Strike Three

When the Coronavirus pandemic forced Major League Baseball to shut down on March 12, the league and its players were hopeful they could return to work in as soon as two weeks. However, as the number of cases and deaths in America rapidly increased and it became clear that the MLB wouldn’t be able to play a full slate of 162 games in 2020, negotiations for a shortened season began. Nobody could have imagined the catastrophe that ensued.

On May 26, the MLB submitted their first offer to the MLB Players Association (MLBPA). This offer included an 82-game season and a sliding scale payout system in which the higher-paid players would earn a lower percentage of their prorated salaries and lower-paid players would get a higher percentage. A prorated salary matches a player’s full salary to the percentage of the season that is played. So, if half the season were played, a full prorated salary would be half of a player’s full salary.

Five days later, the MLBPA made a counterproposal. In this offer, players asked for a 114-game season and full prorated salaries. You can already see from these two offers how far apart the owners and players were in negotiations. The players wanted to play as many games as possible and earn full prorated salaries, but the owners were having none of it.

The MLB made another proposal on June 7. Under these terms, there would be a 76-game season in which players would earn 75% of their prorated salaries assuming the postseason was played. For the owners, it was either a long season with larger pay cuts or a shorter season with more minimal pay cuts. At this point, there was no resolution in sight.

“It's not just the 2020 season at stake, but the future of MLB,” ESPN insider Buster Olney said at the time.

The players made another counter on June 9, consisting of an 89-game season and full prorated salaries. It seemed like there was some actual negotiating going on here, as the players decreased their offer by 25 games.

On June 17, the owners made their final offer, consisting of a 60-game season and full prorated salaries. Wanting a longer season, players rejected the proposal. However, commissioner Manfred decided to create his own season under the terms of the owners last offer. The players desperately wanted to play the game they love and knew the world needed sports back, especially during such a emotional time, so they agreed to report. This does not mean they were at peace with the owners, however.

Something you may notice about the progression of the owners’ offers is that while they increased the percentage of prorated salaries, the number of games they were offering decreased. Let’s take a look and see if we can figure out whether owners were actually offering more money as their offers progressed.

MLB’s first offer was a complete rip-off for players. According to the sliding scale proposed, the highest paid player in baseball, superstar pitcher Max Scherzer, would have made just $7.481 million of his full $37.405 million salary. Under a schedule 50% of a normal season, Scherzer would have earned just 20% of his salary.

In MLB’s next offer for a 76-game season with players receiving 75% of their prorated salaries, Scherzer would have made $13.161 million, which is a big improvement from the first offer, but still just 35% of his regular salary for playing 47% of the season.

Under MLB’s third offer of 72 games with 80% prorated salaries, Scherzer would have made nearly $13.3 million. This is about 35.5% of his normal salary, earned over a season 44% of its normal length. As you can see, the numbers are virtually the same as the second offer.

Under MLB’s final offer of just 60 games but full prorated salaries, Scherzer would have made almost $13.854 million. This is 37% of his salary over 37% of a season. While this is technically equal value for the players, consider that Scherzer’s hypothetical salary increased just $700,000, or 2%, from MLB’s second offer to their last. In short, owners basically made the same offer three times.

Yes, $13 million is quite a lot of money. Most people would kill for that kind of payday. But scale MLB money down to the average income of an American household, which is $51,939 per year. Imagine if your employers asked you to take a 65% pay cut like MLB owners did to their players. You would make just $18,178.65, before paying taxes. What would you do? While baseball players are on a different level financially than the average American, they probably had a similar feeling. And as the players’ employers are billionaires, they can certainly afford to pay the people who make their business run what they deserve. Without players, the MLB wouldn’t even exist. Most owners wouldn’t be billionaires. With that much money, there is no reason to be a penny pincher no matter the circumstance.

The Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA), the contract that the MLB and MLBPA agree upon every four years or so that keeps the league running, expires following the 2021 season. These contracts usually contain new rules, financial plans, and more. With this year’s failed negotiations fresh in everyone’s minds, agreeing upon a new CBA will be more difficult than ever.