meh2

Coronavirus (COVID-19) Baseball Impact

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, JE7HorseGod said:

It's estimated that about 30% of the revenue comes from the gate.  So you can see the math here doesn't add up with this hypothesis.

Here are the revenues by team -

https://www.statista.com/statistics/193645/revenue-of-major-league-baseball-teams-in-2010/

And here are the payrolls -

https://www.usatoday.com/sports/mlb/salaries/2019/team/all/

You prorate both the revenues to account for that lost 30%, and then the prorated salaries and the lost revenue from missed games is a wash.  It's still plenty profitable for someone to own a baseball game that gets played in empty stands on TV.

 

You also have to factor in the over head of running a stadium and what each team invests in advertising.  But I think it's pretty off the wall for the owners to act like they're going to be out on the streets over this.  Yeah they won't make as much money or maybe they even do lose some money.  1 year of loss revenue for decades of explosive growth and profits.... Since the owners every other year reap the most reward seems like they need to be the one's taking on the money risk.  Not the players who are risking their health.

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, OrangeCrush said:

Couple questions on SP

 

1. Will Starters have enough time to build arm strength to go 90-100 pitchers early in the season?

2. If no, how on earth do you score this in fantasy leagues?? (H2H pts)  

 

Was listening to Mad Dog yesterday and he said starters would go like 3 inn... That could be a fantasy disaster. 

 

I'm so sick of hearing this pitchers won't be ready nonsense (not exactly what you're saying but the talking heads keep crying about this).  Go throw a damn bullpen.  Pitch into a screen.  There are a million things that can be done yes not all of them ideal but the 3 weeks of spring training over extra actual games is absurd to me as a baseball player and baseball coach.

 

Pitchers just need to throw hitters actually need to see pitches.  So honestly the lay over has put hitters at a bigger disadvantage not getting live reps.  Granted not hitting in the cold days will help the hitters stats overall.

 

But it's a historic pandemic things will certainly be different, I want to see what guys adjust and rise to the occasion.  Not punish everyone else with less games because some guys (professionals) were too lazy to stay ready or get ready during the negotiations.  Let's reward those who have been professionals and are ready sooner.

Edited by FouLLine
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, OrangeCrush said:

Couple questions on SP

 

1. Will Starters have enough time to build arm strength to go 90-100 pitchers early in the season?

2. If no, how on earth do you score this in fantasy leagues?? (H2H pts)  

 

Was listening to Mad Dog yesterday and he said starters would go like 3 inn... That could be a fantasy disaster. 

Spring ramped up many SP’s to 3-5 innings already and I believe many have been staying on their own throwing programs at least throwing into a net to keep regular activity going. They’ll have a couple of weeks of ST to at least get back to the 3-5 innings before the season starts. I’d think most will be near normal innings by opening day and ramping up beyond 5 innings as they progress. 

Edited by TheForearmShiver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Passan article.  Mostly pretty optimistic, although I admit, I didn't have time to read it all the way through.  It's pretty long.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, 89Topps said:

 

Passan article.  Mostly pretty optimistic, although I admit, I didn't have time to read it all the way through.  It's pretty long.

Here's one of the more salient points as to the Union's position in rejecting the 50-50 revenue split:

It's possible, sources said, but looking at it strictly from a revenue perspective ignores three issues critical to the union.

1. Anything with even the slightest relation to a salary-capped system frightens players, even if this proposal doesn't involve a salary ceiling or any other cap tenets. The mistrust between the sides has deepened in recent years -- just look at their different interpretations of that March agreement, which is barely six weeks old -- and the slightest whiff of a cap sends off Pandora's box signals at the union.

2. Salaries do not grow commensurate with revenue gains. So now, in a year in which the game is struggling, it's necessary for the players to share in the losses? That's not how it works.

3. If a second wave of the coronavirus were to strike before or during the postseason and force the cancellation of games, postseason TV money would vanish. Even if the estimated revenues were $5 billion, they would crater with the cancellation of playoff money and leave the players with less than their prorated share.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How in the heck are they going to have a season when all I read is that if 1 player tests positive the entire team will need to be quarantined for 14 days?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, B&F said:

How in the heck are they going to have a season when all I read is that if 1 player tests positive the entire team will need to be quarantined for 14 days?

Same way we all are conducting our lives, try to avoid getting sick.

They have the inherent advantage of going into a situation where everyone who they show up to work with are going to be tested daily.

We're talking about a group of people who are acutely aware of the mitigating factors of how to avoid negative factors and get in to peak physical conditionon (give or take a Bartolo).

I don't think it should be particularly surprising that their rate of positive tests in the MLB was significantly lower than the general population.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JE7HorseGod said:

Same way we all are conducting our lives, try to avoid getting sick.

They have the inherent advantage of going into a situation where everyone who they show up to work with are going to be tested daily.

We're talking about a group of people who are acutely aware of the mitigating factors of how to avoid negative factors and get in to peak physical conditionon (give or take a Bartolo).

I don't think it should be particularly surprising that their rate of positive tests in the MLB was significantly lower than the general population.

 

So everyone who works at every park is going to be tested DAILY? Where are these tests coming from for hundreds of people per team on a daily basis? NBA telling teams to only test those with symptoms right now because of a lack of overall testing. That’s also not a rate of positive tests. It’s an antibody test which many are giving false negatives already. FDA just changed the ruling on them as many were way over their limits for false negatives. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, daynlokki said:

So what about the ballplayers with underlying conditions? They just aren’t allowed to play or what?

https://mobile.twitter.com/susanslusser/status/1259930734267006976

The Athletic ran a story yesterday that interviewed players with underlying conditions, particularly David Dahl, who doesn't have a spleen. He is planning to play.

https://theathletic.com/1806075/2020/05/11/rosenthal-what-players-with-underlying-health-concerns-say-about-a-possible-return/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, TribeFoo said:

The Athletic ran a story yesterday that interviewed players with underlying conditions, particularly David Dahl, who doesn't have a spleen. He is planning to play.

https://theathletic.com/1806075/2020/05/11/rosenthal-what-players-with-underlying-health-concerns-say-about-a-possible-return/

Which would mean even more precautions for those guys correct? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, JE7HorseGod said:

Here's one of the more salient points as to the Union's position in rejecting the 50-50 revenue split:

It's possible, sources said, but looking at it strictly from a revenue perspective ignores three issues critical to the union.

1. Anything with even the slightest relation to a salary-capped system frightens players, even if this proposal doesn't involve a salary ceiling or any other cap tenets. The mistrust between the sides has deepened in recent years -- just look at their different interpretations of that March agreement, which is barely six weeks old -- and the slightest whiff of a cap sends off Pandora's box signals at the union.

2. Salaries do not grow commensurate with revenue gains. So now, in a year in which the game is struggling, it's necessary for the players to share in the losses? That's not how it works.

3. If a second wave of the coronavirus were to strike before or during the postseason and force the cancellation of games, postseason TV money would vanish. Even if the estimated revenues were $5 billion, they would crater with the cancellation of playoff money and leave the players with less than their prorated share.

 

2. In particular is maddening, as that's spilled over to many other areas with all the corporate bail outs.  

All the owners/investors really bring to the table is that they are assuming risk.  The minute the downside of risk hits, they demand that it is passed onto others.  They got their way on a federal level, hopefully the players don't let them get it here.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, GamblorLA said:

 

2. In particular is maddening, as that's spilled over to many other areas with all the corporate bail outs.  

All the owners/investors really bring to the table is that they are assuming risk.  The minute the downside of risk hits, they demand that it is passed onto others.  They got their way on a federal level, hopefully the players don't let them get it here.  

Yeah.  It isn't as if any professional sports ball owner in 2020 is like Bob's Widget Store that just started out of his garage and they are hanging on by their fingernails to turn a profit in 5 to 7 years and is now fighting to keep the lights on.

If they're really forward thinking, any "losses" they might accrue this year (sketchy as their books may be) pale in comparison to what could happen if there's no baseball this year and the public loses interest again.  But what do I know?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, JE7HorseGod said:

Yeah.  It isn't as if any professional sports ball owner in 2020 is like Bob's Widget Store that just started out of his garage and they are hanging on by their fingernails to turn a profit in 5 to 7 years and is now fighting to keep the lights on.

If they're really forward thinking, any "losses" they might accrue this year (sketchy as their books may be) pale in comparison to what could happen if there's no baseball this year and the public loses interest again.  But what do I know?

MLBPA is considering the revenue split as a salary cap. They don’t want to back down on this point as if you give owners an inch now, they will take a mile on the next CBA. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't been following this saga too closely but a friend of mine told me that teams are saying they stand to lose money this season if they pay the player's prorated salaries (and fan attendance revenue is zero).

 

If this is the case, why would the MLB even have a season? The only reason to rush back in to a season is the economics of it. 

 

Again, I'm not totally informed so please feel free to correct me. Maybe the losses of not playing are much greater than playing with negative profitability. Im not sure. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, NoHablaIngles said:

I haven't been following this saga too closely but a friend of mine told me that teams are saying they stand to lose money this season if they pay the player's prorated salaries (and fan attendance revenue is zero).

 

If this is the case, why would the MLB even have a season? The only reason to rush back in to a season is the economics of it. 

 

Again, I'm not totally informed so please feel free to correct me. Maybe the losses of not playing are much greater than playing with negative profitability. Im not sure. 

Look at it this way - it took the owners an hour to confer and vote positively on profit sharing.

If there was even a chance that they'd lose money this year, don't you think amongst a group of 30 billionaires there'd be more of an argument?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, JE7HorseGod said:

Look at it this way - it took the owners an hour to confer and vote positively on profit sharing.

If there was even a chance that they'd lose money this year, don't you think amongst a group of 30 billionaires there'd be more of an argument?

Well,  it is profit sharing not losses sharing so if there are no profits.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, JE7HorseGod said:

Same way we all are conducting our lives, try to avoid getting sick.

They have the inherent advantage of going into a situation where everyone who they show up to work with are going to be tested daily.

We're talking about a group of people who are acutely aware of the mitigating factors of how to avoid negative factors and get in to peak physical conditionon (give or take a Bartolo).

I don't think it should be particularly surprising that their rate of positive tests in the MLB was significantly lower than the general population.

 

That "inherent advantage" of daily testing didn't exactly help the White House. 

And .7% of players alone figuring the 50 per team they are thinking of using (active roster + minor league taxi squad) adds up to 105 players infected.  And the percentage of older coaches many with underlying conditions -- Terry Franconia would be wise to punt the season for health reasons alone -- would be higher.

Add in all the support staffs, maintenance, medical, housing, transportation, food workers, hotel staffs, security and, of course, "ladies of the night" and the numbers will shoot up a lot more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Backdoor Slider said:

Yeah one of the states where very little testing has happened until now and where the small amount of recent tests show a major spike percentage wise and projection models predict will have a very serious problem soon.  Wouldn't want to be a D-Back right now if they have to play at home.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, The Big Bat Theory said:

  Wouldn't want to be a D-Back right now if they have to play at home.

You wouldn’t? These players are going to be far more protected than the average working American. They and everyone around them are going to have access to as much testing as they want. In my area there’s still a 2 or 3 day turnaround time on test results. They’ll have the very best tests available with the quickest turnaround times. In the event that one of them tests positive, they’re going to have a team of some of the best healthcare providers in the country monitoring their situation. They’re going to have access to any medications or treatments they need. It’s not fair but it’s how this country operates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This news has been our for a good 24 hours but I don't think it's been referenced here. It's the best news I've heard yet, fantasy-speaking. If they delay it forever it wouldn't be long enough for me:

MLB%20178x142%20DarkGrey.png
Rob Manfred COM, College Player
rob_manfred.jpg

Joel Sherman of the New York Post reports that the 2021 World Baseball Classic will be pushed back to 2023.

The plan still needs to be approved by the tournament board. Enrique Rojas of ESPN Deportes reported earlier Monday that the 2021 World Baseball Classic was being pushed back, an expected decision given the unpredictability of how a possible 2020 season will play out amid the coronavirus pandemic. It's also possible, if not likely, that there will still be safety concerns next spring. The 20-team tournament was originally scheduled for March 9-23 next year.

May 11, 2020, 3:01 PM ET

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The Big Bat Theory said:

That "inherent advantage" of daily testing didn't exactly help the White House. 

And .7% of players alone figuring the 50 per team they are thinking of using (active roster + minor league taxi squad) adds up to 105 players infected.  And the percentage of older coaches many with underlying conditions -- Terry Franconia would be wise to punt the season for health reasons alone -- would be higher.

Add in all the support staffs, maintenance, medical, housing, transportation, food workers, hotel staffs, security and, of course, "ladies of the night" and the numbers will shoot up a lot more.

Again with the hookers in the health issue discussion?  Nuff already.

We're talking a sample size of over 5,000 people.  Less than 40 showed signs of infection.  I'm just saying, this is a healthy, health conscious group of people.  Managers were included.

I appreciate that these guys want to make sure they have a safe environment to work in (may we all be so lucky to have the kind of leverage to ask for daily testing of all of our coworkers).  And they should have it.  But some of this handwringing about "what happens if..." well at this point we have nothing.  Let them figure out what happens if.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, duke of queens said:

Well,  it is profit sharing not losses sharing so if there are no profits.....

LOL, let me save you the trouble.

If there was a 1% chance of any team taking a loss they'd be banging the table saying, "it's not safe to expose these guys..." and the discussion would have gone on for days, not an hour.  The owner who thought he might take a loss would leak the discussion to the media and this would all be over.

None of them are losing any money if they pay what they already agreed to.  They're just trying to get more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, JE7HorseGod said:

LOL, let me save you the trouble.

If there was a 1% chance of any team taking a loss they'd be banging the table saying, "it's not safe to expose these guys..." and the discussion would have gone on for days, not an hour.  The owner who thought he might take a loss would leak the discussion to the media and this would all be over.

None of them are losing any money if they pay what they already agreed to.  They're just trying to get more.

Couldn't agree more. I just hope the greed doesn't turn too ugly. Its been a rough year for a lot of people. A little baseball can go a long way in taking our minds off this for a few hours a day. If they get CDC clearance and ample testing and we still don't get baseball because of differences in compensation it will be a black eye on the sport that really can't afford it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.