meh2

Coronavirus (COVID-19) Baseball Impact

Recommended Posts

38 minutes ago, The Big Bat Theory said:

Also the Twins:

And the Reds did them all one week longer:
 

Props to these smaller market teams leading the way as the big organizations remain silent and lag behind.

At least they are now spending their competitive balance money😉

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Welcome To My House said:

Minor league players that are cut, are they able to be signed by other teams or are they just furlough?

They are not FA but are able to collect unemployment because of a bill dealing with the virus

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/16/2020 at 8:18 AM, 89Topps said:

 

I don't know about that.  Those of us who have taken the time to learn about the situation will probably side with the players, but John Q Public just thinks players are overpaid for "playing a game", and probably never gives a thought to who owns the team and how rich they are.

The players are greedy bums.

Maybe not all, but enough to create chaos.

Every player should have to spend a year, working a real job for 50K a year.

Whether players have any case, doesnt matter now.

This is the worst crisis since WW2.

And guess what. Feller, Teddy and many others, put country 1st, by enlisting.

Saying pay cuts are unfair, with nearly every American effected, is bad optics.

A public relations nightmare.

Players need to suck it up for 1 year, bring fans back, and reap rewards later.

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

The players are greedy bums.

Maybe not all, but enough to create chaos.

Every player should have to spend a year, working a real job for 50K a year.

Whether players have any case, doesnt matter now.

This is the worst crisis since WW2.

And guess what. Feller, Teddy and many others, put country 1st, by enlisting.

Saying pay cuts are unfair, with nearly every American effected, is bad optics.

A public relations nightmare.

Players need to suck it up for 1 year, bring fans back, and reap rewards later.

Yeah I've made posts like this and been roasted for it - you likely will receive the same. 

In any case - I agree. Can't help it - been watching MLB for 40 years and agree. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, HOOTIE said:

The players are greedy bums.

Maybe not all, but enough to create chaos.

Every player should have to spend a year, working a real job for 50K a year.

Whether players have any case, doesnt matter now.

This is the worst crisis since WW2.

And guess what. Feller, Teddy and many others, put country 1st, by enlisting.

Saying pay cuts are unfair, with nearly every American effected, is bad optics.

A public relations nightmare.

Players need to suck it up for 1 year, bring fans back, and reap rewards later.

Now change the word player for owner.....

 

How one can have this take and completely give owners a pass is beyond me.  

Share this post


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

Now change the word player for owner.....

 

How one can have this take and completely give owners a pass is beyond me.  

I don't think greed has anything to do with it, for either side.  Both groups are losing a ton of money in this.  Both are negotiating to mitigate their losses.  As anyone in their position would do.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, Weekday Warrior said:

So the owners are going to lose billions no matter what happens this season under any scenario, right? Is there any force beyond fan retention that would incentivize them to give up the billions that the players are asking for?

If this season is cancelled, they can just reopen next season and hold players to their contracts and treat it as business as usual assuming stadiums are open, albeit with an expiring collective bargaining agreement, right?  Why wouldn’t they just shutter up, cut as many losses as possible, and figure the fans will be back next year?

I don’t think I’ve seen anyone do the math, but I think the losses of a canceled season will far exceed the losses in a shortened season. There’s money still to be made this year if teams get creative as I have to imagine that ratings will be significantly higher than most seasons. I think there’s also a chance that teams will be allowed to open their stadiums to fans in at least a limited capacity at some point this summer, perhaps as soon as July in some areas.

Then there’s the inevitable loss they’ll face next year if they cancel the season.  There’s no doubt in my mind that a significant number of fans, especially the casual fan, will turn their backs to the game for at least next year if they can’t come to an agreement squabbling over money during the country’s most devastating pandemic in over 100 years. If they’re the only sport that doesn’t come back this year, it will be an awful public relations look that will have painful ramifications to both players and owners. The backlash they’d face this year and next year would be enormous.

I think I’m in the dwindling minority now, but I still believe that for these reasons they’ll come to an agreement in the next 2 weeks. I also believe that the league’s history of contentious negotiations between players and owners is a significant factor here, but I think it’s mostly just that- negotiations. It’s ugly and it seems both parties are nowhere close to a common ground, but both sides have too much to lose. Get a mediator, resume negotiations, and hammer something out. It shouldn’t be this hard.

Edited by meh2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, WahooManiac said:

Now change the word player for owner.....

How one can have this take and completely give owners a pass is beyond me.  

No one is giving owners a pass.  But this is a capitalistic country unfortunately.  Which means the bosses always have the power over the workers even in multi-millionaire fights. 

So guess what?  No season and the players loose.  Period. 

No season and the owners, who usually are diversified in multiple businesses which they have to be to even afford to buy a sports team n this era, can either absorb the loss and write part of it off using tax loopholes or they can sell their team and get out of the business of baseball and into some different businesses instead.  They have all the options.

Ball players can' t switch their options to other careers without losing economically as they have one skill set and one only that earns them big bucks.  Therefore it is crazy to "hold the line" just because billionaires are worse than millionaires and end up shooting themselves in the foot in the process.  That is the sad reality of the situation.

Meanwhile most fans think pissing matches between the super rich and the "mere" rich are obscene in normal times let alone now when over 40 million Americans are out of work and many would line up for days just to sell popcorn at a ball park and be grateful for the job let alone squabbling over a few million here or there.

I'm all for ideals and principles.  But millionaires out crusading against billionaires isn't a "morality play" I'm interested in seeing in the least.  It is in some parallel universe of the rich and greedy that I don't live in.

In other words it isn't anyone putting owners up on pedestals.  It is more about reality.  Because this world of the rich running everything really sucks but it sucks less for "mere millionaires" than the rest of us so let's just play ball already.

Edited by The Big Bat Theory
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


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

No one is giving owners a pass.  But this is a capitalistic country unfortunately.  Which means the bosses always have the power over the workers even in multi-millionaire fights. 

So guess what?  No season and the players loose.  Period. 

No season and the owners, who usually are diversified in multiple businesses which they have to be to even afford to buy a sports team n this era, can either absorb the loss and write part of it off using tax loopholes or they can sell their team and get out of the business of baseball and into some different businesses instead.  They have all the options.

Ball players can' t switch their options to other careers without losing economically as they have one skill set and one only that earns them big bucks.  Therefore it is crazy to "hold the line" just because billionaires are worse than millionaires and end up shooting themselves in the foot in the process.  That is the sad reality of the situation.

Meanwhile most fans think pissing matches between the super rich and the "mere" rich are obscene in normal times let alone now when over 40 million Americans are out of work and many would line up for days just to sell popcorn at a ball park and be grateful for the job let alone squabbling over a few million here or there.

I'm all for ideals and principles.  But millionaires out crusading against billionaires isn't a "morality play" I'm interested in seeing in the least.  It is in some parallel universe of the rich and greedy that I don't live in.

In other words it isn't anyone putting owners up on pedestals.  It is more about reality.  Because this world of the rich running everything really sucks but it sucks less for "mere millionaires" than the rest of us so let's just play ball already.

Reality is that there is no way the MLBPA is going to accept revenue sharing or any other proposal from the owners based on them claiming losses they will not at least show by opening their books.

You want baseball?  Me too.  But the way to get there is for the owners to at least demonstrate some amount of good faith in these negotiations by at least demonstrating their projected losses are legit.

Players aren't going to risk getting Covid-19 for some mystery sum of money when they know they get 4% by staying home in order to help owners who aren't even willing to share the financials that support their case.  It's unreasonable for them to ask, and if you want "reality" that is reality.  They've said as much.

Anyone who still wants baseball this year should understand, in no uncertain terms, the reason they aren't already planning to report June 10th to Spring Training is that the owners want more money than they already agreed to, and they are claiming the reason for that is that they claim they will lose money but are unwilling to show their work.  And if they don't move from this position, there will be no baseball.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone who still wants baseball this year should understand, in no uncertain terms, the reason they aren't already planning to report June 10th to Spring Training is that the owners want more money than they already agreed to, and they are claiming the reason for that is that they claim they will lose money but are unwilling to show their work.  And if they don't move from this position, there will be no baseball.

 

This.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
44 minutes ago, JE7HorseGod said:

 

Players aren't going to risk getting Covid-19 for some mystery sum of money when they know they get 4% by staying home in order to help owners who aren't even willing to share the financials that support their case.  It's unreasonable for them to ask, and if you want "reality" that is reality.  


I agree with most of what you said but I’m still unclear about how I factor Covid into any of it. Is going to a supermarket to get food less or more risky than playing baseball?  These are healthy young men and while there are certainly risk, it’s not that high.
 

There’s no guarantee there will be a vaccine in 2021 either, so like are they not concerned next year? Losing two years of earning potential as a baseball player is pretty detrimental , even just one for a lot of them. And if there’s a strike in 2022, that’s just going to wreak havoc on a lot of players career earnings. These are guys who worked their butts off to be the best in the world in baseball to earn money for a short amount of time. I respect that a lot , particularly because baseball and fantasy baseball are among my favorite things in life. 

I don’t view these guys as normal workers without ambition and dedication who should just suck it up and take their money. They earned it. If what they did didn’t matter we wouldn’t be discussing it. 
 

Basically half of one season earnings for players is lost to no fault of anyone in baseball.  A player who is set to make 5 million pro rated would make 3 million under the current proposal. I’m not implying the proposal is good but like if you’re willing to risk playing for 5 but not for 3, it’s not about Covid risk imo. I also don’t get what someone like Gerrit Cole is thinking . Yeah he’s getting “ screwed” on making 8 million instead of 35 but he’s locked into a long term deal anyway. If he gets hurt in a shortened underpaid season he’ll be fine. Not sure how taking a 0 for the year is more beneficial to him or Trout.

 

The players should get what they bargained for in contracts, but at the same time the owners are losing a substantial amount of money based on no fans. How much ? I don’t know . Are they exaggerating? Probably, but it is a lot and having games with no fans is not their fault.

Ideally someone non biased could come in figure it out and everyone has to abide. But that ain’t happening.
 

Personally I think the owners should step up and pay because it’s the right thing to do and they stand to benefit most from a healthy league , they will be around long after Trout retires. I’m not saying the players will or should cave but if we have no baseball this year , perhaps limited next year and a strike in 2022, a lot of players will regret it. 


 

 

Edited by brockpapersizer
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always like the players vs owners discussion; the owners always win the PR war because they hold the line on messaging and don't care what the public thinks. Nobody gives the owners a pass but you may as well yell at a cloud while Trevor Bauer will argue with nobodies on Twitter.

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

How much ? I don’t know . Are they exaggerating? Probably, but it is a lot and having games with no fans is not their fault.

That's exactly the problem though.

Nobody knows except the owners.

You can't have a good faith discussion on helping them when they won't even reveal if they even really need help, or how much they need.  But that's what they're asking for.

So you can't have someone "without bias" engage in mediation because that person wouldn't have the knowledge required to successfully mediate.

It's not a poker game where they aren't revealing their hand, they're not telling anybody what the chips are worth.

Edited by JE7HorseGod

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Hanghow said:

; the owners always win the PR war because they hold the line on messaging and don't care what the public thinks. 

 

And many fans don't care about players, only the teams they support, and don't understand why players make a lot of money.  People are much more comfortable complaining about how much Albert Pujols is overpaid rather than vast more players who are underpaid.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, brockpapersizer said:

 

And many fans don't care about players, only the teams they support, and don't understand why players make a lot of money.  People are much more comfortable complaining about how much Albert Pujols is overpaid rather than vast more players who are underpaid.

I sort of understand, most long time sports fans cheer for a team their whole lives, from their point of view the team is "the product" and the players are but a "feature" of the product that is subject to change with each contract negotiation or retirement.

Most of these fans don't really like being reminded of the human element of it when it comes to economics, particularly the reminders that some of these humans make more money in a year than they will make in their lifetime.

However, I must profess I get confused sometimes when someone says, "honor your contract" when a player is holding out for more money, but at that same time can say, "just shut up and do what the owners say and play ball" in this scenario (or other lockout type scenarios) when the owners are the ones not "honoring their agreement" here.

I'm perhaps jaded a bit.  I grew up a St. Louis Rams fan, and am perhaps cynical about sports ownership groups and how they feel about their fans, and have seen what "rooting for laundry" is worth to these guys in ownership.

But I really don't get how someone can feel like ownership forcing players to renegotiate to terms that they can't even possibly know, for reasons ownership refuses to articulate, is the proper solution here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Owners are billionaires and even if they lose money this year, they will make it back over the coming years.

Players are millionaires (some). But you need to think about the 40-man roster, not just those top 15 superstars when forming your opinion. Yes, Bryce Harper and Mike Trout will be fine. But how many 32 year-old 4th OFs and middle relievers, or 26 year-old career minor leaguers, are simply trying to make, for some of them, their last bit of money in this career? This cannot be overstated. Players have a small window to make their money. This isn’t true of owners.

All that said...some of these players speaking out are really, really dumb. Guys like Snell and Trevor Bauer need to understand that many people are emotional, not logical. And while I agree with them that they shouldn’t be taking another pay cut here, many just hear “millionaires whining about money.” Take the temperature of the room, guys.

They’re actually strengthening the owners’ position in two ways:

1- You see it here and on social media. “Shut up and stop whining and play.” They’ve painted themselves the bad guys. The owners didn’t do that.

2- I’m in a union. They’re weakening their stance, as they are making it clear there is not a unified front. The owners want nothing more than a split amongst the players.

I want to back the players badly, and of course still am, but they continue to shoot themselves in the foot. 

  • Like 5

Share this post


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

Owners are billionaires and even if they lose money this year, they will make it back over the coming years.

Players are millionaires (some). But you need to think about the 40-man roster, not just those top 15 superstars when forming your opinion. Yes, Bryce Harper and Mike Trout will be fine. But how many 32 year-old 4th OFs and middle relievers, or 26 year-old career minor leaguers, are simply trying to make, for some of them, their last bit of money in this career? This cannot be overstated. Players have a small window to make their money. This isn’t true of owners.

All that said...some of these players speaking out are really, really dumb. Guys like Snell and Trevor Bauer need to understand that many people are emotional, not logical. And while I agree with them that they shouldn’t be taking another pay cut here, many just hear “millionaires whining about money.” Take the temperature of the room, guys.

They’re actually strengthening the owners’ position in two ways:

1- You see it here and on social media. “Shut up and stop whining and play.” They’ve painted themselves the bad guys. The owners didn’t do that.

2- I’m in a union. They’re weakening their stance, as they are making it clear there is not a unified front. The owners want nothing more than a split amongst the players.

I want to back the players badly, and of course still am, but they continue to shoot themselves in the foot. 

Trevor Bauer is just kinda Looney Tunes and I tend to tune out whatever he says.

But I agree Snell should have known better.

Share this post


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

Trevor Bauer is just kinda Looney Tunes and I tend to tune out whatever he says.

But I agree Snell should have known better.

Yeah Bauer is goofy, but he’s vocal and has a presence. But even the Scherzer statement. He’s not wrong, but STOP NEGOTIATING THROUGH SOCIAL MEDIA. KEEP IT BEHIND CLOSED DOORS. Nothing good comes from this. Tony Clark should really have control of this so there’s a unified voice. 

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

Yeah Bauer is goofy, but he’s vocal and has a presence. But even the Scherzer statement. He’s not wrong, but STOP NEGOTIATING THROUGH SOCIAL MEDIA. KEEP IT BEHIND CLOSED DOORS. Nothing good comes from this. Tony Clark should really have control of this so there’s a unified voice. 

 

This.  Take a page from the owners here,  the first to speak up looks like the loser.  Why do you think the owners never say a damn thing in these situations? 

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

Yeah Bauer is goofy, but he’s vocal and has a presence. But even the Scherzer statement. He’s not wrong, but STOP NEGOTIATING THROUGH SOCIAL MEDIA. KEEP IT BEHIND CLOSED DOORS. Nothing good comes from this. Tony Clark should really have control of this so there’s a unified voice. 

 

I think Scherzer articulated the case better than Snell.

There are a lot of people who just say, "the players are greedy, they want more money" I think it's not the worst thing in the world to hear why that's a misrepresentation of the case from a star player if it's expressed well, as I think it is in this case.

Share this post


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

I think Scherzer articulated the case better than Snell.

There are a lot of people who just say, "the players are greedy, they want more money" I think it's not the worst thing in the world to hear why that's a misrepresentation of the case from a star player if it's expressed well, as I think it is in this case.

well, to be fair, a monkey could have articulated it better than Snell did.   He came across as a whiney little man-child, as an inarticulate simpleton, and as an ultra-greedy 'one-percenter', all in one fell-swoop.   that's not an easy thing to accomplish.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, SoundMaster said:

well, to be fair, a monkey could have articulated it better than Snell did.   He came across as a whiney little man-child, as an inarticulate simpleton, and as an ultra-greedy 'one-percenter', all in one fell-swoop.   that's not an easy thing to accomplish.

LOL, it was bad.  Agreed.

All I'm saying is Scherzer's statement wasn't a problem for me personally, and I'd be hard pressed to understand why anyone wouldn't find it to be a logical if passionate summation of events.

Share this post


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

I think Scherzer articulated the case better than Snell.

There are a lot of people who just say, "the players are greedy, they want more money" I think it's not the worst thing in the world to hear why that's a misrepresentation of the case from a star player if it's expressed well, as I think it is in this case.

No doubt. It’s just not the forum. It drums up a lot of negatively as well. Social media is not the place for any type of nuanced discussion. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

No doubt. It’s just not the forum. It drums up a lot of negatively as well. Social media is not the place for any type of nuanced discussion. 

It could be, if more people were capable of having a nuanced discussion, but that's obviously a much broader and frustrating topic, and I understand that controlling the message is your point here, and that's fair enough.

All I'll say is, if we're talking "fans of baseball" I would suspect that Max Scherzer is a more well known name than Tony Clark.  And it seems to me that A.) They're on the same page and B.) Scherzer pretty much said exactly what happened.  So I don't view his tweet in the same vein as Snell or Bauer.

  • Like 1

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.