CHICAGO — It was 11 years ago in spring training that Chicago Cubs pitcher Carlos Silva gave beat writers a brief summary of his discussion with pitching coach Mark Riggins about the team’s decision to leave him off the roster.
“He was like, ‘Man, you’ve been throwing the ball good, you can pitch, all of that, blah, blah, blah,’ ” Silva said.
I’m reminded of that quote daily while perusing the internet for updates on the labor negotiations between MLB and the players union.
The owners agree to increase the minimum salary by such-and-such percent. The players union agrees to reduce the number of teams in the proposed anti-tanking draft lottery by one or two.
Blah, blah, blah.
At this point of the owners’ lockout, the daily stories over incremental changes in the sides’ proposals sound redundant. It’s like Groundhog Day, without Bill Murray to keep things interesting.
Negotiations are moving along at a snail’s pace, or worse, at the pace of a baseball game. After a long day of not getting anywhere, the sides agree to get back to the table the following day, and then go through the motions again.
Now the clock is ticking toward the Monday deadline set by MLB to either reach a deal or postpone the start of the regular season on March 31.
No one seemed to take the deadline too seriously until Wednesday, when an MLB spokesman made it clear canceled games would not be made up. There’s almost always a way to make up lost games during a season, either by doubleheaders or rescheduling games at the season’s end.
“A deadline is a deadline,” an MLB spokesman said. “Missed games are missed games. Salary will not be paid for those games.”
That’s funny. One of the few things the sides agreed upon during their memorable 2020 dispute over the restart of the season was that doubleheaders would be played but would consist of two seven-inning games because of COVID-19 health and safety protocols. It made sense: Less time together in the clubhouse meant a reduced chance of players contracting or spreading COVID-19.
But last year the hypocrisy of that rule became evident when many of the doubleheaders were split gates, forcing fans to pay extra to watch seven-inning games instead having two separate games for one price with a short break in between.
The pandemic didn’t end, but the greed of owners trumped health and safety protocols.
One thing that never seems to be repeated enough during the lockout is that owners can be replaced without the game suffering an iota, but you can’t replace the players. The value of franchises has gone up because fans want to see the players play.
Sure, you can put minor leaguers in major league uniforms and pretend spring training is business as usual, as seems to be happening this week. But rest assured it’s not the real thing, as we would find out if MLB ever tried to pull it off in the regular season.
The media is still covering the prospects in camps, and some teams, including the White Sox, are setting up Zooms with minor leaguers for media members back home. It’s understandable baseball fans want their fix, and media outlets need to be there. MLB is just giving everyone what they want.
Minor league games will be played around the nation in April even if the lockout continues, and I would expect those games to receive more daily coverage as well.
Yet I can’t help but wonder if the media is inadvertently helping the owners by covering spring training during the lockout, making it seem as though spring is spring no matter who is wearing the uniform.
Apologies to fellow baseball writers, but what if we just ignored the game until an agreement is reached? Would that force owners to show a little urgency?
Maybe they don’t care about losing a month or so of the schedule. Those games in April and early May are always the hardest ones to sell tickets to because of the unpredictable weather. Everyone is always complaining the season is too long anyway.
After the players strike ended in 1995, they agreed to play 144 games of the 162-game schedule, and no one felt cheated by the loss of 18 games. We already have experienced a 60-game season in 2020, so what’s another shortened season?
Owners and players are counting on fans getting over their initial hurt and eventually returning to the ballpark. They feel the game is so good it’s indestructible. I’m not sure, but admittedly some of my friends already are talking about what free agents the Sox and Cubs can sign as soon as the lockout ends, theorizing more stars will agree to affordable, short-term deals because of an expected free-for-all to get jobs at the start of spring training (or, gulp, summer camp).
Who knows what will happen? In 1995, some teams, including the Montreal Expos, claimed they lost money from the strike and dealt some expensive players when spring training started to pare payroll. But owners like the New York Yankees’ George Steinbrenner and the Atlanta Braves’ Ted Turner didn’t stop spending to try to win, and the lack of a salary cap was fine with them.
“The problem has never been the system,” agent Jim Bronner said after the strike ended in ‘95. “The problem is that the owners haven’t had the will to control themselves. The owners never needed a salary cap or a luxury tax to control costs. The argument that they did was nonsense.”
Baseball remains the only major sport without a salary cap, though the competitive balance tax (i.e., luxury tax) basically serves as one. It remains one of the chief sticking points of the negotiations, and they’re reportedly far apart on the issue.
No matter what they decide, there will always be some owners willing to outspend everyone to get what they want. New York Mets owner Steve Cohen signed Max Scherzer to a three-year, $130 million deal before the lockout, leaving him with a payroll of more than $246 million, according to spotrac.com. Does Cohen have the will to control his own spending? Doubtful.
The more things change ...
Blah, blah, blah.
