No Joy in Mudville, No CBA Deal in Jupiter, and No Opening Day on March 31

© Jayne Kamin-Oncea-USA TODAY Sports

So much for commissioner Rob Manfred’s stated desire to avoid a “disastrous outcome,” and so much for the urgency of the owners’ “defensive” lockout, which was supposed to jumpstart negotiations towards a new collective bargaining agreement — albeit in a most curious manner, with 43 days of radio silence and just one formal proposal to the players over a 71-day span. On Tuesday evening, the commissioner canceled the first two series of the regular season — a total of 91 games, constituting five to seven for each team — after the players union and the owners failed to meet his artificially-imposed deadline for a new CBA in time to preserve the season’s scheduled opening on March 31.

“I had hoped against hope I wouldn’t have to have this press conference where I am going to cancel some regular season games,” said Manfred on Tuesday. Citing the two sides meeting in Jupiter, Florida for nine straight days, he added, “I want to assure our fans that our failure to reach an agreement was not due to a lack of effort by either party.”

If indeed those games are lost, they would be the first regular season games missed due to a work stoppage since the 1994-95 players’ strike, and the first due to a lockout by the owners. When the owners locked the players out of spring training for 32 days in 1990, the resulting settlement included an Opening Day pushed back by a week, a season end date extended by three days, and all but two of the 26 teams playing 162 games. The 91 games would instantly leapfrog the 86 missed at the start of the 1972 season due to a players’ strike. As in that year, Manfred has said that games won’t be made up, even if that means competitors playing uneven numbers of games — a situation that helped to decide the AL East that year, with the Tigers (86-70) finishing half a game ahead of the Red Sox (85-70).

It’s worth reiterating that any attempt to reduce the number of games below 162 and thus salaries, service time (including eligibility for free agency), and bonuses would be subject to collective bargaining as well, opening a can of worms that could affect both sides’ positions on other issues; as we saw in 2020, this is not a simple matter. As MLBPA chief negotiator Bruce Meyer said during the union’s press conference on Tuesday, “We would be asking for compensation and/or to have those (canceled) games rescheduled.” The union has previously indicated that if games were canceled, it might not agree to expanded playoffs for 2022.

While there was some optimism on Tuesday morning following a 16 1/2-hour marathon negotiating session and an extension of Manfred’s original February 28 deadline, over the course of the day it became clear that the gaps between the league and the union regarding core economic issues such as the Competitive Balance Tax thresholds, the league minimum salary, and the pre-arbitration bonus pool had not been closed to the union’s satisfaction. The owners declared that they would make their “best offer” before the new 5 pm ET deadline, but that offer was swiftly and unanimously rejected by the players, raising the specter of an uglier and more complicated situation.

During his press conference, Manfred was careful in characterizing the owners’ previous offer given the implications it has in collective bargaining, saying, “We never used the phrase “last, best final offer” with the union. We said it was our best offer prior to the deadline to cancel games. Our negotiations are deadlocked right now… but that’s different than using the legal term ‘impasse,’ and I’m not going to do that right now.”

Meyer disputed Manfred’s claim on the language, though he made clear that he understood “best and final” to be in relation to today’s deadline, rather than indication that the league was done bargaining. “I assume they’re not done negotiating,” he said. “I hope they’re not done negotiating, they have a legal obligation to negotiate. So I assume it’s not ‘best and final’ forever.”

You Aren't a FanGraphs Member
It looks like you aren't yet a FanGraphs Member (or aren't logged in). We aren't mad, just disappointed. We get it. You want to read this article. But before we let you get back to it, we'd like to point out a few of the good reasons why you should become a Member. 1. Ad Free viewing! We won't bug you with this ad, or any other. 2. Unlimited articles! Non-Members only get to read 10 free articles a month. Members never get cut off. 3. Dark mode and Classic mode! 4. Custom player page dashboards! Choose the player cards you want, in the order you want them. 5. One-click data exports! Export our projections and leaderboards for your personal projects. 6. Remove the photos on the home page! (Honestly, this doesn't sound so great to us, but some people wanted it, and we like to give our Members what they want.) 7. Even more Steamer projections! We have handedness, percentile, and context neutral projections available for Members only. 8. Get FanGraphs Walk-Off, a customized year end review! Find out exactly how you used FanGraphs this year, and how that compares to other Members. Don't be a victim of FOMO. 9. A weekly mailbag column, exclusively for Members. 10. Help support FanGraphs and our entire staff! Our Members provide us with critical resources to improve the site and deliver new features! We hope you'll consider a Membership today, for yourself or as a gift! And we realize this has been an awfully long sales pitch, so we've also removed all the other ads in this article. We didn't want to overdo it. In case you didn't read all that, here's the short version. Membership includes:
✓Ad-free browsing
✓Unlimited FanGraphs & RotoGraphs articles
✓Historical & platoon projections
✓Leaderboard & player-page stat heatmaps
✓One-click data exports
✓Customizable player-page dashboards
✓Dark & Classic site modes
✓Weekly Members-only mailbag
✓FanGraphs Walk-Off, your year in review
✓Optional homepage photo removal
✓Gift articles to non-Members
✓Full postseason coverage

Calling Tuesday a “sad day” and citing a need for “significant improvements” in the CBA, MLBPA executive director Tony Clark pointed to the owners’ 43-day delay in starting negotiations as causing difficulty. Via the Washington Post’s Chelsea Janes:

“You understand that you need as much time as possible to work through [the changes you want made],” Clark said. “…It’s why we stood ready for six weeks after the lockout on December 1, ready to have a discussion. It is remarkably interesting against the backdrop of the things that needed to be worked through to find ourselves on February 28th and the course of the last week … working through the issues that needed to be, could have been and should have been discussed in more depth much earlier than they were.”

In its statement, the MLB Players Association said it is “not surprised” by the outcome, and accused the owners of trying to break the union:

So what happened, given that the framework for a deal appeared to have emerged as of Tuesday morning? Quite simply, while the owners were able to leak the major details of their proposal from the wee hours of Tuesday morning, the two sides packed up for the night without the players offering a counterproposal that illustrated just how far apart they still were. Subsequently, the owners offered spin that on Tuesday the MLBPA had taken “a decidedly different tone” that halted momentum towards a deal, a characterization the players disputed:

While it’s unclear what happens next, here’s where the two sides landed on the major issues in their most recent proposals.

Minimum Salary

Comparatively speaking, the two sides weren’t miles apart after Tuesday’s exchanges, with the owners increasing their offer to a starting point of $700,000 for 2022 (up 22.7% from last year’s $570,500) and growing by $10,000 a year, and the players decreasing their offer to a starting point of $725,000 (a 27.1% increase from last year) and growing by $20,000 per year. Here’s a more detailed breakdown that includes a look back at the minimums from the past two CBAs:

MLB Minimum Salaries
Year Minimum ($K) Annual Change
2012 $480.0 15.9%
2013 $490.0 2.1%
2014 $500.0 2.0%
2015 $507.5 1.5%
2016 $507.5 0.0%
2017 $535.0 5.4%
2018 $545.0 1.9%
2019 $555.0 1.8%
2020 $563.5 1.5%
2021 $570.5 1.2%
MLB 2/27
2022 $640.0 12.2%
2023 $650.0 1.6%
2024 $660.0 1.5%
2025 $670.0 1.5%
2026 $680.0 1.5%
MLB 3/1 (Early AM)
2022 $675.0 18.3%
2023 $685.0 1.5%
2024 $695.0 1.5%
2025 $705.0 1.4%
2026 $715.0 1.4%
MLB 3/1 (Final Pre-Deadline Proposal)
2022 $700.0 22.7%
2023 $710.0 1.4%
2024 $720.0 1.4%
2025 $730.0 1.4%
2026 $740.0 1.4%
MLBPA 2/27
2022 $775.0 35.8%
2023 $805.0 3.9%
2024 $835.0 3.7%
2025 $865.0 3.6%
2026 $895.0 3.5%
MLBPA 3/1
2022 $725.0 27.1%
2023 $745.0 2.8%
2024 $765.0 2.7%
2025 $785.0 2.6%
2026 $805.0 2.5%

Both proposals still leave the minimum salary below those of the NBA ($925,258) and NHL ($750,000), while being ahead of the rookie minimum for the NFL ($660,000), though not its second-year minimum ($780,000). MLB is more reliant upon minimum-salary labor than those other sports; per Ben Clemens, last year 47% of all service time went to players making the minimum salary.

Competitive Balance Tax Threshold

On this issue, which still appears to be central to the union’s goals, the owners did not revise their early-morning offer, which includes thresholds that run from $220 million in 2022 (a gain of 2.8% relative to last year) to $230 million in ’26 (a gain of just 4.5% over the ensuing four years) and marginal tax rates in line with the previous deal (20% on the first $20 million over the threshold, 32% on the next $20 million, and 62.5% on anything above $40 million). The players lowered their proposed threshold to $238 million for 2022 (down $7 million from previous proposals but a 13.3% increase on 2021), growing to $263 million for ’26 ($10 million lower than their previous proposals but a gain of 11.4% over the ensuing four years):

Competitive Balance Tax Thresholds
Year Threshold ($Mil) Annual Change
2012 $178 0.0%
2013 $178 0.0%
2014 $189 6.2%
2015 $189 0.0%
2016 $189 0.0%
2017 $195 3.2%
2018 $197 1.0%
2019 $206 4.6%
2020 $208 1.0%
2021 $210 1.0%
MLB 2/27 Proposal
2022 $214 1.9%
2023 $215 0.5%
2024 $216 0.5%
2025 $218 0.9%
2026 $222 1.8%
MLB 3/1 Proposal
2022 $220 4.8%
2023 $220 0.0%
2024 $220 0.0%
2025 $224 1.8%
2026 $230 2.7%
MLBPA 2/27 Proposal
2022 $245 16.70%
2023 $250 2.0%
2024 $257 2.8%
2025 $264 2.7%
2026 $273 3.4%
MLBPA 3/1 Proposal
2022 $238 13.3%
2023 $244 2.5%
2024 $250 2.5%
2025 $256 2.4%
2026 $263 2.7%

As of Tuesday morning, the two sides appeared to be in agreement regarding marginal tax rates, retaining the structure from the expired CBA (20% on the first $20 million over the threshold, 32% on the next $20 million, and 62.5% on anything above $40 million). It’s not clear whether this iteration of the tax structure would retain the last CBA’s repeater penalties (MLB’s previous proposals had dropped it), or whether the league’s current proposal has draft-pick penalties. The players’ proposals have not included them, but the owners’ recent proposals included a second-round pick lost by teams that go over by $20 million to $40 million and a first-round pick by those over by $40 million or more.

Pre-Arbitration Bonus Pool

The owners’ final offer on Tuesday was to contribute $30 million to the bonus pool, up $5 million from Tuesday morning’s offer, while the players came down from $115 million to $85 million. It’s not clear at the moment how many players are covered by each side’s proposals, but as of last week, the owners’ plan covered just 30 players, while the players’ plan had grown to cover 150 players.

Arbitration Eligibility

Initially, the union sought to make every player with at least two years of service time eligible for arbitration, up from the 22% eligible via the Super Two system since 2013. In last week’s proposal, the union lowered that to 75% of all players with between two and three years of service time, coupling it with an increase to their minimum salary and pre-arbitration bonus pool offers, and over the weekend they came down to 35%. As of Tuesday morning, they reportedly were willing to dial back to 22% — a number off which the league steadfastly refused to move — “if [the] rest of [the] numbers work out.”

[narrator voice] The rest of the numbers did not work out.

Playoff Structure

While the owners have pushed for an expansion of the playoff field from 10 teams to 14, the players held the line at 12, and as of Tuesday morning, the two sides appeared to be going forward with the latter number. Via ESPN’s Buster Olney, the top two teams in each league would get first-round byes, with the other four teams, including the third-best division winner, playing best-of-three series. It’s unclear whether that third division winner would get any additional incentive to win the division rather than merely eking out a playoff spot as a Wild Card, or any advantage to distinguish it from the Wild Card teams in the subsequent series, such as a “ghost win” that effectively gives it a one-game-to-none advantage, a practice used in the first round of KBO postseason series.

Via the New York Post’s Andrew Marchand, the gap between the 14- and 12-team formats amounts to only a $15 million difference in what ESPN has offered the league ($100 million for a 14-team format, $85 million for a 12-team one), a very small amount on top of a seven-year, $450 million package for Sunday Night Baseball and select regular season games. It’s telling that the $15 million dollar gap was less than the one between the two bonus pool alternatives that had previously been proposed by MLB based upon the size of the playoffs, to say nothing of the two minimum salary options within that plan:

Draft Lottery

Via MLB.com’s Mark Feinsand, the owners’ proposal to make it more difficult for teams to tank and then secure top draft picks put the first five picks into the lottery, with revenue-sharing status factored in as well:

Last week, the players proposed including the first seven picks within a system that accounted not only for revenue sharing but also market size:

Additionally, prior to the deadline, the two sides had agreed on a universal designated hitter, and on the number of times a player can be optioned during a season (five). They had not yet agreed regarding an international draft, changes to revenue sharing, on-uniform advertising, service-time manipulation, and the amount of time needed to notify the players of rule changes. MLB Trade Rumors’ Tim Dierkes has summarized each side’s position on those matters here.

As for where the talks go from here, Clark said in his press conference, “We’re willing to stay here and have the conversation tomorrow.” For now, there’s no baseball, and there won’t be any for awhile, a fact that’s still on the owners. Manfred now joins a very small fraternity of commissioners who have presided over games lost to work stoppages that includes Bowie Kuhn and Bud Selig.

“The reason we are not playing is simple,” said Clark. “A lockout is the ultimate economic weapon. In a $10 billion industry, the owners have decided to use this weapon against the greatest asset they have: the players.”





Brooklyn-based Jay Jaffe is a senior writer for FanGraphs, the author of The Cooperstown Casebook (Thomas Dunne Books, 2017) and the creator of the JAWS (Jaffe WAR Score) metric for Hall of Fame analysis. He founded the Futility Infielder website (2001), was a columnist for Baseball Prospectus (2005-2012) and a contributing writer for Sports Illustrated (2012-2018). He has been a recurring guest on MLB Network and a member of the BBWAA since 2011, and a Hall of Fame voter since 2021. Follow him on BlueSky @jayjaffe.bsky.social.

73 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Glevin
4 years ago

I love baseball so much but hate MLB with a passion. Absolutely ruining a magnificent game because a bunch of billionaires want to squeeze another few hundred thousands of dollars a year.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
4 years ago
Reply to  Glevin

It’s amazing how they’ve managed to even sink lower than my low, low expectations. I didn’t exactly hate them before, but I do now.

MikeSMember since 2020
4 years ago
Reply to  Glevin

Without running the numbers (which MLB won’t give anyway), I would bet that revenues would continue to grow faster than payrolls under the players offer. I think MLB is (again) negotiating in bad faith and just wants to break the union by canceling enough games and having players miss enough paychecks. They are trying to negotiate just enough to prevent another future Supreme Court Justice from legally calling them on their BS.

riffkeyMember since 2021
4 years ago
Reply to  Glevin

I think human greed often increases at higher levels of income. But it lurks inside most every heart, and I wonder if many of us would choose differently – protests aside.For example- let’s pick a number. 80,000 annually. Would we say no to an increase for the benefit of the minimum wage worker in our company? Maybe not. But only if we made 180,000, then we would decline? Or would we?This in no way justifies the greed and power plays of the owners, but all we have control over is the generosity or lack thereof our own lives.

Last edited 4 years ago by riffkey
MTfor42Member since 2025
4 years ago

***looks at picture of Manfred***
“That’s a clown commissioner Bro”

MLB said they have fans interest in mind yet, they’re cancelling games, ie the only thing fans really want. Absurdity knows no bounds. Shrinking the draft, contracting minor leagues, cancelling regular season games? Done by people who “love baseball”? They love their state sanctioned Monopoly and not paying minor leaguers minimum wage.

If ROI on a baseball team doesn’t get a better return than the stockmarket, why does an insurance company (Guggenheim: Dodgers) and two communications company’s Rogers:Blue Jays and Liberty Media:Braves) own teams? Because Manfred is lying right through the teeth in his chump mug face.

A raise to account for inflation is the miny any working person should get… The very best 1200 baseball players on the planet, who by playing the game at an elite level, which is the genesis of the entire ~$9 billion MLb revenue, are justified in demanding more than an inflation adjustment to compensation.

SolitaireMember since 2020
4 years ago
Reply to  MTfor42

If Manfred had been secretly trying to make baseball less popular the last couple years, what would he have done differently?

MTfor42Member since 2025
4 years ago
Reply to  Solitaire

Advertising on based and uniforms. They’ll look like NASCAR at some point. As a capitulating Yes Man to the owners, I’m sure it wouldn’t be hard to imagine other contrivances.

I just read an article about the NFL having a game in Germany. Concerning Baseball, the absence of efforts like that is concerning. Sure they had MLB in Australia and Japan (and I think London was in the works before COVID). But there’s two pipelines MLB should worry about 1) adding new fans and 2) adding new players. Their cost control methods are damaging #2. And this toxic crap recently will counteract whatever has been done to help with #1.

PhilMember since 2016
4 years ago
Reply to  MTfor42

The Yankees and Red Sox played in London in 2019. I know, I was at the first game – and was very excited as a British baseball fan who had seen one game in Toronto as a child on a family holiday to Canada.

This news is just depressing – and expected.

vslykeMember since 2020
4 years ago

Surely this is supposed to be $10 billion?

“The reason we are not playing is simple,” said Clark. “A lockout is the ultimate economic weapon. In a $10 million industry, the owners have decided to use this weapon against the greatest asset they have: the players.”

GTOBalance
4 years ago

I don’t know much about past CBA negotiations in other leagues, but to me the numbers in the CBT and minimum salary numbers alone seem WILDLY far apart. Which means if they split the difference, neither side would be anywhere near happy. Which then says to me this could last a long while.

The last time a major pro league missed significant games I can remember is the NHL lockout in 04, and that basically cratered the league for seemingly 15+ years. Only now is the NHL back on ESPN. I as a sports fan certainty stopped watching hockey for many years.

soddingjunkmailMember since 2016
4 years ago
Reply to  GTOBalance

The minimum salary thing seems like peanuts to me.

owners increasing their offer to a starting point of $700,000 for 2022 (up 22.7% from last year’s $570,500) and growing by $10,000 a year, and the players decreasing their offer to a starting point of $725,000 (a 27.1% increase from last year) and growing by $20,000 per year.

An initial difference of $25k, escalating to 55k?

Assuming 10 minimum players on a team (let’s make the math easy and enjoy ourselves), that’s an initial annual difference of a quarter million per year per team, growing to half a million.

Rounding error.

Should be super easy to split the difference and move on here.

Last edited 4 years ago by soddingjunkmail
cowdiscipleMember since 2016
4 years ago

It’s a rounding error to the owners and insignificant compared to the total numbers involved, but it isn’t to the half of the union that makes the minimum.

SyndergaardengnomesMember since 2020
4 years ago

Except it’s a rounding error to the owners, and life changing money to the players involved.

It’s the definition of “bad faith” negotiating, when you’re fighting over what would be a minimal impact to yourself, and a gigantic gain for the other party, and you’re not making concessions there.

cowdiscipleMember since 2016
4 years ago

The low minimum does give the owners more leverage in negotiating below market extensions with pre-arb players, so it’s significant to the owners in that sense.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
4 years ago

Well, it’s not bad faith, exactly. You can be negotiating in good faith and still be a miser. The bad faith stuff is because they just decided they wouldn’t negotiate until it was time to cancel games to try and break the union.

soddingjunkmailMember since 2016
4 years ago

The difference between $700k and $725k is life changing money? Really?

FrancoeursteinMember since 2020
4 years ago

I don’t understand that argument. Yes, I’m on the players side, but the minimum salary is already absolutely life-changing money.

sockpirateMember since 2022
4 years ago

So many of us just want to watch baseball. So so many of us want an agreement, but so far MLB has demonstrated the negotiation is not about compromise. It is simply about preserving an arrangement that favors ownership. An unwillingness to continue negotiations gives us insight in to MLB’s main interest which is certainly not the game of baseball. The NFL had Robert Kraft step forward and bring about the end of their impasse. Does baseball possess an owner who cares about the game and will step in and get the parties back to the table?

synco
4 years ago

Ouch, the minimum salary is lower than the freaking NHL? That’s nuts.

MikeD
4 years ago
Reply to  synco

I saw that the other day and was equally surprised. MLB ranks only behind the NFL is revenue compared to all sports leagues in the world.

Last edited 4 years ago by MikeD
MikeD
4 years ago

I support the MLBPA.

Dmjn53
4 years ago
Reply to  MikeD

brave

SolitaireMember since 2020
4 years ago

Just astonishing levels of greed and entitlement from the owners. They could increase their profit by making efforts to expand baseball’s popularity and thus grow the entire pie from which they already get a huge slice. Instead, they’ve chosen to harm baseball’s popularity time and again, shrink the pie, and claim a larger slice. It’s not enough that they get insultingly rich; they also object to anyone else getting a fraction as rich.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
4 years ago
Reply to  Solitaire

This is the most amazing thing about MLB’s position in all this. They seem to show no interest at all in capturing more eyeballs, getting more fans to the game, and converting new people to baseball fans. The entire operation is designed to suck as much money as possible out of the current fans, even if it means losing ground in the mid and long term. They’re all about collecting rents and not about selling their product. MLB could do with a lot more entrepreneurial spirit and a lot less of just passively waiting for the money to roll in.

bernardgilkeyhasaposseMember since 2019
4 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

They absolutely would trade a smaller “pie” for complete control.

drewsylvaniaMember since 2019🏆 MVP
4 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

Think they’re trying to kill the league? I do. YesMan’s comments have made that clear for me.

AlbyMember since 2017
4 years ago

Needless displays of power politics by billionaires seem to be all the rage these days, from Ukraine to the USA’s fields of dreams.

idliaminMember since 2024
4 years ago

Former commissioner Fay Vincent has long contended that labor strife in MLB over the past several decades has been entirely the fault of the owners, ever since they engaged in collusion, which he pointedly characterized as outright theft from the players. Forgive my language, but the owners are rank bastards, and every time a fan refers to the players as “selfish millionaires,” a plutocrat steals an angel’s wings—probably Shohei Ohtani’s, because everybody likes him.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
4 years ago

It seems obvious now that the league’s whole thing was to jam the players by not negotiating until the last minute, with the hope that the threat of missing game checks would force them to surrender. At this point, I don’t think there’s anything I would trust that comes out of their camp.

I mean, the MLBPA’s last proposal was, in my view, a win for the owners–they get playoff expansion without any real structural changes in favor of the players, just basic increases that you might expect in a collective bargaining agreement. But they want to “win”, whatever that means, which means everyone else loses.

pepper69funMember since 2020
4 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

Correct. The owners believe they can break the union. It’s about power.

MikeSMember since 2020
4 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

They aren’t even getting basic increases. The yearly escalators are probably lower than COLA, inflation, and revenue growth.

cowdiscipleMember since 2016
4 years ago
Reply to  MikeS

I was pretty shocked at how low the players’ initial ask was for CBT increases and the minimum salary. Their original ask was pretty much just for cost of living increases since the last CBA, and more or less the minimum that the union should be willing to accept IMO. It doesn’t leave them much room to offer concessions.

They had some big asks regarding changes to service time structures that they dropped unilaterally pretty quickly without getting any concessions from the owners.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
4 years ago

“Hegel remarks somewhere that all baseball labor stoppages occur, as it were, twice. He has forgotten to add: the first time as tragedy, the second as farce.”

(I have, uh, slightly edited it)

dozingoffdadMember since 2021
4 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

The Eighteenth Brumaire of Rob Manfred

tomhaywood
4 years ago

Be careful baseball, or you might wake up one day and find that no one cares anymore.

There is a lot of competition for our attention these days.

drewsylvaniaMember since 2019🏆 MVP
4 years ago
Reply to  tomhaywood

And, on a greater level, we are so used to having to adapt, thanks to the pandemic. We went through a year of incredible uncertainty about our sports teams, which made us accept *not* having them for a long while because we had to.

MLB is gravely underestimating that muscle we built in 2020.

pepper69funMember since 2020
4 years ago

Players experience all the negatives of a salary cap while missing out on the one true advantage. A cap would identify and lock in their percentage of revenue. When revenues rise, then the cap rises and salaries rise. Currently, whenever revenues rise, the players share of financial pie declines. I am sure the owners are well aware of this fact.

stockhfcrx2Member since 2019
4 years ago

Last couple weeks have made me wonder if I would watch baseball this year if not for my 3 ottoneu teams, as sad as that is to think. Every decision by MLB pushes me further away from my lifelong love of baseball. I’ve already lost my passion for the cubs thanks to their new ownership groups greed, I worry that my love of baseball in general will suffer the same fate. My long awaited copy of gran tursimo 7 is coming Friday, maybe that’s the start of a new hobby that will push baseball/sports in general out of my life completely. Probably not but it’s pretty sad that it’s even a consideration. #eattherich

PC1970Member since 2024
4 years ago
Reply to  stockhfcrx2

Add in the changes to the game itself- slow game times with incessant standing around, less actual action due to TTO, more K’s/BB’s, shuttling unknown players in & out of AAA all year long, etc..& man, they are doing everything they can do kill the golden goose.

Jason BMember since 2017
4 years ago
Reply to  stockhfcrx2

But hey, with 26 playoff teams they are bound to see the postseason!

Psychic... Powerless...
4 years ago
Reply to  stockhfcrx2

RE: Cubs owners. Also, their actions seem to indicate that they consider suspected PED use worse than domestic abuse.

Highway61Member
4 years ago

Not sure I can add anything more that hasn’t been said. I love baseball, too, but hate Major League Business. And like many have pointed out, it’s like MLB is purposefully trying to drive me away. It was bad enough they took away the minor league team from my town and now they’re taking it all away. And then lie about working hard to reach an agreement and lie about caring about the fans…caring about our money, sure. I’m not fan of boycotts as usually the people getting hurt are the people at the bottom. But I wish there was a way to send a message, like empty stadiums on Opening Day or opening week or whatever…again, unlikely, but would send a message. I’m just frustrated and ranting. I should get back to work…

LightenUpFGMember since 2018
4 years ago

The owners thinks the fans are idiots, because they think we’ll believe any kind of ‘woe is us’ statement they release, and suckers, because they think we’ll just go back to the ballparks and their high ticket prices whenever this is over. They may find that they are the idiots and suckers soon enough.

Kevbot034
4 years ago

I hurt myself today…to see if I still feel…

🙁

ZonkMember since 2016
4 years ago

Do April games lose money for the owners? Because I am trying to understand why some (or all) owners seem perfectly willing to lose April games. I can’t otherwise explain the lack of urgency by MLB

PC1970Member since 2024
4 years ago
Reply to  Zonk

I’ll bet the Northern teams do, due to bad weather.

Add in season just started so no urgency to go to a game when there is 5 more months to go (with many games in better weather to come), school is still going so weeknights are bad for parents, etc.

Chili Davis Eyes
4 years ago
Reply to  Zonk

I think 2020 showed that what the owners really care about is TV money. The 2020 negotiations also seem to have given them the idea that they can get something they want (expanded playoff TV$) by “conceding” something that was going to happen anyway (regular season games). Sort of a “nice national pastime you have there, shame if something happened to it” negotiating strategy.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
4 years ago
Reply to  Zonk

On average, no, I don’t think so. Someone actually has done a monthly analysis and you can download the data yourself and mess around with it if you want. The analysis is available if you google “Game Attendance in Major League Baseball” and “Saramarie Puzzanghera”.

If you scroll down to % capacity by month per venue, there does seem to be a very small increase in July at about half of the stadiums, and in some cases it builds up a bit as the season goes on. But it’s really hard to say that the Nationals or Blue Jays lose money when 60% of their stadium is full in April vs 80% full in July, and I think those are the biggest shifts.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
4 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

538 calculated out that teams get about a million dollars per game and pay out $700K in expenses, on average (my math may be off, please correct if wrong).

If a team brings in a million dollars per game in stadium-experience-revenue (tickets, concessions, parking, etc) when their stadium is 70% full, and they’re paying out $700K, we’d expect the amount brought in to change as fewer fans show up. But a shift from 70% to 60% is still 85% of the amount. You have to assume that a team is both experiencing a shift that large and is operating on a very thin margin to not turn a profit. I don’t think that’s feasible; the Blue Jays and Nationals are money machines–the teams that operate on shoestring budgets don’t see nearly as big a shift because it’s just low all year round.

But if my calculations based off the 538 numbers are correct (they may not), it does show that the profit margin is considerably less earlier in the season for a handful of teams than later. And we know the owners love putting a premium on things that have big profit margins, because they’ve been going hard for expanded playoffs and that’s where the biggest margins are for (likely) most teams.

Brian547Member since 2019
4 years ago

I know that these must be terrible times to be running a baseball website. This community has both spawned joy for countless people but also provided a stepping stone into the world of real baseball. All because we needed a break during grad school. This is in thanks, and in offer to help if I can. I am fairly litterate (intentional misspelling). Better yet I work for free. I am a Cleveland area native and if ever you need a benign and poorly edited post about the Guardians please let me know. Meg, Dave, Carson, Ben, Jeff, and all the rest my brain is being rude to, THANK YOU!!! You have made my life better. Thank you. 
Cheers,

Brian547Member since 2019
4 years ago
Reply to  Brian547

Also tell Dan I beat him to the Bieber breakout by a year. lol…ZIPS is great but when you see someone with 80 command suddenly throw a 70 slider/curve and tick up 3 mph…. Check the comments for the opening day thread in 2020. This is so self serving. Bash away commentors at me. Fangraphs is still a bastion of goodness in the stupid stupid world.

steveo
4 years ago

One thing I will say is that I thoroughly enjoy that the commenters on this site have switched to being pro player. For a time it was about 50/50, in my estimation. I know most would disagree, but there were a lot of anti-player sentiment during the season on posts about labor negotiations.

Also, I’m very busy and I simply would not watch a 162 game season in which 14 teams get into the playoffs. Even 12 teams is pushing it, honestly, but I think I’d lean towards watching. I love baseball, but there’s no way I could bring myself to caring about a regular season when my team would likely make it every year. I’d just watch highlights or something. There are close to zero stakes. I’d just check the standings or the box scores and see what happened. Then I’d tune in for the post season. At this point in my life I have enough time for two sports, basketball and baseball. I watch basketball because I thoroughly enjoy the product. This is coming from someone who watched around 150 regular season games of my team per year + another 100 games of other teams throughout the year. I don’t really know where I’m going with this comment, but MLB is doing serious damage to the long term health of this sport.

joe_schlabotnik
4 years ago
Reply to  steveo

completely agree. i’d follow the leader boards and check in from time to time, and probably start tuning in for the CS round. In a way its nice! I’ve been really conscious of spending too much time on baseball the last couple years. im a busy guy. maybe its for the best.

WARonEverything
4 years ago

I would love someone to show me how any of the players demands will make the owners pay them more in aggregate. Yes the pre-arb players will get more money – which mean arb eligible players will likely get more money (although maybe a few more are non-tendered and possibly keeping the same or lowering the aggregate arb eligible spend) .

But we all know the owners will just lower their bids for Free Agents or let more average RPs go unsigned. In the end, the teams are just reallocating their budgeted player salary spend and spend as much as they plan on spending. Sure maybe a few ‘rebuilding’ teams who have a greater proportion of pre-arb players might be pushing their overall salary up for the next couple years before they can level set, but even a team like the Pirates could just non-tender guys like Ben Gamel and Chris Stratton and more than even out the min salary cost increase and added cost of the pre-arb bonus pool.

steveo
4 years ago

Exactly this. Even with a 12 team playoff field, teams would spend even less on free agents. Statistics have shown that teams have been spending less per win even in the 10 team format. Also, the owners objection to the CBT is insane when you really think about it. The CBT is just an option to spend money, there’s no compelling anyone to spend money. The owners being so hung up on modest gains on a CBT shows their greed. They don’t even want the option for teams to spend lol.

WARonEverything
4 years ago
Reply to  steveo

right, somehow the owners have made it seem like this is a bigger deal than it actually is – especially when you consider how few teams will hit the CBT no matter where it is. teams make a budget for salaries and sure some will take this into account, but the majority of teams are so far from the ‘cap’ it does not make a difference. It feels like they just want more bargaining chips and making it seem like they are giving so much by raising this a couple million is laughable.

joe_schlabotnik
4 years ago

KG insists in his chat that the owners are fans of baseball. I have a hard time imagining it! Half these teams intentionally suck anyway, now they are just doing everything in their power to protect their ability to remain profitable without putting any effort into it.
Oligarchs! Funny how we pretend they only exist in Russia

joe_schlabotnik
4 years ago

i mean really, imagine it this way: do you think the pirates owner is tuning in to watch his team fail – by design – every night? Do you think marlins ownership cares that its in a permanent tank? I just don’t buy that they are actually fans.
Even the rich teams have obvious limitations to their fandom: the lerners (wealthiest owners in north american sports as of a couple years ago), willingly have passed up on a dynasty, letting bryce, rendon, trea all go. Despite quite vocal desires to stay from 2 of the 3!
Perhaps Steve Cohen (who outside of this simple understandable human quality is otherwise perhaps the most wretched of the owners) is actually a fan. Steinbrenner definitely was.
I think they are fans of power. Which is just the sociopath MO

joe_schlabotnik
4 years ago

never forget that these asshats are the ones who are first ones given the trophy after a team wins the world series. just insane pageantry. this year the winning team should distance themselves from the owner

steveo
4 years ago

I am enjoying that players are finally understanding the economics of baseball and what makes them money. Even Max Scherzer pointed out that the point of the CBT was to discourage break away spending. It’s been a salary cap, essentially. He even hilariously mentioned that proof of this was the Yankees having a lower payroll than the Padres. He’s 100% correct and I was totally shocked to hear it from a player. The CBT needs to be abolished, honestly. The owners would never go for that though.

Mike NMN
4 years ago

One thing should be apparent to everyone…Manfred didn’t have to cancel two series because his self-imposed deadline slipped by one or two days. The point of the cancellation is to inflict economic pain on the players and to have a synthetic bargaining chip. But it also inadvertently reminds people of another factor: The tanking/non-competitive team issue that the Owners don’t want to do anything about because they like the low salaries those teams play. 1st Series (games to be lost). Tanking Pirates play St. Louis, tanking Reds play Braves, tanking Orioles play Rays, tanking (seems like) Marlins play Giants. Remember also that Marlins only play SF 7 times, total. The lost games could have meaning in the standings, including who makes the playoffs. Now, I understand MLB isn’t troubled by that, so long as the money is good, but fans should take note of it.

David Klein
4 years ago

If only mlb was half as good at marketing their players in non lockout times as their are at tearing them down during the lockout. The owners basically leaked to owner friendly writers that Scherzer was a problem child during negotiations.

drewsylvaniaMember since 2019🏆 MVP
4 years ago

Everything out of YesMan’s mouth points to him trying to kill the game. His emblematic moment was “just a piece of metal”.

drewsylvaniaMember since 2019🏆 MVP
4 years ago

Time for a new league.

David Klein
4 years ago
Reply to  drewsylvania

Due to the antitrust it ain’t happening

drewsylvaniaMember since 2019🏆 MVP
4 years ago
Reply to  David Klein

Maybe Congress will revoke.

deuce26
4 years ago

Taking the side of the players is popular and feels good. Because the owners are greedy, power hungry, and would love the break the union. But let us not forget that the MLBPA has shit all over it lowest paid members forever and is now sold out to agents representing the highest paid in their membership. It’s a sad fact that in any labor negotiation, ownership has the ultimate hammer. They own the product. What angers me is that both sides are willing to screw over the fans and minor leaguers in order to line their own pockets even more.

Jason BMember since 2017
4 years ago
Reply to  deuce26

“What angers me is that both sides are willing to screw over the fans and minor leaguers in order to line their own pockets even more.”

This is a bad take. Players know they are the product, have seen their overall compensation go down as revenues and (particularly) franchise values have soared, and are looking for some fair amount of sharing in those gains. I don’t deny that they probably have negotiated to the detriment of their lowest-paid members in previous negotiations but I am willing to recognize that they are trying to right that wrong now.

deuce26
4 years ago
Reply to  Jason B

Players have a legit case as far as sharing increasing revenues. But this has nothing to do with my point that you quoted. Both sides have no problem jacking up ticket prices, concessions, parking, and souvenirs. Neither side shows any concern for the ridiculous compensation that minor leaguers get. This is why is can’t favor one side over the other. They are both in the wrong.

Jason BMember since 2017
4 years ago
Reply to  deuce26

This is again a bad take.

“Both sides have no problem jacking up ticket prices, concessions, parking, and souvenirs.”

Players have zero control over that. Absolutely none whatsoever.

“Neither side shows any concern for the ridiculous compensation that minor leaguers get.”

Again, players have no control over that. They can’t collectively bargain on their behalf as they are not members of their union.

I get the urge to blame both sides here (kinda?), but to the extent there is shared blame it’s like 98/2 or 99/1.

deuce26
4 years ago
Reply to  Jason B

Saying players have no control is a nice talking point, but not factually true. They have to ability to include concern for these issues in the bargaining process, but fail to. It’s obvious that as players angle for higher compensation, this will result in higher prices for fans. MLBPA could insist (during bargaining) that minor leaguers be fairly compensated. It’s too easy to just throw all the blame on the owners (although they deserve a good share of it). Both sides are concerned with their own interests to the exclusion of others.

cregwalkerMember since 2022
4 years ago

Looks like I won’t be watching much MLB this year seeing as there’s no upper limit to the owners’ greed. Perhaps I’ll start trying to devise wRC+ for college baseball.

Jason BMember since 2017
4 years ago

Rob–

To you and the rest of your cabal, WE ARE MOST ASSUREDLY SAYING “BOOOOOOOOOO!”, not Boooo-urns.

That is all.