Will The MLB Suspend The 2020 season

[jad]

No one will sympathize with either side. If money keeps them off the field, the fans will punish both sides and stay away when they return.

 

Jad is wrong that the fans returned after the ‘94 strike. It wasn’t until the overhyped drug fueled Home Run record chase by MGwire and Sosa in 1998 that popularity returned for baseball.

 

I'm not sure the facts back this theory up, although of course in a sense we are both right: after the strike, the fans did not IMMEDIATELY come back, as you claim, but they did come back: here are the rough stats for total attendance: 1992: 55million; 1993: 70 million (!); 1994 50 Mil. 1995 50 mil; 1996 60 mil, 1997 63million; 1998 70 million; 1999 70mil; 2000 71mil; 2001 72; 2002 67; 2003 67; 2004 72.; 2005 74; (from there fairly stable, to 68million in 2019). The fans were back to pre-strike levels by 1996. And from there, attendance looks to me to be pretty flat, no? (I'm not sure what the big spike in attendance in '93 means, since 92-95 is otherwise pretty stable--50-55million. --Any ideas on that? I suppose you might argue reasonably enough, that without the strike this spike would have continued?)

[a700hitter]

I'm not sure the facts back this theory up, although of course in a sense we are both right: after the strike, the fans did not IMMEDIATELY come back, as you claim, but they did come back: here are the rough stats for total attendance: 1992: 55million; 1993: 70 million (!); 1994 50 Mil. 1995 50 mil; 1996 60 mil, 1997 63million; 1998 70 million; 1999 70mil; 2000 71mil; 2001 72; 2002 67; 2003 67; 2004 72.; 2005 74; (from there fairly stable, to 68million in 2019). The fans were back to pre-strike levels by 1996. And from there, attendance looks to me to be pretty flat, no? (I'm not sure what the big spike in attendance in '93 means, since 92-95 is otherwise pretty stable--50-55million. --Any ideas on that? I suppose you might argue reasonably enough, that without the strike this spike would have continued?)

I would argue that baseball undertook many fan friendly initiatives to win back the fans because they knew they had damaged the sport. I'll take the word of people like Glavine who lived through it rather than an interpretation by you of attendance stats.

[a700hitter]

Owners would pay less by using MiLB guys.

I don't think the owners want to dip down to their prospects and start their service clocks.

[notin]

I'm not sure the facts back this theory up, although of course in a sense we are both right: after the strike, the fans did not IMMEDIATELY come back, as you claim, but they did come back: here are the rough stats for total attendance: 1992: 55million; 1993: 70 million (!); 1994 50 Mil. 1995 50 mil; 1996 60 mil, 1997 63million; 1998 70 million; 1999 70mil; 2000 71mil; 2001 72; 2002 67; 2003 67; 2004 72.; 2005 74; (from there fairly stable, to 68million in 2019). The fans were back to pre-strike levels by 1996. And from there, attendance looks to me to be pretty flat, no? (I'm not sure what the big spike in attendance in '93 means, since 92-95 is otherwise pretty stable--50-55million. --Any ideas on that? I suppose you might argue reasonably enough, that without the strike this spike would have continued?)

 

MLB has a short season in 1994 with no postseason. So maybe reset interest after a strike?

[mvp 78]

I don't think the owners want to dip down to their prospects and start their service clocks.

 

AAAA players most likely.

[a700hitter]

AAAA players most likely.

And broken down journeymen with one foot or both feet in their baseball grave.

[jad]

I would argue that baseball undertook many fan friendly initiatives to win back the fans because they knew they had damaged the sport. I'll take the word of people like Glavine who lived through it rather than an interpretation by you of attendance stats.

 

Interpreting stats? I'm just giving the numbers. Which do not support the notion that 'the fans didn't/won't come back', as you yourself admit. And if it took 'many fan friendly initiatives' to get them back then, there's no reason to suspect that the owners won't come up with more of them in the future.

[mvp 78]

And broken down journeymen with one foot or both feet in their baseball grave.

 

Yup. It’ll be like the year they played with scabs.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

Yup. It’ll be like the year they played with scabs.

 

Or the year they played with Gorkys, Owings, Cashner, Chacin, Shawaryn...

[moonslav59]

Or the year they played with Gorkys, Owings, Cashner, Chacin, Shawaryn...

 

 

Not sure who was worse.

[Kimmi]

We need Joe Kelly back.

[5GoldGlovesOF,75]

We need Joe Kelly back.

 

To drill a fastball right between the 1 and 9 on Covid's back and then stand his mound.

[Kimmi]

To drill a fastball right between the 1 and 9 on Covid's back and then stand his mound.

 

Haha. There you go.

[Elktonnick]

I miss Joe Kelly. Although he isn't good for one's nerves.

[Elktonnick]

The Oakland A's announced yesterday that they are furloughing employees and will cease weekly stipends to their minor leaguers June1st. So it begins!

[mvp 78]

The Oakland A's announced yesterday that they are furloughing employees and will cease weekly stipends to their minor leaguers June1st. So it begins!

 

These poor billionaires. Really hurting right now!

[Elktonnick]

These poor billionaires. Really hurting right now!

 

Oakland owner Jack Fisher is one your poorer billionaires. His fortune is worth only 2.4 billion.

[notin]

Oakland owner Jack Fisher is one your poorer billionaires. His fortune is worth only 2.4 billion.

 

... not counting tips..

[moonslav59]

Owners Looking to Bust the Union

 

major-league-baseball-union-coronavirus

Edited May 27, 2020 by moonslav59

[Elktonnick]

Owners Looking to Bust the Union

 

major-league-baseball-union-coronavirus

 

I don't recognize the author's name. He is not a baseball writer. Has ever written about MLB before.

[moonslav59]

I don't recognize the author's name. He is not a baseball writer. Has ever written about MLB before.

 

My guess is, not much.

[TedWilliams101]

I'd gladly trade 2020 for less power for the players union. In fact, I'd be willing to lose multiple seasons if we could get a salary cap, do something about the teams that don't spend any $ at all, and stop giving out long guaranteed contracts. I dream of a day when guys like Panda, Price, and Pedroia can get cut for minimal cap penalty. I hate how teams get handcuffed by contracts and refuse to move on. It's frustrating as all hell. Almost as frustrating as all these stars that end up costing teams $100 million on the backend of their careers when they can barely walk. As much as I want Mookie back, the last 3-5 of his deal just won't be worth it...

[Jasonbay44]

The Oakland A's announced yesterday that they are furloughing employees and will cease weekly stipends to their minor leaguers June1st. So it begins!

 

What is crazy is the A's owner, who is a billionaire, wasn't willing to pay his minor leaguers $400 a week, which in a lot of states isn't even half of what unemployment is paying these days due to the Coronavirus.

 

It doesn't sound like a deal is close and I wouldn't be surprised if a season doesn't happen at all at this point.

[Jasonbay44]

I'd gladly trade 2020 for less power for the players union. In fact, I'd be willing to lose multiple seasons if we could get a salary cap, do something about the teams that don't spend any $ at all, and stop giving out long guaranteed contracts. I dream of a day when guys like Panda, Price, and Pedroia can get cut for minimal cap penalty. I hate how teams get handcuffed by contracts and refuse to move on. It's frustrating as all hell. Almost as frustrating as all these stars that end up costing teams $100 million on the backend of their careers when they can barely walk. As much as I want Mookie back, the last 3-5 of his deal just won't be worth it...

 

No one is forcing teams to give out those contracts. I'm fine with the players getting paid guaranteed most as for most of them it evens out as they begin their career young and dominant for pennies. For example, Rafael Devers was an MVP candidate for 600k a year last season.There is no way the players begin getting less power, especially when the owners are all making and are worth absurd amounts of money.

[TedWilliams101]

No one is forcing teams to give out those contracts. I'm fine with the players getting paid guaranteed most as for most of them it evens out as they begin their career young and dominant for pennies. For example, Rafael Devers was an MVP candidate for 600k a year last season.There is no way the players begin getting less power, especially when the owners are all making and are worth absurd amounts of money.

 

I get all that and I'm certainly not on the owners side. The lack of a cap also doesn't help. I can't imagine being a KC fan knowing that all the good players you draft will walk because you can't match what the big market teams can pay. It makes the whole idea of fair competition a joke.

 

As for contracts, you are right sometimes it works out with drafted players they way overperform their rookie contract, but that doesn't Help all FA signings that turn into Pablo, etc. It also doesn't help when you can't adjust after a few years. Take Porcello for example, he should have been given option to take a pay cut or be cut going into last year with how awful he was the previous two years. Or Pedroia who is eating up a ton of $ to be off the roster. What about the Sale situation. His contract could turn into a disaster and there's nothing we can do.

 

Its easier for a big market team like the Sox to survive a few bad big contracts, but smaller markets can't survive it. When Chris Davis happens to a smaller market team, it can be disastrous.

 

Of course if they went to a cap, the guaranteed contracts could become absolute disasters for some teams.

 

I just want parity and the best players on the field. Salaries shouldn't factor into playing time, yet we all know it does. You never see the $30 million aging slugger end up on the bench to the better player... You should.

 

I was always a baseball fan first and foremost, but watching how sports like the NFL operates with a cap, contracts, etc, it makes the MLB less and less interesting to watch. MLB is dying outside of the big markets, I wonder why...

[jad]

No one is forcing teams to give out those contracts. I'm fine with the players getting paid guaranteed most as for most of them it evens out as they begin their career young and dominant for pennies. For example, Rafael Devers was an MVP candidate for 600k a year last season.There is no way the players begin getting less power, especially when the owners are all making and are worth absurd amounts of money.

 

Agree 100%. Also, I am worried about this season. Players obviously want to play (with a few exceptions, due to health and family concerns). Owners? I don't know: all the statements I've seen from them are about revenue losses. I wonder what the financial calculations are (1) a lost season vs. (2) a half season paying acc. to the players' proposal. If those figures are anywhere within shouting distance of each other, I fear the owners would take the losses for a lost season, in part to show what bad-asses they are. (If they were running a 'business' rather than working on a 'hobby' this might be different.)

[Kimmi]

What is crazy is the A's owner, who is a billionaire, wasn't willing to pay his minor leaguers $400 a week, which in a lot of states isn't even half of what unemployment is paying these days due to the Coronavirus.

 

It doesn't sound like a deal is close and I wouldn't be surprised if a season doesn't happen at all at this point.

 

No, it doesn't sound like a deal is close, but I would be surprised if the two sides don't work something out. They both know how bad it will look if the season doesn't get played because of disagreements over money.

 

Personally, I like the thinking that the players who make more are the ones who take the bigger hit. They can afford it. MLB's first proposal might be asking the players to give up too much (though I would not feel the least bit bad for Trout if he only makes $70K per game), but it is the first offer and this is a negotiation. The players need to make a reasonable counter offer and the owners need to make the compromise.

 

Merloni said it best: Right now I don't like either side very much.

[S5Dewey]

No, it doesn't sound like a deal is close, but I would be surprised if the two sides don't work something out. They both know how bad it will look if the season doesn't get played because of disagreements over money.

 

Personally, I like the thinking that the players who make more are the ones who take the bigger hit. They can afford it. MLB's first proposal might be asking the players to give up too much (though I would not feel the least bit bad for Trout if he only makes $70K per game), but it is the first offer and this is a negotiation. The players need to make a reasonable counter offer and the owners need to make the compromise.

 

Merloni said it best: Right now I don't like either side very much.

 

IMO the bigger issue is the message the players and owners are sending to the public and fans in particular. That message is, "We're a bunch of millionaires playing baseball and a bunch of multi-millionaires (or in some cases billionaires) who own the teams and we are so greedy that we're unwilling to come to a reasonable compromise so we can continue to provide entertainment to you folks who aren't nearly as well off as we are."

 

Posters here don't represent the general public since we're rabid baseball fans, and we're sick of it. How well do you think this is playing with the casual fan? MLB should be very careful. They may very well be killing this goose that keeps laying golden eggs.

[Elktonnick]

IMO the bigger issue is the message the players and owners are sending to the public and fans in particular. That message is, "We're a bunch of millionaires playing baseball and a bunch of multi-millionaires (or in some cases billionaires) who own the teams and we are so greedy that we're unwilling to come to a reasonable compromise so we can continue to provide entertainment to you folks who aren't nearly as well off as we are."

 

Posters here don't represent the general public since we're rabid baseball fans, and we're sick of it. How well do you think this is playing with the casual fan? MLB should be very careful. They may very well be killing this goose that keeps laying golden eggs.

Perfectly said!

[Kimmi]

IMO the bigger issue is the message the players and owners are sending to the public and fans in particular. That message is, "We're a bunch of millionaires playing baseball and a bunch of multi-millionaires (or in some cases billionaires) who own the teams and we are so greedy that we're unwilling to come to a reasonable compromise so we can continue to provide entertainment to you folks who aren't nearly as well off as we are."

 

Posters here don't represent the general public since we're rabid baseball fans, and we're sick of it. How well do you think this is playing with the casual fan? MLB should be very careful. They may very well be killing this goose that keeps laying golden eggs.

 

I completely agree Dewey. I have said that I don't really care who gets the money between the owners and the players. None of them really need it. What doesn't sit well with me is how they come across as being completely unplugged from what is happening to so many people during this pandemic. There are people who literally cannot feed their children, there are workers making minimum wage who are sleeping in their garages for fear of infecting their families, and the list goes on, and these guys are complaining about making only $2.5 mil for 4 months of work. Give me a break.

 

People need the return of sports to help them feel some sense of normalcy and renewed hope. Don't screw this up baseball.