- This topic has 498 replies, 26 voices, and was last updated 5 years, 11 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
One thing I haven’t heard much about are vesting options and performance contracts. I assume they would be prorated. This could certainly impact guys like Carpenter, Miller, and Wainwright.
As you suggest, perhaps they will sit down on a case-by-case basis and negotiate a pro-rated scale. Should be easy to calculate once they know how many games will be played, but they have to actually lay it out and agree.
Thinking about it more, a simple percent of games pro-ration may not be fair to the player. If I am a starting pitcher and have innings (rather than appearance) incentives, I might push for a more relaxed scale based on the faster ramp up plans without a full spring camp to get pitch counts built up.
Also, more doubleheaders and fewer days off could mean fewer starts for starters and even fewer relief appearances, too, compared to the same number of games played over a normal season.
Like so many nuances, this should be interesting…
In a condensed schedule that includes doubleheaders is it possible they could play 10 games in 7 days? Or maybe the question should be, how many SP’s do you carry to cover the 5man rotation schedule? 7 SP’s? 8 SP’s? Our SP depth could really be a plus in a condensed schedule, if they perform as we expect.
Is MLB setting the stage to ask players to take cuts, too? Starting June 1, it could get really hairy.
Manfred said in the memo that MLB would continue making scheduled financial distributions to all 30 teams in April and May — money that "will assist the Clubs in paying the salary advances that are being made to players," which will total $170 million over the next two months.
— Jeff Passan (@JeffPassan) April 14, 2020
Players should be taking cuts if there is no season. I’d be in favor of a graduated system where players making the minimum take smaller cuts and they increase for those making increasing amounts of money.
I think MLB is setting the stage for no season at all. The players will get their $170M and that is it.
Yes, I understood it to be 170mil and no right to sue for any additional salaries in case the season is lost.
MLB Player Contracts In A Shortened Or Cancelled Season https://t.co/MBMfSl1rfJ pic.twitter.com/1e7AglLT1u
— MLB Trade Rumors (@mlbtraderumors) April 14, 2020
“In the event of a cancelled season, players will be credited MLB service in the same amount they accrued it in 2019.”
So a player line Alex Reyes…would that push him to the level of arbitration since he missed most of the year in the minors, or will it extend him another year?
Alex Reyes was not in the majors the vast majority of 2019, so he only accrued 10 days of MLB service time. No substantive change to his situation.
I would have rather had Flaherty for an extra year but it seems like we’ll have Reyes through his entire prime if he ever gets healthy enough to stick around.
On the plus side if the season is cancelled that means no more Cecil and Leake salary to be paid and one less year of Fowler and Carp salary to be paid. Miller would probably become a FA since his vesting option wouldn’t vest. Yadi would probably have to take less to play in 2021. Waino would be TBD.
I thought my earlier answer covered it. To be specific, a player on an MLB injured list accrues MLB service time. However, if a 40-man roster player is on a minor league injured list, he does not accrue MLB service time. Hope that clarifies.
P.S. This is one reason* why just before the roster freeze occurred, the Cardinals optioned out all the 40-man roster players who did not have a good chance of making the team. That way if one of them gets injured during this outage, his recovery time is on the minor league books.
Because it did not matter for the 20 non-roster players, they still officially remain in camp.
* The other reason is that 40-man roster players are paid much less when in the minor leagues.
Uh, no, it is not worked out…
If 2020 baseball games have no fans, MLB may ask the players to take less pay. Some say that issue was already hashed out when the sides reached a deal in March. Others disagree. With @Ken_Rosenthal https://t.co/T6fo5ouRpU
— Evan Drellich (@EvanDrellich) April 16, 2020
What do you think? Is asking the players to take less money as crazy as this opinion suggests or is it to be expected if the games are played in empty stadiums?
Make players relocate away from families. Cram a bunch of doubleheaders in to try and get as close to 162 as you can. But, hey! Can the guys take a pay cut? I don’t see it. Not a chance.
— Maury Brown (@BizballMaury) April 16, 2020
Why should the players be exempt in taking a pay cut? Most all other business owners and employees impacted by these events are taking reductions and layoffs.
In recent years, collective bargaining has ended up making the revenue split for owners and players roughly even from what I’ve read. Whatever, if the split in recent years is X to Y, then maybe the players should be willing to take an X to Y share of a cut this season. At least that could be a consideration in negotiations.
Of course they should take a cut but we don’t know that they aren’t willing. There might be some initial saber rattling but I suspect at the end of the day they would do it as long as the cuts are “reasonable”, whatever that is.
But we are probably getting the cart before the horse. I think we are a long ways off before seriously seeing players getting anywhere close to a baseball field.
I do not think the cart is that far ahead of the horse. We could debate the date when play might begin, but one date is set in concrete – May 31. That is when the current interim agreement between owners and players ends.
In the first go-around, the players gave ground on money to get the service time guarantee. This time around, they would need to negotiate any continued advances before play begins, as well as how the players would be paid for the season whenever they start up. Obviously, the players have leverage, because without them, there can be no games.
Or, even if there are no games played in 2020, they would still need to negotiate what that means for the players. Do they get any more money or is the April/May money all there is going to be? If there are going to be no games, what leverage do the players have to get any more money?
It is shaping up to be complicated and contentious, so I think it is good if they are already starting to talk.
Agreed. Nothing wrong with starting talks but nothing will happen until the medical officials give the green light. I respect Dr. Fauci a lot but I think he was saying in theory there could be a way to make it work but as usual the devil would be in the details.
In my non-medical opinion there will be no sporting events of any kind in 2020 with fans in the stands. Having games without fans will be centered on how fast we can ramp up testing. There appears to be a ways to go on that.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.