Oso planning to go pro
I don't understand why the players are hell bent on the 100% prorating of their contracts. They would make more in 85% of 65 games than 100% of 50 games. And more in 85% of 81 games than 100% in 65 games. You'd think most players would be more interested in the bottom line they are making as opposed to their per game rate. Especially when so many people have had to take a % reduction of their rates this year. What they are looking at right now is a 50 game season with regular playoffs. Basically the worst possible outcome for both sides. Nice work guys. You negotiated a lose-lose deal.
I don’t think the owners are offering that though. All offers are the same dollar amount, just packaged differently. There are many rich players, but based on how MLBs pre-arbitration suppresses contracts, not all are making millions. Many good young players are still at around $600k. I’d certainly be happy with that paycheck, but not everyone is making 5M a year.That’s all after these guys didn’t make a living wage in the minors.
Yeah, and don't you think those guys specifically, would rather make more bottom line, than per game? For a guy making 600K per season, they will make about 20K more in 65 games at 85% than in 50 games at 100%. That seems like it would be significant for a guy just coming off minor league starvation wages. And you're right about if the owners are offering that. Neither side is negotiating in good faith. They are both being idiots trying to make some point for the next CBA, and they will drive away fans hurting themselves in the short run and the long run.
https://twitter.com/baueroutage/status/1272641345941721088?s=21Bauer calls out Manfred as saying it’s a stall tactic since they could easily play 64-72 games if started planning now.
Being mad at everyone equally without digging into the nuance is implicit support for the owners.
Not that it'll do anything, but here is a petition to remove Rob Manfred. https://t.co/g1O5vNRvGT
Does anyone hate baseball as much as owners?
Most younger demographics
I’m knee deep in nuance and support neither.
And that's fine, but the owners will gladly take that. Adjudicating equal fault and blame here benefits the owners. They have an ability to wait this out and be the bad guys in a way the players don't. MLB franchise values grew at a 9.3% annual compounded rate from 1991-2000 despite a strike cancelling the 1990 season and the 1994 playoffs. So they don't care about "what's good for the game." And those 30 guys plus Manfred know they can wait out the players on annual revenue too. They know the players association can't keep the union together for very long with no pay. Too many disparate interests (young vs old players, position players vs pitchers injury risk) and they know that stars won't let the primes of their careers go by holding out for a better deal.
This guy gets it.
Everyone gets it. The owners are crapbags. No one has once said otherwise.
Exactly. The owners are bad. They deserve the blame here. This is not a "both sides" situation. No one here says otherwise. That doesn't make the other side "good." The PA has shown it's not above lying either, nor do they care any more about the fans than the owners.
I don't understand why the players are hell bent on the 100% prorating of their contracts. They would make more in 85% of 65 games than 100% of 50 games. And more in 85% of 81 games than 100% in 65 games. You'd think most players would be more interested in the bottom line they are making as opposed to their per game rate. Especially when so many people have had to take a % reduction of their rates this year.
The owners are greedy, stubborn and don’t give a sh!t about the fans. The players are greedy, stubborn and don’t give a sh!t about the fans. But the owners have leverage.
Because that is what the owners and players agreed on in their March deal.
This is where both sides really are lying.The March deal did allow the owners to seek to reopen negotiations on financial matters if games had to be played without fans. The PA has lied about this when they claim the owners are reneging on the March deal.At the same time, while the owners can seek to renogotiate, the players aren't obligated to do so. So the owners are full of sh-- when they say the players are acting in bad faith by declining to renegotiate the terms.Both are exercising their rights under the deal, and both are lying about other.