When Does The Lockout End? Answer: March 10th, 2022

[wallus]

No need to make things very complicated on a salary floor. They need to do just like what they do in the NBA and distribute anything below the floor to all of the players on the roster. This happened this season with the OKC Thunder.

[umphrey]

Now that this is starting to affect the season it feels much more real. I'm really disappointed that we are looking at our 2nd half assed season in 3 years. Probly gonna drop my fantasy baseball team because I don't care to draft a team that won't play again. The Brewers are interesting right now so I'm not swearing off baseball or anything but if I was a fan of a bad team I might be.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Now that this is starting to affect the season it feels much more real. I'm really disappointed that we are looking at our 2nd half assed season in 3 years. Probly gonna drop my fantasy baseball team because I don't care to draft a team that won't play again. The Brewers are interesting right now so I'm not swearing off baseball or anything but if I was a fan of a bad team I might be.

It's kind of unbelievable how short-sighted both sides are being about this situation. There are plenty of other things for baseball fans to do with their money and time, and MLB isn't in a strong enough position to just casually discard any of their already-aging fanbase.

 

I so badly wanted to see a normal baseball season and, yet again, we're not going to get that in 2022.

[wntrtxn21]

If the owners hadn't locked out the players, the offseason & eventually the regular season would have proceeded as normal, just without a CBA in place. That's what happened in 1994 anyway.

 

The owners didn't want this for two main reasons. One is the salary cap, errrr I mean the "luxury tax". Had the owners not locked out the players, there would be no mechanism in place to limit spending with the CBA expired.

 

The other is leverage. If the season had continued while negotiations were ongoing the players could choose to strike prior to the postseason, where the owners receive a much larger percentage of revenues compared to the early season games they stand to lose by initiating a lockout instead.

 

I'm still waiting to hear which elements of the owners proposals posters find more reasonable or better suited for the future of the game when compared to those same elements of the players proposals.

 

Exactly the Yankees, Dodgers, Red Sox and other teams could have spent whatever they wanted this off season if the lockout wouldn't have happened. The gap between the small market teams payroll and the large market teams would have grown. The large market teams basically would have also received a free reset on the tax for this season and if the large market teams wouldn't have spent the union would have been calling it collusion.

 

The only proposal that I have liked from the owners was the $100m salary floor. But the owners never released or mentioned what would happen if a team goes below that floor so that was an auto reject from the players. If the two sides could come together and combine a tax around $220m and a floor around $100m I think that would be a perfect solution it basically creates a salary cap but allows teams to go over it.

 

If a team is below the $100m salary floor they lose their 1st round pick and it is included in the lottery. If a team is a large market team and they are below the $100m salary floor by the end of the season they forfeit their 1st round pick and pay a tax of 40% which will escalate to 120% of the minimum salary which is then split 50-50 between the small market teams and a pool for the players who are pre-arbitration eligible. This solves the pre-arbitration issue and pays those players more potentially and also solves the tanking issue. Small market teams forfeit their 2nd round pick for the first and second year they are under the salary floor and after the second year they forfeit their 1st round pick and competitive balance picks. This will push teams to actually compete and not just give up half way through the season. This would obviously mean that the playoffs would have to expand and I think a total of 14 teams would be fine maybe reduce down to 12 but I think 14 would be ok.

 

Why would any small market owner agree to such a horrendous penalty w/o the same thing happening to the big spenders who go over the tax? MLB is ready to remove any penalty for the mega spenders signing FAs and your penalty hurts the small market teams even more. If there is a floor w/penalty, then there should be a lower ceiling tax and an equal penalty for teams that exceed the ceiling. IMO the 162 game season loses most of it's meaning if 14 teams make the playoffs. Teams could actually under spend just to make the playoffs and go from there. They'd be playing the W.S. on November.

[wntrtxn21]

No need to make things very complicated on a salary floor. They need to do just like what they do in the NBA and distribute anything below the floor to all of the players on the roster. This happened this season with the OKC Thunder.

 

I would be all for it IF there was a cap like the NFL or even a loose cap like the NBA. Otherwise all it does is hurt the small market teams even more than now.

[CheeseheadInQC]

If the players want to decrease revenue sharing because they say the small market owners are pocketing it, why not instead propose to link it to payroll, with teams below it either losing all or a portion on a sliding scale based on amount under of their revenue sharing funds to be distributed to the teams getting revenue sharing funds that spent over it? It would set up a pseudo floor the same way the luxury tax is a pseudo cap.

[markedman5]

[wallus]

No need to make things very complicated on a salary floor. They need to do just like what they do in the NBA and distribute anything below the floor to all of the players on the roster. This happened this season with the OKC Thunder.

 

I would be all for it IF there was a cap like the NFL or even a loose cap like the NBA. Otherwise all it does is hurt the small market teams even more than now.

 

The NFL has a very loose cap as well.

[BrewFan130]

I guess it’s a good indicator to why smart wealthy business owners want to own even the teams that claim to lose money year after year. They may be losing money on paper, but I find it hard to believe they’re losing anything. It’s interesting that the players salaries are all public record, but the teams financials are not. I wonder what teams like the Yankees and Dodgers make in fan merchandise annually. I know the Dodgers have a $8.35 billion dollar tv contract over 25 years.

Aside from that, I thought owners and players learned from the 1993 strike. It had a much larger negative effect than anyone was expecting with a lot of lost fans that took many years to rebuild

[SeaBass]

Aside from that, I thought owners and players learned from the 1993 strike. It had a much larger negative effect than anyone was expecting with a lot of lost fans that took many years to rebuild

I don't think this time around can truly compare to 1994 unless they lose the playoffs and world series and the owners have specifically set this up so that doesn't happen. Doesn't mean there won't be negative effects but I think the idea is it won't be on that level. It also still feels, right now, that both sides are invested in making this as painless as possible. There may be a delay to the start of the season but as long as it's not a big delay the recovery shouldn't be too difficult. I don't really know where that line is though between minimal delay and too big of a delay.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

April weather typically sucks in northern Wisconsin. It is wet, and often still very cold, as winter tries to hang on as long as possible. The proof for me during that month that actual spring weather and nice days are on the horizon is being able to follow early-season Brewers baseball. But now billionaire owners bickering with millionaire players is threatening to take that away, which would be the second time in three years. And that sucks.

 

I know that baseball will eventually be back. But if they don't get their differences ironed out this week, and it ends up delaying the season, it's going to be an absolutely terrible look. And both sides are to blame.

[sveumrules]

And both sides are to blame.

 

I agree, but considering the owners locked out the players & their proposals to this point demonstrate an unwillingness to even really negotiate in good faith, I'd say their share of the blame is magnitudes larger than the players' share.

[TURBO]

If the players weren't locked out, the players would have went on strike mid-season anyway.

 

This is better than losing the play-offs and world series had that happened.

 

Both sides are villians in this situation.

[sveumrules]

If the players weren't locked out, the players would have went on strike mid-season anyway.

 

Maybe they would have, maybe they wouldn't have.

 

The difference would be that while the two sides were negotiating there still would have been baseball happening.

 

I'm not saying the players are "good guys" & owners are "villains", just that when you compare both sides actions & proposals against one another the owners are far more villainous.

 

Right now the players are essentially Gard & the owners are more or less Juwan Howard.

[gebc1997]

There are a decent amount of proposals that have gone in the players favor this go around. maybe it's not enough, but they are there.

 

1. Universal DH adds 15 full time jobs

2. The first so many picks in the draft will be in a lottery (4-7)

3. No more draft pick compensation for free agent signings

4. The general agreement to have a bonus pool for pre arby players, that has never been part of any CBA before

5. An agreement to increase minimum salaries, these can and should be greatly increased imo

 

The only one I've seen that benefits the owners is the likely increase in playoff teams

 

There may be some others that I'm forgetting but there is more movement in the favor of the players as opposed to the owners. maybe not enough, but its there

[TURBO]

If the players weren't locked out, the players would have went on strike mid-season anyway.

 

Maybe they would have, maybe they wouldn't have.

 

The difference would be that while the two sides were negotiating there still would have been baseball happening.

 

I'm not saying the players are "good guys" & owners are "villains", just that when you compare both sides actions & proposals against one another the owners are far more villainous.

 

Right now the players are essentially Gard & the owners are more or less Juwan Howard.

 

Ok, well, that is your opinion........man.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

There are a decent amount of proposals that have gone in the players favor this go around. maybe it's not enough, but they are there.

 

1. Universal DH adds 15 full time jobs

2. The first so many picks in the draft will be in a lottery (4-7)

3. No more draft pick compensation for free agent signings

4. The general agreement to have a bonus pool for pre arby players, that has never been part of any CBA before

5. An agreement to increase minimum salaries, these can and should be greatly increased imo

 

The only one I've seen that benefits the owners is the likely increase in playoff teams

 

There may be some others that I'm forgetting but there is more movement in the favor of the players as opposed to the owners. maybe not enough, but its there

 

The biggest hold-up now is the players wanting a decrease in shared revenue and higher luxury tax thresholds, which in essence only helps the large market clubs. Players want this because it is their belief that small market owners are not reinvesting shared revenue earnings back into player salaries, but are instead pocketing that as profit. They believe that penalizing large-market, huge revenue teams for having huge payrolls is directly taking money out of players' pockets.

 

I believe that there is some truth to what the players believe in these cases. However, if MLB concedes and gives the players what they want here, it will only hurt small market teams such as the Brewers. The Brewers would basically be penalized because teams like the Pirates suck and refuse to pay to put a competitive product on the field.

 

The only real answer here is a strict salary cap and salary floor. But it will never happen, because the large market teams don't want it and the $100+ million contract players don't want it. And those are the guys who are ultimately making the decisions. It isn't the Mark Attanasios or Brent Suters of the world (even though Suter has been present at the negotiations, I would imagine rich jerks like Scherzer are much more vocal).

[wntrtxn21]

If the players weren't locked out, the players would have went on strike mid-season anyway.

 

Maybe they would have, maybe they wouldn't have.

 

The difference would be that while the two sides were negotiating there still would have been baseball happening.

 

I'm not saying the players are "good guys" & owners are "villains", just that when you compare both sides actions & proposals against one another the owners are far more villainous.

 

Right now the players are essentially Gard & the owners are more or less Juwan Howard.

 

I couldn't disagree more. To say the owners are far more villainous is just completely incorrect. When you compare the proposals it becomes extremely apparent that the players are just as much at fault as the owners. The players knew going in that their demands were so contentious they would force the owners to lock them out. If the owners let the season open, it would give the players exactly what they wanted from the start. The leverage to re-enact 1994 when they had the max leverage where it would hurt the game and the owners the most. The owners after witnessing the last strike, aren't going to let that happen. The owners are in a divided camp where negotiations are difficult. In the current scenario, both sides are Juwan Howard, slapping himself.

[SeaBass]

"Billionaires arguing with millionaires."

"Both sides are to blame."

 

Man, I just love mindless clichés.

 

"The billionaires are to blame."

"It's all the owner's fault."

 

These are the ones I really want to catch on. It just feels more accurate.

[Baldkin]

If someone told you negotiations for an issue were urgent and needed to happen, you'd think they wouldn't wait 6 weeks to begin negotiations like the owners did.

Once you started to make some concessions in these negotiations, you'd think they would make some on their side as well - the owners have not.

4 days to solve this or games will be cancelled.

One group, and one group only is to blame - the owners.

 

Just because you believe the players should "Play for free" doesn't mean the players should have to. This is their career.

 

Overwhelmingly, the players love baseball, do you think you can say the same for the owners? If you answer that "Yes" ask yourself how Rob Manfred is still commissioner.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

Just because you believe the players should "Play for free" doesn't mean the players should have to. This is their career.

 

I get that baseball players at the MLB level have a very rare and valuable skill set. But look at the median family income in this country ($79,900). Then look at the minimum salary of a first year MLB player ($570,500). No one is playing for free. There are very, very few people who can logically relate to the "plight" the players are feeling at the moment.

 

I think that some owners love baseball. I wish more did. But some of them simply love making money. In the end, that's how they earned enough of it to even purchase an MLB franchise. It is what it is.

Edited February 24, 2022 by Ron Robinson's Beard

[sveumrules]

The median income in the country is irrelevant. Baseball is its own economy with an Antitrust Exemption & everything.

 

If its hard to relate to the "plight" of the players, it should be exponentially harder to relate to the "plight" of the owners since they are exponentially richer than the players.

[Ron Robinsons Beard]

The median income in the country is irrelevant. Baseball is its own economy with an Antitrust Exemption & everything.

 

If its hard to relate to the "plight" of the players, it should be exponentially harder to relate to the "plight" of the owners since they are exponentially richer than the players.

 

I am a working stiff who is employed by a corporation. Most people are in a similar situation, unless you are self-employed or a CEO of a company yourself. Therefore it is much easier for me to relate to the players' side of this than it is the owners' side. I cannot relate to the CEO of my small company, let alone those who own major Fortune 500 type companies. It's not even the "haves vs. the have-nots". It's more than that. It's a whole different dynamic.

[jerichoholicninja]

Overwhelmingly, the players love baseball, do you think you can say the same for the owners? If you answer that "Yes" ask yourself how Rob Manfred is still commissioner.

 

Eh, I don't think that's as true and you want it to be. I remember sitting near the SkySox bullpen a few years ago and overheard [sarcasm]Brewer's great[/sarcasm] Mike Zagurski say "I really don't like baseball but I like what it pays me." To varying degrees, I'm sure this is the feeling of the vast majority of players.

[TURBO]

Just because you believe the players should "Play for free" doesn't mean the players should have to. This is their career.

 

I get that baseball players at the MLB level have a very rare and valuable skill set. But look at the median family income in this country ($79,900). Then look at the minimum salary of a first year MLB player ($570,500). No one is playing for free. There are very, very few people who can logically relate to the "plight" the players are feeling at the moment.

 

I think that some owners love baseball. I wish more did. But some of them simply love making money. In the end, that's how they earned enough of it to even purchase an MLB franchise. It is what it is.

 

Agreed.

 

I honestly don't mind how rich the owners are. They have a high risk / high reward business. They have to pump loads of money into that businees. It doesn't bother me that they make gobs of money as long as they put some back into their teams to stay competitive. I don't like the fact that we villainize rich business owners in this country. If they made their money legit, more power to them. (this train of thought is coming from a teacher, who is married to another teacher) I'm all for capitalism, it's the foundation of our nation. Where would we be without it?

 

That aside, when guys like Soto turn down 350 million, it doesn't sit well with ordinary average guys like me. That kind of money sets up generations of his family, not just him. The money the players make resonates with me, not the owners. Players, even those on the low end of the pay scale are set up for life if they manage it correctly. Let's say you play 5 years at 600 k, that is 3 million. Regular working stiffs don't make that in a lifetime.

 

It's just impossible for me to take the players side when they can make 600K to 30 million per season. Oh woe is them...

 

I don't even mind that they make that kind of money, they have a special skill set, and deserve it, but crying to the general public falls on deaf ears imho.