adplus-dvertising
Connect with us

Sports

MLB fight between owners and players fuelled by fundamental divide – Sportsnet.ca

Published

4 years ago

 on


TORONTO – A common misconception about the impasse between Major League Baseball and its players is that this is simply a fight about money, and that there’s a sweet spot to be found in terms of dollars that will save the 2020 season.

You know, middle ground.

At its most basic level, sure, fair enough, but only if you’re really looking at things in a vacuum. Really, the dispute is far more fundamental, with the owners pushing for a percentage of total compensation and the union holding firm on the per-game proration the sides agreed upon in the March 26 pandemic road map.

300x250x1

The distinction is crucial, since the former dramatically alters the sport’s financial framework, with the potential to establish lasting precedent, and the latter maintains the established value of labour in the game, an essential principle for the union.

As a result, “they’re not even in the same room,” says Greg Bouris, the Major League Baseball Players Association’s communications director from 1998-2018 who now runs a consultancy firm, Power X Communications, and is director of the undergraduate sports management program at Adelphi University.

“Right now, there are two silos,” he continues. “Baseball is trying to negotiate lower wages. And the players are saying, ‘Pay us the number of games that you can pay us on a pro-rated basis.’ … They’re not talking about the same structure and they’ll never reach an agreement until they get on the same page with the structure.”

Hence, barring a sudden retreat by one side or the other, the challenge in trying to save the season isn’t in finding a middle ground, per se, but rather in building a pathway around the roadblock, which under the current circumstances will be remarkably difficult.

The primary need on the players’ side is relatively straightforward – safeguard the integrity of the guaranteed contract. From the moment a player arrives in the majors, he’s taught that “so many players sacrificed so much to preserve the players’ right to a guaranteed contract that once he signs that contract, he can’t take anything less than what the contract provides him,” says Bouris.

Given the way players were for decades blatantly preyed upon by manipulative owners, it’s easy to understand why. The MLBPA is the sole union among the Big Four in North American sports not to be broken by its respective league, and while you can look at MLB’s tactics the past couple of months as an attempt to do just that, they instead of helped reinforce to players why their solidarity is so essential.

Discounting their services now “opens a door that will never close,” says Bouris. “And anybody who says that it would is ridiculous. I see a lot of, well, this could be a one-time exception. No. If it happens once, you know it’ll happen again. … You’re fooling yourself if you think you’ll get it back.”

What – or who – is driving things on the owners’ side is less clear.

Commissioner Rob Manfred — who negotiated baseball’s first drug testing program as well as the collective bargaining agreements with the players in 2002, 2006 and 2011 before taking over from the retired Bud Selig in 2014 — “knows the players better than they know themselves,” says Bouris.

He’s been cast as the villain in all this, but remember, he’s ultimately an employee of the owners.

“The offers that Major League Baseball presented, each and every one of them, Rob knows that there’s no way the players would ever accept that,” he continues. “Either (the owners) or he took for granted that maybe the union wasn’t unified, that it was splintered or weak, but I just couldn’t see anything in these deals (they offered) other than they were pleading with the players to work at a discount because everybody’s out of work.”

In business, even if distasteful, that’s the way it goes.

The collective bargaining agreement expires in December 2021. There are no guarantees about next year amid the pandemic. This was a pretty good time to check for soft spots and vulnerabilities.

But there’s calculated brinkmanship, and then there’s greedy recklessness, and threatening to cancel the season five days after “unequivocally” guaranteeing there would be one certainly qualifies as the latter.

That’s led Bouris to join those who believe that “a very powerful, vocal minority” of owners “had no intention from March on, given the economic structure of their sport, to play any games without fans in the stands.”

“I think something happened along the way, probably more so from central baseball, perhaps a few teams, that maybe we’ll be able to loosen things up so that by the summer (a season could take place),” says Bouris. “The first thing that came to my mind from a marketing and from a baseball perspective, I said, ‘Wow, this is going to be amazing. Baseball can debut on the Fourth of July. What would be more unbelievable? We’ve been shut in for four months. It’s the rise of the Phoenix.’

“I think they saw that, and then the owners are like, ‘Yeah, but we generate 50, 60 and in certain teams’ cases, 70 per cent of our revenue from the gate, so unless the players are going to do it for free, we want no part of it.’”

The course of action taken by the owners certainly supports that outlook.

They started out by floating the idea of a 50-50 revenue split, a trial balloon that immediately blew up in their face, and then transitioned to alternate models essentially offering the same thing, a similar percentage of their pro-rated salaries.

Each was leaked in a calculated attempt to coerce players into accepting, “especially because none of them have been through this before,” says Bouris. “Maybe they could shame or guilt or strike some kind of sympathetic chord with the players by having the public turn their venom on the players saying, ‘I can’t believe you’re not going to play baseball over money.’ That may have been why they played those hands.”

The financial pressure on owners offers another explanation.

Teams on the lower end of the payroll scale may manage with only national and local TV along with merchandising revenue, but clubs spending the most on players may not.

The New York Yankees, for instance, carried a projected 2020 payroll of $241.8 million as of March 28, according to The Associated Press. Even if they were responsible for half of that under an 81-game season, that’s a lot of ground to cover without selling a single ticket, hot dog or beer.

The Los Angeles Dodgers ($221 million) and Houston Astros ($207 million) are both on their heels, while seven other clubs have payrolls of at least $167 million or more. The Toronto Blue Jays are at $108 million, while six clubs are under $100 million, with the Pittsburgh Pirates leading the way at $54.4 million.

Without insufficient revenue coming in, owners need to be liquid enough to cover the money going out. For some, their worth is directly linked to their equity and they may not have ample cash reserves to bridge the gap. Their other businesses may also be under duress. There are limits to how much debt they may want to take on. They may not want to sell a stake in the club to cover the current shortfalls.

Any of those issues would help explain the owners’ current stance.

Given their public comments, Arizona Diamondbacks owner Ken Kendrick (“I believe the other leagues have it right and (a salary cap) avoids these labour conflicts to a great extent”) and St. Louis Cardinals owner Bill DeWitt Jr. (“the industry isn’t very profitable, to be quite honest”) are likely to be in the hawk camp, as are the higher payroll clubs.

“They may, at the end of the day, say, ‘Yeah, we can play for the sake of playing and I’m going to lose a lot of money. But you know what? I’m going to lose less if we don’t play. I’ll pay my staff and all this stuff, but I’d rather not even play, let’s just come back next year,’” says Bouris. “I think that was their intention until somebody saw this, ‘Oh, my gosh, July 4th, apple pie, this is us, we’re going to put that white hat on and be this big social institution we profess to be and this is a great marketing opportunity.’ And I think they got out ahead of themselves. Then some of the owners said, ‘We can’t do this, guys, unless the players are giving away the talent.’

“And that’s why we’re having two different conversations.”

And that’s why this has become a zero-sum game, rather than a give-a-little, get-a-little back-and-forth. Salary deferrals, exchanging discounts now for like value down the road or something along those lines may offer a creative path forward.

In lieu of that, someone has to break to save the season.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Related Topics:
Continue Reading

Sports

NHL teams, take note: Alexandar Georgiev is proof that anything can happen in the playoffs

Published

4 hours ago

 on

April 24, 2024

By

It’s hard to say when, exactly, Alexandar Georgiev truly began to win some hearts and change some minds on Tuesday night.

Maybe it was in the back half of the second period; that was when the Colorado Avalanche, for the first time in their first-round Stanley Cup playoff series against the Winnipeg Jets, actually managed to hold a lead for more than, oh, two minutes or thereabouts. Maybe it was when the Avs walked into the locker room up 4-2 with 20 minutes to play.

Maybe it was midway through the third, when a series of saves by the Avalanche’s beleaguered starting goaltender helped preserve their two-goal buffer. Maybe it was when the buzzer sounded after their 5-2 win. Maybe it didn’t happen until the Avs made it into their locker room at Canada Life Centre, tied 1-1 with the Jets and headed for Denver.

At some point, though, it should’ve happened. If you were watching, you should’ve realized that Colorado — after a 7-6 Game 1 loss that had us all talking not just about all those goals, but at least one of the guys who’d allowed them — had squared things up, thanks in part to … well, that same guy.

300x250x1

Georgiev, indeed, was the story of Game 2, stopping 28 of 30 shots, improving as the game progressed and providing a lesson on how quickly things can change in the playoffs — series to series, game to game, period to period, moment to moment. The narrative doesn’t always hold. Facts don’t always cooperate. Alexandar Georgiev, for one night and counting, was not a problem for the Colorado Avalanche. He was, in direct opposition to the way he played in Game 1, a solution. How could we view him as anything else?

He had a few big-moment saves, and most of them came midway through the third period with his team up 4-2. There he was with 12:44 remaining, stopping a puck that had awkwardly rolled off Nino Niederreiter’s stick; two missed posts by the Avs at the other end had helped spring Niederreiter for a breakaway. Game 1 Georgiev doesn’t make that save.

There he was, stopping Nikolaj Ehlers from the circle a few minutes later. There wasn’t an Avs defender within five feet, and there was nothing awkward about the puck Ehlers fired at his shoulder. Game 1 Georgiev gets scored on twice.

(That one might’ve been poetic justice. It was Ehlers who’d put the first puck of the night on Georgiev — a chip from center ice that he stopped, and that the crowd in Winnipeg greeted with the ol’ mock cheer. Whoops.)

By the end of it all, Georgiev had stared down Connor Hellebuyck and won, saving nearly 0.5 goals more than expected according to Natural Stat Trick, giving the Avalanche precisely what they needed and looking almost nothing like the guy we’d seen a couple days before. Conventional wisdom coming into this series was twofold: That the Avs have firepower, high-end talent and an overall edge — slight as it may be — on Winnipeg, and that Georgiev is shaky enough to nuke the whole thing.

That wasn’t without merit, either. Georgiev’s .897 save percentage in the regular season was six percentage points below the league average, and he hadn’t broken even in expected goals allowed (minus-0.21). He’d been even worse down the stretch, putting up an .856 save percentage in his final eight appearances, and worse still in Game 1, allowing seven goals on 23 shots and more than five goals more than expected. That’s not bad; that’s an oil spill. Writing him off would’ve been understandable. Writing off Jared Bednar for rolling him out there in Game 2 would’ve been understandable. Writing the Avs off — for all of Nathan MacKinnon and Cale Makar’s greatness — would’ve been understandable.

It just wouldn’t have been correct.

The fact that this all went down now, four days into a two-month ordeal, is a gift — because the postseason thus far has been short on surprises, almost as a rule. The Rangers and Oilers are overwhelming the Capitals and Kings. The Hurricanes are halfway done with the Islanders. The Canucks are struggling with the Predators. Panthers–Lightning is tight, but one team is clearly better than the other. Bruins–Maple Leafs is a close matchup featuring psychic baggage that we don’t have time to unpack. In Golden Knights–Stars, Mark Stone came back and scored a huge goal.

None of that should shock you. None of that should make you blink.

Georgiev being good enough for Colorado, though? After what we saw in Game 1? Strange, surprising and completely true. For now.

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Sports

"Laugh it off": Evander Kane says Oilers won’t take the bait against Kings | Offside

Published

16 hours ago

 on

April 23, 2024

By

The LA Kings tried every trick in the book to get the Edmonton Oilers off their game last night.

Hacks after the whistle, punches to the face, and interference with line changes were just some of the things that the Oilers had to endure, and throughout it all, there was not an ounce of retaliation.

All that badgering by the Kings resulted in at least two penalties against them and fuelled a red-hot Oilers power play that made them pay with three goals on four chances. That was by design for Edmonton, who knew that LA was going to try to pester them as much as they could.

That may have worked on past Oilers teams, but not this one.

300x250x1

“We’ve been in a series now for the third year in a row with these guys,” Kane said after practice this morning. “We know them, they know us… it’s one of those things where maybe it makes it a little easier to kind of laugh it off, walk away, or take a shot.

“That type of stuff isn’t gonna affect us.”

Once upon a time, this type of play would get under the Oilers’ skin and result in retaliatory penalties. Yet, with a few hard-knock lessons handed down to them in the past few seasons, it seems like the team is as determined as ever to cut the extracurriculars and focus on getting revenge on the scoreboard.

Ryan Nugent-Hopkins, the longest-tenured player on this Oilers team, had to keep his emotions in check with Kings defender Vladislav Gavrikov, who punched him in the face early in the game. The easy reaction would be to punch back, but the veteran Nugen-Hopkins took his licks and wound up scoring later in the game.

“It’s going to be physical, the emotions are high, and there’s probably going to be some stuff after the whistle,” Nugent-Hopkins told reporters this morning. “I think it’s important to stay poised out there and not retaliate and just play through the whistles and let the other stuff just kind of happen.”

Oilers head coach Kris Knoblauch also noticed his team’s discipline. Playoff hockey is full of emotion, and keeping those in check to focus on the larger goal is difficult. He was happy with how his team set the tone.

“It’s not necessarily easy to do,” Knoblauch said. “You get punched in the face and sometimes the referees feel it’s enough to call a penalty, sometimes it’s not… You just have to take them, and sometimes, you get rewarded with the power play.

“I liked our guy’s response and we want to be sticking up for each other, we want to have that pack mentality, but it’s really important that we’re not the ones taking that extra penalty.”

There is no doubt that the Kings will continue to poke and prod at the Oilers as the series continues. Keeping those retaliations in check will only get more difficult, but if the team can continue to succeed on the scoreboard, it could get easier.

 

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Sports

Thatcher Demko injured, out for Game 2 between Canucks and Predators – Vancouver Is Awesome

Published

17 hours ago

 on

April 23, 2024

By


Thatcher Demko returned from injury just in time for the start of the Stanley Cup Playoffs but now is injured again.

After the Vancouver Canucks’ victory in Game 1, Demko was not made available to the media as he was “receiving treatment.” This is not unusual, so was not heavily reported at the time. Monday’s practice was turned into an optional skate — just nine players participated — so Demko’s absence did not seem particularly significant.

But when Demko was also missing from Tuesday’s gameday skate, alarm bells started going off.

300x250x1

According to multiple reports — and now the Canucks’ head coach, Rick Tocchet —Demko will not play in Game 2 and is in fact questionable for the rest of their series against the Nashville Predators.

Demko made 22 saves on 24 shots, none bigger — and potentially injury-inducing — than his first-period save on Anthony Beauvillier where he went into the full splits.

While this is not necessarily where Demko got injured, it would be understandable if it was. Demko still stayed in the game and didn’t seem to be experiencing any difficulties at the time.

Demko is a major difference-maker for the Canucks and his injury casts a pall over the team’s emotional Game 1 victory. 

Tocchet confirmed that Demko will not start in Game 2 but said Demko did skate on Monday on his own. He also said that Demko’s injury is unrelated to the knee injury he suffered during the season that caused him to miss five weeks. Instead, Tocchet suggested Demko was day-to-day, leaving open the possibility for his return in the first round. 

TSN’s Farhan Lalji, however, has reported that Demko’s injury could indeed be to the same knee, even if it is not the same exact injury.

If Demko does indeed miss the rest of the series, the pressure will be on Casey DeSmith, who had a strong season when called upon intermittently as the team’s backup but struggled when thrust into the number-one role when Demko was injured. Behind DeSmith is rookie Arturs Silovs, who has come through with heroic performances in international competition for Latvia but hasn’t been able to repeat those performances at the NHL level.

DeSmith played one game against the Predators this season, making 26 saves on 28 shots in a 5-2 victory in December.

While DeSmith has limited experience in the Stanley Cup Playoffs, his one appearance was spectacular.

On May 3, 2022, DeSmith had to step in for the injured Tristan Jarry for the Pittsburgh Penguins, starting their first postseason game against the New York Rangers. DeSmith made 48 saves on 51 shots before leaving the game in the second overtime with an injury of his own, with Louis Domingue stepping in to make 17 more saves for the win.

The Canucks will look to allow significantly fewer than 51 shots on Tuesday night.

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending