Major League Baseball is expected to soon present the MLB Players Association with a proposed format for a shortened 2020 season, with the proposal coming perhaps as early as Tuesday. Though the owners’ reported desire to ask for a further reduction in player salaries is expected to be the major negotiation point (or roadblock) in any proposal, we have also heard that health and safety are naturally the largest concerns on the players’ minds given the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.
The Cardinals’ Andrew Miller and the Yankees’ Chris Iannetta (both members of the MLBPA executive board) recently went into further detail about these concerns in a chat with ESPN.com’s Jesse Rogers. As Miller put it, “I don’t think anything can be done” until a concrete plan is put forth about how players, coaches, clubhouse members, and others can be protected from the threat of coronavirus infection.
“We want to put a good product on the field, but that’s totally secondary to the health of the players,” Miller said. “We are generally younger and healthier, but that doesn’t mean our staff is, that doesn’t mean the umpires are going to be in the clear. It’s not hard to get one degree of separation away from players who have kids who may have conditions, or other family members that live with them.”
The health question ties into the revenue question. The owners’ reported argument for a further reduction in player salaries is that teams are facing a massive revenue shortfall by playing games without any fans in attendance at ballparks. However, Iannetta argues that players, coaches, and staffers face “an intrinsic risk” by coming together to play games, “and we should get fairly compensated for taking that risk for the betterment of the game and the betterment of the owners who stand to make a huge profit off the game.”
It should be noted that players have already agreed to give up a substantial portion of their 2020 salaries. Under the terms of the original agreement made in March between the league and the players’ union, players received a $170MM lump sum to be paid out over April and May, with different amount going to players based on service time and contract status. The most any player could have received is roughly $300K, the total going to players on guaranteed MLB contracts or players who had become eligible for salary arbitration.
The $170MM would be the only money received by players if the 2020 is canceled, though if games are played, the $170MM would then become an advance on players’ actual salaries, which would then be prorated based on the number of games played. To use Miller himself as an example, if an 81-game schedule takes place, he would receive roughly half of his $11.5MM salary for the 2020 season. So if owners push for an even larger salary reduction, Miller would lose even more than the $6.25MM he has already lost to the coronavirus shutdown.
The MLBPA’s stance is that the March agreement settled the matter of 2020 salaries, which the league disputes due to clause in the agreement that (depending on your interpretation) may or may not open the door to further negotiation based on the likelihood that games will be played without fans. While teams will undoubtedly take a major hit from the loss of ticket sales, concession sales, parking, and other revenue tied to having fans attend ballgames in person, there will still be revenue coming to the league and the 30 individual teams via TV and broadcast contracts. Miller also made the point that player salaries “are not tied to revenue in any way. If the owners hit a home run [with a new revenue stream] and make more money, we don’t go back and ask for more on our end.”
It remains to be seen how this issue will be resolved, or if it will necessarily be as big of a stumbling block as it appears to be at this juncture. As Joel Sherman of the New York Post points out, the general public won’t look kindly on the possibility of a financial argument scuttling a possible 2020 season. Sherman also suggested a potential answer to the salary question, which is simply to defer owed salaries into future seasons. This is similar to how the league will pay out bonuses to prospects taken in this year’s amateur draft, though obviously we’re talking a much higher overall dollar figure when it comes to big league contracts.
“ and we should get fairly compensated for taking that risk for the betterment of the game”
Is Ianetta serious? Completely stopped reading here. Almost no one who has gone back to work is getting hazard pay and this clown thinks they need to be compensated extra for any perceived risk to going back to work?
I’m not one to side with owners, but that’s unreal and reeks of entitlement.
The baseball field isn’t a hospital. You’re not directly exposing yourself purposely to the virus. Someone needs to check his privilege.
doctors and nurses working in hospitals generally get paid in full plus large bonuses. players on the other hand will work to increase profit for the owners. and both doctors and baseball players get paid very well after spending time working for peanuts. in players case, literally, crumbs!
My sister is a nurse. Not getting a large bonus. Many hospitals are actually laying staff off with lots of empty beds because they keep,waiting for covid patients that are not coming in and canceling a lot of surgeries and procedures and tests because they are considered elective even though the test if positive will show the need for,a,potential life saving treatment. The state banned hospitals from performing elective surgeries.
the elective surgeries thing has been the biggest travesty of all. my mom too has been sent home early because her hospital is less busy. meanwhile people who are in real pain are being turned away from hospitals because their conditions “arent life threatening enough.” if one thing about the response to this virus nationwide must change, its those rules.
Yup 100% Gozuman but if you came here a month ago you would have heard 1,000 chickens screaming about Sale and Noah going under the knife-
But now the harsh realities is those people have No jobes
Dark side you are right on this, my elderly father has lung cancer, diagnosed in late January and got his first treatment Friday, what they have done to hospitals is a travesty
best of luck to him and your family
Thanks DarkSide
My wife has been an emergency room nurse for the last 8 years. The next “large bonus” she gets will be her first. Fingers crossed.
Vizionaire, that’s a flat out lie.
Large bonuses? Are you stoned? My sister is a nurse and I know other nurses and doctors and no one get a penny bonus.
Well said, they should have the right to ultimately opt out of their contract but better be careful what you wish for ….theres plenty on the outside willing to “do your job” with no Haz pay
if the owners did bring scabs good luck getting the cba done. walk-outs, lock-outs…. it’ll not be pretty!
Im saying the players have a choice but the Bus isnt going to wait for a couple folks if they are late
If the refuse to play 2020 cool, just expect those 2021 checks to be smaller due to loss of revenue- Only fair right?
I know its en vogue to always support the players but these guys are just as greedy as the owners-
Everyones making sacrifices, players need to understand the short term losses to them will keep the long term viability alive.
Baseballs dying…..like hard…I dont think most players care, they want every penny they can get their hands on….its Mlb’s job to over-see this doesnt happen and to keep baseball on its feet thru this whole struggle
as far as i know owners cannot reduce salaries arbitrarily.
No, but if the two sides can’t reach an agreement both will lose billions of dollars this year. Baseball is also a sport that can’t afford a lot of negative publicity, if it comes out that they could play health wise but don’t because they can’t agree on finances, they will get crushed. Plus with NO revenue coming in all year (if they can’t agree) then free agency next year will be terrible, and that leads in to a CBA year
Both sides better not screw this up or they could be making huge long term problems for the game.
The only reason steroids were “allowed” and left to run rampant, was the sport was struggling to recover from a work stoppage and as Maddux said “chicks dig the long ball”
Didn’t seem like he was asking for hazard pay, just that they get paid their pro-rated salaries, which they should.
Really? Nearly half of baseball revenue would be lost without fans in the bleachers. Half a season at half revenue would point to 1/4 salary for players. Owners would be silly to play games at all if they are going to lose hundreds of millions in the process.
So, moving forward, player salaries should reflect a ratio of total revenue generated and perhaps equity in teams as franchises increase in value hundreds of percentiles. Just to be fair and all.
It’s not hazard pay and it’s not dependent on external revenue. He adds the point to bolster his case, but the reality is that players signed contracts and should be paid at a pro-rated salary for the games they play. Period.
he never said “hazard pay.” he’s saying the owners need to realize that they cant just take all the players’ money given the inherit risks to the staff, umps, coaches, and family members. the players cant play with masks on so there is absolutely some risk. and to simply say “no one else is getting hazard pay” is once again the fallacy of expecting sports leagues to act exactly like normal businesses, because they simply dont.
“the players cant play with masks on”
Why not?
Do you not see how silly your question is? I think you do, you just want to be argumentative. Baseball is not a priority, it is a luxury. If things cannot be worked out so everyone is safe and getting paid their contracts then there shouldn’t be a season. Expecting athletes to run around exerting themselves with face masks is silly. But, I suspect I am just engaging you in irrationality.
My bad. I haven’t seen baseball in a while. I must’ve forgotten about how frequently baseball players actually “exert themselves.”
Nobody is expecting them to do anything. Saying that players can’t play with a mask on if they want to is ridiculous.
They literally do it every game when its cold….grow up adam, your engaging in being a whiny lil ……..
He’s not taking about hazard pay? Yes he is. That’s exactly what he’s referring to because of their increased risk.
That is not a statement suggesting they just want a fair pro-rated salary. If it was why would he be mentioning risk? There would be no need to mention risk. He’s throwing the risk angle out there to suggest they shouldn’t have to sacrifice more pay even though no fans will be in attendance.
The players position is that they should receive prorated salary, not prorated salary plus hazard pay. The owners agreed to that in March and now want to renege on that deal.
if it was hazard pay he would be asking for more money. he isnt. he is simply stating that taking more money at a time like this would not be in the best interests of players.
No agreement was reached on a season without paid attendance. Agreement calls for added negotiation if games are played w/o fans.
“Agreement calls for added negotiation if games are played w/o fans.”
I have never seen any reporting that says this. It’s always reported that the owners interpret the deal this way. If the agreement was as clear cut as you say I’m sure we’d have seen the text by now.
You said, “….this clown thinks they need to be compensated extra”.
Nope, this ballplayer and the rest believe they should be compensated FAIRLY – meaning pro-rated swaths of their previously agreed upon salaries.
MLB can moan about not making gate receipts and concessions but they don’t evenly share revenues on tv deals as it stands now. Not to mention they’ll be saving money on travel with the new league formats.
Haha saving money on travel? You can’t be serious.
So travel savings wipes out the lost revenue of fans in attendance?
I gotta know what drugs some of you are on to pitch these crazy statements to try and support your position.
Here’s a reality check:
The salaries they signed were based on the fact during a typical season they bring in a certain amount of revenue. Due to circumstances this year beyond anyone’s control that same level of revenue will not be coming in. Fair pay for these players would be to see a reduction in salary.
In fact to really make it fair we should tie the direct percentage of total revenue earned for each team last season and subtract that percent from player salaries
For instance, say the Braves attendance revenue account for 20% of total team revenue. Freeman’s pro-rated salary should then be reduced by 20%
Putting this in numbers format, let’s say they play 81 games. Freeman was originally projected to make $22 mil. His pro-rated salary drops him to $11 mil. Then a further reduction of 20% consistent with revenue lost would drop him to $8.8 mil on the year
That would be getting compensated fairly.
Note: The 20% is just a hypothetical for the purposes of the example. I have no idea what percent attendance accounted for in Braves total revenue. Use whatever that number is to reduce the pro-rated player salary is the point.
Your proposal is more of a surreality check. Like the article said, player salaries aren’t tied to revenue. Nobody’s clamoring for players to receive a nonnegotiated 20% raise on their existing contract when revenue goes up 20%.
This would require the owners to share their finances to prove the percentage, and they won’t do that. And if they say, “Trust us,” the players won’t do that.
MJ
Here’s your reality check. Owners that anticipated making typical revenue during a CV19 pandemic are idiots, and owners aren’t idiots.
Were you the guy calling for reciprocal increases in player salaries as franchise values nearly doubled in some cases over the past five years, and billion dollar TV contracts started rolling in, even for small market teams? Somehow I doubt it.
Opening the gates to fans guarantees nothing, perhaps not even enough to cover operating costs, yet owners are asking players and other team employees to offset loss and risk by further reducing salaries.
It’s not the responsibility of the players to mitigate the risks and costs of owning a baseball club, and it’s not their job to void a previous agreement to facilitate owners making more money.
So when Ianetta says that players are increasing health risk and career health risk by contracting a disease that can damage vital organ tissue and lessen their value as athletes, I agree with him and think players already agreed to their pay cut, at a time where owners were likely scrambling to manage assets and invest during an economic collapse. Now owners want their cake and to eat it too.
Player salaries have absolutely grown as those billions for tv revenue have come in, look at the money thrown around this past offseason
Both sides are likely in for a huge reality check soon that will cost both big money and us the game we love
MJ is 100% correct
I’ve never been one to complain that players make too much money, but
Hey Chris, you make millions don’t tell a nation with over 30 million unemployed and doctors and nurses working on the front lines that you need to be “fairly compensated “ for your risks
Screw you Ianetta
“ Hey Chris, you make millions don’t tell a nation with over 30 million unemployed and doctors and nurses working on the front lines that you need to be “fairly compensated “ for your risks”
Good thing those owners that’ve been enjoying appreciation of their investments, at times 1000% all while the franchise is throwing off cash are now donating millions towards frontline health workers and “doing the right thing”.
Where on the planet is there a business that makes billions of dollars off the backs of 750 current employees, and why should those 750 or so people cave further on their compensation so owners can sit at home safely and enjoy profit? Players are in a unique position to leverage their status into money from these owners. This isn’t difficult.
Hmmm I guess so if my boss told me to come in, I could say No or pay me hazard pay. Think he would welcome me with open arms?
the only people talking about hazard pay are illiterate message board commenters
Oldoak, As I mentioned, I’ve never been one to rip on players for what they make, but if you can’t see the problem with him complaining about being “fairly compensated” in the situation we currently have, I’m not sure what to tell ya
I mean Ianetta likely has enough money to support his family for the rest of their lives already, if he has handled his money well. So if he doesn’t think it’s fair under the circumstances, he doesn’t have to play. Heck under the new rules in place in most states he could refuse to report to work, claim fear of Covid, and collect unemployment like millions of others.
Baseball, players and owners, better be real careful how they handle this, the last work stoppage crushed the game for years till they allowed steroids to bust HR records, in the economic situation our nation is facing over the next several years they could ruin the game for decades
are you part of a unionized work force?
Astros2017
“ if you can’t see the problem with him complaining about being “fairly compensated” in the situation we currently have, I’m not sure what to tell ya”
The situation we currently have is one where an extremely wealthy and small group of majority owners have accrued franchises that have increased exponentially in value over a short span of time, all the while creating cash flow owners have enjoyed. Now when it’s convenient to cite a decrease in revenue and perhaps value of a franchise we are hearing about poor owners that lose revenue from fans not attending.
Fan attendance may not be a legislative issue moving forward in the next couple months, it may be an economic issue with lack of disposable income. It will be a fear and uncertainty issue, where people will not want to attend large gatherings.
Setting a precedent that allows owners to mitigate the risks of ownership is what is being proposed here. Setting a legal precedent that allows owners to cite economic hardship as justification for reducing guaranteed contracts is what’s being proposed here. It’s not just greedy owners vs greedy players.
Lol they aren’t setting any legal precedents, they are making a proposal the players would have to agree to.
The way you are arguing from one side right now is exactly how Baseball has operated for decades, it is what has led to work stoppages that have really harmed the sport in the past. Do that now with the economic depression we are facing, and you could kill the game for a long long time. Both owners and players have gotten incredibly rich off of people like us, who absolutely love the game. If you want to support either side coming out and crying about their money go ahead, personally I think it’s disgusting
Astros,
Yeah, they are setting precedent by conceding reductions in salary based on economic uncertainty. I fail to see how that’s not setting a precedent.
And regarding another one of your posts;
google.com/amp/s/www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/28341…
And if you cared to research this topic you would see that any increase in salary has not coincided percentage wise with franchise value or revenue.
I did the exact same thing. I stopped.
I always find it do funny that everyone is so quick to support the players when it comes to money, in baseball.
I wish I could get a raise when the company makes more money but real life doesn’t work that way. Interesting that normal people think it’s ok for baseball players to do exactly that.
All this outbreak has done for baseball is show exactly how greed plays so a large role in the game.
different rules and constraints in their labor market so not really comparable point of discussion. but keep pushing that false equivalency.
perhaps you’re to much of a wimp to ask or don’t know how to advocate for yourself or maybe you’re not worthy of a raise based on performance. you know what it doesn’t really matter because you don’t like your comp go find a better job that will pay you more.
not sure I agree. I sign a job offer and am obligated to fullfil it unless I resign. they sign contacts with the same principle. not sure where the difference lies in the simplistic form. but you keep spinning how they are better than the common man.
Preach
It’s called negotiation for a reason. Players are right to walk in with that and see if they make it out.
Further thought – outside of viruses economic crashes are huge spikes in mortality rates. Be it hunger, depression, alcohol or drugs people die are high rates when work is hard to find! I think smart people need to figure out how to get Americans consuming again as we are headed towards high mortality rates regardless.
Has the league clarified how it will proceed if a player or coach tests positive? It will happen just as it has elsewhere. I don’t think European Football has figured that one out as they are dealing with some of this and are closer to play resumption. It would be chaos if the team had to self isolate for 14 days.
spain’s la liga’s first and second divisions have found 5 infected players. they are not going to bring the games back until everyone is safe and they can test players, coaches and support cast are all tested daily.
They keep talking about it, it’s not going to help, just get it done. Is it that hard?
It’s Rob Manfred. So yes its extremely difficult. It went from April 7th to May 2nd to late July then Memorial Day. Now it’s early July
Yes it is that hard. The CB players are trying to maximize every penny they can squeeze from the owners. The owners are trying to squeeze out every penny they can in order to off set lost revenue. To ask both sides to stop the greed is a very difficult thing.
My opinion… and I usually side with the owners…. is pay the contracts. Unless there’s wording in the players contracts regarding games being missed or something to that effect – I think they should honor the contracts. That being said… the owners will simply have to learn to be more careful in the future. Stop going crazy in the contracts they agree to with feee agents and such. Stop giving the huge bonus money to draft choices. Draw a line.
Again…. I’m no lawyer nor a contract expert. If there’s done wording regarding revenue sharing.. then I can see reduction of payment. Can share revenue that doesn’t exist.
@bigjon You’re dreaming. There’s no way these contracts don’t include force majeure clauses and there’s nothing arbitrary about prorating salaries based on games played.
How bout the old coaches and ump wear protective gear?
in 130 degree in texas they will collapse.
Don’t both stadiums in Texas have roofs to help with the heat like in Arizona?
well if they had the 3 state plan in place that goes out the window, but its also a cop out simply to say ” they wolnt be able to play because its too hot.”
“old coaches and umps?”
rangers stadium has no air conditioning around playing surfaces,
This isn’t hard. Take each player’s salary and divide by 162 games. Pay them their average per game salary for the number of games they decide to play this season.
the thing is the owners are also concerned about the loss in attendance money.
The thing is the owners assume all the risk in this situation, which they love to hold over the players during negotiations. Now they can enjoy that position
Has that risk ever been fairly recognized ?
Certainly not by fans thats for sure!!
@DerekBells The owners assume all the risk?? Do you really think there’s no force majeure clauses?? Be serious now
This is where the owners have to tap into their equity to save the product.
They already agreed to do that, and are now reneging from that agreement and asking for additional salary reduction.
Maybe Chris Ianetta should be paid 2 million times his WAR for 2020… oh wait, then he’d owe the Yankees money.
id imagine a lot of this is rhetoric. as much as both sides arent going to cave, id imagine both will likely concede something easily enough simply to get some money rolling in. its early in this process but that things are moving forward so far is a good sign.
I would think millions of dollars to play a game would be sufficient “hazard pay”, apparently not.
again, its nothing about hazars pay. its about making guys take less money and then making them put those close to them at risk.
Nobody is “making” them do anything.
what in earth do you mean? they’re not individually choosing whether or not to take less money.
It means that nobody is forcing them to play baseball. That’s their choice. If they don’t think it’s worth the risk, they don’t have to play.
Kids play games.
These guys are professional men. They compete in contests for money.
im surprised anyone who comments on a sports site doesnt realize this fact. yes its a game but there is billions upon billions in it. finances are clearly a big concern.
I keep hearing “guarantee of everyone safety” and “everyone is safe”. No one is ever safe in life.
Honestly this is going to boil down to money. Some players may scoff at playing during this but in the end the money will dictate everything. Safety of personnel involved with the teams putting on games will be a close 2nd.
Plus whose to say that these players and families won’t wile out after some restrictions get lifted. I could see at least a handful of players getting Rona because either they or a family member can’t social distance or stay at home more often than not. Which is what we should all still be doing for the most part. Even if beaches and parks are open.
Ianetta seems to have hit a nerve, but stripped of the adrenaline it caused, he has a point. Thirty players in a clubhouse, plus coaches, trainers, service people, etc does enhance the risk each player takes. And while the odds of a young and healthy athlete suffering serious illness are certainly less than a senior citizen, they are not nil. If someone is infected, it’s going to spread, and MLB is going to need a protocol for dealing with that, given that a 14 day self-quarantine is normally indicated. It will only take one high profile serious illness to be a both a human and a business disaster. Let’s stop making the players the bad guys here. The owners want something more from the players than was previously bargained for,…what are they prepared to give in return? And, ask yourself seriously, if you could throw a ball 98MPH or hit one 450 feet, wouldn’t you want to be paid, especially when your contract says nothing at all about attendance?
Put payroll caps in and split revenue down the middle like the other pro leagues.
@brucenewton Maybe they can split capital expenses down the middle too… in fairness
if so, isn’t it fair for players to get a part of capital gains? angels were purchased in 2003 for $180 mil. it’s worth $ 2 bil now!
Good point Viz– players aren’t entitled to revenue splits anymore than they are entitled to capital gains
Chris Ianetta can’t even hit a baseball anymore, so it makes sense he’s trying to squeeze out every penny possible before he is forced to hang the spikes up.
Ianetta better not be asking for one red cent more then was agreed to. Baseball players are not necessary like doctors and nurses, and thus should not collect hazard pay ( or whatever he wants to call it). If they are concerned about Coronavirus, then just refuse to play, and we will see you in 2021. I can get my sports fix with NASCAR and in June golf ( and hopefully) hockey. Of course, they better not expect free agency to be like 2019.
You have it exactly backwards. Iannetta is asking for what was agreed to, while the owners are asking the players to take less than what was agreed to, yet the majority of people seem to be taking the owners side.
I have said it before and I will say it again: The owners and players agreed on something and that is fair. But for the same reason, I oppose the players getting more, I oppose them getting less. Which is? A deal is a deal, and no one forced either side to sign. But the players have to understand that there will be a 20% Unemployment Rate in this Country and teams are going to take a financial hit. Which means James Paxton is not getting $25m a year ( or more) for 6 or 7 years, no matter how much his agent Scott Boras complains about it.
James Paxton wouldn’t get an AAV of $25M at 6-7 years pre-pandemic. poor example.
going on 32 yo injury prone SP who’s never pitched more than 161 IP in a season – are you nuts?
Boras wasnt the problem last time, he had all the peasants doing his bidding for him
This is the problem I foresaw with the “union”. Some reps simply do not want to play, and that is their right, but I’d be willing to bet the majority of the league wants to play.
Every time I see a player speak out about “risk vs reward” it’s a guy like Trout (300 million plus contract) Kershaw (200 million plus) Miller (70 million), Wheeler (who just secured over 100 million dollars). Unless I missed something, I haven’t heard an Alonso, Alvarez, Tatis etc saying they don’t want to play.
IMO, the union needs to do the right thing, which is let the players who want to play play. In turn, the owners need to do the right thing as well and pay the players their entire game checks.
I get that teams are not going to make as much money as they have in the past… too bad. You gave contracts to players to PLAY THE GAME! Not a single player has a clause in their contract that says if attendance drops below X or the profit margin isn’t Y they make less. They are paid to play. Plain and simple and there is no more argument about it.
so eff the players who have paid their dues and earned their exorbitant salaries. don’t hate the player, hate the game.
Dear Andrew Miller,
I really hope MLB figures out a way to guarantee your safety.
Sincerely,
Everyone currently deployed and working overseas in a hostile environment who’ve been involuntarily extended.
“We are generally younger and healthier, but that doesn’t mean our staff is, that doesn’t mean the umpires are going to be in the clear. It’s not hard to get one degree of separation away from players who have kids who may have conditions, or other family members that live with them.”
It’s right there. Miller is pretty clear that he realizes players are low risk, but there are staffers or family members who may be higher risk that are more likely to get exposed. Way to take what he said and mock him as if he’s focused exclusively on his own personal safety.
Oh yeah? You mean the umpires who ALREADY have an agreement with Major League Baseball?
Miller has no right for starters to talk about Umpires and Staff because NEITHER are covered by the PLAYERS UNION.
you’re angry at him being concerned for the safety and security of others simply because the union he represents doesn’t cover them?
but you have the right to talk about the subjects as someone who belongs to none of the groups? hypocrisy at its finest.
talk about yourself!
100
People pushing for baseball players to play during a pandemic seem to think it’s their god-given right to play baseball. Those of us with non-essential jobs that involve contact with other people need to stay home.
For those who are on the front lines—postal and delivery workers, first responders, grocery and supply chain workers, first responders, military—I thank and salute them, hope they stay safe, and think they should get paid a heck of a lot more.
Baseball is non-essential.
(“right to watch baseball”, not “right to play baseball”)
I’m generally with the players on this one.
I think they should get a full prorated pay for the number of games played. They signed a contract and there is no profit sharing. If you choose to buy a baseball team and sign players to multi million guaranteed contracts that’s a risk you took on… and for this year it’s going to cost them. If they need to cut costs they can start in next years free agent market.
Having said that the idea of “guaranteeing” players safety is laughable. With front line health care and grocery store workers getting paid far less every day to do their essential jobs with much higher risk… a “safety guarantee” is impossible to provide and ridiculously selfish to ask for. Steps should be taken to limit the risk for sure… but that’s really the best that can be done. If the players don’t like the steps taken (provided they’re reasonable) then opt out for 2020. Team doesn’t have to pay you for this season, gets the opportunity to void your entire contract and see what you can get in next years severely impaired free agent market.
EXACTLY!!!!
See how many of these turds speak up when the train starts running down the track
Let’s be real. Does anybody think the LA Angels are going to play without Trout? Dodgers without Kershaw? Etc. If they refuse to play, then cancel the season. Otherwise any “Title” won by some team,,will be even less valid then Barry Bonds steroid aided “Records.”
i think the actal number of guys who would consider holding out is lower then their words suggest. when push comes to shove most guys will probably give in if the rest of the union decisively adopts an agreement. maybe there is somebody that holds out, but im sure the owners would be glad to make money and not pay that guy over paying that guy and not making money.
Maybe if you are Baltimore and not wanting to pay Chris Davis that is true. But do you think that applies to the Yankees and Gerrit Cole?
Or the Dodgers and Mookie Betts? Those teams want titles.
“If the owners hit a home run [with a new revenue stream] and make more money, we don’t go back and ask for more on our end.”
Uhh… but you could. “Normally we suck as a union” is a hell of an argument.
No they couldn’t. They would have to wait until the next CBA to negotiate that, and as we all know owners would fight tooth and nail to prevent players from getting a cut of new revenues
no. unlike nba or nfl, baseball’s ancient structure doesn’t allow players to get more when revenue increases.
Yep gotta say for Mr Miller, open mouth and insert foot… MLBPA, has no say in the umps and coaches and Mgrs… work the problem and stop the BS dancing already.. amazing
Ianetta and Miller are saying what I’ve said all along. These guys (including umps and staff) are real people with real families, and their families’ health comes first. There’s no way baseball is being played in 2020, nor should it.
No one disputes that Ianetta and Miller are real people, and maybe the season should be cancelled ( especially what is happening with La Lega ( Spanish Soccer) having players catching Coronavirus). But if that happens, do not expect big contracts in free agency or in the next Collective Bargaining Agreement and above all no more cries of wolf oops collusion:
A FRIGGIN MEN NY Yankee….
And furthermore no crying down the line when basketball and football puts you completely out of sight-
Baseball is dying and the players have a lot of blame on their shoulder
Fans as always are being used as the pawns
didn’t realize so many baseball fans across the nation were part of the 1% and felt so entitled over the players to have a sport to watch. Players can do whatever the hell they want with a majority union, and you don’t have to like it. Comparing it to the private sector where many jobs don’t have unions, CBAs and are at will employment states, is a false equivalency.
Do you also begrudge your colleagues who earn more than you or negotiate for higher comp based on experience, achievements and skillsets?
this entire board reeks of bratty privilege, but everyone loves counting other people’s money.
one small point: if Miller loses half of 11.5 million that’s 5.75 million not 6.25 million
The last I heard player contracts were per season, not 162 game season but per season. I realize there is an argument to be made for salary cuts due to the shortened season but I don’t see a legal ground for owners to force that to happen. I’m open to other opinions though.
the players have already agreed to take massive pay cuts prorated to the number of games played. The owners want to renege on that deal and force the players to take even less money. Somehow most people see this and think it’s the *players* who are being greedy.
The players are not facing massive pay cuts. I have no sympathy for someone going from $5m to $2.5m when 20% Unemployment is projected, and some minor leaguers are getting getting $0.00 this season.
.
neither do i have sympathy on billionaire owners trying to be cheaper than polyester suits!
Some of those same Billionaires will be broke at the end of all this-
Their own business and now the org is losing millions every week
This isnt a case of im going to hate on who has less money, this is not the winter of 2018 again
Should we just cancel everything everywhere?.
Seriously, this is something that is now part of our lives forever. There will be treatments and vaccines over time but like any other virus never a cure. Everyone is always going to be at risk, not just today but tomorrow, next week, next month, next year, next decade. This idea that we can hide forever is foolish.