COVID 19 Roundup: Salary Troubles Ahead
This is the latest installment of a series in which the FanGraphs staff rounds up the latest developments regarding the COVID-19 virus’ effect on baseball.
Owners Seek Salary Cuts
If you were wondering why the talk surrounding fanless games was a bit on the vague side when MLB and the MLBPA came to an agreement on service time issues, you now have your answer. With the prospect of games with no live fans becoming increasingly likely, MLB reportedly wants players to take a pay cut because of lost gate revenues. The players believe the agreement reached last month that would pro-rate salaries for the number of games actually played in 2020 already reflects the possibility of fanless games, while the owners believe the agreement about salaries contained the basic assumption that the games would be of the “normal” variety.
This friction between ownership and player interests can be seen by the latest exchange of public comments by Andrew Cuomo and Scott Boras. Per Ken Rosenthal and Evan Drellich’s report for The Athletic:
The prorated formula Boras references is for a shortened season — a player, for example, would receive half his salary if the schedule consisted of 81 games rather than the customary 162. The agreement also accounts for a canceled season, awarding players a collective advance payment of $170 million over April and May, money they keep if no games are played.
A separate section of the deal, listing the conditions for games to resume, says the commissioner’s office and the union “will discuss in good faith the economic feasibility of playing games in the absence of spectators or at appropriate substitute neutral sites.” Similar phrasing exists in other parts of the agreement as well.
One person with knowledge of the deal said the clause was not intended to signal any willingness by the players to reopen salary discussions. Others said the issue was left undecided, and that the league made it clear to the union that economic adjustments would be necessary if games were played in empty parks.
There’s plenty of time to iron out this issue, but if neither side comes off their position, we might not have a 2020 season even if it becomes feasible to play games. Just speaking for myself, if I’m a player and I’m thinking about granting an additional concession to owners, I’d want to see more direct evidence from the owners’ finances (and not just reported finances) on what the economics look like for fanless games. Ownership has not always acted in good faith in baseball’s labor disputes, so I’d enter these negotiations with a desire to compromise but an unwillingness to easily give MLB or the owners the benefit of the doubt.
Transitioning to Normal
CBS News obtained a document from the White House broadly outlining some of the priorities in re-starting the economy. Ed O’Keefe, a political correspondent for CBS News, reported that President Trump is focused on sports leagues resuming play. The document does outline that social distancing would still be required for sporting events, but it’s not surprising to see reopening sports being a priority on a panel that includes the commissioners of all four major sports.
Los Angeles Sets Requirements for Sports
If normal games with normal crowds become feasible for baseball in 2020, the Dodgers and Angels would have to satisfy the five conditions that Los Angeles mayor Eric Garcetti laid out for large events to resume. Los Angeles is the first baseball city to specifically announce their skepticism to having normal games at all in 2020, but they probably won’t be the last.
Sweet Home, Arizona
If a Florida-Arizona plan becomes necessary and there’s a Florida-related COVID issue — there’s more travel involved in the Grapefruit League than the Cactus League — Arizona governor Doug Ducey expressed a willingness for the state to work with MLB and hold the entire season in Arizona if needed. MLB hasn’t committed to even a Florida-Arizona league yet and is still talking about it as one of several possibilities, but the more backup plans MLB has, the more likely it is that there’s a 2020 season.
Webster Garrison Slowly Recovering
Louisiana has been one of the states hardest hit by the virus. Former A’s infielder and current A’s minor league manager Webster Garrison, a Louisiana-native diagnosed with the virus, was placed on a ventilator in late March. Mechanical ventilators have had mixed results for COVID-19 patients, but after weeks on a ventilator, Garrison has recovered enough to be able to breathe on his own. We’ll take whatever good news we can muster, and this certainly qualifies.
Dan Szymborski is a senior writer for FanGraphs and the developer of the ZiPS projection system. He was a writer for ESPN.com from 2010-2018, a regular guest on a number of radio shows and podcasts, and a voting BBWAA member. He also maintains a terrible Twitter account at @DSzymborski.
“The players believe the agreement reached last month that would pro-rate salaries for the number of games actually played in 2020 already reflects the possibility of fanless games, while the owners believe the agreement about salaries contained the basic assumption that the games would be of the “normal” variety.”
I find it difficult to believe that a bunch of money-conscious individuals who both pay and earn millions of dollars would sit down at a table and NOT discuss this. Did literally no one think of it? Were the owners all super blind and the PA was snickering behind their hands waiting for them to sign the dotted line so they could unleash their secret plot of “Dudes you totally didn’t specify, got you!”? Super weird that no one would bother specifying this.
This reads more like one side or the other moving the goalposts a little bit. Either the owners looked at their finances again and decided they needed to reopen this issue, or the players were well aware that salaries could be put back on the table but are denying that as a negotiating tactic. It should be noted that Boras is not known for being straightforward in statements involving his clients’ money (nor should he be).
If anybody pulled a fast one here, I think it’s the owners. I can believe they put in ambiguous language about good faith discussions knowing that they could use it to reopen negotiations on any issue they wanted.
Yeah, this line: “Ownership has not always acted in good faith in baseball’s labor disputes….” is putting it veeeeery nicely. The owners have been hiding/lying about revenue for years, so their credibility when they now say, “we don’t got munny, we swerz!” is less than zero. Open the books!