Screenshot via Boys & Girls Club
Meeting face-to-face for the first time since Major League Baseball locked out its players in early December, no one was quite sure what to expect as the league and the Players’ Association convened on Monday.
The previous meeting between the two sides a couple of weeks ago ended in veiled barbs being tossed via credentialed intermediaries within hours. Ugly. And concerning.
As of Monday, we’re a little more than two months away from our regularly-scheduled Opening Day. Needless to say, the clock is ticking. And the fan base — like, the entire game’s fan base — is on tenterhooks regarding that timetable.
The league and union parted ways after a little more than two hours of negotiations on Monday. OK. That’s gotta be something. Oh, to be a fly on that wall. Anyway, shortly after reports of the adjournment broke, details of the meeting began to dribble out, as well. And, at first glance, they were a bit shocking.
Per Evan Drellich of The Athletic, the union has agreed to pull their proposal of early free agency (29 1/2 years old or five years of service time was the ultimate dream; not to be) and revise their revenue-sharing plan (if a team is gonna reap luxury tax dollars, they’d better sow them appropriately).
Presumably, the MLBPA is making such substantial concessions with the hopes of kickstarting actual progress. These were two notable issues brought to the table by the union, but, in the long run, these two legs were likely just the most logical to kick out.
According to previous tradewinds — and confirmed by Drellich on Monday — MLB has no interest in lowering the age or service time guidelines for players to reach free agency. That makes sense.
The last thing the league wants to do is start paying free agents earlier. Mega-deals put mega-dents in bottom lines. Let’s not forget, of course, they’re billionaires and they can most definitely afford it. But this is the dance they must dance. And the MLBPA knows this.
As for revenue sharing, that should and must be revised. But the union’s apparent willingness to let the league lead that dance could end up going a very long way in other facets of this battle. Give and take, folks. That’s the name of the negotiation game.
Let’s make one thing clear. The Players’ Association laying down their swords on two hot-button issues is not a sign of weakness. Far from it. This was not one side caving to another. This was a calculated chess move.
The MLBPA appearing to shift its focus from the free agency threshold to other, arguably more pressing matters — arbitration eligibility, for one — is a crystal-clear sign of union solidarity to us.
What we see is the league’s veteran players — specifically the players approaching free agency in the coming years — sacrificing their potentially early paydays for the good of the union as a whole. In particular, their younger generation of members.
In recent years, pre-arbitration and arbitration-eligible players have been making indelible marks on the game, providing value on all sides of the chalk and literally taking our game to new heights.
But, generally, unless a player has three years of service time under their belt, they're making the equivalent of peanuts and Cracker Jack.
For example, Pete Alonso, who leads the majors in home runs since making his MLB debut in 2019, has earned approximately $1.47 million over three seasons (2020 pro-rated). By comparison, he earned $2 million winning the 2019 and 2021 Home Run Derby contests.
A united focus on securing the future of the next generation of the workforce with the support of the players who already paid their dues as the foundation could result in a juggernaut of a negotiating front.
You can’t kick out one, giant, cement leg.
Never any paywalls. Once it leaves my head, it’s yours. If you want to pay me for my work, it’s greatly appreciated.
Become a paid subscriber below, or if you enjoyed the story, drop a buck or two in our Venmo account (@TheAppleNYM)