Will There Be a 2020 Season?

[Dick Allen]

8 hours ago, Baker said:

Carlos Rodon’s career is in real jeopardy with all the injuries he has had. He probably could have gotten $100M ,  4 years ago on an extension. Sure Boras works for him and sure Boras has been pumping him up for a big payday in free agency. Boras can afford a few busts, whereas the individual could lose generational wealth. 

Why would the White Sox have done that? That is crazy. Zero chance even if he was winning CY Young awards.

[Chicago White Sox]

1 hour ago, Dick Allen said:

Why would the White Sox have done that? That is crazy. Zero chance even if he was winning CY Young awards.

Especially when better pitchers at similar career points signed for like half of that (Snell, Nola, & Severino).

[oldsox]

9 hours ago, Texsox said:

So you believe a different agent could have gotten him a bigger payday? How? 

Hypothetically, by not always insisting on Free Agency, no matter what.

[NWINFan]

10 hours ago, mqr said:

we can argue economics all we want. The season is flat out not happening. 

I agree. I don't think it is going to happen, either. Even if they get  a few games in, things will not work out in long run for 2020. This is just an example of how the country has not gotten this under control. Things are not going to return to normal just like that. This crisis will go beyond the next election cycle. If things don't improve, 2021 is in doubt, too. It is time that the country truly faces up to how bad this is.  No, this isn't the damned flu.

[Texsox]

40 minutes ago, oldsox said:

Hypothetically, by not always insisting on Free Agency, no matter what.

Are you suggesting that a player may not want to go to free agency, hires Boras, and then is forced to go free agency? That the player 

A. Doesn't know how Boras operates (but fans do)

and

B. Is forced to do what Boras wants?

 

[Balta1701]

Maybe we shoulda used “stay home and wear a mask otherwise there won’t be any sports again” as the selling point.

[caulfield12]

6 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

Maybe we shoulda used “stay home and wear a mask otherwise there won’t be any sports again” as the selling point.

Might have actually worked in SEC, ACC and Big 12 territory....

[Ducksnort]

Apparently MLB will not counter the latest proposal by the players. MLBPA supposed to vote on the latest 60 game proposal from owners today.

[oldsox]

11 minutes ago, Texsox said:

Are you suggesting that a player may not want to go to free agency, hires Boras, and then is forced to go free agency? That the player 

A. Doesn't know how Boras operates (but fans do)

and

B. Is forced to do what Boras wants?

 

Not exactly. My comments about Boras are tempered by the fact that I just don't like him.  Some think he is good for baseball, I think that he might have been, but now isn't.  He's greedy, to a fault.  Don't ask me why.  I'll let someone else be his shrink.  Then, the one time he represented  a very high White Sox draft pick, Carlos Rodon, he really tried to put the wood to the Sox.  He held out for an amount way above slot, and then tried his best to make the Sox pay even more, to the extent that there would have been penalties to the Sox.  Boras didn't care.  They should have just walked, and let Rodon go through the draft again the next year.  But they capitulated and signed him.  Had the White Sox walked, they would have received the #4 pick the next year, and saved all that over slot money.  Then, you could not have said that Boras was good for his client, because Rodon might not have been able to go back to college for his senior year, having hired an  agent.

Boras used to represent Cargo, when Cargo was a real hot commodity.  Cargo wanted to extend with the Rockies, Boras wanted to test FA waters, Cargo negotiated his own contract with Rockies, got what he wanted where he wanted.  Might be the only time a Boras client rejected his tactics.

Then, we have 2020 with all of its problems.  No deal yet, and you can't convince me that Boras has been helpful in trying to get a deal done.  Quite the opposite, I'm sure.  We'll probably never know the extent Boras went to convince MLBPA not to accept a deal.

[Texsox]

He's greedy or his clients are greedy?

His job is to do what his clients want him to do. Do you really think grown men, professional athletes who compete every day,  just cower behind him and do what he tells them to do while they give him millions for the pleasure? 

You know all this about him and how he operates. How do the guys that sign with him not know? Are they just clueless and sign with Boras because no one else will accept them? I believe they know exactly what they are getting and that is exactly what they want and why they hire him. Later, they can hide behind him and he'll take all the PR flack so the athlete can keep their endorsements (which he negotiates and earns a fee for).

Athletes are competitive. If you've been around any you know it isn't just competitive in their sport. They know exactly what the other guys are earning. They are competitive in salaries as well. No one dreams about being paid below market, but they do dream about being the highest paid at their position or in their sport. Boras helps them to get there. 

If players just wanted to help their clubs they would not hire an agent and just accept whatever the team wants to offer. 

[Baker]

6 hours ago, Dick Allen said:

Why would the White Sox have done that? That is crazy. Zero chance even if he was winning CY Young awards.

    Clayton Kershaw got a $200M contract extension after 2 Cy Youngs, probably something the WS wouldn’t do. 
 

  Rodon was no Kershaw, but I don’t think it’s unreasonable to think he could have gotten close to $100M/ 5 years extension after his first 2 solid seasons. 

[DirtySox]

 

[Dick Allen]

22 minutes ago, Baker said:

    Clayton Kershaw got a $200M contract extension after 2 Cy Youngs, probably something the WS wouldn’t do. 
 

  Rodon was no Kershaw, but I don’t think it’s unreasonable to think he could have gotten close to $100M/ 5 years extension after his first 2 solid seasons. 

That is very unreasonable. 

[DirtySox]

 

[KrankinSox]

24 minutes ago, DirtySox said:

 

Players wanted the imposed season so they can file a grievance. They view that as their best bet for a big payday.

[pcq]

Rodon was nothing but a taker showing little durability. He is a fringe starter at this point. I doubt other teams would want to invest in him. Better to spend resources on healthier prospects. 

[Ducksnort]

20 minutes ago, KrankinSox said:

Players wanted the imposed season so they can file a grievance. They view that as their best bet for a big payday.

Yep. What a shame. All about the $$$$$

[Jerksticks]

Free country. 

[Texsox]

Twenty games and a outbreak ends the season. 

[southsider2k5]

17 hours ago, Baker said:

Carlos Rodon’s career is in real jeopardy with all the injuries he has had. He probably could have gotten $100M ,  4 years ago on an extension. Sure Boras works for him and sure Boras has been pumping him up for a big payday in free agency. Boras can afford a few busts, whereas the individual could lose generational wealth. 

Based on Sox history,  notice they don't seem to sign many pitchers to these kind of deals. If they do, it is early and for a lot less money. 

[Y2Jimmy0]

I'm surprised that the players are going to turn this down honestly. It doesn't make sense for them. They think they should get more than 60 games prorated in exchange for expanded playoffs, etc. I don't think they'll win a grievance though. 

If they agree to a deal: players get 60 games full prorated (37% of salary), universal DH (extra jobs), two years of expanded playoffs (some money for playoffs), keep some of the advance from March, not allowed to file a grievance. 

 

If they don't agree to deal: Rob Manfred imposes season around 54 games (33% of salary), no universal DH, regular playoffs (players don't get paid), return the advance from March, they can file a grievance that owners didn't negotiate in good faith. 

The owners were worried about this grievance. After the players most recent proposal though, I think they'd lose the grievance. MLB has consistently said season must end on September 27th due to COVID-19 concerns. I think that's mostly bullshit and it's about FOX tv deal. The players proposed 70 games though which was scheduled to go longer than September 27th which is the date that MLB's health experts recommended. I think by the owners turning down that deal and not countering, it allows them to win a grievance based on the fact that players weren't being reasonable by trying to go longer than what MLB's medical experts have proposed. 

MLBPA must feel otherwise. They have to think they can win this grievance. I think the owners would cancel the season in that case though. 

[Texsox]

The longer the season the better chance of it turning into a Covid circus with teams decimated by illnesses trying to field a team. 

[Y2Jimmy0]

6 minutes ago, Texsox said:

The longer the season the better chance of it turning into a Covid circus with teams decimated by illnesses trying to field a team. 

For sure. MLB just wants to get to the post-season ASAP. It's where the owners make the most money and they think they can come up with a bubble plan if necessary to get the games played. 

[Texsox]

Let's just play a double elimination tournament and call it a year. I might only be half joking. Looking at the college programs, Trumps staff for the rally, etc all with multiples of infected people and all I can think is why try? 

[Ducksnort]

1 hour ago, Y2Jimmy0 said:

I'm surprised that the players are going to turn this down honestly. It doesn't make sense for them. They think they should get more than 60 games prorated in exchange for expanded playoffs, etc. I don't think they'll win a grievance though. 

If they agree to a deal: players get 60 games full prorated (37% of salary), universal DH (extra jobs), two years of expanded playoffs (some money for playoffs), keep some of the advance from March, not allowed to file a grievance. 

 

If they don't agree to deal: Rob Manfred imposes season around 54 games (33% of salary), no universal DH, regular playoffs (players don't get paid), return the advance from March, they can file a grievance that owners didn't negotiate in good faith. 

The owners were worried about this grievance. After the players most recent proposal though, I think they'd lose the grievance. MLB has consistently said season must end on September 27th due to COVID-19 concerns. I think that's mostly bullshit and it's about FOX tv deal. The players proposed 70 games though which was scheduled to go longer than September 27th which is the date that MLB's health experts recommended. I think by the owners turning down that deal and not countering, it allows them to win a grievance based on the fact that players weren't being reasonable by trying to go longer than what MLB's medical experts have proposed. 

MLBPA must feel otherwise. They have to think they can win this grievance. I think the owners would cancel the season in that case though. 

If the players turn this down (which looks like that's what's gonna happen) I bet the season is cancelled over the owners not wanting to go to court, and are probably sick of dicking around with this whole thing.

Edited June 20, 2020 by ScooterMcGee