Official *MLB Season Delayed* Thread

[Judge Jude]

Ken Rosenthal:

Source: MLB proposal includes:

•60 games in 70 days

•Season starting July 19th/20th•


Full Prorated Salary

•Expanded Playoffs in 2020 and 2021

•Waiving of any potential grievance

[cavebird]

Well, that's not going to be accepted. Make it 72 or so games, and maybe there's a shot. Maybe the counter will be 80 and they end at 70?

[Ken]

Well, that's not going to be accepted. Make it 72 or so games, and maybe there's a shot. Maybe the counter will be 80 and they end at 70?

Wait what? The players have already said just tell us when and where. I think they'd take 60. The back and forth negotiation is over isn't it?

[revo]

Wait what? The players have already said just tell us when and where. I think they'd take 60. The back and forth negotiation is over isn't it?

Nope. Manfred & Clark met today in Arizona in person (jeez, what took them so long), and apparently are getting close to hashing this out.

The "when and where" came with a price tag -- a grievance to be filed. MLB obviously wants to avoid this, as there's a good chance they would lose.

[Ken]

Nope. Manfred & Clark met today in Arizona in person (jeez, what took them so long), and apparently are getting close to hashing this out.

The "when and where" came with a price tag -- a grievance to be filed. MLB obviously wants to avoid this, as there's a good chance they would lose.

That's fair, but I think the public negotiations with proposals going back and forth are done. At this point, with the players saying "when and where", they've called the owners' bluff which was a smart move. Later switching to asking for more games seems disingenuous. If we get a reasonable proposal for a reasonable number of games, it's time to cross all the t's and move forward IMO. Arguing 60 vs 72 doesn't seem like it should be the focus now.

[revo]

That's fair, but I think the public negotiations with proposals going back and forth are done. At this point, with the players saying "when and where", they've called the owners' bluff which was a smart move. Later switching to asking for more games seems disingenuous. If we get a reasonable proposal for a reasonable number of games, it's time to cross all the t's and move forward IMO. Arguing 60 vs 72 doesn't seem like it should be the focus now.

Welp, seems like games played is the only focus. Sounds like a trade of full pro-rata pay for an expanded postseason and no grievance may have worked.

[DMT]

Welp, seems like games played is the only focus. Sounds like a trade of full pro-rata pay for an expanded postseason and no grievance may have worked.

So they should give the players the number they want.

[Sour Masher]

So they should give the players the number they want.

They should. My commish and long time pal is obsessed with baseball to an unhealthy degree. It mentally heals him. He has been crying himself to sleep the last few nights. Really hoping they get this done today. Some peeps put a lot of weight into this game. The country is ready for baseball!

[Ken]

So they should give the players the number they want.

I'm all for more games, so sure.

[cavebird]

That's fair, but I think the public negotiations with proposals going back and forth are done. At this point, with the players saying "when and where", they've called the owners' bluff which was a smart move. Later switching to asking for more games seems disingenuous. If we get a reasonable proposal for a reasonable number of games, it's time to cross all the t's and move forward IMO. Arguing 60 vs 72 doesn't seem like it should be the focus now.

Games = money, which is what they have always been arguing about. The March agreement said "most games possible" or something like that, so the players have something to latch on to there. MLB could have simply imposed the 60-game season---it did not because it wants the expanded playoffs and grievance waiver. To get something, they have to give something. Using the general figure of $4 billion for a full year's payroll that I have read, the 12-game difference between 60 and 72 games is slightly less than 30 million. This should not get in the way of anything.

[Ken]

Games = money, which is what they have always been arguing about. The March agreement said "most games possible" or something like that, so the players have something to latch on to there. MLB could have simply imposed the 60-game season---it did not because it wants the expanded playoffs and grievance waiver. To get something, they have to give something. Using the general figure of $4 billion for a full year's payroll that I have read, the 12-game difference between 60 and 72 games is slightly less than 30 million. This should not get in the way of anything.

I get that games=money, but at least by their public statements they have already conceded that particular negotiating point. They can certainly argue on others if there's new topics to discuss.

[KnuckleBalls]

I believe the public statement about tell us when and where was a dare to the owners to excercise the 50 game clause and have grounds for a grievance. The players feel they have been hammered in the last few contracts and want as many games as possible. The owners are in the shit now and have to come up with a number over the 50. The players will hold out for as many as they can get and my bet is it goes above the current 60. My hope anyway. This only makes the next round of CBA negotiations even tougher and the future of the game murkier. Is anyone looking a generation down the road?

[revo]

Games = money, which is what they have always been arguing about. The March agreement said "most games possible" or something like that, so the players have something to latch on to there. MLB could have simply imposed the 60-game season---it did not because it wants the expanded playoffs and grievance waiver. To get something, they have to give something. Using the general figure of $4 billion for a full year's payroll that I have read, the 12-game difference between 60 and 72 games is slightly less than 30 million. This should not get in the way of anything.

Your math appears off.

If $4bn is the total salaries for the season, then it comes out to $24.6m per game ($4bn/162).

12x24.6=$296m.

[cavebird]

Oops. Miscounted the zeros (well, not zeros, digits), $300 million. That's a little larger climb.

[Ken]

I believe the public statement about tell us when and where was a dare to the owners to excercise the 50 game clause and have grounds for a grievance.

Man, talk about negotiating in bad faith. If that's truly the case, then I'm back to both sides being at fault here. Billionaires arguing with millionaires. No surprise that both are greedy assholes I guess.