Will There Be a 2020 Season?

[ptatc]

1 hour ago, bmags said:

I am in general very pro player. I think the players positioning is getting better, the first "no salary cap!" positioning was idiotic.

Players have a harder time since any one of hundreds can break off and say something dumb, while owners know from years not to speak ever.

But, I think it's harder this time to just take the "owners signed the agreement in march, can't negotiate!". Clearly things are way worse than I think many anticipated when everything canceled. The loss of revenue you are talking about is not something that happens without everyone feeling it, though it could very well be short term. It is an outlier, and I think the way to bridge that while allowing positive or negative changes is a year of revenue sharing (though matched to typical % of players salaries +1/2%)

Yeah, the owners are billionaires, but here's a good illustration of the reality in action.

 

 

Bu-whah!? You are [redacted: millionaire] OWNER! You can't just keep paying your employees! You are ignoring rent!? Just pay with your millions!

edit: well apologies to Patty Light here, I figured he had more than a cup of coffee. Soooo...not a millionaire

What do you think will happen in FA next offseason if players "win" this?

A lot of the problem is manfred sucks. You can see silver in the NBA meeting with players constantly, making sure they have a voice. Manfred just tries to plop his shit on everyone and make them feel like a zero sum game rather than something the league needs to get through with everyone as close to whole as possible.

It should come down to what the revenues will be. The sport is losing roughly 1/3 of the revenues with no fans. The next will be how much revenue are they losing from the media contracts. Are they going to get only 1/2 the revenue from these contracts? It will be interesting as to how much revenue loss there is, that's why the owners pushing for the revenue sharing makes sense. However, they agreed to that compromise way too soon thinking it would be a good deal early.

[Balta1701]

4 minutes ago, ptatc said:

It should come down to what the revenues will be. The sport is losing roughly 1/3 of the revenues with no fans. The next will be how much revenue are they losing from the media contracts. Are they going to get only 1/2 the revenue from these contracts? It will be interesting as to how much revenue loss there is, that's why the owners pushing for the revenue sharing makes sense. However, they agreed to that compromise way too soon thinking it would be a good deal early.

Well the obvious problem is that answer is literally unknowable until the season is played. We're about to see big surges in case numbers across the country, so are people going to be watching more or less TV as that happens? What happens if there is only 1 league running? How much extra revenue do they get for extra playoff series?

[KrankinSox]

6 hours ago, Harold's Leg Lift said:

Snellzilla spittin fire.  

SnElLzILlA sPiTtINg FiRe

 

[Jose Abreu]

 

[caulfield12]

3 hours ago, Jose Abreu said:

 

That’s fine, as long as his wife/family are still supportive when he hits FA at 32 rather than 31...and ends up earning $30+ million less for his career.   Not to mention lost future endorsement opportunities if he’s one of the few holding out at home.  That kind of move doesn’t play well no matter how you spin it to the average American sports fan or consumer.

[ptatc]

4 hours ago, Balta1701 said:

Well the obvious problem is that answer is literally unknowable until the season is played. We're about to see big surges in case numbers across the country, so are people going to be watching more or less TV as that happens? What happens if there is only 1 league running? How much extra revenue do they get for extra playoff series?

exactly. That's why the owners plan makes sense in a vacuum.

[Balta1701]

28 minutes ago, ptatc said:

exactly. That's why the owners plan makes sense in a vacuum.

Then to get the players to give a deal where they go to a share rather than the current agreement, the owners should be offering the players a larger share than any other league. That way, if it sets a precedent for creating a capped league, it’s a precedent the owners hate and want to negotiate away. Both sides are making a sacrifice to create that as a compromise. 65% or revenue to the players? Owners would hate that precedent as much as the players don’t want a cap.

plus, expenses should be weirdly low since they wouldn’t be spending money managing crowds or marketing ticket sales, so an unusually high fraction of revenue seems reasonable. 

[greg775]

I think the players should get 100 percent of the contract they signed. But I also think companies should suck it up and not lay off anybody during corona. Players need to get full pay. Will they or will they settle? For one season owners should suck it up. they got the $$.

[ptatc]

7 hours ago, Balta1701 said:

Then to get the players to give a deal where they go to a share rather than the current agreement, the owners should be offering the players a larger share than any other league. That way, if it sets a precedent for creating a capped league, it’s a precedent the owners hate and want to negotiate away. Both sides are making a sacrifice to create that as a compromise. 65% or revenue to the players? Owners would hate that precedent as much as the players don’t want a cap.

plus, expenses should be weirdly low since they wouldn’t be spending money managing crowds or marketing ticket sales, so an unusually high fraction of revenue seems reasonable. 

I agree. They owners made the mistake of agreeing to the previous deal too early. If they want to change it now, they need to give up more to the players. 

[turnin' two]

22 hours ago, Harold's Leg Lift said:

Snellzilla spittin fire.  

It doesn't really make sense to be carrying on the negotiations in public.  Snell (or other players) don't really have anything to gain by doing stuff like this.  This would irritate the crap out of me if I was Tony Clark.

[Texsox]

If I understand this correctly the healthiest people on the planet with 24/7 access to premier unlimited health care are concerned about returning to work because they might endanger their health.

Imagine what the rest of society without those advantages is facing. 

[Chisoxfn]

22 hours ago, Y2Jimmy0 said:

I think canceling the season is the worst case scenario. It'll have huge ramifications on the 2021 season and into the future. 

It would be a death sentence to baseball. I think worse than the 94 strike.  One thing to cancel because of the virus, another because of money (at a time when we are facing record unemployment). 

[Richie]

31 minutes ago, Chisoxfn said:

It would be a death sentence to baseball. I think worse than the 94 strike.  One thing to cancel because of the virus, another because of money (at a time when we are facing record unemployment). 

Agreed. The owners and the league need to make this happen, at all costs, IMO. 

The potential issues stem much further than simply this season's revenue/losses. 

[Richie]

And I'm sorry... I have no sympathy for the "risking our lives" bit. This coming from a guy who lost his uncle to this virus. 

You are in your 20's and early 30's, in top physical condition. You are at a MICROSCOPIC risk of losing your life and will be 10x more protected than the average citizen. People are going back to work in restaurants, factories, etc. I am going back to work in a gym training and rehabbing athletes soon. The world is slowly getting back to work, for much less money and in much more hazardous situations. It's simply not asking that much. 

[ThirdGen]

16 minutes ago, Richie said:

And I'm sorry... I have no sympathy for the "risking our lives" bit. This coming from a guy who lost his uncle to this virus. 

You are in your 20's and early 30's, in top physical condition. You are at a MICROSCOPIC risk of losing your life and will be 10x more protected than the average citizen. People are going back to work in restaurants, factories, etc. I am going back to work in a gym training and rehabbing athletes soon. The world is slowly getting back to work, for much less money and in much more hazardous situations. It's simply not asking that much. 

Couldn't agree more.  I don't understand why the assumption is being made that playing baseball in empty stadiums under constant supervision and strong cleaning precautions is any more dangerous than wherever they would be if not at the ballpark.  Its not like they are being held in vacuum chambers with no human interaction when not playing.  I understand the fear of front line workers with constant interaction with the public (cashiers, health care workers, etc), but it seems like people are hijacking those reasonable fears into other lines of work like baseball where the public interaction just doesn't exist.

[bmags]

3 hours ago, turnin' two said:

It doesn't really make sense to be carrying on the negotiations in public.  Snell (or other players) don't really have anything to gain by doing stuff like this.  This would irritate the crap out of me if I was Tony Clark.

ding ding ding.

[greg775]

On 5/15/2020 at 10:11 AM, turnin' two said:

It doesn't really make sense to be carrying on the negotiations in public.  Snell (or other players) don't really have anything to gain by doing stuff like this.  This would irritate the crap out of me if I was Tony Clark.

I don't blame the players for talking this way. I don't think anybody who is still locked down should ever blast a player for concern.

This virus is either life and death or it isn't. We've been thoroughly conditioned the last 2 months to thinking this thing is lurking everywhere ready to kill and we've been shamed into thinking about doing anything. Can't have it both ways. When players balk, they balk. The politicians have been dictatorial about this. We are in danger every ,moment we leave our abodes. Big danger. So either pay the players their entire salaries or forget the season. Owners can afford it (right now).

Edited May 16, 2020 by greg775

[michelangelosmonkey]

On 5/15/2020 at 12:24 PM, Richie said:

And I'm sorry... I have no sympathy for the "risking our lives" bit. This coming from a guy who lost his uncle to this virus. 

You are in your 20's and early 30's, in top physical condition. You are at a MICROSCOPIC risk of losing your life and will be 10x more protected than the average citizen. People are going back to work in restaurants, factories, etc. I am going back to work in a gym training and rehabbing athletes soon. The world is slowly getting back to work, for much less money and in much more hazardous situations. It's simply not asking that much. 

Yes but what about the NBA players...a bunch got it back in February and now they are piling their corpses up like cord wood...oh wait.  We are, right now at about 1 in 4,000 Americans dead from this...Italy during the plaque had 2,400 dead out of 4,000 and THEY didn't cancel baseball.  I'm tired of hiding under my bed and I want to see Robert and Moncada and Jimenez hitting.  

 

Edited May 16, 2020 by michelangelosmonkey
math

[Justinsettle]

5 hours ago, michelangelosmonkey said:

Yes but what about the NBA players...a bunch got it back in February and now they are piling their corpses up like cord wood...oh wait.  We are, right now at about 1 in 4,000 Americans dead from this...Italy during the plaque had 2,400 dead out of 4,000 and THEY didn't cancel baseball.  I'm tired of hiding under my bed and I want to see Robert and Moncada and Jimenez hitting.  

 

Exactly...and then adjust that rate for the vast majority of deaths being over 65 with comorbid conditions.  They have a much better chance of dying from something else vs this virus.  In my opinion they should be playing in front of fans...those that are scared to come out stay home.  Every covid model has been based on poor data and pretty much every decision around this has been bad.

[Timmy U]

7 minutes ago, Justinsettle said:

Exactly...and then adjust that rate for the vast majority of deaths being over 65 with comorbid conditions.  They have a much better chance of dying from something else vs this virus.  In my opinion they should be playing in front of fans...those that are scared to come out stay home.  Every covid model has been based on poor data and pretty much every decision around this has been bad.

My opinion may be colored by the fact that I live in NYC where 20,000 people are dead. The problem isn't the people attending large gatherings "taking their chances," it's providing fuel for the virus to keep spreading. Everyone who gets it, even those who don't get particularly sick, keep the virus alive in the community. If the average person who gets it gives it to two people, you can see how that just delays when this thing is finally over. Not to mention the inevitability of people dying as a result. I would love to have crowds back, but it is a terrible idea. 

Just a note, players didn't die, but people affiliated with the NBA definitely died as did Karl Anthony Townes' mother.

[Jack Parkman]

Just my opinion, but anyone who is working away from home and around other people right now should get hazard pay. I don't care who it is or how much they're getting paid. 

The players aren't being unreasonable at all. If you have enough money to own a sports team, you can pay your players for playing in empty stadiums. 

Edited May 17, 2020 by Jack Parkman

[Dick Allen]

I do think there will be some players very reluctant to play, and wouldn’t be surprised if there is a season, several will sit it out.

[Balta1701]

17 minutes ago, Dick Allen said:

I do think there will be some players very reluctant to play, and wouldn’t be surprised if there is a season, several will sit it out.

I'd guess maybe 10-20% of the league, with some notable veterans included. 

[Y2Jimmy0]

23 minutes ago, Dick Allen said:

I do think there will be some players very reluctant to play, and wouldn’t be surprised if there is a season, several will sit it out.

Yeah they will have that right. They can sit out and not get paid if they want. They are entitled to that I'd think. 

[Ducksnort]

7 hours ago, Jack Parkman said:

Just my opinion, but anyone who is working away from home and around other people right now should get hazard pay. I don't care who it is or how much they're getting paid. 

The players aren't being unreasonable at all. If you have enough money to own a sports team, you can pay your players for playing in empty stadiums. 

I'm still working and we're getting paid hazard pay. An extra $2 an hour. It's really nice and I agree that every person who is working should get some kind of temporary bonus...at least in places where stay-home orders are taking place and non-essentially deemed businesses are forced closed.