Jump to content

MLB 2021 Hot Stove League


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 93
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

It’s going to be a long time before we see baseball until both sides get serious. Based upon my experience, they need to do is engage in round the clock negotiating.  That’s the only way a deal gets done. Piecemeal negotiating sessions are unproductive. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Brad said:

It’s going to be a long time before we see baseball until both sides get serious. Based upon my experience, they need to do is engage in round the clock negotiating.  That’s the only way a deal gets done. Piecemeal negotiating sessions are unproductive. 

I agree but these aren't piecemeal, as I think of it, in the sense that both sides come back with whatever changes they will now offer. Many of them there is no movement on at all by the PA (and some MLB calls non-starters) and others, the players move further away instead of any movement toward a compromise.

Seems that daily meetings this week have nothing to do with serious negotiations and is just for show.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, jcam_44 said:

Not sure why the players should make the biggest concessions, they are the reason there is a product, but I am a union man. With that being said I think it was expected that this would eat into the regular season on both sides and a reduced schedule is unspoken but welcome. 

Of course the players are the reason for a product .... but if customers can't obtain it they will loose Interest and spend their funds differently .... more sooner than later ....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, jcam_44 said:

Not sure why the players should make the biggest concessions, they are the reason there is a product, but I am a union man. With that being said I think it was expected that this would eat into the regular season on both sides and a reduced schedule is unspoken but welcome. 

How about any concessions at all?  If you look at the proposals as described, the owners have moved far more off of their initial offers than the PA.  And when the PA does move, what they give with one hand they take with the other, by making some small movement toward owner's number but then making larger ask than before on something else.

No seriousness, no urgency, nothing.  They are counting their lucky stars that the owners locked them out because otherwise there is no question they would be on strike right now. So public opinion may be with the players (now) but we'll see how that shakes out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Brad said:

And they’re all a bunch of dicks. 

This. 

But some dicks are worse than others - and I see that yesterday after PA increased demand on minimum salary, owners increased their offer.  Who is making an effort here? I continue to stand by my prior assertions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Dan Gould said:

This. 

But some dicks are worse than others - and I see that yesterday after PA increased demand on minimum salary, owners increased their offer.  Who is making an effort here? I continue to stand by my prior assertions.

 I’m of the mindset if you believe your labor is worth more than you don’t just bend over and take whatever is given. The turn on unionized labor in America is fascinating and sad to me. So many people in the work force are the labor and the sentiment that you should just take what you can get astounds me. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, jcam_44 said:

 I’m of the mindset if you believe your labor is worth more than you don’t just bend over and take whatever is given. The turn on unionized labor in America is fascinating and sad to me. So many people in the work force are the labor and the sentiment that you should just take what you can get astounds me. 

So the answer is no spirit of compromise whatsoever?  Nobody is saying take what is given, but if you want an agreement, negotiate. There is no negotiation going on by the player's, Not a serious one.  And as others have pointed out, people will find other ways to spend their disposable income.  Hurting the industry by forcing the cancellation of any portion of the season is not helpful in any way. 

Or have they lost sight of what happened with the last work stoppage? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, jcam_44 said:

If I ask for $2 and they offer .50, asking for $3 next as a way of saying $2 is a minimum. It’s still negotiating. Negotiating does not require a reduction of request on $2. Especially if you want to cut jobs at the MiLB level.

It's not serious negotiating. Call it what you want but its not serious.  Serious is compromising somewhere. They haven't done a damn bit of it.

Look I get it they think now they've been screwed over the last few negotiations. Don't care. Upending the entire system (NO revenue sharing at all?  A payroll tax no one  will ever pay?) is not negotiating either.

Do you honestly expect the owners to roll over?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Dan Gould said:

It's not serious negotiating. Call it what you want but its not serious.  Serious is compromising somewhere. They haven't done a damn bit of it.

Look I get it they think now they've been screwed over the last few negotiations. Don't care. Upending the entire system (NO revenue sharing at all?  A payroll tax no one  will ever pay?) is not negotiating either.

Do you honestly expect the owners to roll over?

I expect the owners to share profits fairly. The payroll tax is a negotiation of 1% to 3% which was a difference of 50 million. The revenue for MLB in 2021 was estimated at 4 billion. It seems to me like the pie is getting bigger and the slice for the players is getting smaller. Similar to what the NFL did last negations. I’m pro-labor so I am always about the labor getting their fair share. The numbers are so big a lot of people think the players are getting a fair cut because to those outside the league its more than we make. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, jcam_44 said:

I expect the owners to share profits fairly. The payroll tax is a negotiation of 1% to 3% which was a difference of 50 million. The revenue for MLB in 2021 was estimated at 4 billion. It seems to me like the pie is getting bigger and the slice for the players is getting smaller. Similar to what the NFL did last negations. I’m pro-labor so I am always about the labor getting their fair share. The numbers are so big a lot of people think the players are getting a fair cut because to those outside the league its more than we make. 

The payroll tax is about insisting on a floor no one is near, to eviscerate what once served as something of a break on runaway salaries. Which by the way, have you looked at some of the huge contracts signed in the past few years and in the cut-short off season this year? Owners have been opening the wallets anyway.

Same way with "no revenue sharing"?  I am not even clear why the players should have any space in negotiating how teams share revenue. But no revenue sharing keeps the rich richer and presumably spending more.

So all of the things that avoided labor strife for a couple of decades almost, to be eliminated.

Remember what Bill Veeck said about "the high cost of mediocrity". We're inevitably going to see mediocre players out of baseball sooner, surely by the time they hit 32 or so, because  why pay when a first or second year player gives the same production?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess we have different views on negotiations. I think it is hard to be harsh when I don’t have any “skin in the game” so I can’t say they aren’t negotiating in good faith. 

owners are opening their wallets? Why do you care if the owner spends money? 

Nixon torpedoed the rights of laborers with the air traffic controllers and the mindset has taken hold across America that the rich should get richer at all costs. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, jcam_44 said:

Nixon torpedoed the rights of laborers with the air traffic controllers and the mindset has taken hold across America that the rich should get richer at all costs. 

That was Reagan.

2 hours ago, Dan Gould said:

It's not serious negotiating. Call it what you want but its not serious.  Serious is compromising somewhere.

Somewhere will come eventually. But right now will not be it.

It's all big-dicks big-dicking. Why? Because they can.

Depending on the eventual outcome, it's either huge hubris or big balls. Put me down for hubris, and everybody gets the same big-dick sized piece of that pie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JSngry said:

That was Reagan.

Somewhere will come eventually. But right now will not be it.

It's all big-dicks big-dicking. Why? Because they can.

Depending on the eventual outcome, it's either huge hubris or big balls. Put me down for hubris, and everybody gets the same big-dick sized piece of that pie.

Correct. 
 

I think the important thing is there was an expectation of a shorten season because they already know it can work because it’s been done. I think the biggest news has been the universal DH. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, jcam_44 said:

If I ask for $2 and they offer .50, asking for $3 next as a way of saying $2 is a minimum. It’s still negotiating. Negotiating does not require a reduction of request on $2. Especially if you want to cut jobs at the MiLB level.

I used to negotiate contracts for a living and what you suggest is not negotiating. When someone offers .50 and you come back with 2.00 you’ve established your ceiling. If you go back the next day and say it’s not 2 but 3, that’s negotiating in bad faith. I’ve had that happen to me and it almost led to the collapse of the contract. Now, there’s nothing that says you can’t do that because until a contract is signed, theoretically you can ask for everything. However, don’t expect it to go over well. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Brad said:

I used to negotiate contracts for a living and what you suggest is not negotiating. When someone offers .50 and you come back with 2.00 you’ve established your ceiling. If you go back the next day and say it’s not 2 but 3, that’s negotiating in bad faith. I’ve had that happen to me and it almost led to the collapse of the contract. Now, there’s nothing that says you can’t do that because until a contract is signed, theoretically you can ask for everything. However, don’t expect it to go over well. 

Is low balling not bad faith then? Or is that just good negotiating? It all depends on the side of the negotiation you’re on. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, jcam_44 said:

So many people in the work force are the labor and the sentiment that you should just take what you can get astounds me. 

I believe this is an profound misunderstanding of unions .... without these a lot of employees would be at free will of Neoliberalism today .... but don't want turning this into politics territory ....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, jcam_44 said:

Is low balling not bad faith then? Or is that just good negotiating? It all depends on the side of the negotiation you’re on. 

That’s good negotiating. If I start out at a high price, it’s now on the table. It’s a floor I can’t go below so I start out low knowing I have to go up at some point. I’m sure MLB has a number in mind. If I was negotiating a price for a product I would not start out at the number I wanted to get to but give myself wiggle room so that I could eventually agree to a number closer to where I wanted to end up all along. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Brad said:

That’s good negotiating. If I start out at a high price, it’s now on the table. It’s a floor I can’t go below so I start out low knowing I have to go up at some point. I’m sure MLB has a number in mind. If I was negotiating a price for a product I would not start out at the number I wanted to get to but give myself wiggle room so that I could eventually agree to a number closer to where I wanted to end up all along. 

that’s good negotiating depending on the side you’re on. There isn’t only one side of negotiating and if the other side is considered the “enemy” as the owners view the MLBPA then you start on the wrong foot to start. The problem is, in my opinion, the workforce should be viewed as a partner and not a product. Again, I’m pro-union so I find it offensive to be low balled, where you believe a low floor must be set. I view labor and product two vastly different needs, where it sounds like you view product and labor the same, thus negotiations are the same. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...