Negotiations have taken place, but not the big things, and the quantification of demands

By the way, day 19 of the lockout is nothing special. It just happened to be a Monday where I had things that I wanted to get to, including the latest update on the ongoing negotiations. Negotiations have taken place recently, but you already know that they did not touch on the most important economic subjects.

⇒ Jesse Rogers reports that owner and player representatives met last week to discuss, among other things: “the schedule, grievance procedures, special events and / or drug and violence policies domestic ”. While this is likely to affect the economy, it won’t be on the table until next month at the earliest. So these are pretty tame things at the moment, and your unbridled hope is that the uneconomic things turn out so well that the parties are ready to look into the basic economy in the first half of January. (Your more realistic fear is that each side will stay where they were on December 1, and it won’t be until spring training is really impacted that they’ll even start to really talk again (at that point, a delay by compared to the start of the regular season would be a virtual lock).)

⇒ Stephanie Apstein reports that last week’s negotiations were deemed sufficiently minor that key negotiators on either side were not even involved.

⇒ Rogers adds in a separate article that no negotiations are scheduled for this week, and it is not known when the economic problems will actually be restored.

⇒ Speaking of basic economics, we always mention them in general – this question, which impacts money; this problem, which impacts service time and therefore money; etc. – but what if you could narrow the numbers down to something more tangible? How much money is the X show Actually value? Well, Eno Sarris took a look at this at The Athletic, trying to quantify the real monetary values ​​of possible approaches by the sides of things like the old free agency. There’s a version in there where players get free agency at five if they’re 29.5, DH is added, minimum wage is raised sharply, and owners get uniform patches and playoffs. widened, and the net is a wash (i.e. uniform patches and widened playoffs pay for the other changes). An interesting way of looking at it, and it would definitely make you think the sides can’t be as far apart as they look – or at least they shouldn’t be. Anyway.

⇒ For me, I was mostly interested in seeing how relatively small some issues were. Raising the minimum wage could be, by far, the most “expensive” change for homeowners, depending on the size of the increase – but then, shouldn’t it be? Considering that something like half of all the big leagues are now in pre-refereeing, shouldn’t we be moving more money as they please (in addition to increasing the years of refereeing and getting the agency free earlier)? For example, raising minimum wages to $ 800,000 from their current level of $ 570,000 would “cost” more than twice as much as the plan to reduce free will to five years for guys who are at least 29.5 years old.

Comments are closed.