Connect with us

MLB

What the MLB deal with players means for 2020 season and beyond

Published

on

Following round-the-clock negotiations since the coronavirus outbreak postponed the beginning of the season, Major League Baseball and the MLB Players Association struck a deal Friday that outlined how the sport would proceed in the coming months. The players gained certainty that even in a lost season they would be granted full service time. The league received significant financial hedges and control over how baseball would resume play.

It was a significant agreement with enormous implications that go beyond 2020. Let’s unpack the full breadth of its consequences.

What does this agreement cover?

Almost every issue of significance to the sport as it tries to navigate this confusing moment in history: the resumption of play and scheduling, service time, player pay, amateur talent, arbitration, debt service and the luxury tax, among other issues.

Why was it necessary?

With MLB’s original Opening Day scheduled for Thursday (March 26), the league faced a deadline on how it would handle player contracts. Paragraph 11 of the uniform player contract allows commissioner Rob Manfred to suspend deals in the case of a national emergency, which President Donald Trump declared March 13. Had the agreement not been agreed upon by the players Thursday and ratified by owners Friday, Manfred could have invoked Paragraph 11. Neither he nor the players wanted to display such myopia in the midst of a health crisis, so the incentive for both sides to compromise was strong.

So when is baseball coming back?

While that remains unclear, the agreement, obtained by ESPN, illustrates how baseball might go about returning to the field.

Before anything else, it addresses resumption of play and says both parties will work in good faith to “complete the fullest 2020 championship season and postseason that is economically feasible.” The agreement outlines three necessities to start the 2020 season, though it offers significant caveats that allow Manfred — in consultation with the union — to override them.

1. No governmental edicts on mass gatherings that would prevent teams from playing in their home stadiums;

2. No travel restrictions in the United States or Canada;

3. The determination, after talking with health experts and the union, that playing does not expose players, staff or fans to health risks.

The caveats are the key to this seminal part of the agreement: Manfred, it says, can consider the use of neutral sites instead of home stadiums as well as the possibility of playing in front of no fans. Though not ideal, games with no fans in areas that are not coronavirus hot spots provide the clearest path toward games being played.

Let’s say the curve flattens, medical facilities are no longer overrun and a national recovery begins. What is the first step?

There are three obvious ones that should happen simultaneously: map out a schedule that covers the regular season and postseason, bring players to training camps, and execute a detailed plan that does its best to ensure the safety and health of every team.

What does a potential schedule look like?

That remains completely TBD. The agreement illustrates just how open-minded both parties are to achieving a shared goal: as much baseball as possible.

MLB is willing to amend roster rules to ensure a shortened Spring Training 2.0 — games could begin as soon as two weeks after players report back to camps to prepare for the season — doesn’t leave teams hurting for innings because starting pitchers aren’t stretched out. Players are willing to schedule more doubleheaders to squeeze in as many games as possible. Both were fine with the regular season stretching into October and the postseason into November. A neutral-site World Series in a warm-weather location? Sure. Expanded playoffs of a new, and potentially unique, variety? Yup.

“Players want to play,” said Tony Clark, the executive director of the MLBPA. “That’s what they do. And being able to get back on the field and being able to play, even if that means their fans are watching at home, is something they’ve all expressed a desire and interest to do and to do as soon as possible.”

The best-case scenario seems to be that players head to camp in mid-May and target a return in early June. That might be wishful. But it’s where they are for now. And if they do, then a 130-game schedule is not out of the realm of possibility. It’s quite optimistic, though, and anywhere from 80 to 100 games would be a huge win.

Is keeping players healthy really possible?

Tough to say. In Japan, where Nippon Professional Baseball had postponed its March 20 opening day until April 24, star pitcher Shintaro Fujinami tested positive for the coronavirus Thursday along with two of his Hanshin Tigers teammates. The rest of the team is in quarantine, and the Tigers canceled practices through at least April 1. NPB secretary general Atsushi Ihara said the league still planned to open on the 24th.

Would MLB do the same? What if an outbreak happened inside a clubhouse in July? Or during a pennant race? Or in the postseason? As much as these are hypotheticals, they are also questions MLB must ask itself before returning. The agreement does give at least a sliver of insight into the possibility, saying that Manfred can suspend or cancel games after the season starts provided “there is a change in circumstances.”

Why does everyone so badly want to play?

Well, for one, because baseball rules.

Beyond that, every day without a game is a day without money flowing into the league’s coffers and players’ pockets. The coronavirus could wipe out billions of dollars in revenue after a record-setting financial year, and while players are not guaranteed a percentage of those revenues because MLB does not operate on a salary-capped system, salaries typically ebb and flow with the financial health of the sport.

Especially acute to the sport’s financial standing are cash-poor franchises that already have considered laying off or furloughing employees. Manfred secured promises this week from all teams that they would continue to pay their employees through at least April. Job cuts could arrive in May, if there is no season scheduled, and nobody in the sport wants that. The fear among employees across the sport already is palpable, and if baseball desires to be a healing agent for the nation — and it does — saving jobs is a good start.

Since the schedule is more or less up to this pathogen about which we still don’t know very much, what do we know?

Players cared deeply about the doomsday scenario. Service time, which awards players for days spent in the major leagues and goes toward determining free agency, arbitration eligibility and pension, was their focal point — particularly service time in the event of a lost season.

For days, the union insisted that major league players receive full service regardless of the outcome. When MLB relented — thus guaranteeing Mookie Betts, J.T. Realmuto, George Springer, Trevor Bauer and Marcus Stroman, among many others, the right to be free agents this winter — the deal went from probable to near-certainty.

Only players who logged an entire season of major league service last year will receive the full year in the doomsday scenario. If a season is played, a full year of service can be earned even if the season is shorter than the typical 172 days to reach that milestone.

So players got service time. Are they getting paid now, too?

Their salaries for 2020 will be prorated. If teams play an 81-game schedule, players will get 50% of their full, agreed-upon money. If they play 120 games, they will receive 74%. Performance-bonus clauses will be prorated too.

If the season is canceled, the only payment players will receive is the $170 million advance teams guaranteed players to be distributed in April and May. The money is essentially a down payment on salaries for 2020. Should games be played, it will be factored into paychecks. If no games are played, the players get to keep the $170 million without repayment.

The agreement adds that players cannot sue for their salaries — an important distinction even though Paragraph 11 almost certainly would have held up in a grievance setting.

Who among the players wins biggest in this scenario?

All major league players who have reached arbitration and thus do not have contracts with a different salary whether they are in the major leagues or minor leagues. They will receive $5,000 a day in April and May — or about $150,000 a month.

Where does the remainder of the money go?

There are three other classes of players, as defined by the MLBPA’s plan to split the advance.

A young star like Juan Soto of the Washington Nationals has what is called a split contract, which calls for him to be paid $629,400 in the major leagues and $289,150 in the minor leagues. Players with split deals for more than $150,000 in the minor leagues will receive $1,000 a day — or around $60,000.

Stud rookie Bo Bichette of the Toronto Blue Jays is on a split deal, with a minor league salary that’s in the $91,800 to $149,999 range. He’ll get $500 a day — half of what Soto is making and 10% of a veteran.

Top prospect Cristian Pache, whom the Atlanta Braves added to their 40-man roster this winter, is on the minimum for a split deal: $46,000. Those on split deals under $91,800 will be paid $275 a day, or somewhere in the neighborhood of $16,500.

Those who lose the worst are non-roster invitees and current free agents. Non-roster players who signed minor league deals hoping to get added to a 40-man roster for Opening Day don’t get a penny, though the union is considering ways to financially assist such players. And current free agents are prohibited from signing thanks to the roster freeze that went into effect upon the owners’ ratification of the agreement.

What else?

So much else!

• The arbitration system will be adjusted to consider lessened counting statistics because of the shorter season, and salaries secured during the 2021 offseason through arbitration won’t be used in the precedent-based system going forward.

• The MLBPA gave up the right to challenge Manfred’s enforcement of the debt-service rule, which is supposed to limit teams’ debt to 10 times earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization. Translation: Teams may borrow money to stave off financial problems, and MLB and the players are fine with that.

• When determining which teams have exceeded luxury-tax thresholds, the league will base it on what full-season salaries were supposed to be, not prorated salary payment. The taxes paid, however, will be on a prorated basis. And if there is no season, there will be no taxes owed, implying every team would reset to the lowest competitive balance tax threshold.

• Depending on when the season starts, players believe the All-Star Game could be eliminated.

The what could be what?

As if this whole situation wasn’t already bad enough for the Los Angeles Dodgers. First they could lose Betts without him playing a single non-spring training game in a Dodgers uniform (if the season is canceled, that is). Now they might get rid of the All-Star Game at Dodger Stadium, too? If the season starts July 1, stopping it 11 days later for the Home Run Derby and an exhibition game doesn’t exactly make a ton of sense.

play

3:36

Around the Home discusses the different possibilities the MLB can do with a shortened season.

Poor Los Angeles, right?

There’s a solution here, you know. Not one that would make up for possibly losing Betts or the All-Star Game or both but one that at least lessens the sting. If baseball is played this year, it’s almost assuredly going to have a neutral-site World Series. What better place than Dodger Stadium? Los Angeles loves baseball. The stadium is a gem. The weather is perfect. It makes too much sense not to happen.

Back to the agreement. So there are draft changes?

Of all the points in the deal, this one caused the most consternation, because amateurs historically get short shrift in these agreements. Owners want to suppress amateurs’ salaries. And no amateurs are part of the MLBPA, so their interests often do not dovetail with those of a union of professionals.

MLB has the right to move the 2020 MLB draft back from June 10 to as late as July 20, with a signing date as late as Aug. 1. A concrete date hasn’t been set yet. The rounds have been reduced from 40 to as few as five, though Manfred has the option to increase that number at his discretion — and might do so if games are being played and revenue is coming in. MLB also can shorten the 2021 draft to as few as 20 rounds and move it to the same dates.

In both years, the payment of draft bonuses will be delayed significantly. While signing-bonus slot values will remain the same as the 2019 draft — typically, they increase 3% to 4% annually depending on revenues — the maximum up-front payment in 2020 and 2021 will be $100,000 within 30 days of an approved contract. Fifty percent of the remaining value will be paid on July 1 the next year, then the balance on July 1 two years later.

Undrafted players cannot get more than $20,000, even if a team is under its allotted draft pool, in both the 2020 and 2021 drafts. This would be especially onerous in a five-round draft, and executives and agents agree there would be significant financial jockeying by teams starting in perhaps the third round. For example, consider a fourth-round pick with a slot value of around $500,000. A club could call a player and tell him it will pay him $200,000 if he agrees to sign at that pick. If the player doesn’t accept that amount, he runs the risk of going undrafted and maxing out at 10% of that. It’s a difficult gamble to take — and while teams could use that extra $300,000 to pay a higher-round pick, they also have the option of not spending the money at all.

For both the 2020 and 2021 drafts, MLB has the right to organize voluntary showcases for players — essentially a combine. Players on MLB’s Top 300 Medical Information Program — used to pool medical info for clubs on top prospects — may not provide exclusive data or video to one team without also offering it to MLB to be shared with all teams.

To curb the selling of draft picks, the agreement nullifies teams’ ability to trade competitive-balance selections, previously the only ones that could be traded, in the 2020 or 2021 drafts. In the 2020 MLB season, if every team plays fewer than 81 games, the commissioner has the right, after negotiating with the MLBPA, to change the draft order for the 2021 draft.

Why change the draft?

The reason is to save money and pave the way for a new draft system, which MLB was hoping to achieve in the next collective bargaining agreement. In 2019, the total value of bonus pools was $266,480,400. The slot values of the first five rounds were $238,094,400. That’s a savings of $946,200 per team for 2020 and 2021.

There won’t be a mess of $125,000 bonuses handed out after the 10th round, which ran up total expenditures for teams but didn’t count against their draft pool. While clubs are still paying their scouts, travel budgets will be far lower than in 2019.

What was the reaction to the draft changes?

Agent Scott Boras, a longtime advocate for draft rights, lashed out, telling The Athletic: “It’s unconscionable the owners in this climate would reduce the collectively bargained money given to drafted players in the top rounds. I don’t mind them reducing the rounds. That’s not the issue. It’s reducing the payments to those players. To cut their bonuses in this climate and use a pandemic situation in our country as a means to do that, I really find it unconscionable.”

Sound though Boras’ point might have been, it registered as tone deaf to a wide grouping of people around the league, particularly with millions of Americans suddenly unemployed and the crux of his point that amateurs wouldn’t be getting a raise.

“Everyone is entitled to their opinion,” Clark said. “The players were committed to preserving entry in some form, which was quite different than what was being represented from the other side. Eventually we reached a compromise. It wasn’t perfect.”

Which teams can take advantage of undrafted free agents?

Two types of teams: legacy franchises and ones with robust player-development systems. This could be a jackpot for the Los Angeles Dodgers and New York Yankees, both of whom are industry leaders in player development and have enough brand value to entice players to sign with them. With the $20,000 maximum, other teams could entice undrafted players with simple opportunity. The sales pitch: If the money is the same everywhere, come to the team that’s going to make you better. In other words, make the best of a bad situation.

How does this affect amateur baseball?

For amateur players, it is just a lot of bad news. Those inclined to sign and turn pro in the 2020 draft might receive similar money to last year, and it will be paid over a two-year period without interest. The loss is marginal but real. The college junior set to sign for $300,000 after the fifth round, who turned down some money out of high school in anticipation of this day, gets hit the hardest. It’s either $20,000 this year or probably the same as a senior next year, due to reduced negotiating leverage. Not to mention the fact that college coaches might prefer to spend some of their 11.7 scholarships on incoming freshmen who can contribute for three years rather than keep a senior.

It will be a boon for college baseball because of the surfeit of talent. Fewer high school prospects will turn pro. College juniors can return to school. Same for seniors, if granted extra eligibility. It might get ugly trying to make a new roster amid all of a college coaching staff’s prior assumptions and commitments, but there will be more talent across the board.

The Division I council will vote on Monday about roster relief. Programs could get extra spots to handle the change. Redshirting and junior colleges will be the way to manage this influx of players to college baseball, and it’s possible independent leagues or Japan’s Nippon Professional Baseball could be an option, as they have occasionally been in the past.

“Juco baseball is going to be amazing next year,” one longtime scout said.

How will players be scouted this year? Weren’t all the games canceled?

It’s unclear exactly how this will play out, with so much uncertain regarding the gathering of people in public places. If games can be played, college players will go to summer leagues — the Cape Cod League being the top option — and high schoolers will play in a number of showcases and tournaments as they normally do over the summer. A potential MLB combine would also be a part of this showcase schedule. MLB has run similar summer events for prep players, only for players a year before they’re eligible to be drafted. There’s obviously a chance none of these things happen.

How would teams draft players if they don’t play any games between now and draft day?

Clubs are confident in their evaluating ability, and scouting for the draft is a year-round endeavor. The southern half of the country was playing for about a month before everything stopped, and there are reams of data and high-speed video, along with a full summer and last spring’s worth of data already collected. Teams could draft multiple rounds confidently with no additional games played or data and video collected, as they’d all have less information in a somewhat uniform way. Both scouting-driven processes and analytical-model-driven processes thrive on information, but there is a point where the marginal benefit is pretty small.

How does this tie into MLB’s grander plan?

With the proposal by the league to eliminate as many as 40 minor league teams, the league would cut player-development costs by outsourcing talent to college. Effectively, low-tier pro prospects won’t be signed out of high school and develop in the minor leagues as teenagers, using club resources the whole time. Rather, they will go to college to develop, the cream will rise, clubs will have more certainty about their draft investment in that college player and he’ll get to the major leagues more quickly from the day he’s drafted. The return on investment is undoubtedly higher and the development costs to MLB clubs lower. MLB and the NCAA hadn’t collaborated much in the past until December’s agreement to hold the draft in Omaha the day before the College World Series starts.

Moral hazards in college baseball exist. Winning in the short term for a college coach to get a contract extension or move to a bigger program means, broadly, that some things not in the long-term interest of some players and MLB clubs that might pick them — more sliders thrown, more pitches per game, more bunts, different swing mechanics, fewer reps — are a reality of the college game. But MLB teams now regularly dip into the college ranks to find coaches, so the incentive gap has narrowed.

It also could lessen opportunities for players from disadvantaged or multisport backgrounds who need high-level reps to improve. Gone would be later-round draft bonuses or developmental spots in top college programs. If these things were thought of as a marketing cost to increase the popularity of the game, akin to MLB’s RBI Program, it might be more palatable to owners. The same goes for eliminating small-town minor league teams.

What about the minor leagues this season?

The agreement doesn’t address the status of the minor league season since less than 10% of minor league players are part of the MLBPA. Around baseball, there is significant skepticism that it will look anything like it has in recent years.

Major league teams clearly need a grouping of Triple-A and Double-A players to be ready in case of injuries, but that’s also baseball in 60 cities — cities with their own questions about health and safety and the ability to operate with no fans. Two player-development directors this week talked about minor league baseball turning into a complex-only operation — lots of back-field and intrasquad games among the lower-level minor leaguers and perhaps games at spring sites between organizations’ Triple-A and Double-A teams.

Short-season ball is for all intents and purposes dead in 2020 because the influx of amateur talent into organizations this year will be minuscule. Now it’s simply a matter of how the league chooses to handle those players already with teams.

What about the international signing period?

Manfred has the right to delay the 2020-21 signing period, which was set to begin on July 2, until as late as Jan. 15, 2021 through Dec. 15, 2021. There isn’t a concrete bonus deferral for the international realm like the draft, but this big of a potential delay could act as a version of one. Should MLB delay the beginning of the new signing calendar, there would be a dead period from July 2, 2020 to the beginning of the 2020-21 class. The league also can push back the 2021-22 signing period to Jan. 15, 2022 through Dec. 15, 2022.

The bonus pools for the 2020-21 and 2021-22 signing periods will be the same as 2019-20. Teams will not be allowed to trade pool space — they could previously trade for up to 50% on top of their original pool — for both periods.

What will this mean for teams in the international realm?

Most of the 2019-20 money is spent and most of the 2020-21 money is already committed. Teams could try to renegotiate deals for the next signing period, though that would be seen as a deep breach of trust by the trainers who develop most of the talent in Latin American countries.

How about for players and trainers?

It is a potential disaster for two different economies. The first is for players. A not-insignificant percentage of elite players’ families take out high-interest loans against their expected bonuses. This can happen for players as young as 13 years old, who can receive multimillion-dollar commitments from teams that want to sign them at 16. If loan payments come due and the families do not have the money to repay them, the compound interest could potentially wipe out a significant portion of the bonus money they do receive. Further, when Latin American teenagers sign with major league teams, they almost never spend their first season in the United States — and, thus, are not subject to U.S. tax laws on the bonus. Top players from the 2020-21 class who sign in January 2021 could be asked to play in the states and would find their bonuses taxed accordingly.

The greatest expense for players is paying the buscónes, or trainers, who house them, feed them and train them from as young as 10 years old. Often a child will drop out of school and start at a local academy. If he shows promise, the trainer there will shop him to more well-known trainers, who give the local trainer a percentage of the player’s eventual signing bonus. In total, players typically pay 30% to 50% of their bonuses to buscónes. Academies, though, can run on thin margins, particularly those with a significant number of players. One person intimately familiar with Dominican baseball estimated the potential six-month float could cause half the academies in the D.R. to shut down. Academies time their expenses to a July 2 signing period, and changing that could devastate them.

All of this fits with what now feels like an eventuality: an international draft come 2022. The timing, actually, lines up perfectly: If MLB pushes back the 2020-21 signing period, its end will coincide with the expiration of the current collective bargaining agreement. The consequence would be a potential double class — those from the 2021-22 group whose signings were pushed back and those who were set to be 16 by July 2, 2022 — but that could be addressed with a higher bonus pool for that first year or a resetting of the signing age.

This is a lot to digest. How do we close this thing out?

By closing team workout facilities, which they’ve finally done. The hope now is that they’ll reopen soon, that this agreement wasn’t for naught and that baseball — real, regular-season baseball, the kind that, regardless of crowd, is compelling nevertheless — will be a reality sooner than later.

Source link

MLB

Olney — It’s not just the 2020 season at stake, but the future of MLB

Published

on

Many of the folks inside baseball but outside of the Zoom labor negotiations assume that, eventually, cooler heads will prevail in the talks between the owners and the players’ union. Because they have to — right?

Because the alternative — no attempted restart of baseball in 2020 because of a failure of the two sides to agree to terms — bears catastrophic consequences, now and in the sport’s future. The leaders on both sides have to see that — right?

They have to understand this nuclear option is no option at all — right?

They have to understand how baseball might need a generation or two — decades — for some fans to forget or forgive this ill-timed squabble over money, at a time when so many have lost jobs and increasingly struggle to meet the cost of shelter and food. Baseball’s owners and players can’t be so deeply mired in distrust and doctrine that they don’t see this — right?

But here we are, in a countdown to utter disaster for Major League Baseball, and sources of moderation on both sides are having difficulty identifying the path through which the parties will leave their respective bunkers to reach the agreement the industry must have. As distasteful as the terms might be for the owners and players, they should all recognize that while concern over player and staff safety could ultimately prevent games from being played, they must settle the question of player compensation — whatever form that takes — and shake hands on the deal and smile for the cameras. (Actually, please be sure to get it in writing that everybody acknowledges — more later on how the failure to do that has contributed to the current stalemate.)

If that doesn’t happen — if they can’t agree on a deal to play in 2020 — baseball will become a loathed presence on North America’s sporting landscape, scorned by many fans. The labor fight will merely be deferred, with escalation in some form all but assured because of the unresolved issues.

Next spring, with only months remaining in the current collective bargaining agreement, the players are more apt to use the threat of a strike. Owners, already damaged by the money losses this year, could be more inclined to dig in and wait out the players, aiming for a lasting reconstruction of baseball’s financial model. The labor fight could go on and on, and by the time it all plays out, it’s impossible to know how many fans, feeling alienated or disgusted, will leave baseball behind once and for all.

The only sure thing is that the owners and players will lose, unless they settle this standoff that risks mutually assured destruction.

So they have to make a deal. Right?

The fractures between the lead negotiating groups — led by commissioner Rob Manfred and union chief Tony Clark — have developed into a gaping chasm of suspicion and frustration. But each side will also have to work through competing internal forces.

Sources say there is a group of owners perfectly willing to shut down the season, to slash payroll costs and reduce losses, and the disparate views among the 30 teams have been reflected in the decisions to fire and furlough. The Pirates’ Bob Nutting used the shutdown as an avenue to suspend team contributions to employee 401K plans — savings best measured monthly in the tens of thousands of dollars rather than the millions that would actually be difference-making for a franchise probably worth at least $1 billion. The Oakland Athletics’ John Fisher decided to eliminate the $400 weekly salaries of minor leaguers, which might save the franchise about the amount of the team’s unpaid stadium rental bill. On the other hand, clubs such as the Tigers, Padres and Royals demonstrated greater humanity, with the Royals’ John Sherman deciding to pay his minor leaguers.

The clash of clans on the players’ side was illuminated this week by the Twitter spat between Trevor Bauer and Kyle Lohse, client of Scott Boras, after Bauer tweeted, in so many words, that Boras should butt out of union business. Over the past 2½ months of social distancing, raw exchanges like these have me wondering how we are so technologically advanced and yet so many seem unable to place a direct phone call.

I know what you’re thinking: “OK, Boomer. That conversation stuff is so old-school.” But better communication will be needed to overcome the union’s internal division, to band the baseball brothers together and present a united front that was once a reflex position among the players.

The labor-relations scars of Hall of Fame pitcher Tom Glavine are well-earned from his time as a union front man during the ’94-95 players’ strike. He has never had a sledgehammer personality, so the message he seemingly tried to impart in an interview with the Atlanta Journal-Constitution the other day was subtle and indirect but hardened. “If it were to come down to an economic issue and that’s the reason baseball didn’t come back, you’re looking at a situation similar to the strike of ’94 and ’95 as far as fans are concerned,” he said. “Even if the players were 100% justified in what they were complaining about, they’re still going to look bad.”

Keep in mind that the players’ strike in ’94-95 took place during a time of relative national prosperity. There was no global pandemic, record unemployment or growing civil unrest.

Looking back, Glavine said, “The accessibility thing was a miscalculation on my part. I just felt like if I did an interview on the radio or TV, or if I had five or 10 minutes, I could make somebody understand what was going on and come to our side. That just wasn’t going to happen.”

From the early-April interviews Boras gave to the statements released by Clark to Blake Snell’s Twitch feed, it’s as if there has been an effort to win a public relations fight. If asked — and yes, the union would be well-served to seek the counsel of Glavine, David Cone, Todd Zeile, Johnny Bench and others who helped to construct the world’s strongest union the current players inherited — Glavine would seemingly tell them: Don’t bother; you’re not going to win in the court of public opinion.

Perhaps old union warriors Don Fehr and Gene Orza could offer useful reviews of the players’ association’s current logjam, given their knowledge of the baseball landscape and their decades-old understanding of the owners and leverage. Clark played 15 years in the big leagues, accomplishing things Fehr and Orza could only dream of — 251 big league homers, the stature of a respected clubhouse leader. But Clark does not have a legal background, and in his one major negotiation, the CBA talks of 2016, the union lost enormous ground in agreeing to a deal that effectively fostered soft salary caps and continued tanking.

Bruce Meyer, Clark’s right-hand man, has been in baseball for less than two years. The perception of Bauer, many other agents and management officials is that Boras is in a position of high influence right now, and while Boras is the most celebrated player representative in U.S. sports history, with record-setting deals, he also lacks front-line experience in negotiations that possess such long-standing ramifications for this and the next collective bargaining agreement.

Clark, Meyer and Boras have stood firmly behind an assertion that the late-March agreement between the union and MLB made clear that players would be paid their prorated salaries for any games, even without fans in the stands. On the other hand, management contends that the agreement contained an understanding that the question of player compensation would be revisited if there were no fans in the stands, and Joel Sherman wrote recently about the contemporaneous internal management memo that backs this position. There are players and agents who would like to see comparable documentation from union leadership, in the form of memos and emails.

The talks between the two sides are stalled over this important point, and if clear-cut language recognized by both sides does not exist, “it’s the fault of the lawyers,” said one agent. “The result is devastating.”

One way or another, this issue has to be resolved. A question asked by moderates on the players’ side: Who will make a deal?

And a question asked on both sides: Is it possible for the owners’ side to refrain from the destructive practice of leaking offers to the media? This practice has repeatedly undercut the effort to construct a bridge of trust and shaped the perception of owners’ motives. After MLB’s most recent proposal was published before it was presented, pitcher Jake Diekman wrote on Twitter, “It’s getting very irritating that all of the information regarding the start of the baseball season is getting leaked before 95% of the players can even see it.”

On Memorial Day, union moderates thought some conceptual traction had started to build toward a deal, with some salary considerations swapped for some protection of the upcoming free-agent classes. But because the offer was so stark, with the highest-paid players asked to take cuts of up to 80%, and because of how it leaked, many moderates thought that the owners’ offer backfired and pushed the players closer to Boras’ position — that negotiations about salary are over. The highly respected Max Scherzer, a member of the union’s executive committee and a Boras client, tweeted that “there’s no reason to engage with MLB in any further compensation reductions,” citing conversations with “the rest of the players.”

Thus, 80 days after baseball was shut down over the coronavirus pandemic, the two sides are completely at odds — the owners asking for major salary concessions without being willing to opening their financial books, and the union leaders settled behind what might be an unsettled issue, depending on what the negotiated language says.

Meanwhile, they’re like two second cousins arguing loudly in the back pews during a memorial service. Everyone watching the spat is mortified and embarrassed for them.

They have to work it out. Don’t they?

• Paul Hembekides sent along some notes about baseball’s financial landscape:

1. MLB’s financial proposal would be a big financial hit for high-earning players (obviously), but that is a really small subset. There were 1,410 players who appeared in an MLB game in 2019. There were 124 players who earned at least $10 million in 2019 (9% of the player pool); there were 140 scheduled to earn at least $10 million in 2020. Forty players earned at least $20 million in 2019 (3% of player pool); there were 47 scheduled to earn at least $20 million in 2020. (This does not account for those who did not play a game in 2019, such as Yoenis Cespedes.)

2. Over the past decade, the value of the average MLB franchise has increased by approximately 300%, to $1.85 billion. The annual contract of the average MLB player has increased by about 40%, to $4.4 million. As The Associated Press reported, salaries have stagnated over the past five years.

3. Baseball is a young man’s game. The percentage of players by current service time (from 2019 40-man Opening Day rosters):

0-1 year: 30%
1-2 years: 16%
2-3 years: 11%
3-4 years: 9%
4-5 years: 6%
5-6 years: 6%
6+ years: 21%

Note: This does not add up to 100% because of rounding.

• If the two sides forge an agreement and baseball is played in 2020, it will be interesting to see if some players eligible for free agency in the upcoming offseason choose to not participate for reasons similar to why some NFL and NBA prospects bypass combines and bowl games — out of concern for short-term risk.

Let’s say a 29-year-old pitcher is set to become eligible for free agency in the fall and is leery about the possibility of injury, perhaps enhanced by the odd work schedule this year or some performance struggles in what promises to be a small sample size. That player might choose to sit out whatever season is played, opting to take his 2019 résumé into market.

Baseball Tonight Podcast

Friday: Mike Farrell and Brian Rivera, co-directors of the E:60 feature Imperfect: The Roy Halladay Story, discuss Brandy Halladay’s decision to talk with them, how they discovered an important video element and the ways Roy’s story could impact others; Todd Radom’s weekly quiz, and a discussion about PNC Park.

Thursday: Mark Teixeira gives a clear-eyed take about the ongoing negotiations between the owners and the players; longtime media relations director Jay Horwitz discusses his new book about his time with the Mets.

Wednesday: Yankees third-base coach Phil Nevin brings the stories from his time in baseball — about Aaron Boone’s impersonations, that confrontation he had with his former GM, and the best baserunner he has ever worked with. Paul Hembekides has numbers that back up Nevin’s belief and discusses a dark day in baseball history.

Tuesday: Matt Vasgersian, Sunday Night Baseball’s play-by-play man, offers his top five signature home run calls among current announcers and discusses the state of baseball; Sarah Langs of MLB.com talks about historic short-season performances.

Source link

Continue Reading

MLB

Tim Kurkjian’s Baseball Fix – How Tippy Martinez once picked off the side

Published

on

You love baseball. Tim Kurkjian loves baseball. So while we await its return, every day we’ll provide you with a story or two tied to this date in baseball history.

ON THIS DATE IN 1950, Tippy Martinez was born.

Martinez was a very good reliever; he had a 3.45 ERA and 115 saves in 546 games. He won a ring with the 1983 Baltimore Orioles. And yet he is best known for one game, Aug. 24, 1983, because he picked off three runners in one inning of a game that Orioles fans voted the greatest in franchise history.

“I get asked about it almost every day,” Martinez said.

The full “On this date …” archive

The Orioles were playing the Toronto Blue Jays in a big pennant-race game. Orioles manager Joe Altobelli had been through his two catchers, Rick Dempsey and Joe Nolan, in order to get the score tied after nine innings. In the bottom of the 10th, outfielder Gary Roenicke was playing third base, outfielder John Lowenstein was playing second and second baseman Lenn Sakata was catching for the first and only time in his career. Toronto’s Cliff Johnson had homered to start the 10th to give Toronto the lead. Then Barry Bonnell singled.

In came Martinez.

“I didn’t even recognize our catcher because he was a second baseman,” Martinez said. “But Lenny was looking at this opportunity as a whole new career for him as a catcher. He wanted to throw some guys out. I’m thinking, ‘Not on my watch, you’re not.’ I was just hoping he could catch the ball. I couldn’t even throw my curveball because he couldn’t do anything back there, I just had to throw fastballs on the outside part of the plate. I decided to shorten my move — it was not cheating — because we knew they were going to run because Lenny was back there. [Manager] Bobby Cox was going crazy in the other dugout.”

Martinez threw to first baseman Eddie Murray and picked off Bonnell.

“The first move on Bonnell wasn’t even a good one, but he took off for second,” Martinez said. “The next batter, [Dave] Collins, walked. Everyone thinks I walked three guys in that inning, and picked them all off. I didn’t; I only walked one. Collins was really fast. I made a dummy move, then on the second move, I picked him off. The fans were going crazy.”

The next hitter was Willie Upshaw.

“He hit a ground ball to Lowenstein, but he had the range of a dime. He couldn’t get to it,” Martinez said. “Bobby Cox was screaming at his first-base coach [John Sullivan] to keep Upshaw’s foot on the bag. He was screaming that he would send the first-base coach back to the minor leagues if Upshaw got picked off. Willie barely took a lead. I was wondering, ‘How am I going to pick this guy off? I’ve never picked off two guys in an inning, how am I going to do three?’

“I made the best pickoff move I’ve ever made. The ball was in Eddie’s glove. Upshaw didn’t even move. He wasn’t breaking for first, or for second. He was just standing there. All hell broke loose in the ballpark. I looked at Cox. He had destroyed the cooler in the dugout. I couldn’t believe it.”

In the bottom of the 10th, Cal Ripken homered to tie the score, then, appropriately, Sakata hit a walk-off three-run homer to win it. When the Orioles closed Memorial Stadium after the 1991 season, they brought back dozens of players to commemorate it. The players ran onto the field and stood at their primary positions. Sakata went behind the plate. The fans got it. They cheered and laughed.

Martinez smiled.

“People always ask me all the time, ‘How about those three pickoffs?'” Tippy said. “First question, every time.”

Other baseball notes for May 31

In 1970, Walt Williams had five hits in one game. He had one of the best nicknames ever, No Neck Williams, because he had no neck.

In 1920, Edward Bennett Williams was born. Brilliant lawyer, demanding owner of the Orioles. At the podium the night the Orioles won the 1983 World Series, general manager Hank Peters celebrated the win. Williams, seconds later, whispered in his ear during the trophy ceremony, “I’m worried about next year.”

In 1962, Joe Orsulak was born. Good player, really good hitter, high school pingpong champion in three states. He once beat Cal Ripken 24 straight games of pingpong. “He wouldn’t leave until he won,” Orsulak said. “He won the 25th game at 2 o’clock in the morning. Then he went home.”

In 1981, Jake Peavy was born. Good pitcher, great guy. He used to yell at himself on the mound: “I try not to yell, I try not to swear, but at seven o’clock every night, I turn into someone different.” Dear friend and teammate Adam Dunn once said, “We used to do an over-under on when he’s going to yell at himself for the first time in the game. I usually set it at about 5½ pitches. He is a clown.”

Source link

Continue Reading

MLB

Remember that time a goose crashed into the Tigers’ scoreboard?

Published

on

Editor’s note: This story on the Detroit Tigers’ Rally Goose was originally published on May 31, 2019.

It was just a typical game between so-so Angels and Tigers teams last May when a flock of geese landed on the field at Detroit’s Comerica Park during a rain delay. Moments later, the Rally Goose was born — after a near-death experience. (To see the Rally Goose’s flight, crash and revival, scroll to the bottom of the story.)

Alex Wilson, then-Tigers pitcher: After they started to pull the tarp up, all the geese flew off — except for one.

Nicholas Castellanos, Tigers outfielder: The grounds crew took out flare guns and noisemakers to try to get him to fly away.

Andrew Goodrich, grounds crew: If the noises don’t work, we have to chase them. I ran hard for a while before I realized I was getting fatigued and had to tag somebody else in. But just then, he took flight, and we thought he was gone.

Dr. Catherine Roach, veterinarian and Tigers fan in attendance: Geese are fairly smart — not super smart — and he should have been able to fly out and away. I wonder if he was confused by the lights.

Mario Impemba, then-Tigers TV broadcaster: People were starting to cheer, and the next thing I know, slam, headfirst into a sign! He started careening backward and somersaulting, then he hit his neck on a chair and flopped to the ground. I thought, “That goose is dead.”

Roach: I ran down there and grabbed the goose. I put him under my arm, we threw towels over him, and we went to my clinic for some tests. By then, he seemed fine.

James McCann, then-Tigers catcher: We put a rally together and won the game, and that’s when you started to hear about the Rally Goose. I felt like we had to have one for ourselves.

Chase Mahoy, clubhouse attendant: James left a note to get some goose decoys. So the next day, I went and bought eight.

McCann: The next thing you know, the Rally Goose was born.

Roach: In the morning, I took him up to the Michigan State vet school’s wildlife ward. He was feeling a lot better, and they released him on a lake near Lansing.

Wilson: We carried the decoys around for a while. But then it kind of lost his mojo. We never gave him a name; he’s just Rally Goose.

Goodrich: We ordered a little goose that we put on one of the mowers. I hope the Rally Goose lives forever.

Ben Fidelman, Tigers PR: The Rally Goose replica is now with our archives and curation department and will be showcased at different Tigers events throughout the year as an artifact from the 2018 season.

Roach: People asked me, “Why aren’t we winning anymore?” And I’d say, “It’s just me and a goose — there’s only so much we can do.”



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending