The Road to Nowhere
When I first read about MLB presenting a new proposal to the Players, I felt some guarded optimism. I thought that it was significant that MLB bothered at all to make a counterproposal after saying they weren't going to make one. Sadly, though, as the details continue to come out it became clear that this wasn't going to be a gamechanger for breaking the stalemate. It seemed like every new detail that leaked out over the course of the day made it clearer that this offer wasn't going to move the sticks at all.
Craig Edwards at FanGraphs summarizes both the proposal and the way it came out over the course of the day:
Many of the details that leaked out made it seam less and less likely that this proposal had any chance of being accepted by the players. Other than forgiving 20% of the money that was advanced to the players in the original negotiations, it became clear that MLB was asking the Players to take all of the physical risks involved with playing and a good chunk of the financial risks, too.
Edwards does a good job of showing how little the players would benefit from this offer compared to the others that have been discussed. As he points out, the players are risking $80 million in pay if COVID-19 shuts the game down before the expanded Playoffs are completed. Edwards also demonstrates that the players would actually do better under the 48-game fully prorated pay schedule discussed last week.
This just seems to be keeping to the familiar pattern where MLB doesn't seem capable of coming up with a genuine offer that has any chance of moving these negotiations along. Meanwhile, the Players Union under Tony Clark has yet to show any imagination with their offers. We just seem to all be on the same road to nowhere as Major League Baseball seems committed to doing irreparable harm to their game.
- First we learned that there was a new proposal from MLB where there would be a 76-game schedule and the players would be paid 75% of their prorated salaries across the board. The proposal would also eliminate draft pick compensation for free agent signings for this coming off-season only. This would be a concession to the Players' worry that the current financial situation would negatively impact free agents contracts.
- Later we found out that the 75% salaries would only be paid if all of the Playoffs were completed. If not, the compensation would drop to 50% of prorated salaries.
- Then later we learned that players would be required to sign an "acknowledgment of risk" waiver in order to play.
Many of the details that leaked out made it seam less and less likely that this proposal had any chance of being accepted by the players. Other than forgiving 20% of the money that was advanced to the players in the original negotiations, it became clear that MLB was asking the Players to take all of the physical risks involved with playing and a good chunk of the financial risks, too.
Edwards does a good job of showing how little the players would benefit from this offer compared to the others that have been discussed. As he points out, the players are risking $80 million in pay if COVID-19 shuts the game down before the expanded Playoffs are completed. Edwards also demonstrates that the players would actually do better under the 48-game fully prorated pay schedule discussed last week.
This just seems to be keeping to the familiar pattern where MLB doesn't seem capable of coming up with a genuine offer that has any chance of moving these negotiations along. Meanwhile, the Players Union under Tony Clark has yet to show any imagination with their offers. We just seem to all be on the same road to nowhere as Major League Baseball seems committed to doing irreparable harm to their game.
The problem with negotiations is that someone wants to come out as the winner and that means the other party is the loser. Since no one wants to wear the loser t-shirt, it stalemates the process.
ReplyDelete