Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
southsider2k5

Welcome to the MLB work stoppage

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Dick Allen said:

There is nothing you can do about it. Don't be bitter.

I think the owners following a path that is likely to cause a large part of the season to be canceled, while pushing the line of legality, is plenty of reason to be bitter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

I think the owners following a path that is likely to cause a large part of the season to be canceled, while pushing the line of legality, is plenty of reason to be bitter.

Life goes on. You'll find something else to occupy your time. It will probably even be more productive, unless you become a USFL fan.

Edited by Dick Allen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Dick Allen said:

Life goes on. You'll find something else to occupy your time. It will probably even be more productive, unless you become a USFL fan.

It is damned interesting how the owners put out that proposal and within 24 hours the "Defend the owners" side has become "oh so the season is probably lost, it's not a big deal, who really cares about baseball".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Balta1701 said:

It is damned interesting how the owners put out that proposal and within 24 hours the "Defend the owners" side has become "oh so the season is probably lost, it's not a big deal, who really cares about baseball".

The press has been talking about the labor issues for a couple of years. To be honest, I never thought it would get this far, but it did. One thing to consider is once it gets to this point, these things never get ironed out until the calendar says it needs to happen now. So this is all song and dance still. If the players counter any time soon, it will be an offer they know they owners wouldn't remotely consider.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

If you don't care, even if the season gets canceled, then why are you in this thread? 

I'm bored. After testing positive for Covid I use this as a break from other projects. Why are you in this thread?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

It is damned interesting how the owners put out that proposal and within 24 hours the "Defend the owners" side has become "oh so the season is probably lost, it's not a big deal, who really cares about baseball".

I care about the players and don't want them to play one more game under these horrid conditions. I hope they hold out until they get every one of their demands. But we both know they are too willing to compromise. They want to play and show the fans a good time. Sadly, the players are bargaining in good faith and will be offering the owners a deal the owners will accept. 

So Balta is this the 1% rule? If you agree with anything from the owner's perspective you are on the owner's side? How are you deciding who is on what side? For the record I'm on the side of end this quickly and could care less which side claims they won. I guess that puts me on the owner's side in your eyes. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Dick Allen said:

You can blame owners and you wouldn't be wrong, but where are the players' proposals?

Probably currently being rejected by the owners.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Balta1701 said:

I am not surprised that the owners are pushing a policy that will likely cost the 2022 season. But that's because I think very lowly of the people you are defending.

Spoiler alert - the owners are using you in a PR battle right now. 

The owners are using their economic advantage to win this battle.  What you or I think is unimportant to either side IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Difficult to understand why the owners seem to act as if they are standing at the edge of a cliff and would rather cancel the season. I suppose the Guardians and Pirates might be leading the charge. Manfred should be specific when he claims the owners are in a tough spot. Give the players five years service time and forget about manipulation. Starting wages should be up to $1M and universal arb after two years. More revenue sharing for the cheap teams. Done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Dick Allen said:

You can blame owners and you wouldn't be wrong, but where are the players' proposals?

I wouldn't be surprised if they took a week to make a counter offer. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Texsox said:

I wouldn't be surprised if they took a week to make a counter offer. 

Slow playing negotiations are how most of these things are done.  Players will now take their time and counter with an equally non-starter counter offer.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, pcq said:

Difficult to understand why the owners seem to act as if they are standing at the edge of a cliff and would rather cancel the season. I suppose the Guardians and Pirates might be leading the charge. Manfred should be specific when he claims the owners are in a tough spot. Give the players five years service time and forget about manipulation. Starting wages should be up to $1M and universal arb after two years. More revenue sharing for the cheap teams. Done.

That five year service time just helps the big market teams with deeper pockets. I could see the team owners deeply divided on that. Even the $1 mil minimum helps the large market team by tying more more payroll on the bottom players small market teams have even less to compete for better players.  On a small payroll team cheap draft picks that develop, a few low priced veterans, and a mid level FA might be their best lineup. It seems that capping the biggest spenders while forcing a minimum until there isn't more than a 2X difference between the highest and lowest will bring teaming towards the middle. The goal is to take away from the most talented teams and move those players to the worse teams. Just increasing salaries won't do that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, poppysox said:

Slow playing negotiations are how most of these things are done.  Players will now take their time and counter with an equally non-starter counter offer.  

The union couldn't do much until the owners made a proposal. Putting something together that the owners will accept will take time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Texsox said:

The union couldn't do much until the owners made a proposal. Putting something together that the owners will accept will take time. 

I'll bet you could put a counter-proposal on the table in a day.  I predict it will take them over a week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, poppysox said:

I'll bet you could put a counter-proposal on the table in a day.  I predict it will take them over a week.

How many lawyers are reading these proposals? Plus the details, figuring out how some team could get around the intent. Just look at the minimum wage rules. How many games does a player have to be on the roster to earn the minimum? Prorating? All that would have to be refigured. Obviously the owners stalled, but I think one week is reasonable for the counter offer. If it happens sooner great.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dick Allen said:

You can blame owners and you wouldn't be wrong, but where are the players' proposals?

Last I heard before the six week layoff was that player had made a proposal and the owners didn't respond to it, so the players were not willing to make another proposal and negotiate against themselves.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Texsox said:

How many lawyers are reading these proposals? Plus the details, figuring out how some team could get around the intent. Just look at the minimum wage rules. How many games does a player have to be on the roster to earn the minimum? Prorating? All that would have to be refigured. Obviously the owners stalled, but I think one week is reasonable for the counter offer. If it happens sooner great.  

They have been preparing the counter-proposal for weeks would be my guess.  Just needs some modification to fit the owner's offer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, poppysox said:

The owners are using their economic advantage to win this battle.  What you or I think is unimportant to either side IMO.

But what the law thinks…matters a lot. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Balta1701 said:

But what the law thinks…matters a lot. 

Has the union made that accusation? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Texsox said:

Has the union made that accusation? 

Actually…yes. The MLBPA has a $500 million grievance case pending in the courts against the owners claiming they refused to negotiate in good faith during the 2020 COVID protocol dispute. Filed earlier this year - also notable since it was filed about 10 months after the agreement.

Interestingly, the 1994 strike ended after a judge found that the owners…failed to bargain in good faith. Gosh that feels weirdly familiar.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Texsox said:

That five year service time just helps the big market teams with deeper pockets. I could see the team owners deeply divided on that. Even the $1 mil minimum helps the large market team by tying more more payroll on the bottom players small market teams have even less to compete for better players.  On a small payroll team cheap draft picks that develop, a few low priced veterans, and a mid level FA might be their best lineup. It seems that capping the biggest spenders while forcing a minimum until there isn't more than a 2X difference between the highest and lowest will bring teaming towards the middle. The goal is to take away from the most talented teams and move those players to the worse teams. Just increasing salaries won't do that. 

Or the poor billionaires who own baseball teams in non-large cities can open up their damn checkbook to pay to keep their players. 

Too many forget that the lack of spending is a choice by ownership, rather than a necessity. 

All 30 teams can afford Mike Trout and Gerrit Cole at their current deals, and still put together a competitive roster. They just choose not to. 

Edited by Jack Parkman
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

Actually…yes. The MLBPA has a $500 million grievance case pending in the courts against the owners claiming they refused to negotiate in good faith during the 2020 COVID protocol dispute. Filed earlier this year - also notable since it was filed about 10 months after the agreement.

Interestingly, the 1994 strike ended after a judge found that the owners…failed to bargain in good faith. Gosh that feels weirdly familiar.

Great then we don't have to worry about it. We have a court system to fix it. 

So I answered your question why I'm in this thread, why are you? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Texsox said:

Great then we don't have to worry about it. We have a court system to fix it. 

So I answered your question why I'm in this thread, why are you? 

Because I am a believer in fair labor relations and oppose unfair labor practices when I see them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×