NEWSLETTER
When Rob Manfred said on Wednesday that he hoped the players would come off of full prorated pay for this year, that pretty much sealed it that the owners’ latest offer would not be the kind of obvious, sensible offer to get things done (i.e., something like 70 games at full prorated pay, some deferrals if needed, and then all the added stuff MLB wants, like expanded playoffs, extra player participation, etc.).
Sure enough, it’s going to be another cut to salary over a much shorter season than the players requested:
Sources: MLB owners to offer 70-75 game plan https://t.co/JzSXyLUWUH
— Jesse Rogers (@JesseRogersESPN) June 12, 2020
MLB expected make 72-game proposal today to players for more than 80 percent of prorated pay if there’s a postseason. MLB also expected to significantly raise the percent from 50% in the event the postseason has to be canceled.
— Jon Heyman (@JonHeyman) June 12, 2020
MLB has removed the tiered pay system it originally proposed, and raised the % of pay, especially in the event the postseason has to be canceled. But the changes have been incremental, there’s no confidence players will accept and no evidence they’ll move off full prorated pay.
— Jon Heyman (@JonHeyman) June 12, 2020
We will need to see the full details before judging – remember, it’s always a trickle-trickle and you need the full picture to really value things – but on its face, you can see that the owners are reducing the number of games from their last proposal (down to 72 from 76 games), while only slightly increasing the percentage paid (up to 80-85% from 75%). Who wants to guess that the bottom-line dollar totals is more or less the same?
In that case, the owners didn’t actually move much at all on that part of the deal. Instead, perhaps there’s even more playoff money coming (but that’s putting some more of the risk on the players), and as Heyman notes, an increase in the payout rate if the postseason is cancelled (but that means they still get much less than whatever MLB is offering in the event the postseason is cancelled).
The previous offer effectively equated to 57 games’ worth of prorated pay for the players. Just for for whatever it’s worth (and that is very little, given that we need more details), 80% of 72 games is 57.6 games. So, again, without more details, it looks like the owners moved up … one single game after the players came down 25 games. The owners seem to be saying, “Yes, we want more baseball, too! … but we’re not actually going to pay you more than the shortened season we’d rather mandate.”
The players’ last offer was for 89 games at prorated pay (down from 114 – hey, both of those are too long of a season, realistically, and I do acknowledge that), with expanded playoffs that pays out to the owners in the traditional way (i.e., players only get their portion of gate receipts, which might be zero this year). It looked to me like a good faith counter-offer.
We’ll see if this owners’ offer can be characterized that way when more details come out. It doesn’t really look like it initially, and that wouldn’t be a surprise, given that it has long felt like the goal for most owners was to get to a point where they “have” to mandate a shortened season. Reportedly, the deadline for that is next week.
I’ll roll out updates as appropriate.
UPDATE: Pretty much looks like what you’d expect, based on the above, though we still need a lot more detail to evaluate:
The #MLBPA receives formal proposal from #MLB on 72-game season starting July 14, with 80% guarantee of their prorated salaries with a postseason, 70% with no postseason. Deadline is Sunday for 72-game schedule. Also, 29-man rosters for the first month. Players also have opt-out.
— Bob Nightengale (@BNightengale) June 12, 2020
UPDATE 2: It’s a slightly higher guarantee if the postseason is completed, when you count $50 million the players would get from the postseason pool:
MLB proposal also includes expanded postseason of as many as eight teams per league. If postseason is completed, players would receive equivalent of 83 percent of prorated salaries, including additional money from postseason pool.
— Ken Rosenthal (@Ken_Rosenthal) June 12, 2020
UPDATE 3: Now that we have a fuller picture of the bottom-line dollar values, some points – the gap is narrowing … but only if you presume the postseason definitely gets completed:
So, if the World Series is played to its entirety, there's a $314 million difference between #MLB's proposal and what the players would earn with full pro-rated pay over 72 games. The gap is narrowing.
— Bob Nightengale (@BNightengale) June 12, 2020
So, the money. As @bnightengale and others said, it maxes out at $1.5B with $1.27B guaranteed. It’s a step forward in terms of overall money offered but remains far short of the players’ desire for full pro rata. Including $50M in playoff bonuses, it would be ~83% full pro rata.
— Jeff Passan (@JeffPassan) June 12, 2020
The max on offer – if postseason is completed – is 83% of pay on a 72-game season. That is equivalent of 60 games prorated pay.
Stop trying to shift the postseason risk on the players. Just freaking offer prorated pay for 60+ games (keep the postseason money) & BE DONE WITH IT.
— Bleacher Nation (@BleacherNation) June 12, 2020
UPDATE 4: Other miscellaneous bits out there:
Season would run July 14-Sept 27 in MLB proposal.
— Joel Sherman (@Joelsherman1) June 12, 2020
MLB proposal expires Sunday according to their offer.
— Joel Sherman (@Joelsherman1) June 12, 2020
UPDATE: From USA Today’s full write-up, for what it’s worth: “The MLB Players’ Association is expected to reject the offer, insisting on full pro-rated pay, but likely will submit a counter-proposal by Monday in hopes of reaching an agreement by mid-week.”
