Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Sunday, May 17, 2020

Aspiring MLB team owner Alex Rodriguez thinks players should take revenue-sharing deal to save season

A recent episode of ESPN’s Get Up was a particularly egregious session in which Mike Greenberg and Mark Teixeira extolled the owners’ deal and minimized player concerns. As our Andrew Bucholtz put it, “it’s rather funny to see Greenberg and Teixeira, two people who have been quite enriched by agents’ attempts to get what their labor is “worth,” out here arguing that MLB players should just take whatever owners are proposing to them.”

The same can be said of Alex Rodriguez, who, for many, is the posterchild of enriching one’s self in order to get paid their true worth, and who is now trying to get players to agree to this deal out of a sense of duty to baseball fans.

“It is the people’s comfort food and people are starving. And I just don’t want to see this great game, people fighting, billionaires fighting with millionaires. This has nothing to do with the past. This has nothing to do with the strike. This is actually when the owners and players are aligned and we want the same thing. We want to save baseball. We want to play baseball.

“Players want to play. Fans want to watch. And at the end of the day, if you don’t play today, you don’t win tomorrow, because hopefully, we don’t have another situation like this. This is like beyond anything we’ve ever seen before. I just urge the players and owners to think collectively. If there’s $100 in the pie, like the NBA, players take $50, owners take $50. And we give it to the fans. We thank the fans of baseball.”

RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: May 17, 2020 at 05:14 PM | 28 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: alex rodriguez

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

   1. Adam Starblind Posted: May 19, 2020 at 09:10 AM (#5951933)
The problem here is that there are just too many mouths at the trough.

   2. Rough Carrigan Posted: May 19, 2020 at 02:06 PM (#5952017)
Are there more mouths at the trough than there were before?
   3. What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face? Posted: May 19, 2020 at 02:22 PM (#5952026)
And at the end of the day, if you don’t play today, you don’t win tomorrow
I'll be generous and assume this is a coherent figure of speech in colloquial Centaurese that got lost in translation.
   4. Itchy Row Posted: May 19, 2020 at 03:01 PM (#5952042)
He's right. Nobody has ever not played one day and then won the next day. At the end of the day, that's just science.
   5. Barry`s_Lazy_Boy Posted: May 19, 2020 at 03:29 PM (#5952057)
out here arguing that MLB players should just take whatever owners are proposing to them.


No one is arguing that. They aren't saying the players should play for $20 a game. They are saying the 50% revenue offer is one they should accept.

Whatever. The season is already DOA.
   6. Ron J Posted: May 19, 2020 at 06:40 PM (#5952122)
#5 Exactly when is the last time MLB bargained in good faith?

Any negotiator is familiar with the concept of half a loaf but given past history the PA will demand either hard numbers (rather than a percentage of a number that will have been gamed) or an extremely strong verification process with all of the things in play carefully defined. And since the latter will take forever to negotiate, the only practical way to get a season is hard numbers.
   7. Bug Selig Posted: May 20, 2020 at 07:08 AM (#5952211)
#6 is exactly right. Given MLB's labor-relations history, why would anybody ever agree to half of a completely fictional number?

I must say that I am momentarily proud of the BBTF crew. Very little of the "Oh, those greedy millionaires! I'd much rather the money stay in the pockets of the billionaires" faux-populism.

Oh, and speaking of bad-faith - Bravo to MLB for releasing a 60-some page plan outlining their fantastical plans that the other side absolutely isn't going to accept. That's "it's on the governor's" level of bullshittery.
   8. Ron J Posted: May 20, 2020 at 07:31 AM (#5952216)
#7 I've said it before. MLB released the plan in an effort to win the PR battle.

And they will win it.

Past PA leadership has always understood that this doesn't matter (and Miller in particular was always willing to take the hit personally). I remain hopeful that the current leadership understands this too.
   9. Barry`s_Lazy_Boy Posted: May 20, 2020 at 09:54 AM (#5952237)
I'm arguing in the players favor by saying they should accept some kind of offer. If they have to have some look at the books to confirm, demand that as part of the negotiations.

Instead, they're going to accept their $170M for the entire season. Do you think going mostly without pay for a season will increase the players' bargaining position for the CBA? The main argument against a 50% seems to be "oh, we're too stupid to avoid getting out-negotiated in the next CBA."

The players are going to be paid ~4% of their salaries this year. They're gonna be desperate in the next CBA and lose because of that. And Tony Clark.

   10. Ron J Posted: May 20, 2020 at 10:07 AM (#5952240)
And I'm arguing that MLB isn't going to open the books and will game any revenue numbers without an ironclad agreement on what constitutes revenue.

And both sides will have taken it in the shorts when it comes time for the negotiations. If they do badly in the next round (which wouldn't surprise me) it will be independent of any decisions made about this season.
   11. Greg Pope Posted: May 20, 2020 at 10:12 AM (#5952241)
It's so weird to see how quickly former players turn on the current players. A-Rod, OK, he's angling for ownership. But Greenberg and Teixeira? It seems like players go immediately to crotchety old man upon retirement.
   12. Ron J Posted: May 20, 2020 at 10:18 AM (#5952242)
#11 Certainly never happened with the generation of players that really got the union off the ground. Jim Bunning for instance.
   13. Barry`s_Lazy_Boy Posted: May 20, 2020 at 10:25 AM (#5952246)
At least they'll be ideologically pure with their 4%.
   14. Stevey Posted: May 20, 2020 at 11:16 AM (#5952264)
At least they'll be ideologically pure with their 4%.


So at what point should the players step in and say "the owners have been screwing us over for years, at what point do we stop putting up with this ####\"?

The only way to read what you've posted in this thread is that the players should accept whatever they get that's more than 4%. At some point, the owners will know they can offer just 5%, and the Barry's out there will be like "yup, players gotta take that".
   15. Bug Selig Posted: May 20, 2020 at 04:06 PM (#5952431)
I think the problem is that careers are short enough that the players don't really have any reason to take the long view. Owners are owners until they decide not to be (in general). Players have no such luxury - there is definitely a case to be made that a lot of players need to agree to whatever maximizes their 2020 income. And the owners know it.
   16. cardsfanboy Posted: May 20, 2020 at 09:55 PM (#5952542)
honestly I haven't looked at this too deeply, I've already accepted no season of baseball... But if the argument is 50% pay cut this year, then the counter argument should be that all existing contracts should be automatically extended a full season at the same rate.... with a player option to accept that rate before the season starts. If you are arguing that a person should take half a pay cut this year, then adding a year at the same rate or at 75%.
   17. Pat Rapper's Delight (as quoted on MLB Network) Posted: May 21, 2020 at 12:42 AM (#5952557)
But Greenberg and Teixeira? It seems like players go immediately to crotchety old man upon retirement.

Teixeira was a crotchety old man the day the Rangers drafted him out of Georgia Tech.
   18. Jose Needs an Absurd Ukulele Concert Posted: May 21, 2020 at 09:03 AM (#5952584)
In a vacuum I don't think Tex or A-Rod is wrong. The problem, as noted by Ron in #6, is that what constitutes revenue is the tricky bit. Until the owners open their books for an audit the MLBPA should be telling them to pound sand.
   19. cardsfanboy Posted: May 22, 2020 at 08:34 AM (#5952853)
. But if the argument is 50% pay cut this year, then the counter argument should be that all existing contracts should be automatically extended a full season at the same rate.... with a player option to accept that rate before the season starts. If you are arguing that a person should take half a pay cut this year, then adding a year at the same rate or at 75%.


So let's say you are a player named Albert Pujols and you have a two years remaining on your contract, and you are getting 20mil this year, at half that rate you would be paid 10 mil for this season, but then the team extends your contract another season at 10 mil, it's a players option, and for 10 days after the world series last game, any team can negotiate with him and sign him with no penalty assigned to that team(no comp pick), after the ten days is up, the player can 1. sign with another team 2. take the option or 3. pursue other options if they want. Also no comp picks for any player that takes the option for the following year.

I would probably make one exception when it comes to comp picks, if the player signed his current contract before he came an unrestricted free agent, then if they sign with another team, a comp pick would be a possibility.... (this part is tricky, but to me makes sense, many times the player and the team will sign a good player early to lock up arby years and maybe a free agent year, with the knowledge that they can't afford him if he reaches free agency, so the plan was to get a comp pick, in this situation you would want to retain that right/strategy) There would have to be other tweaks also, just to get it to be mostly fair to all parties, but at the same time this system would guarantee that all players end up getting paid the full amount they signed if they want to.(just not at the yearly rate that they signed for)


Another tweak would be of course service time counts double this year, but that will provide even more incentive for the owners to keep a young promising player down in the minors.
   20. bobm Posted: May 22, 2020 at 01:29 PM (#5952949)
A-Rod knows baseball fans needed to send in the cavalry. He can certainly horse trade between the owners and players, because he can say with credibility that the players are looking a gift horse in the mouth. Unfortunately, this late in the year, I think A-Rod is locking the barn door after the horse is gone.

   21. cardsfanboy Posted: May 22, 2020 at 02:56 PM (#5952985)
Wasn't Arod kinda screwed over by the mlbpa, when he got traded to the Red Sox and took a pay cut, and they refused to let him do that? At least that is how I remember it.
   22. The Yankee Clapper Posted: May 22, 2020 at 04:45 PM (#5953009)
Wasn't Arod kinda screwed over by the mlbpa, when he got traded to the Red Sox and took a pay cut, and they refused to let him do that? At least that is how I remember it.
The MLBPA kept A-Rod from giving back $4M per year of his guaranteed money to Boston, and he ended up making much more with NY, so that would be a weird definition of ‘screwed over’.
   23. cardsfanboy Posted: May 22, 2020 at 05:14 PM (#5953015)
The MLBPA kept A-Rod from giving back $4M per year of his guaranteed money to Boston, and he ended up making much more with NY, so that would be a weird definition of ‘screwed over’.


The definition of screwed over is having a bit of control of your own destiny. I get he was rich and all, but from at least one viewpoint, I think he thought it would have been nice to be the guy to have been the best player on the team that won the world series for Boston. I don't remember the deal, but ultimately he lost the ability to choose where he ended up playing because the union decided money was more important than a players own interest.

Note: I don't fault the union for their decision, but I do understand why Arod may not be the biggest fan of a behemoth organization that refuses to look at individual cases as individual cases and instead focus only on the organizations best interest.

   24. Karl from NY Posted: May 22, 2020 at 05:20 PM (#5953016)
I think it was more like A-rod made that pay cut offer for the good PR optics, knowing all along the union wouldn't let it happen.
   25. cardsfanboy Posted: May 22, 2020 at 05:44 PM (#5953020)
I think it was more like A-rod made that pay cut offer for the good PR optics, knowing all along the union wouldn't let it happen.


if you think so.... seems more tin foil hatter nuttery than we usually get around here to me, but sure. Ultimately he wanted to go to a legit contender, the Red Sox were it... In theory the players union claims to be about the players interest, but ultimately they were about the unions's best interest. If Arod goes to the Red Sox, it's possible they win the division and not the wild card,(manny vs arod that year was a 3 war difference...but there are of course other factors involved... ) But if everything else goes the same way, he's remembered as the star who came over and led them to their first title in a 100 years, heck... Theo might lose a bit of luster in this scenario.

I've never thought of Arod as a guy who really recognizes pr optics, he's not Jeter. (Jeter literally never did anything, but made sure to not have bad pr, at least Arod did things, but sometimes they failed... Jeter was white bread to Arod's wheat bread)
   26. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: May 22, 2020 at 06:14 PM (#5953025)
I'll be generous and assume this is a coherent figure of speech in colloquial Centaurese that got lost in translation.


You'll have to ask Ambassador Mollari.
   27. Mayor Blomberg Posted: May 22, 2020 at 07:12 PM (#5953031)
I don't fault the union for their decision, but I do understand why Arod may not be the biggest fan of a behemoth organization that refuses to look at individual cases as individual cases and instead focus only on the organizations best interest.


and so side with MLB instead ...?
   28. cardsfanboy Posted: May 22, 2020 at 08:43 PM (#5953040)
and so side with MLB instead ...?


My ultimate point is that I don't have a problem with Arod going against the union, he has pretty much understood their business like nature over the welfare of the individual, so he's pushing the 30 individual owners over the union. They ignored his goal for the sake of the betterment of their business, so if he wants to join a business, he should forsake others goal in betterment of his business.... this was him learning from the union.... the goal of the group (in this case the owners) is more important than the goal of any individual.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

News

All News | Prime News

Old-School Newsstand


BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
The Piehole of David Wells
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogOT – NBA CoronaThread 2020
(3143 - 12:42pm, Jun 01)
Last: Los Angeles El Hombre of Anaheim

NewsblogJudge: Len Dykstra’s reputation is so bad it’s legally impossible to libel him
(6 - 12:35pm, Jun 01)
Last: Edmundo got dem ol' Kozma blues again mama

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 6-1-2020
(28 - 12:30pm, Jun 01)
Last: Eric J can SABER all he wants to

NewsblogNationals’ Max Scherzer signals union’s rejection of MLB’s proposed salary cuts
(7 - 12:15pm, Jun 01)
Last: Steve Balboni's Personal Trainer

NewsblogEmpty Stadium Sports Will Be Really Weird
(4530 - 12:10pm, Jun 01)
Last: Zonk Emerges from his Bunker and Sees his Shadow

NewsblogOT - Catch-All Pop Culture Extravaganza (June 2020)
(6 - 12:09pm, Jun 01)
Last: Hot Wheeling American

NewsblogA's Tell Minor Leaguers They Won't Be Paid for the Remainder of the Season
(40 - 11:48am, Jun 01)
Last: David Nieporent (now, with children)

NewsblogMLB Network to celebrate Derek Jeter's career with 64 consecutive hours of Jeter programming
(40 - 11:32am, Jun 01)
Last: Pat Rapper's Delight (as quoted on MLB Network)

NewsblogMLB owners sending latest plan to MLBPA that includes sliding pay scale for players
(91 - 10:15am, Jun 01)
Last: RoyalsRetro (AG#1F)

NewsblogSon of Agassi, Graf could be a future ace
(37 - 9:02am, Jun 01)
Last: Rally

NewsblogMLB teams release hundreds of minor league players, per report
(9 - 10:01pm, May 31)
Last: Ron J

NewsblogOT Soccer Thread - Spring 2020
(247 - 8:01pm, May 31)
Last: Jose Needs an Absurd Ukulele Concert

NewsblogNot in Missouri anymore: Royals move legal home to Delaware
(7 - 9:30pm, May 30)
Last: Zach

NewsblogRoy Steele, the A’s ‘Voice of God,’ dies
(4 - 6:28pm, May 30)
Last: AndrewJ

NewsblogWe Can Show Baseball Reruns, Too
(64 - 10:39am, May 30)
Last: Hysterical & Useless

-->

Page rendered in 0.3768 seconds
46 querie(s) executed