MLB 2020 Season Opening Update

[z - El Guapo - retired]

MLBTradeRumors

6:55PM: The Center Of Disease Control And Prevention has issued a recommendation against any events of 50 or more people over the next eight weeks in the United States. That eight-week timeline would last until May 9, so assuming that the health situation stabilizes within those eight weeks, a Memorial Day start to baseball season wouldn’t seem feasible, given the necessary time required for preseason preparations.

[z - El Guapo - retired]

Today's Update:

Following last night’s recommendations from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Major League Baseball has issued a new statement confirming that Opening Day will be delayed considerably later than the original April 9 date:

[z - Tim]

el presidente

[z - El Guapo - retired]

Latest On Potential Realignment For 2020 Season

By Steve Adams | April 28, 2020 at 5:38pm CDT

As Major League Baseball and the MLB Players Association mull creative ways to embark on a 2020 season amid the COVID-19 pandemic, the latest plan being explored would feature realignment into three geographically determined divisions of 10 teams, USA Today’s Bob Nightengale reports. At least over the course of the regular season, teams would only play within their makeshift divisions, so as to minimize travel requirements. There’s “cautious optimism” among MLB officials of starting play by July 2 and perhaps even in late June, according a handful of decision-makers who spoke with Nightengale.

The current proposal would apparently eliminate the traditional American and National Leagues. While the report doesn’t specify as much, that would presumably bring about the implementation of a universal DH for the 2020 season. That could be a temporary alteration unique to the 2020 campaign, although a universal DH has been increasingly seen as an inevitability in recent years, so perhaps the league would prefer to use this as a sort of testing grounds for future seasons. There’s also some hope that teams could begin the season in either Arizona, Texas or Florida but eventually be able to return to their own parks.

Obviously, there’s plenty of reason for any optimism to be rather guarded in nature. Medical experts and government officials would need to green-light a return to play, and both will be highly dependent on the availability of testing. Capacity would need to expand to the point that players can be tested regularly without those tests coming at the expense of availability to the greater public.

For all of the recent talk of increased hope regarding a return to play — whether by Nightengale in this afternoon’s column or in previous pieces from Ken Rosenthal and Jeff Passan — there’s still no indication as to how the league plans to proceed if/when a player or players test positive for the coronavirus. Perhaps MLB will look to how other leagues are handling such scenarios; the KBO will reportedly immediately quarantine any such player and shut down his team’s facility for a period of 48 hours for cleaning purposes.

More drastic scenarios where several players/coaches on a single team contract the virus would need to be planned for as well. And while most players could be reasonably expected to have relatively mild symptoms given their age and general health, that’s certainly not true of all players (nor is it true of the much older coaches who will inherently be in close quarters with said players). Players with preexisting conditions (e.g. asthma, diabetes, ulcerative colitis, etc.) and those who’ve previously battled cancer are clearly at higher risks than others. Outlining a general arrangement that allows all parties to feel comfortable is a daunting challenge.

Furthermore, while it’s certainly encouraging to hear of budding optimism in a number of reports, Nightengale mentions that the league and the union have still “yet to engage in formal discussions about the financial ramifications of playing without fans.” That’s an enormous roadblock that must be addressed. The MLBPA already felt that the situation was addressed by the agreement reached in late March, but league officials have since made clear that they feel a renegotiation of terms will be necessary if games are played without fans in attendance. While the optics of a lengthy squabble over finances would be astonishingly bad at a time when unemployment has skyrocketed, one would still imagine those discussions will be both contentious and complex.

Of course, outside of waiting for the development, testing and large-scale distribution of a vaccine — which would likely require more than a year without any baseball — there’s no scenario that is without risk and pitfalls. Every plan regarding a potential return to play is going to be wrought with contingencies. The 2020 season, if played, is bound to look like no season we’ve seen in the past or will see in the future.

[z - El Guapo - retired]

MLB Hoping To Stage Regular Season Games At Home Parks In 2020

By Anthony Franco | May 3, 2020 at 9:33am CDT

We’ve heard of a handful of ideas about ways in which MLB could look to bring back games in 2020. Many have involved centralizing teams in a few states, perhaps with temporary league and divisional realignment. MLB’s “preferred plan,” however, is to stage as many games as possible in teams’ current home parks, reports Marc Topkin of the Tampa Bay Times. Those games would still be without fans, of course, at least at the beginning of the season.

Should play in home stadiums prove feasible, the schedule would be designed to limit travel, Topkin adds. Teams would primarily be pitted against opponents from within one’s division and the other league’s corresponding division. (So, AL East teams would predominantly face division rivals as well as NL East opponents, NL Central teams would see a heavy dose of the AL Central, etc.). Previously considered ideas, including centralizing all thirty teams in Arizona or arranging groups in Arizona, Florida and Texas, are now “less likely” and “being downplayed or dismissed,” Topkin notes.

MLB was already considering staging spring training games at home parks, but orchestrating the regular season from teams’ home bases would be a more significant undertaking. If possible, it would offer some stability the other proposals would not have. Players and their families would be able to live in their teams’ home cities, rather than moving to a central location for a few months. Players would still have to abide by social distancing requirements, but they wouldn’t be quarantined. MLB wouldn’t necessarily have to consider drastic structural realignment, although an expanded postseason would be a possibility, Topkin adds. And even without fans in attendance, there could be some comfort for TV viewers in seeing teams at familiar confines.

Regardless of where and when MLB attempts to return to action, there’d be myriad challenges. Coronavirus testing needs to be available to players and staff. The league needs to have contingency plans in place in case someone involved tests positive. Players would no doubt have to ramp up quickly in an abbreviated spring training 2.0. There remains massive uncertainty.

Optimism is building around the league that some portion of the season can be salvaged, though. It seems the hope is that’ll be possible without needing to gather teams at a few central locations.

[z - El Guapo - retired]

Latest On MLB’s 2020 Schedule Proposal

By George Miller and TC Zencka | May 9, 2020 at 7:49pm CDT

Ken Rosenthal of The Athletic has the details on MLB’s newest proposal for a 2020 season. Rosenthal notes that nothing he describes is set in stone and could very well change upon scrutinization from the Players’ Union or medical professionals. Read his full write-up for all the details.

That said, the bones of the proposal are as follows: MLB would look to play a 78- or 82-game season beginning in early July, where teams would compete only with opponents in their geographic region (i.e., AL West teams would play only division rivals and NL West teams). Ideally, those games would take place in clubs’ normal home parks, but teams in cities where that isn’t feasible could temporarily relocate to their spring training cites or other MLB parks.

A 14-team postseason structure continues to be floated as part of this newest proposal. As previously described, each league would send 7 teams into the playoffs instead of the current 5. The best record in each league would hold a premium place in the postseason as the only team to get a bye for the first round. Of course, until we hear differently, any and all news of a playing schedule should be taken with a grain of salt.

Player pay continues to be a key question with any proposal (beyond health concerns and logistics, of course). There is no timetable for when fans would be allowed to return to stadiums, making it likely that players would be asked to accept a further reduction in pay. As Rosenthal lays out, however, they would potentially be compensated through a single-season revenue-sharing agreement.

The ramifications of this schedule proposal spread far and wide, though the priority remains on figuring out the safest and best way to return to baseball. Still, a season half the length of normal could result in suped-up playoff races.

Beyond the ramifications on the 2020 season, a wonky schedule could add another wrinkle to upcoming drafts. A short season means less margin for error and more room for potential cinderella runs or surprising collapses. Limiting the draft to just 5 rounds, meanwhile, means that a great number of potentially very good major league players will go unselected. It also likely means a stronger draft class in 2021 and beyond, as players with remaining eligibility will be inclined to return to school for another go-round. Factoring in a short season that could send some very competitive clubs to the top of the draft order, and MLB is facing a very particular couple of (draft) seasons in the short term. From a financial standpoint, clubs will have the opportunity to sign some very high-potential undrafted players for a mere $20K signing bonus. The competition and eventual distribution of those players will be an interesting case study to track over the next 10+ years.

Of course, the first step remains the approval of the proposed structure. If the owners approve of the deal on their scheduled call with the league office, Rosenthal suggests that the proposal could be sent to the Players’ Union for approval as early as Tuesday.

[z - El Guapo - retired]

Manfred Expresses Optimism For 2020 Season

By Jeff Todd | May 14, 2020 at 8:41pm CDT

In an appearance on CNN, MLB commissioner Rob Manfred expressed optimism regarding the prospects for a 2020 season. The Athletic’s Lindsey Adler is among those tweeting quotes from the interview; CNN’s Anderson Cooper has shared some video via Twitter.

Though he’s hopeful of baseball being played this summer, Manfred made clear the thinking involves spectator-free contests. Anything more would be unexpected at this point. The focus, clearly, is just on getting some reasonable product off of the ground.

Manfred also warned of the dire consequences to the economic health of the game if the campaign doesn’t work out. He said losses to the thirty teams could “approach” a remarkable $4B if 2020 is shelved entirely. Obviously, it’s not clear from a brief interview precisely what is and isn’t baked into that number.

Among many other hurdles, of course, is the matter of sorting things out with the players. Manfred expressed “great confidence” that the sides will ultimately see eye to eye, “both that it’s safe to come back to work and work out the economic issues that need to be resolved.”

MLB will not “force” any individual player to suit up, Manfred said. (How that decision would be free from disincentives is another question.) But he expects that won’t be a significant issue. “We hope that we will be able to convince the vast, vast majority of our players that it’s safe to return,” says Manfred.

Planning for the safety of players and others involved in putting on contests will obviously be critical. There’s certainly a strain of opinion that doesn’t see it as a truly achievable goal under the circumstances.

Manfred promoted the testing and tracing plan that was reported earlier today. Critically, the league does not plan to suspend play if a player (or, presumably, other employee) tests positive. Instead, it would keep that player isolated and away from the playing field until he has received two negative tests — presuming he’s able to recover — while also testing all those that had been in close contact to the player.

That’s a far less restrictive approach than that maintained by the Korea Baseball Organization, which says it will shut down for three weeks if any player tests positive. Thankfully, Korea’s top league hasn’t had to do so just yet. And Taiwan’s CPBL has even progressed to the point where limited live fans are attending games. Of course, those leagues are operating against the backdrop of societies that have had much more success at gaining control over the spread of the coronavirus.

[z - El Guapo - retired]

This taken from a piece in MLBtraderumors:

...It seems the most immediate dispute is rather narrow — and, frankly, a bit hard to comprehend. Despite publicizing a 50/50 revenue sharing concept — but not ever making clear just what revenue would be shared — the league has yet to formally propose that approach to the players.

At the moment, per The Athletic, the league’s position is that “the union needs to drop its stance that the salary matter is closed before it makes a new proposal.” On the other hand, the MLBPA “does not think it should discuss sacrificing additional pay until the league demonstrates its financial distress.”

This seems either to be a symbolic battle that shouldn’t need to be held or yet another instance of the sides jockeying for technical advantage rather than just diving into the many practical issues that confront them. Either way, there’s obviously a need both for the league to come forward with information regarding “economic feasibility” of fan-free games and for the union to consider whether it is sufficient to justify modification of the pro rata reduction of pay that was already agreed upon.

If the negotiating parties had a greater degree of trust, they probably wouldn’t be grounded on this particular sandbar. There’s so much to lose for all involved that they’ll surely find a way to make progress. But every moment of financial bickering represents a mutual lost opportunity to generate goodwill through the return of the game. And the only lack of trust ramps up the potential risks, given that the league and union are only just beginning to jointly navigate the unknown waters of baseball in the era of the coronavirus.

[z - El Guapo - retired]

Latest On Salary Dispute Between MLB, MLBPA

By Steve Adams | May 20, 2020 at 3:40pm CDT

May 20: The league is aiming to formally present the union with an economic plan by this Friday, USA Today’s Bob Nightengale reports.

May 19: As Major League Baseball and the MLB Players Association continue their standoff over player compensation in a shortened 2020 season without fans in attendance, it seems neither side is prepared to budge. MLB Network’s Jon Heyman tweets that some with the league believe they “have it cold in emails” from late March that the previously agreed-upon prorated salary arrangement was contingent on fans being in attendance. The MLBPA, of course, has contested that the standing agreement sufficiently addresses that scenario (i.e. that the players are entitled to prorated salaries even in a spectator-free setting).

Joel Sherman of the New York Post has obtained the email in question, which was sent from MLB senior vice president of labor relations/deputy general counsel Patrick Houlihan to deputy commissioner Dan Halem. Within the email, Houlihan details a conversation he had with MLBPA deputy general counsel Matt Nussbaum on the morning of March 26:

Matt asked what ‘economic feasibility’ meant in Section I. I told him it meant that we would only consider playing in neutral sites or without fans if it worked for us economically. I reminded him of [commissioner Rob Manfred]’s comments at the outset that playing in empty stadiums did not work for us economically. But I said, for example, that we might be willing to have a conversation about playing some limited number of games in empty stadiums if players agreed to reduce their daily salaries for those games, and if it was part of a larger plan that made economic sense. Matt confirmed that that is what he thought we meant, but appreciated the confirmation.

Of course, it can’t be gleaned from that email just how clearly and accurately the league’s stance was laid out by Houlihan, nor is there any direct quote or confirmation of that understanding from an MLBPA official. We also don’t know whether any additional discussions or negotiations surrounding the issue took place between that conversation and the actual ratification of the agreement. While this email certainly indicates that the two sides discussed the matter, its status as a true “smoking gun” is up for interpretation.

The league will surely seek to use this as ammunition to argue that the MLBPA represented a belief that spectator-less games would need to be accounted for in a separate negotiation. The MLBPA took a similar approach recently when agent Scott Boras ardently stated that ownership “represented during that negotiation that they could operate without fans in the ballpark,” ultimately declaring that there will be no renegotiation of the standing agreement.

Late last week, commissioner Manfred suggested that owners were facing a collective loss of as much as four billion dollars — a grim portrayal which the league argues as the driving factor in its reported proposal for a revenue-sharing plan with the players. However, Travis Sawchik of FiveThirtyEight reports that the players are of the belief that, based on what ownership has presented, they’d benefit from a season of prorated player pay much more than by simply canceling the season (Twitter thread). The league’s revenue projections, for instance, did not account for the expanded playoff format that has been suggested but not yet formally proposed, according to Sawchik. If that’s the case, the players likely feel they still have leverage.

To that end, MLBPA senior director of collective bargaining Bruce Meyer tells Sherman: “the contract itself is very clear that in the event of a partial season players will get paid pro rata salary — whether with fans or without.”

That much seems debatable based on the portions of the agreement that have been made public, but the MLBPA nonetheless appears set to stand firm on that assertion. Meyer also confirms multiple reports that the league has yet to formally propose a salary scale (presumably due to the union’s refusal to even consider the 50-50 revenue share that was reported last week).

“Rather than actually negotiating over these issues the league is focusing on leaking self-serving internal memos to the media,” Meyer tells Sherman. He goes on to add that the league has yet to provide the Players Association with any documentation to support that their revenue losses would actually align with the extent of their claims.

It’s frankly baffling that things have reached this point. The two sides swiftly worked out an agreement not two weeks after the league was shut down due to the COVID-19 pandemic, but the document produced by those negotiations inexplicably failed to address this very scenario in a decisive manner that left no room for other interpretation. The implementation of a prorated pay scale in a shortened season seemed straightforward, but a later clause stating that the two sides will “discuss in good faith the economic feasibility of playing games in the absence of spectators” has proven nebulous enough to bring about the current stalemate.

The optics of a billionaires-versus-millionaires standoff is always cringe-worthy but is particularly egregious at a time when so much of the country has been laid off or furloughed. As both sides squabble over enormous sums of money, many in the general public look on with frustration and resentment.

It’s understandable that the players feel they’ve already made concessions and have now had the aforementioned “good faith” violated by the league’s call for additional cuts, but it’s also confounding that first iteration of their agreement left the door open for this publicly unfolding drama. It’s not as though playing games without fans in attendance was a radical concept at the time of the agreement; it had been a heavily speculated-upon possibility. The fact that it wasn’t expressly accounted for is a staggering omission.

If both sides are indeed drawing a hard line and are entirely averse to renegotiated terms, it stands to reason that the eventual outcome could be litigation. At that point, an arbitrator would need to consider the language within the original agreement and the alleged representations made by the league, weighing those against the purported email proof and any other evidence ownership wished to present.

[z - El Guapo - retired]

MLB Will Propose Financial Plan To Players On Tuesday

By Jeff Todd | May 23, 2020 at 6:15pm CDT

TODAY: Though the league’s proposal is still days away, there is “more optimism” that a deal can be reached to launch the 2020 season, according to MLB Network’s Jon Heyman (Twitter links). While many details still stand in the way of an agreement, both the league and the MLBPA are aware of the stakes, both the financial cost if no games are played, as well as the “understanding on both sides what cancellation of [the] season would do to” damage baseball as a whole. To this end, Heyman writes that the “belief is, both sides will compromise” in some fashion from their current positions — the owners’ desire for a 50/50 revenue split and the players’ desire for prorated salaries.

[z - El Guapo - retired]

www.baseballprospectus.com/news/article/59205/mlb-owners-players-baseball-labor-negotiations-covid-19/?utm_source=Baseball+Prospectus&utm_campaign=6eb2d460d2-2020-05-29+Baseball+Prospectus+Basic+Newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_1613350d6d-6eb2d460d2-370141945