LOCKOUT '22: When will we see baseball again?

[oblong]

when things are slanted to once side then of course that side will have fewer demands. Why wouldn't they?

 

[RedRamage]

2 minutes ago, chasfh said:

Teams tax themselves for spending too much, but do not penalize themselves for spending too little.

Here's where progress needs to be made imho, but it's a very complicated issue.  For players it's probably a little more clear cut, but I don't think it's black and white from a owner, front office, or fans perspective.'

I'm sure the players would like to see a set minimum to sure that teams aren't just pocketing "tax money" from other major market teams but instead investing that into players.  But as a fan I don't want my team to just pay player #26 enough to ensure that they cross the minimum payroll line.  That's a waste of money to me that could be spent improving facilities, hiring better staff, adding to the scouting team, or even saving up to spend next year.

The obvious comeback to that is: But are the owners doing that?  I dunno... 

Maybe create a salary floor: If a team isn't at that floor they don't get tax money (or maybe reduced tax money depending on how far under the floor they are?), instead that money goes into (read in Al Gore's voice) "a lockbox" that teams can apply to get money from.  Like: "We want to improve parking for our fans, so we're requesting $X dollars from the tax fund to help with that." Or: "We want to hire a new scout for this region and would like a grant for that this year."

[Longgone]

3 minutes ago, oblong said:

when things are slanted to once side then of course that side will have fewer demands. Why wouldn't they?

 

When you are in the position the players are in you really have two choices; settle for smaller incremental gains over time, or put your industry through hell trying to force a concession, which generally results in harming both sides. 

[RatkoVarda]

salary floor is so artificial; should not be paying players just to reach it; pay talented players for their talent

of course, salary "cap" - which is what luxury tax really operates as - is also artificial

- knock control down to 5 years, not 6; 2 not 3 years of arbitration; minimum salary 1M; 27 man roster; with 26 active

a find a way to stop service time manipulation. (do not know how)

revenues have increased 40% since this CBA started and owners want to decrease luxury tax by 20% - that's nuts

[chasfh]

17 minutes ago, oblong said:

when things are slanted to once side then of course that side will have fewer demands. Why wouldn't they?

 

Exactly. I would think the only thing the owners would demand is that things remain just as they are right now.

[Longgone]

17 minutes ago, oblong said:

when things are slanted to once side then of course that side will have fewer demands. Why wouldn't they?

 

And all i am saying is that puts the onus on the players in this go around, since they are the ones with the demands and no concessions, and all negotiations are, by nature, two sided.

[John_Brian_K]

1 hour ago, Tiger337 said:

There has never been a strike or lockout during the social media era.  This is going to get brutal if it cause games to be missed.  It might actually pressure them to get things done faster.  

God I hope not.  I do not want social media pressuring anything...I do not care how much I love it.

[Tiger337]

If the current relationship is unfair, then of course the players would have more demands.  Either the owners want to play a full season or they don't.  That's where there can be leverage.  It's a battle of wills.  Which side is going to be hurt more by missed games?  

[chasfh]

9 minutes ago, Longgone said:

When you are in the position the players are in you really have two choices; settle for smaller incremental gains over time, or put your industry through hell trying to force a concession, which generally results in harming both sides. 

Except Players haven't been getting smaller incremental gains. They've been going backwards. Baseball is generating more revenue and Players are being paid less. So why is it Players responsibility that Baseball locks them out and stops the game cold in its tracks for accepting less and less while Baseball makes more and more?

[Tiger337]

1 minute ago, John_Brian_K said:

God I hope not.  I do not want social media pressuring anything...I do not care how much I love it.

Giving fans a voice is not a bad thing.  

[Longgone]

1 minute ago, chasfh said:

Except Players haven't been getting smaller incremental gains. They've been going backwards. Baseball is generating more revenue and Players are being paid less. So why is it Players responsibility that Baseball locks them out and stops the game cold in its tracks for accepting less and less while Baseball makes more and more?

That would be a fair and reasonable conclusion, to be made whole from the previous agreement, and gain some modest improvements. That's far from what is the current position, however.

[John_Brian_K]

Having just had a business fail and having people think because you own a business you must be rich...I tend to side with ownership especially now with what covid did to sales etc.  They are most likely trying to catch up..you can point to all the numbers you want...those numbers are not actual profit numbers.  Just because revenue is up does not mean the owners are piling the cash in.

Current social commentary is always "look at how much money they have!  They are the bad guys!" when without them we do not have baseball....we do not have many things.  People in those positions take massive risks.  Sometimes they are rewarded and sometimes not.  

Just bad timing for the contract to expire now as opposed to in 2-3 years...I think things would be different.

[chasfh]

2 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

If the current relationship is unfair, then of course the players would have more demands.  Either the owners want to play a full season or they don't.  That's where there can be leverage.  It's a battle of wills.  Which side is going to be hurt more by missed games?  

That's a good question. Missed games hurts Baseball as a collective, since the entire enterprise gets shut down and the gameday revenue stops flowing in, and it obviously hurts Players for most of whom this is their sole livelihood and source of income.

But when it comes down to individual owners, I don't think baseball is the main source of income for even a single one of them. I would bet that for most owners, baseball is a very small part of their portfolio. For however long baseball is suspended and games are missed, every one of those individual owners will be fine and the income will still to flowing to them from their various other sources.

So, I'm going to conclude that Players will be hurt more by missed games.

[chasfh]

2 minutes ago, Longgone said:

That would be a fair and reasonable conclusion, to be made whole from the previous agreement, and gain some modest improvements. That's far from what is the current position, however.

What is the current position?

[John_Brian_K]

5 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

Giving fans a voice is not a bad thing.  

Fans have always had a voice.  You know what you will get with social media?  The pitchfork crowd who could not care less about baseball...they see old rich white guys and want their pound of flesh.

[Longgone]

9 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

If the current relationship is unfair, then of course the players would have more demands.  Either the owners want to play a full season or they don't.  That's where there can be leverage.  It's a battle of wills.  Which side is going to be hurt more by missed games?  

If it gets to the point where you have to try to force the other side into a concession, instead of bargaining in good faith, you have failed.

[chasfh]

6 minutes ago, John_Brian_K said:

Having just had a business fail and having people think because you own a business you must be rich...I tend to side with ownership especially now with what covid did to sales etc.  They are most likely trying to catch up..you can point to all the numbers you want...those numbers are not actual profit numbers.  Just because revenue is up does not mean the owners are piling the cash in.

Current social commentary is always "look at how much money they have!  They are the bad guys!" when without them we do not have baseball....we do not have many things.  People in those positions take massive risks.  Sometimes they are rewarded and sometimes not.  

Just bad timing for the contract to expire now as opposed to in 2-3 years...I think things would be different.

I'm a business owner, too. The only thing we have in common with them is that we share the title of "business owner" with them. You and I have practically nothing else in common with the men who own baseball teams as part of their empire. They are a different breed of cat from you and me, and we are not in the same boat as they are. Even as business owners ourselves, we have to pay admission to even step foot on their boat.

Edited December 2, 2021 by chasfh

[John_Brian_K]

Just now, chasfh said:

I'm a business owner, too. The only thing we have in common with them is that we share the title of "business owner" with them. You and I have practically nothing else in common with the men who own baseball teams as part of their empire. They are a different breed of cat from you and me, and we are not in the same boat as they are. We have the pay admission to even step foot on their boat.

No doubt.

[chasfh]

1 minute ago, John_Brian_K said:

No doubt.

And so, I'm not clear why you appear to feel such sympathy for Baseball and none for Players.

[Longgone]

6 minutes ago, chasfh said:

What is the current position?

Early arbitration, early free agency, eliminating the luxury tax, eliminating draft penalties for signing premium free agents...

[John_Brian_K]

1 minute ago, chasfh said:

And so, I'm not clear why you appear to feel such sympathy for Baseball and none for Players.

Players are taking no risk...none..AND they are millionaires we would have to pay to step on their boat with also.

[gehringer_2]

16 minutes ago, chasfh said:

Except Players haven't been getting smaller incremental gains. They've been going backwards. Baseball is generating more revenue and Players are being paid less. So why is it Players responsibility that Baseball locks them out and stops the game cold in its tracks for accepting less and less while Baseball makes more and more?

I think one problem is that there is limited solidarity on the players side because there is such a chasm between the large number of have not players and small number of have players - and the 'haves' seem to control the union. If I'm Eric Haase what do  uncapped contracts like Max Scherzer just got do for me? The union spends all their energy fighting a cap, a stance which benefits only the top players and in fact hurts the rest because the more they pay Max (or we pay a SS) the higher the drive to have more players on the roster be held at the minimum. Little wonder to me the union doesn't have the solidarity to make substantive progress.

[Tiger337]

10 minutes ago, John_Brian_K said:

Fans have always had a voice.  You know what you will get with social media?  The pitchfork crowd who could not care less about baseball...they see old rich white guys and want their pound of flesh.

I doubt it.  People who don't care about baseball are not going to care about the lockout.  It's not like politics where people think decisions have a big effect on their lives (I think politics is way overrated but that's a discussion for a different forum) There aren't going to fake news stories or threats of violence from outsiders.  It will be fans ridiculing the players and owners and threatening not to watch any more games.  

[mtutiger]

9 minutes ago, John_Brian_K said:

Players are taking no risk...none.

The players take a risk with their health (and future earning potential) every time they step on the field. Not to mention that they are the ones that allow for fans to show up and make money for the teams.

[chasfh]

10 minutes ago, Longgone said:

Early arbitration, early free agency, eliminating the luxury tax, eliminating draft penalties for signing premium free agents...

None of this sounds unreasonable to me.