Will Tigers Pony up for Skubal

[chasfh]

I wouldn't want us to forego the 2026 playoffs because we are big mad at Boras and Skubal.

[KL2]

1 hour ago, Longgone said:

These are mostly old issues that have been proposed, discussed and tweaked for decades. There is no large precipitating issue that should lead to an impasse. We are dealing with human beings, however.

i think you're digging your head in the sand if you think they are non issues. They are the constant issues, and remain big, and any one let alone the wide gaps on multiple is why people fear a work stopage. 

Take salary cap for example, its been discussed. But now more owner want it because of crumbling RSN (something that didnt exist in the last few years) and they cant keep up with the Dodgers and Mets of the world.

Paying players more sooner will also be a factor but owners will want to tie that to some sort of cap, which the players will hate.

While they have bene tweeaked they are still major issues with wide gaps between the sides and major current and future financial factors at play. To think there is no large issue that should lead to an impasse is being obtuse and aware of the current labor situation.  

Edited 1 hour ago by KL2

[gehringer_2]

4 hours ago, Tiger337 said:

Every time the CBA expires, there is talk about bitterness on both sides are and how the season is going to be lost, but we haven't had a lot season in 30 years other than the Covid season.  Why is this time going to be different?  

If there is a driver this time around, I think it would be a schism within ownership between those are demanding to have the playing field leveled vs the Dodgers/Yankees/Mets. In that collision the players would be more or less just be caught in the middle. I don't have any particular insight into how PO'd the majority of owners are at the way the Dodgers and couple others have been throwing money around, but I wouldn't be surprised if the temperature around the issue is rising, in part because of the on-going failures to thrive at so many RSNs. When a dozen or so teams are going to be asked to negotiate away income they thought they could count on, it can't make them happy to see LA drop $60M on a 4 WAR player. So while I don't know if the strain between owners is high or not, it's easy enough to see the reasons it might be growing.

One way that could play out in terms of the actual contract issues is that the players want the number of years of arb control cut, and I can't see any way the mid market and below teams would ever agree to that without a big increase in revenue sharing. So there is one possible three way dance.

Edited 1 hour ago by gehringer_2