MLB Collective Bargaining Discussion

[The Human Q-Tip]

Whatever money they gave up was minuscule, and they're getting the most amount of games that the owners were willing to offer. Also, not having to play expanded playoffs was a big deal as well.

I think that may be where the rub is. A lot of fans assume that baseball players actually like playing baseball, and especially like the playoffs because they are competitive individuals and want to compete for a championship. So when the players say "we don't want any expanded playoffs for this year, even if you're including a playoff pool of $25-50M", a lot of fans think "WTF?" I thought these guys would want a better shot at competing in the playoffs?"

 

[LL3]

I think that may be where the rub is. A lot of fans assume that baseball players actually like playing baseball, and especially like the playoffs because they are competitive individuals and want to compete for a championship. So when the players say "we don't want any expanded playoffs for this year, even if you're including a playoff pool of $25-50M", a lot of fans think "WTF?" I thought these guys would want a better shot at competing in the playoffs?"

I agree -- this was a bad look for the players, even as I understand their desire to hold on to bargaining chips.

 

[Out of the Rafters at the Q]

I think that may be where the rub is. A lot of fans assume that baseball players actually like playing baseball, and especially like the playoffs because they are competitive individuals and want to compete for a championship. So when the players say "we don't want any expanded playoffs for this year, even if you're including a playoff pool of $25-50M", a lot of fans think "WTF?" I thought these guys would want a better shot at competing in the playoffs?"

The amount of money the owners make off the playoffs is obscene. That's where a huge chunk of the national TV money comes from.

The amount of money the players make off the playoffs is not tied to their salary. It's actually based off the ticket sales, which in COVID times, is likely zero.

So, yeah, expanded playoffs is a huge bargaining chip.. If owners want it, they should treat their labor better. It would be wildly irresponsible of Tony Clark to give that up without an enormous return.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

The amount of money the owners make off the playoffs is obscene. That's where a huge chunk of the national TV money comes from.

The amount of money the players make off the playoffs is not tied to their salary. It's actually based off the ticket sales, which in COVID times, is likely zero.

That was not going to be true for this season. The owners' proposals included anywhere from $25-50M in playoff pool money. So the players wouldn't be playing for free.

So, yeah, expanded playoffs is a huge bargaining chip.. If owners want it, they should treat their labor better. It would be wildly irresponsible of Tony Clark to give that up without an enormous return.

The players could have proposed expanded playoffs for 2020 only, so they wouldn't be giving up a bargaining chip for future negotiations. They also could have countered with increasing the pool money for this year in exchange for those playoffs. They did neither. So that's why it looks to a lot of fans like they simply do not care much about the playoffs, which is disillusioning for a lot of fans.

Obviously not for you and some others, who are glad the players turned down more money in exchange for expanded playoffs. But for those of us who would have wanted that...it's a disappointment.

 

[Out of the Rafters at the Q]

What a way to twist things.

Here, take your pittance and like it. If you don't, to hell with you!

I'm definitely someone who doesn't want more baseball. Sorry, only the people pushing for the players to shut up and play ball (which they actually were willing to do--just not with additional concessions piled on top) want that. I'm not even sure why I'm a fan! These failed negotiations are definitely only one-way disappointments.

Maybe... just maybe, I'm able to compartmentalize my desire to be entertained and other people's desire for fair labor negotiations and process each one individually, as my desire for entertainment shouldn't be held to a greater degree of importance than other people's livelihood.

No, that can't be it.

 

[Derek]

$25M is the number I saw for the playoff pool, which distributed among 16 teams is about $50k per player

EDIT: as a fan, I hated the idea of expanded playoffs

 

[Out of the Rafters at the Q]

$25M is the number I saw for the playoff pool, which distributed among 16 teams is about $50k per player

Then divide that by the number of games...

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

What a way to twist things.

Here, take your pittance and like it.

I suppose that depends on how you define "pittance".

Baseball players generally make the most playoff money out of any major sport, and it isn't close.

How much players get paid for playoff runs

Play baseball if you can. Professionally.

www.sbnation.com

In 2017, the most recent year for which I found data on a quick search, the players split $85M.

But under the deal Manfred imposed -- which the players chose over a negotiated deal --the players are only making $25M for the playoffs. The owners offered to raise that to $50M in exchange for expanding the field from 10 to 16 teams, but the players said no.

In other words, the players association rejected the idea of doubling the total amount of playoff money for its players, and the players themselves would even have made more per game. They rejected that. And now they're stuck with a "pittance" half the size of the one they could have earned.

I'm definitely someone who doesn't want more baseball. Sorry, only the people pushing for the players to shut up and play ball (which they actually were willing to do--just not with additional concessions piled on top) want that. I'm not even sure why I'm a fan! These failed negotiations are definitely only one-way disappointments.

Dude...the players didn't even counter on the issue of expanded playoffs for this year. That's the point. Increase the pool, make it just for this year...but nothing. It was like they simply didn't want to play those games, period. I'm not really sure how it's possible to reasonably conclude anything else. And that's what is perplexing to some fans.

 

[LL3]

EDIT: as a fan, I hated the idea of expanded playoffs

In particular, the expansion to 16 teams is really ugly. I would have been ok with it for this season, but not beyond. Moving forward, 12 teams could work, giving top 2 teams in each league a bye, which would emphasize the importance of the regular season a bit more. I doubt we keep the present 10 beyond the next agreement, but if we did, I would like to see the WC round be a best of 3.

 

[Derek]

In particular, the expansion to 16 teams is really ugly. I would have been ok with it for this season, but not beyond. Moving forward, 12 teams could work, giving top 2 teams in each league a bye, which would emphasize the importance of the regular season a bit more. I doubt we keep the present 10 beyond the next agreement, but if we did, I would like to see the WC round be a best of 3.

I love that making the playoffs in the MLB actually means something.

 

[jup]

I think that may be where the rub is. A lot of fans assume that baseball players actually like playing baseball, and especially like the playoffs because they are competitive individuals and want to compete for a championship. So when the players say "we don't want any expanded playoffs for this year, even if you're including a playoff pool of $25-50M", a lot of fans think "WTF?" I thought these guys would want a better shot at competing in the playoffs?"

That $25-$50 million is such a deceptive and prejudicial figure.

Take the upper limit of $50, but remember it was spread across ALL TEAMS in the offer, so you divide it by 30. Now each team has a 60 player pool, pretty hard to say that they all won't share in it, and you come away with $27K/player if you distribute it evenly. Lets say 25 man guys get a lions share maybe $40K which leaves the other 35 at about $20K.

So $50 million sounds staggering but when you get down to what it might net in the individual players pocket, not so much. For a $4 million 25 man roster guy it is 1% - that is a BFD (be sure to catch the sarcasm) to a guy who probably has earnings of upwards of 30 million already.

For a minimum guy at $563,500. it is 3.5% => maybe enough to get excited about - I'm sure there are a lot of guys that could use an extra $20K at the minimum level, but it still just isn't a whole lot.

I'm not sure how excited you would be if your boss said you would get a 1% or even a 3.5% raise, but it would require more work (more playoff rounds and more teams in them) to get it.

 

[jup]

$25M is the number I saw for the playoff pool, which distributed among 16 teams is about $50k per player

EDIT: as a fan, I hated the idea of expanded playoffs

NO WAY did the pool only include the playoff teams. It was a kick back to the regular season salaries to pump up the overall net, since the owners were not offering a full pro rata for the regular season. If you read the offers that is what was always stated. Which means it was distributed to all teams all players

 

[Derek]

NO WAY did the pool only include the playoff teams. It was a kick back to the regular season salaries to pump up the overall net, since the owners were not offering a full pro rata for the regular season. If you read the offers that is what was always stated. Which means it was distributed to all teams all players

If that's the case, it's even less money than I thought.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

That $25-$50 million is such a deceptive and prejudicial figure.

Take the upper limit of $50, but remember it was spread across ALL TEAMS in the offer, so you divide it by 30. Now each team has a 60 player pool, pretty hard to say that they all won't share in it,

That's a complete red herring. If the players had countered with "fine, but the playoff money should go only to the teams that play", the owners would have said "sure". Why the fuck would the owners care - all they care about is the amount coming out of their pockets? And the players also could have countered with "make it $75M for expanded playoffs this year." Again...they didn't even try to get a better deal for playoff money. That's what's weird about this.

Further, players normally decide who gets shares and who doesn't, and it certainly doesn't have to be all 60 players. They could just as easily limit it the exact same way it is normally limited.

But forgetting the whole issue of distribution, the MLBPA is supposed to represent all of its players, and should be concerned primarily with how much money their members earn in total, not which members get the money. Favoring some members over others is a breach of the duty of fair representation. And the reality is that the players overall would be getting double what they'd otherwise be getting, and for playing far fewer than double the number of games.

I'm not sure how excited you would be if your boss said you would get a 1% or even a 3.5% raise, but it would require more work (more playoff rounds and more teams in them) to get it.

Actually, a 3.5% raise is considered pretty decent in the real world. Also....if my job was baseball, I'd probably not turn down that raise just because I didn't want to play a few more games. And it really wasn't going to be that many more games. You'd have the same number of rounds...just more teams participating in that first round.

Look, I understand that you know some players, so you're hearing their perspective. That's fine. I'm just saying that their perspective is not the same as the perspective of most fans who don't know players (or owners) personally. It's just kind of a surprise to us.

 

[bob2the2nd]

That $25-$50 million is such a deceptive and prejudicial figure.

Take the upper limit of $50, but remember it was spread across ALL TEAMS in the offer, so you divide it by 30. Now each team has a 60 player pool, pretty hard to say that they all won't share in it, and you come away with $27K/player if you distribute it evenly. Lets say 25 man guys get a lions share maybe $40K which leaves the other 35 at about $20K.

So $50 million sounds staggering but when you get down to what it might net in the individual players pocket, not so much. For a $4 million 25 man roster guy it is 1% - that is a BFD (be sure to catch the sarcasm) to a guy who probably has earnings of upwards of 30 million already.

For a minimum guy at $563,500. it is 3.5% => maybe enough to get excited about - I'm sure there are a lot of guys that could use an extra $20K at the minimum level, but it still just isn't a whole lot.

I'm not sure how excited you would be if your boss said you would get a 1% or even a 3.5% raise, but it would require more work (more playoff rounds and more teams in them) to get it.

Yeah as someone that is absolutely thrilled with a maybe 3k bonus at the end of the year, i cant even fathom the thought that 20k-40k isnt worth possibly playing an extra month of a sport.