MLB Lockout Thread

[bleed orange and Black]

Anyone think that MLB could resort to replacement players again like in one of the previous strikes???

[NCRaven]

The MLBPA fed their strike fund by withholding royalties from video game maker, playing card companies and the like.  Each player can request a stipend up to $15,000 per month.  It's expected that the wealthier players will not draw on the fund.

[Bahama O's Fan]

11 minutes ago, bleed orange and Black said:

Anyone think that MLB could resort to replacement players again like in one of the previous strikes???

How would that work? They would put out the "rules" for playing (essentially their version of a CBA) and invite anyone to come try out to play under those conditions? Maybe I better oil up my old glove. 

[NCRaven]

I believe that scabs were used during a strike, not a lookout.  If they open the gates to play games, then players under contract would have every right to report and get paid.  And, if owners refused to sign free agents, they could face legal action for collusion.  Again.

[OsFanSinceThe80s]

5 minutes ago, Bahama O's Fan said:

How would that work? They would put out the "rules" for playing (essentially their version of a CBA) and invite anyone to come try out to play under those conditions? Maybe I better oil up my old glove. 

I'm going to learn how to throw a knuckleball. I don't see a repeat of 1995 where the owners move ahead with replacement players...but never rule out stupid moves when it comes to professional sports leagues. 

[DrungoHazewood]

2 hours ago, MarCakes21 said:

I'm a bit confused in general by this concept, mainly because its the MLB and not a typical fortune 500.  But shouldn't the Commissioner, while hired by the owners (ie the Board), be there to represent both the players and the owners? 

Wouldn't that be nice?  Faye Vincent is the only commissioner in many decades to kinda, sorta act that way and he was very quickly dispatched and replaced by Bud Selig, who wasn't just a rep of the owners but an actual owner.

The reality is that there is no one looking out for the game.  The commish represents the current owners, the head of the MLBPA the players, and nobody really represents the fans, the minor leaguers, the game of baseball, or the taxpayers' interest in the game.

[DrungoHazewood]

39 minutes ago, NCRaven said:

I believe that scabs were used during a strike, not a lookout.  If they open the gates to play games, then players under contract would have every right to report and get paid.  And, if owners refused to sign free agents, they could face legal action for collusion.  Again.

Right, can't cross a picket line if there's no strike.  It's a lockout. There will be no replacement players unless some major things change.

[Frobby]

3 hours ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Manfred was hired by the owners to be the figurehead for their positions.  If most of them didn't like what he was saying or doing they'd replace him. 

Just ask Fay Vincent.  

[wildcard]

4 hours ago, Frobby said:

Honestly, why should the players bear the majority of the burden on this issue? The rich owners want to limit the amount of revenue sharing as a means to improve competitiveness, by forcing the players to accept spending disincentives.   The players want to limit spending disincentives as a mechanism to ensure competitiveness, by forcing the owners to do more revenue sharing.   I don’t see why “the players need to be realistic.”   The lion’s share of the burden of maintaining competitiveness should be on the owners.  They’re the ones who benefit most if fan interest is high all over the league rather than only in a few big markets.  

I totally agree if all the players want is to be employees paid at the highest rate they can be paid.   But if you listen to the players press conference that is not what they are saying.   The say they want a say in everything because they care about the game as much as anyone.    Make up your mind players.   

Either you are just employees going for the highest dollar or you are concerned about the competitiveness of the game in which case why are you trying to widen the gap between the low revenue teams and the high revenue team competitiveness by wanting to raise the luxury tax.

The players need to decide who they are because right now they are talking out of both sides of their mouths.

I agree the owners are the main one to be responsible for competitiveness and thus the luxury tax level.  But the players  want to drive the luxury tax level without owning up to any responibility for the keep the game competitive.   Its disingenuous.

I want you to listen to the players press conference and then tell me what you think.   

[interloper]

4 hours ago, eddie83 said:

Manfred for all his faults is a scapegoat. It’s about what the majority of owners want. 

I don't care man. Guy chuckled it up in that press conference. He's an evil POS. At this point I would support a strike if the owners continue down this road. Burn it all down. This PA has the guts and intelligence and media savvy to do it. Remake the game for the future players. The owners and Rob can suck my farts. 

 

[Frobby]

8 minutes ago, wildcard said:

I totally agree if all the players want is to be employees paid at the highest rate they can be paid.   But if you listen to the players press conference that is not what they are saying.   The say they want a say in everything because they care about the game as much as anyone.    Make up your mind players.   

Either you are just employees going for the highest dollar or you are concerned about the competitiveness of the game in which case why are you trying to widen the gap between the low revenue teams and the high revenue team competitiveness by wanting to raise the luxury tax.

The players need to decide who they are because right now they are talking out of both sides of their mouths.

I agree the owners are the main one to be responsible for competitiveness and thus the luxury tax level.  But the players  want to drive the luxury tax level without owning up to any responibility for the keep the game competitive.   Its disingenuous.

Let’s not kid ourselves.   The players want to make as much money as possible.   In some respects that coincides with wanting a more competitive league (minimum floors, no tanking), in some cases it doesn’t (luxury tax).    So they’ll play the “good for the game” card when it works in their favor, ignore it when it doesn’t.   And the owners do the same exact thing.   

The difference, as I see it, is most players have short careers, and even the rare minority don’t last past 15-20 years.  Owners will own their teams a long time.  Dwindling interest in the game hurts the current owners more than it hurts the current players.   It’s the owners who need to figure out ways to make the league more competitive, and they have more incentive to sacrifice short term profit maximization than the players do.  They can’t expect the players to solve their problem for them.  
 

[Tony-OH]

23 hours ago, Sports Guy said:

Manfred just said the last 5 years of revenue have been hurt because of the pandemic.  I know it’s felt like forever but I’m pretty sure the pandemic isn’t 5 years old.

The one thing I think we all can agree to is Manfred is the lead clown of the clown show!

[LookinUp]

7 hours ago, Camden_yardbird said:

My point is this.  Risk is not shared across teams.  The MLB system is set up so that some teams can take risks that other teams just can't.  I dont think that is a refutable to anyone as educated as this board is, we all recognize it.  And in that way, I would say the threshold for "properly run" is very different for the Orioles than it is the Yankees, or Dodgers, or any of many other teams that bat away their failed risky contracts with enormous resources.

Just wanted to point out that this above paragraph, to me, was excellent.

Also, in response to many other posts, I wanted to say that I'm not convinced that a level playing field is better for either the owners or the players.

MLB gets more revenue from the Yankees going to the World Series, by far, than just about anything. That's what they want. It hurts them to have Tampa play the Diamondbacks or something like that.

So while a level playing field is a really romantic thing to root for, I think you're fooling yourself if you think that's the goal of either side even if you think that's the fundamental problem with the number of fans watching. 

[Can_of_corn]

4 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

The one thing I think we all can agree to is Manfred is the lead clown of the clown show!

I don't think I'm alone in thinking that the MLBPA should have replaced Tony Clark after he got pantsed in the last CBA.

[NCRaven]

8 minutes ago, Tony-OH said:

The one thing I think we all can agree to is Manfred is the lead clown of the clown show!

He's incredibly awkward in public.  He's also increased owners' revenue by $billions throughout his tenure and that's all that matters.  The old days of "in the best interests of baseball" are long gone.