MLB, MLBPA Continue Negotiating

The MLBPA and MLB are roughly 64 games apart in their latest respective plans for the 2020 regular season.

Sources told ESPN’s Jeff Passan that MLB could propose a much shorter season than what the MLBPA proposed earlier this week.

These discussions came after a 114-game proposal with salaries being fully prorated.

A 114-game season with full pro-rata for the players gives them over 70.37 percent of their original 2020 salary, whereas a 50-game season would give them under 30.86 percent of their original 2020 salary.

The owners would obviously want a shorter season so they do not have to pay the players as much while abiding by the March “prorated salaries” agreement.

The players’ proposal would consist of 114 games over 124 days. According to Passan, MLB just wants 50 games starting in July.  Last year, teams played 81 games between July 11 and Sept. 29. 

Hypothetically, if MLB proposes a 50-game season, the players could respond in a few different ways:

  • Accept a 50-game regular season full pro-rata
  • Counter with an 82-game regular season full pro-rata
    • One game more than half of a normal season game
    • Counters where the two sides stand
  • Counter with a 100-game regular season full pro-rata
    • It’s a round number and only a small reduction of their latest proposal
  • Hold their ground

There is obviously a near-infinite amount of possibilities to bring back baseball in 2020, but players getting full prorated salaries is a likely outcome due to a lot of buzz recently on Twitter, including from defending World Series champion Max Scherzer.

Passan also noted that MLB commissioner Rob Manfred said a new proposal will get to the MLBPA “promptly.”

The negotiations have been summed up as the two sides aren’t even on the field yet, they are still in their “tunnels.”

Check us out on our socials:   
Twitter: @PTSTNews and @TalkPrimeTime
Facebook Page: Prime Time Sports Talk
Join our Facebook Group: Prime Time Sports Talk 
Instagram: @primetimesportstalk

Share this:

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *