The 2020 Cleveland Indians

[bob2the2nd]

Passan bomb:


See full thread.

Note also Indians fan Centauri2's comment, which apparently resolves the "but the owners are going back on an already negotiated deal!" question:

so this raises a question then. Lets assume that no baseball gets played this year(who knows at this point). I assume since the previous agreement gets thrown out, would that mean that the players would not be gaining a year of experience?

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

Let’s be honest, neither gives a shit about the fans. Sucks though, I agree.

They may not care about the fans in the abstract, but I suspect the owners in particular are concerned about the longer term effect of alienating fans simply because of how directly it impacts their bottom line.

 

[JDailey23]

Can you explain the clear-cut path? I see a very complex situation that has the odds stacked against games being played.

NHL has a plan, NBA has a plan, many soccer leagues throughout the world have a plan, MMA has a plan. Its evident that the fear factor of Covid19 was off and none of this was necessary to shut the country down like this, facts are facts. Back on topic.
MLB had the chance to be the first of the major, major sports leagues to get back to playing real games before anyone else, instead, they look like a bunch of bums. Fighting over money, it just makes them all look bad.
Imagine, all these kids being able to watch live sports for the first time in months. MLB has tv possibly all to themselves to promote the league and all their studs.
Instead, all we are talking about is them NOT playing and fighting over money.

 

[JDailey23]

so this raises a question then. Lets assume that no baseball gets played this year(who knows at this point). I assume since the previous agreement gets thrown out, would that mean that the players would not be gaining a year of experience?

Yes. I heard the JP Morose or whatever his name is the other day and that is exactly what happens.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

From what I heard, the players consider the most recent proposal a step backward.

They're basically getting paid the same as what they were offered for 48 games.

What the owners are doing is twofold. On the one hand, mixing and matching various offers is a very good way to avoid a charge of refusal to bargain down the road. If the players say "they didn't negotiate in good faith", the owners can come back with "we tried all sorts of different ways to package our offer than were rejected." That usually works to defeat those charges. You don't have to change the overall value of an offer as much as show a willingness to bargain over the mix.

They're also doing a bit of a PR thing. The owners' last offer is pretty much exactly what a fan like @sportscoach was saying they should do. Expanded playoffs, close to a half season of ball, and upping the player % to 75%. It may still be unacceptable to the players, but it at least will make it look to some that the owners are trying.

If the players are going to stick to "nothing less than full pro-rata salaries", I'm personally not sure a 48 game season is even worth having. It's going to be weird enough watching games with no fans in the stands cheering. Having a season in which some pitchers may not get even a dozen starts, and some guys are likely to get sick and yanked during the course of the season, might do more harm than good.

 

[Wham with the Right Hand]

As long as the players compare every proposal to the original offer to pay them their full salaries prorated to the number of games played everything will be a step backward. Until the players give up the naive hope that they can get paid their full pro-rated salaries despite no ticket, concession, or parking revenue we won't get an agreement. The owners' initial offer was based on being able to sell tickets to all the games with no restrictions. That is not the case anymore so why the players continue to demand to be paid in full when the owners can't sell ANY tickets is beyond me.

A 76-game schedule starting July 1 is doable, especially with an expanded playoff. The players would get about 35% of their full-season salaries (75% of their pay for 76 games). Or they could take 4.25% of their pay ($170 million divided into $4 billion) for not playing at all. Would they rather play 76 games for 35% of their full-season pay or zero games for 4.25%? On top of that, over 50% of the players would see some playoff money if they went with the 16-team format.

Finally, they might want to consider what's best for the long term health of the game. I don't know how to put a price on fan goodwill, but playing a half-season this year plus an expanded playoffs certainly has to be better for the product in the long run, which means more money for both sides.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

NHL has a plan, NBA has a plan, many soccer leagues throughout the world have a plan, MMA has a plan. Its evident that the fear factor of Covid19 was off and none of this was necessary to shut the country down like this, facts are facts. Back on topic.
MLB had the chance to be the first of the major, major sports leagues to get back to playing real games before anyone else, instead, they look like a bunch of bums. Fighting over money, it just makes them all look bad.

Well...of course it is about money. Baseball is the players' job, and it is the owners business. So while there are other factors to consider, money has to play a major role in the decision-making for both sides.

 

[Derek]

NHL has a plan, NBA has a plan, many soccer leagues throughout the world have a plan, MMA has a plan. Its evident that the fear factor of Covid19 was off and none of this was necessary to shut the country down like this, facts are facts. Back on topic.
MLB had the chance to be the first of the major, major sports leagues to get back to playing real games before anyone else, instead, they look like a bunch of bums. Fighting over money, it just makes them all look bad.
Imagine, all these kids being able to watch live sports for the first time in months. MLB has tv possibly all to themselves to promote the league and all their studs.
Instead, all we are talking about is them NOT playing and fighting over money.

We've already talked extensively about why the MLB and MLBPA are in a much tougher position than these other organizations. There is no win-win compromise out there for the two sides. If they play, it will mean that one side conceded and the other side won.

 

[JDailey23]

We've already talked extensively about why the MLB and MLBPA are in a much tougher position than these other organizations.

It’s not that difficult, it’s literally all about money. This side wants more games and money, this side wants less game and to keep more money. That’s all it is now.

 

[Derek]

It’s not that difficult, it’s literally all about money. This side wants more games and money, this side wants less game and to keep more money. That’s all it is now.

Then tell me what the simple solution is to playing games because I don't see it. If they play, it'll be because one side decided to take a big hit. None of the other sports organizations returning to play have had to worry about this.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

We've already talked extensively about why the MLB and MLBPA are in a much tougher position than these other organizations. There is no win-win compromise out there for the two sides. If they play, it will mean that one side conceded and the other side won.

I think that's the perspective that is the entire problem right now. Rather than looking at this as a one-off that won't set a precedent, the MLBPA is looking at is as a matter of principle, and not just money. That makes it extremely difficult to reach an agreement because it is no longer just about the bottom line.

 

[JDailey23]

Then tell me what the simple solution is to playing games because I don't see it. If they play, it'll be because one side decided to take a big hit. None of the other sports organizations returning to play have had to worry about this.

Owners need to suck it up

I think that's the perspective that is the entire problem right now. Rather than looking at this as a one-off that won't set a precedent, the MLBPA is looking at is as a matter of principle, and not just money. That makes it extremely difficult to reach an agreement because it is no longer just about the bottom line.

Its going to kill them if they don’t figure this out fast.
With millions out of work and not getting paid, it’s makes them look like spoiled brats to non die yards. Remember 94, took years and a shit ton of illegal steroids and homeruns to get the league back.

 

[Derek]

I think that's the perspective that is the entire problem right now. Rather than looking at this as a one-off that won't set a precedent, the MLBPA is looking at is as a matter of principle, and not just money. That makes it extremely difficult to reach an agreement because it is no longer just about the bottom line.

It's true though. It may be a short-term thing, but they're about to start negotiating a new CBA entirely as well. The whole situation is very complex. I know you agree there's no simple solution.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

It’s not that difficult, it’s literally all about money. This side wants more games and money, this side wants less game and to keep more money. That’s all it is now.

Think of it like a restaurant during coronavirus.

The restaurant says "we have no in-restaurant customers, and the take out meals we can sell bring in less revenue because we're not selling alcohol with meals. Meal prices no longer cover our costs. So if we're going to stay open, staff has to take a 20% cut."

From the restaurant's perspective, that's reasonable because it doesn't makes sense to stay open just to lose more money than if they closed.

But the cooks say "we're doing the exact same work, so why should we make 20% less? We're not going to accept that."

So the restaurant closes. Is it really fair to blame either side for that?

 

[Derek]

Owners need to suck it up

While I'm certainly pro-player in this, I'm not going to drag the owners for not wanting to lose money.

I will say that opening their books would go a long way toward an agreement, but they're not going to do that leading up to a new CBA.