If they made the announcement this week, pitchers would have more than a month before the June 10 Spring Training Pt2 starts. They could easily throw at home / wherever they currently are. I'm guessing most of them already are throwing. 50+ days should be plenty of time.Whether Keith Law is clueless or not, I have a hard time believing baseball would go with a 20 day “Spring” training.
Do they want to injure an entire generation of pitchers?
I'm going to need a minute to digest all of this information.MLB owners approve plan that would have baseball return by July 4: https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id...-plan-july-start-players-union-preps-weigh-it
Now it's up to the players to approve it.
Among some of the details of the plan:
-An expansion of playoff teams from 10 to 14
-An 82-game season
-The use of home stadiums in areas that have local and state governmental approval
-A so-called spring training 2.0 that begins in June with a season set for early July
-A universal designated hitter
-Geographical schedules, in which teams play only in-division opponents and interleague opponents in a similar area (i.e., American League Central teams play only AL Central and National League Central teams)
-A 30-man roster with a taxi squad that would have upward of 50 players available
It appears that the only team that wouldn't be able to play in their normal home stadium would be Toronto who would be forced to likely play at their spring training home in Dunedin, FL.
I tend to side with the owners more than most, however, if the players will take essentially 50% pay cut, due to playing 50% of the games, and full playoff comp, I would have to side with the players here. Most, if not all of the owners are billionaires, they can have a "break-even" season for once. Heck, it will be a write off at tax time.The players have some legitimate gripes about the compensation framework under this deal. It goes back on a deal they reached with the owners in March that pro-rated salaries based on the % of season played, and instead makes player salary a function of revenues, putting much more of the risk of losses on the players during a season when there may be nearly zero revenue generated from attendance and concessions, which makes up roughly 40% of MLB revenue.
Generally, I side with the players in these situations and this is no exception. If the owners want the players to shoulder a big chuck of the risk, they need to give the players a payout at the end.
Personally, I think a deal will be done and that for 2020 it will look substantially like the proposal, but that the owners will have to make some concessions for 2021 and the future in terms of minimum salary, service time, roster size, etc.
I’m also relatively certain we’ve seen the last pitcher take an AB in a MLB game. It’s going to be DH across the board from here on out.
Innings pitched is a very common incentive among pitchers. It’s often used as a threshold to vest options. For example, Jon Lester’s 7th year (2021) club option becomes guaranteed if he pitches a combined 400 innings In the 5th (2019) and 6th (2020) years of his contract.Curious how incentives will be played out. On a scale of 1-100 on my baseball contract knowledge, I'm probably hovering at around a 6, so I don't know how prevalent things like games played, HRs hit, saves, etc. are in contracts, but if they do exist, how would those be affected?
If a guy's got half as many games to hit on an incentive goal, how do they handle it? Prorated like everything else? Maybe that's the obvious answer.
That was one of the original rumors when all this started was having the World Series played at Dodger Stadium to make up for them losing this year's All-Star Game.There’d almost have to be a neutral site World Series, right? Will the Dodgers get it to make up for losing the All Star Game?