLB and MiLB.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,504
Because having money is not a special skill, because the average franchise value is up a billion and a half dollars, because there is literally zero financial risk in owning a MLB franchise, because despite that they are trying to chisel the players out of anything close to their fair value, players who are the actual product and who if they are lucky will have a handful of years to earn real money.
It's funny that we think this now. As of a few decades ago, there were still teams of sports owners that have gone bankrupt (the Os were in bankruptcy before Peter Angelos bought the team for one.) Also, some owners definitely manage to lose money on their teams - I mean look at the Coyotes in the NHL.

I also wonder how much money baseball teams are going to make a couple of decades from now as they lose their most dedicated fans.

But one of the reasons that franchises in the NBA have taken off in value is because of labor peace, which the MLB owners are trying to get at. I don't think the MLB owners mind losing a season of revenues if it gives them decades of labor peace like the NBA or even the NHL.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,504
Agreed on this, I have not attended a MLB game since 2013 and had no plans to do so again even before Covid.
Now THIS I find interesting, and maybe worthy of its own thread. How many fans on this board don’t attend games, and why? And is that limited to MLB or other levels as well?

For me, going to a ballpark, in beautiful weather, and watching a game I love, with no time constraints, is one of life’s pleasures. (Now, I do appreciate those ballparks that allow you to bring your own food, because it is NOT pleasurable to blow $12 on a beer and $15 on a sandwich.) But I still enjoy attending baseball games far more than any other sport, and even go to more games than, say, movies in a theater (Pre-pandemic; the last two years has thrown everything off). I was/am certainly looking forward to going to games again this spring/summer - MLB and MiLB.
We talk about this in the baseball is broken thread that JA mentioned above.

I'm not as bad (good?) as JA but the only games I've gone to for the last multiple years were at the Toilet and Wrigley (because I wanted to see those parks) and to sit on the Fenway Wall. I don't buy baseball swag for myself at all. I've personally stopped watching baseball because I simply don't have the four hours it takes to watch the game and unlike basketball and football, it doesn't work well trying to fast forward through the game. I also find a real lack of action in baseball as everyone is going for Ks or HRs. So one of the reasons I can step away from the "Which side is acting worse?" debate is because I've lost any emotional involvement to the game.
 

TheGazelle

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 17, 2009
1,210
I also think inflation is going to cut the number of people who go to games, particularly combined with residual anger over the lockout. As stuff costs more, cutting out an expensive trip to a baseball game is an easy thing to axe, particularly when you can just watch the game from your couch.
 

cornwalls@6

Less observant than others
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
6,249
from the wilds of western ma
I have major issues as well with the style of play now, and the length/pace of the games. But for me, that manifests itself in my no longer being as glued to it every night on NESN, as I once was. It's on in the background most days if I'm home, while I'm doing other things. Will look in periodically, and dig in on the end of a close game, and will definitely focus in on a big series, but it is no longer appointment viewing every night. However, there are few thing in life I enjoy as much as a day, or an evening, spent at Fenway. I still go to about 10-15 games most years, and can't see that ending anytime soon. Unless the lockout really drags on, and half or more of the season is lost, I'm not likely to become too alienated from baseball. A blown out season could sour me on it for a time, but not a 2-3 week delay in starting the season.
 

Murderer's Crow

Dragon Wangler 216
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
23,482
Garden City
I'll go to a couple of games this year if they play but I can't say the lockout does or doesn't impact me. My interest in seeing the sport live has been waning since I was a teenager. The only sport I still love seeing live is hockey.
 

Lose Remerswaal

Experiencing Furry Panic
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
It's funny that we think this now. As of a few decades ago, there were still teams of sports owners that have gone bankrupt (the Os were in bankruptcy before Peter Angelos bought the team for one.) Also, some owners definitely manage to lose money on their teams - I mean look at the Coyotes in the NHL.
Losing money does not mean they have lost value

This is from Forbes, annual valuation of the Coyotes franchise. Since you can't click on the lines in this image

50073

you can either go to this link or trust my reading of the numbers: https://www.forbes.com/teams/arizona-coyotes/?sh=9cbe6476477d

2021 $400m
2020 $285m
2019 $300m
2018 $290m
2017 $300m
2016 $240m
2015 $220m
2014 $225m
2013 $200m
2012 $134m

I would say someone who bought the Coyotes would probably be pretty pleased with their return on investment.
 

mikcou

Member
SoSH Member
May 13, 2007
921
Boston
It's funny that we think this now. As of a few decades ago, there were still teams of sports owners that have gone bankrupt (the Os were in bankruptcy before Peter Angelos bought the team for one.) Also, some owners definitely manage to lose money on their teams - I mean look at the Coyotes in the NHL.

I also wonder how much money baseball teams are going to make a couple of decades from now as they lose their most dedicated fans.

But one of the reasons that franchises in the NBA have taken off in value is because of labor peace, which the MLB owners are trying to get at. I don't think the MLB owners mind losing a season of revenues if it gives them decades of labor peace like the NBA or even the NHL.
I think you're going to have to explain how you think the owners are trying to get labor peace by being intentionally antagonistic. They'd like peace - sure, but only at their price. That's not really seeking peace. They keep throwing last minute distractions in to extract more - its clear what they are trying to do even without their history, which is quite long in its shittyness.
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
46,278
I think you're going to have to explain how you think the owners are trying to get labor peace by being intentionally antagonistic. They'd like peace - sure, but only at their price. That's not really seeking peace. They keep throwing last minute distractions in to extract more - its clear what they are trying to do even without their history, which is quite long in its shittyness.
and I am going to repeat myself again, if they really wanted " labor peace" why the hell did they wait 6 weeks after locking out the players to even start negotiating with the MLBPA.... its been clear as day the owners main goal is to break the union
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,504
Losing money does not mean they have lost value

This is from Forbes, annual valuation of the Coyotes franchise. Since you can't click on the lines in this image

View attachment 50073

you can either go to this link or trust my reading of the numbers: https://www.forbes.com/teams/arizona-coyotes/?sh=9cbe6476477d

2021 $400m
2020 $285m
2019 $300m
2018 $290m
2017 $300m
2016 $240m
2015 $220m
2014 $225m
2013 $200m
2012 $134m

I would say someone who bought the Coyotes would probably be pretty pleased with their return on investment.
I'm not an expert on the Coyotes as some other SOSHers are (there's a thread on them) but the current owner bought a majority stake in the Coyotes for $300M in 2019, they are using a 4,000 seat college arena apparently next year, and they can barely make payroll. My guess is that the current majority owner has no ROI so far (not that he cares; he's a billionaire) and actually has a tenuous investment because the value of that franchise is going to depend a lot on whether he can get a stadium complex approved and built in the near future.

The same article notes that the NHL incurred over $100M in operating losses while operating the Coyotes; that's real money even by professional sports standards.

Look I'm not saying that owners are poor or not making money. Most of them are. I just don't get the utter disgust people have towards owners when they are trying to maximize return, which I thought was the entire goal of capitalism. Professional sports is a good business to be in and has a lot of perks, but it's not a money-printing business like Amazon or MSFT or Apple or Tesla or what not. I mean that's why typically people make their money elsewhere and then buy their sports teams - rather than people making money in sports and then trying to take over other businesses.

Are the owners greedy? Sure. Anyone who charges $15.00 for 20 ounces of (usually) flat beer is greedy. And if the owners are going to start getting charitable with their revenues, I'd much rather them lower ticket prices (yes I know that's not really a solution because it just makes money for scalpers but you get the point) than anything else but we all know that's not going to happen either.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,504
I think you're going to have to explain how you think the owners are trying to get labor peace by being intentionally antagonistic. They'd like peace - sure, but only at their price. That's not really seeking peace. They keep throwing last minute distractions in to extract more - its clear what they are trying to do even without their history, which is quite long in its shittyness.
They want labor peace the same way the NHL got it.
and I am going to repeat myself again, if they really wanted " labor peace" why the hell did they wait 6 weeks after locking out the players to even start negotiating with the MLBPA.... its been clear as day the owners main goal is to break the union
It's pretty much a truism that negotiations never really start until there's a deadline. It's called "leverage".
 

ThePrideofShiner

Crests prematurely
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
10,687
Washington
International Draft has been agreed upon per Passan.


View: https://twitter.com/JeffPassan/status/1501957163488526338


Passan:
MLB and the MLBPA agreed that they have until July 25 to reach a deal on an international draft that would start in 2024, a source tells ESPN. If a deal is reached, the qualifying offer will vanish. If no deal, the QO will return and the international system will remain the same.
 

Bosoxian

New Member
Aug 17, 2021
158
Oh, I forgot about this part, the players said a while back that if the season is not 162 games, they will not approve the playoffs going from 10 to 12 teams this season (Both sides are agreed on 12 currently, not 14).

"With the possibility of 162 games becoming more remote, the talks could stall. The players are expected to seek full salaries. The owners may not concede. But without full pay, the MLBPA has vowed to not authorize the expansion of the playoffs — a revenue boon for the owners that is part of both proposals. "

https://theathletic.com/3174208/2022/03/09/mccullough-the-mlb-lockout-hasnt-ended-if-it-doesnt-soon-it-might-get-worse/
I’d bet that the players use that as a bargaining chip in case the owners try to prorate their salaries
 

Lose Remerswaal

Experiencing Furry Panic
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
I'm not an expert on the Coyotes as some other SOSHers are (there's a thread on them) but the current owner bought a majority stake in the Coyotes for $300M in 2019, they are using a 4,000 seat college arena apparently next year, and they can barely make payroll. My guess is that the current majority owner has no ROI so far (not that he cares; he's a billionaire) and actually has a tenuous investment because the value of that franchise is going to depend a lot on whether he can get a stadium complex approved and built in the near future.
Snipping for size, not for value, and yes, in the short run the Coyotes are a money losing proposition. In the long run, as one of a very few NHL franchises, they have real value which is why Forbes gave them the valuation they did. Same with every MLB team, to get this back on topic. I'd be shocked if the franchise isn't worth $500 million 2 years after they figure out the arena situation, and they will figure it out, either in the Phoenix area or elsewhere
 
International Draft has been agreed upon per Passan.


View: https://twitter.com/JeffPassan/status/1501957163488526338


Passan:
MLB and the MLBPA agreed that they have until July 25 to reach a deal on an international draft that would start in 2024, a source tells ESPN. If a deal is reached, the qualifying offer will vanish. If no deal, the QO will return and the international system will remain the same.
So it's pretty close to what the players proposed yesterday, right?
 

staz

Intangible
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 2, 2004
20,671
The cradle of the game.
Let it be so.

View: https://twitter.com/JonHeyman/status/1501970536393580548?s=20&t=6EgRI2oj7or2WKl1QBI6eQ


Sides are not far apart enough on $ to mess this up now (I don’t think). Could go back and forth a couple times. But no excuse not to finish this today.

Union awaits counterproposal on $. Look close but a bit of work needed, mostly on bonus pool. MLB CBT: 230M in ‘22 to 242M in ‘26 Union CBT: 232M in ‘22 to 250 in ‘26 MLB Bonus Pool: 40M all 5 years Union: 65M in ‘22 to 85M in ‘26 MLB minimum: 700M to 770M Union: 710M to 780M
700M? He means 700K, right?
 

mikcou

Member
SoSH Member
May 13, 2007
921
Boston
They want labor peace the same way the NHL got it.

It's pretty much a truism that negotiations never really start until there's a deadline. It's called "leverage".
By signing an objectively reasonable deal with the players? Let me know when the owners offer anything approaching 50% of baseball related revenue to the players (and no trying to shift their COVID loss onto the players in 2020 doesnt count).

Yes, the NHL had a lockout, but the negotiations on the part of the owners were a lot more rational than anything going on here, which can reasonably be put as the owners wanting everything under the sun. The NHL owners at least had a point that they were spending more than every other major sports league on player salaries so margins were significantly compressed to their comparables - their initial estimate was a 75% share to players pre-04 lockout and was contractually guaranteed at 57% after said lockout and down to 50% in 2012. This is not remotely comparable to payroll costs in baseball (even including minor leaguers at their high in the 2010s was 55-56%). Meanwhile MLB ownership is trying to get concessions to ensure player salaries stay well below any comparables.

Your entire posts of owners wanting cost certainty and cheaper salaries is just a great example of that. They want: 1) large growing revenue well in excess of inflationary rates; 2) cost certainty; and 3) cheap costs - thats basically a dream world. Industries dont generally provide all three and most industries that have to play in a free market only get one, especially if its the first. Of course, this is just a great example of why being a sports team owner is a great gig - there is virtually no risk in the business and close to guaranteed margins absent cataclysmic events (massive wars, global pandemic).
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,504
By signing an objectively reasonable deal with the players? Let me know when the owners offer anything approaching 50% of baseball related revenue to the players (and no trying to shift their COVID loss onto the players in 2020 doesnt count).

Yes, the NHL had a lockout, but the negotiations on the part of the owners were a lot more rational than anything going on here, which can reasonably be put as the owners wanting everything under the sun. The NHL owners at least had a point that they were spending more than every other major sports league on player salaries so margins were significantly compressed to their comparables - their initial estimate was a 75% share to players pre-04 lockout and was contractually guaranteed at 57% after said lockout and down to 50% in 2012. This is not remotely comparable to payroll costs in baseball (even including minor leaguers at their high in the 2010s was 55-56%). Meanwhile MLB ownership is trying to get concessions to ensure player salaries stay well below any comparables.

Your entire posts of owners wanting cost certainty and cheaper salaries is just a great example of that. They want: 1) large growing revenue well in excess of inflationary rates; 2) cost certainty; and 3) cheap costs - thats basically a dream world. Industries dont generally provide all three and most industries that have to play in a free market only get one, especially if its the first. Of course, this is just a great example of why being a sports team owner is a great gig - there is virtually no risk in the business and close to guaranteed margins absent cataclysmic events (massive wars, global pandemic).
no one said the offers were objectively reasonable. i don't even know what that means in this context.

hopefully they get a deal done.
 

BravesField

New Member
Oct 27, 2021
252
Nah. They can do many things at once. And this won’t be a complicated/drawn out debate like some other bills where those bills were the main/singular focus for a few weeks). It’s also one of the few times congress may have this debate over their anti trust status while the owners have actually locked the players out and may actually be bipartisan (for different reasons)
Absolutely right. This is a bill which can be knocked out over lunch. Many on this board argue that taking away the exemption will not end the lockout. Maybe your right, but which party benefits from the antitrust exemption? I can't see where it benefits the players or the fans. Screw the owners. Take them out to the woodshed and revoke the exemption.
 

pokey_reese

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 25, 2008
16,253
Boston, MA
Knowing that they still have to get some kind of ST in, I wonder how the scheduling of FL/AZ games will pan out if they reach an agreement by tonight. Presumably, most of the pitchers have been getting their arms ready on the side, so it shouldn't require the same ramp-up period, right? Maybe we can skip the 'best shape of his life' period?
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
20,676
Maine
Knowing that they still have to get some kind of ST in, I wonder how the scheduling of FL/AZ games will pan out if they reach an agreement by tonight. Presumably, most of the pitchers have been getting their arms ready on the side, so it shouldn't require the same ramp-up period, right? Maybe we can skip the 'best shape of his life' period?
I expect that teams are still going to take it slow on the pitcher ramp-up even if many/most pitchers have been throwing on their own, if only because the coaches/trainers don't know exactly where their pitchers are in their prepartions. I don't think that means they won't shorten spring training, but pitchers will definitely not be "Opening Day ready" on Opening Day. I'm curious to see if either side will consider that and propose expanded rosters for the first month or so to allow teams to have more flexibility with their staff.
 

John Marzano Olympic Hero

has fancy plans, and pants to match
Dope
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2001
24,548
Look I'm not saying that owners are poor or not making money. Most of them are. I just don't get the utter disgust people have towards owners when they are trying to maximize return, which I thought was the entire goal of capitalism. Professional sports is a good business to be in and has a lot of perks, but it's not a money-printing business like Amazon or MSFT or Apple or Tesla or what not. I mean that's why typically people make their money elsewhere and then buy their sports teams - rather than people making money in sports and then trying to take over other businesses.

Are the owners greedy? Sure. Anyone who charges $15.00 for 20 ounces of (usually) flat beer is greedy. And if the owners are going to start getting charitable with their revenues, I'd much rather them lower ticket prices (yes I know that's not really a solution because it just makes money for scalpers but you get the point) than anything else but we all know that's not going to happen either.
Well, I'm glad that we finally sussed out John Henry's burner account.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.