Author: Steve Adams

Amid widespread expectations that the 2020 minor league season will not be played, Major League Baseball is considering an expanded version of the annual Arizona Fall League as a means of recouping some critical game reps for prospects throughout the sport, Josh Norris and J.J. Cooper of Baseball America reported earlier this week. MLB is thinking about not only adding additional teams to the traditional AFL format but also mulling the creation of a Florida Fall League, per the report.

While the AFL usually features six teams, each made up of prospects from five MLB clubs, there’s been talk of all 30 organizations being permitted to field their own Fall League club in 2020. There would be added cost for MLB clubs under this scenario, as player are paid for AFL play — albeit at a particularly high level. Cooper and Norris write that AFL prospects generally are paid $2250 per month, plus a $750 housing stipend.

Broadly speaking, that’s an eminently manageable sum for an organization to stomach, even if it’s sending a full roster of players as opposed to just a handful of names. But we’ve also seen even the $400 weekly stipend being paid to most minor leaguers at present be utilized as a cost-saving mechanism by some clubs. The A’s initially stopped the stipend entirely as of June 1, but reversed course yesterday in the wake of widespread criticism from fans and media.  Similarly, the Nationals sought to reduce the weekly payment by $100 but reversed the decision after a wave of negative reaction from fans and their own Major League players (who had banded together to cover the would-be losses for the organization’s minor leaguers). A few teams have committed to paying their minor leaguers through the end of August, when minor league seasons would’ve ended, though most have only committed through the end of the current month.

All of that is particularly notable given that the BA report suggests MLB could try to begin Fall League play “within weeks” of kicking off the regular season. (For those keeping score on odd seasonal semantics, that’d put “Spring” Training in June and “Fall” League play in July/August.) It’s not clear whether Fall League pay would be in addition to the ongoing stipend or whether it’d simply replace the stipend; presumably, that’d be left to ownership discretion on a team-by-team basis. Minor league players, after all, aren’t protected by the MLB Players Association.

Even with an expanded two-league format that allows each organization to send one team would leave each organization with close to 200 prospects missing key developmental time. Eno Sarris, Emily Waldon and Ken Rosenthal of The Athletic (subscription required) tackle the matter, floating the possibility that some teams could include at least one top prospect who isn’t big league-ready as part of the proposed 20-player taxi squad that would train and work alongside the Major League roster. This proverbial “50th man” wouldn’t actually play in any MLB games, but would at least get an opportunity to at least somewhat replicate some type of normal developmental environment.

The taxi squad plan will also provide an opportunity for teams to provide work to minor league coaches and instructors who are otherwise hamstrung by the lack of a minor league season. Such coaches, instructors, training staff, etc. will be necessary since the regular Major League coaching staff would naturally be focused on the 26-30 big leaguers on the official roster.

Finding roles for these minor league coaches, coordinators, and other player development personnel is another separate issue altogether. Sarris, Waldon, and Rosenthal note that since many of these employees are furloughed within their organizations, it creates some legal gray area as to whether or not they could potentially look for a job with another team — as the Athletic trio put it, “If you are a furloughed employee on a one-year contract, are you basically a free agent?” That said, Major League Baseball took a firm stance against such “poaching” practices when the suspension of Uniform Employee Contracts was originally announced.

5:22pm: The league and the union have continued to battle this week in the form of letters, per Ken Rosenthal and Evan Drellich of The Athletic. Halem sent one to the union Wednesday explaining why the league’s not on board with its 114-game proposal, saying that “we do not have any reason to believe that a negotiated solution for an 82-game season is possible” and detailing why extending the regular campaign into October isn’t feasible from the league’s perspective. As of now, the league’s also unwilling to give service time to a player who opts out of a potential season for health and safety reasons.

MLBPA negotiator Bruce Meyer responded that he’s not sure MLB even wants a season to take place. “We are happy to hear that ‘the Commissioner is committed to playing Baseball in 2020,’” Meyer wrote, “since MLB’s course of conduct continues to lead to doubts.” The union also called MLB’s unwillingness to play into October “wholly unjustified.”

For now, MLB seems inclined to pursue a schedule of 50-some games, but that would also displease the union. Furthermore, the two sides haven’t even finalized health and safety protocols in the event a season does happen, though Meyer wrote, “We will be available at your convenience to continue those discussions, including over the weekend.”

10:26am: Major League Baseball and the MLB Players Association remain at odds over both the length of a would-be 2020 season and the manner in which players would be compensated in a shortened schedule. Both sides have their own brand of mathematical gymnastics to show how much revenue would (or wouldn’t) be lost, and neither side has been inclined to budge whatsoever to this point. To recap — an abbreviated timeline of how this has played out:

• March 26: MLB and the MLBPA “agree” to conditions for return to play; players will receive prorated salaries if a season is played or a $170MM advance payout divided among all players if the season is canceled. Players will accrue the same service time they did in 2019 even if no season is played.
• April 16: Initial reports surface that ownership will seek further pay cuts from players due to a lack of gate revenue. The league points to a clause in the March agreement stipulating the two sides will “discuss in good faith the economic feasibility of playing games in the absence of spectators.” The union contends prorated salaries were agreed upon with or without fans in attendance.
• May 11: After nearly a month, ownership finalizes an economic proposal that includes a revenue share with the union. Before it is even formally proposed to the MLBPA, union chief Tony Clark wholly dismisses the proposal, likening it to a salary cap.
• May 26: After another two weeks of calculated leaks from both sides and public back-and-forth, ownership presents a “sliding scale” for further pay reductions that amounts to a mean 38 percent cut on top of prorated salaries (lesser percentages for lower-paid players but greater cuts for higher-paid stars). The season would consist of 82 games.
• May 31: The union counters with a proposal for 114 games and prorated salaries.
• June 3: MLB rejects the MLBPA’s proposal and indicates it will not offer a counter-proposal. Instead, commissioner Rob Manfred and the league’s owners begin discussions on an even shorter season — reportedly 48 to 54 games — at prorated rates.

Now, per ESPN’s Jeff Passan, the league is focusing in on a 48-game season. Fans and players alike recoil at the notion of such a truncated season, but the Associated Press yesterday obtained an email from deputy commissioner Dan Halem to the union in which Halem wrote: “You confirmed for us on Sunday that players are unified in their view that they will not accept less than 100% of their prorated salaries, and we have no choice but to accept that representation.”

The dramatically shortened schedule being discussed by the league is a reflection of the losses they’re willing to accept. The extent of those losses remains a point of contention, as the league has not yet provided the MLBPA with what it terms to be sufficient evidence to substantiate their claims.

Nonetheless, Passan takes a look at the numbers both sides have put forth. If the league is willing to play prorated salaries on a 48-game schedule and the union is indeed accepting an 82-game season at a prorated level, then the difference amounts to 34 games’ worth of prorated pay. Even accepting the figures ownership has floated at face value, the dispute — at least viewed through this lens — boils down to about $326MM in total, Passan surmises.

Ownership might look to spin the number to be greater, just as the union might look to cast doubt upon the fact that the losses are even that sizable. Regardless, if the players will indeed accept an 82-game season and prorated pay, the dispute comes down to roughly one month’s worth of games. On the surface, that appears like it should be a surmountable obstacle, but of course neither side has been particularly enthusiastic about compromise in any capacity.

Still, SNY’s Andy Martino writes that at least one person involved in the talks believes the outcome will indeed be a compromise: something in the vicinity of 65 to 80 games with slightly less than prorated salaries and temporary suspensions of the luxury tax and qualifying offer systems.

That sounds amenable to onlookers, though the involved parties surely view things differently. FiveThirtyEight’s Travis Sawchik examines why the players may be so reluctant to agree to further cuts, noting that the oft-cited “millionaires vs. billionaires” characterization of the public squabble isn’t necessarily reflective of the average big leaguer. Nearly two thirds of the league last year had not yet reached three years of MLB service time in 2019, meaning most had yet to even secure their first million-dollar contract. Add in their tax bracket, union dues and agent fees, and the actual amount that players take home off their pre-arb salaries is indeed probably lesser than most would assume from the outside looking in. It’s worth pointing out, of course, that ownership could push back with similar means of demonstrating that their revenues are less than most would assume.

Taking a step back from the finer details, it’s rather remarkable to look at the above timeline, realize that it spans more than two months, and think that the two sides are still, in essence, diametrically opposed without any real willingness to compromise to get a product back on the field. The NHL and NBA have approved plans for a return to play, but the distrust between MLB and the MLBPA with collective bargaining talks looming in 2021 continues to stand in the way of a suitable compromise.

7:49pm: There’s no end in sight to this standoff. After an MLBPA board meeting on Thursday, union head Tony Clark said, “The league’s demand for additional concessions was resoundingly rejected” (full statement here via Jeff Passan of ESPN.com). The players want to return to the field, but they’re simply not open to another pay cut, as Cardinals reliever Andrew Miller told Evan Drellich and Ken Rosenthal of The Athletic (subscription link). “Players are engaged like I’ve never seen before,” Miller said. “Every day through ths each of those factors is reinforced. We hope to be on the field as soon as possible.”

6:39pm: As the deadlock between the league and the Players Association continues, MLB Network’s Jon Heyman tweets that the 30 team owners are remaining “steadfast” in aiming to end the season by Nov. 1. Diamondbacks owner Ken Kendrick already firmly voiced earlier this week his stance that ownership’s model of not playing games in November “will never be changed.”

Twins president, CEO and executive board member Dave St. Peter offered a similar sentiment in a lighter tone than Kendrick, telling La Velle E. Neal III of the Minneapolis Star Tribune: “Getting derailed on the start/stop scenario is the worst-case scenario. You’re trying to thread a needle in getting a baseball season in before a second surge of this virus which we believe is a very real possibility.”

Never one to hold back his thoughts, agent Scott Boras again pushed back on ownership’s public-facing stance, telling The Athletic’s Ken Rosenthal: “The NFL and college football – contact sports – could be playing in November, let alone December. MLB, a social distancing sport, says it can’t play playoffs in November.”

It’s possible to push back on baseball being a “social distancing sport” in a general sense — there are close quarters the dugout, clubhouse, on the bases, etc. — but relative to a sport like football, the point obviously holds true. As St. Peter and Kendrick have alluded to, however, the worst-case scenario for the league might be paying the players a prorated salary (or even a reduced rate) and then having to cancel postseason play. USA Today’s Bob Nightengale has previously reported that the standard-format postseason television revenue could approach $777MM, with an expanded format pushing that number closer to $1 billion.

Furthermore, as Reds righty Trevor Bauer and his agent, Rachel Luba, discussed earlier this spring in a detailed YouTube video, player postseason shares are derived from gate — not television revenue. In other words, those TV dollars are pure profit for the owners. Perhaps there’s additional negotiation to be done there, but if the two sides have yet to even agree on regular-season player compensation absent gate revenue, it’s unlikely they’ve sufficiently addressed postseason shares. The sheer volume of revenue owners would stand to receive from carrying out a postseason — be it expanded or not — gives enormous incentive to strike a deal at some point, but both the length of schedule and the timeframe within which it falls remain major obstacles.

All of that seems to dovetail with the league’s newfound push for a shortened schedule. It was reported over the weekend that the owners feel the standing March agreement gives commissioner Rob Manfred the power to unilaterally impose a shorter length of season. Doing so would likely entitle the players to prorated salary but over a fraction of the would-be regular season; the New York Post’s Joel Sherman suggested as few as 48 to 54 games may even be under consideration.

That push would limit the owners’ in-season expenses while bringing about a notable postseason windfall. To that end, Ronald Blum of the Associated Press obtained an email sent from deputy commissioner Dan Halem to MLBPA negotiator Bruce Meyer which expressly confirms that the league is looking into a commissioner-imposed, shortened season. A portion of said email read as follows:

We do not have any reason to believe that a negotiated solution for an 82-game season is possible. You confirmed for us on Sunday that players are unified in their view that they will not accept less than 100% of their prorated salaries, and we have no choice but to accept that representation. Nonetheless, the commissioner is committed to playing baseball in 2020. He has started discussions with ownership about staging a shorter season without fans.

However, Blum notes that the league is strongly opposed to deferring salaries, with interest, likening that to another means of accruing debt. Halem also expressed concerns about the costs of acquiring mass testing capabilities, suggesting that’d cost teams upward of $50MM.

As has been the case for months now, it’s readily apparent that both sides have considerable motivation to finalize some type of agreement on how to salvage the 2020 season. Actually moving closer to finding a common ground, however, has proven virtually impossible — even as other sports have found ways to chart a path back to their seasons.

June 4: Both Sakamoto and Oshiro showed only “traces” of the virus, the Giants announced (link via the Kyodo News). Mitsuo Kaku, an epidemiologist who has worked both with NPB and Japan’s pro soccer league, indicated that Sakamoto and Oshiro “had recovered from their infections,” adding that “there is not a high risk they would expose others around them.” Both players have been hospitalized to undergo further testing, and teammates who came into contact with them will undergo a polymearse chain reaction test.

According to the report, the league has yet to indicate that this situation will impact the scheduled June 19 opener.

June 3: Japan’s Nippon Professional Baseball resumed exhibition play this week as it prepares for its new June 19 start date, but two players on the Yomiuri Giants have already tested positive for COVID-19, per Jason Coskrey of the Japan Times. Reigning Central League MVP Hayato Sakamoto and catcher Takumi Oshiro both tested positive on the first day that games were set to resume. Wednesday’s scheduled exhibition game between the Giants and the Seibu Lions has been canceled.

Beyond that cancellation, there’s been no announcement as to how the league will handle the pair of positive tests. Both players will surely be isolated, but the league’s overall health and safety guidelines aren’t yet clear. The Kyodo News wrote just yesterday that NPB was still in the process of finalizing those protocols, borrowing heavily from the guidelines utilized in the Korea Baseball Organization and Taiwan’s Chinese Professional Baseball League — both of which are now well into their respective regular seasons. The CPBL, in fact, has begun to allow fans to attend games — permitting up to 2,000 per contest as of mid-May, per FocusTaiwan. NPB has been aiming to play a 120-game season.

The pair of positive tests underlines the importance of Major League Baseball establishing health and safety protocols that are not only agreeable to players but as efficient as possible in terms of minimizing the spread of the virus. NPB is less than half the size of MLB (12 teams). The challenges of keeping 30 MLB teams, coaching staffs and taxi squads healthy (as well as umpiring crews, security workers, grounds crew, etc.) are plentiful. To this point, Major League Baseball and the MLB Players Association have yet to reach agreements on either health protocols or player compensation.