Speaker 1: You are listening to the Dan Patrick Show on Fox
Speaker 1: Sports Radio. It's our two on this Thursday, Dan and
Speaker 1: the Dana d. Stan Patrick Show. I'm wondering that when
Speaker 1: the National Hockey League gets back on the ice, they
Speaker 1: have the Stanley Cup Final and then you have the
Speaker 1: commissioner taking out the Stanley Cup trophy? Do you pump
Speaker 1: in booze just to make him feel at home there?
Speaker 1: All right, welcome to the program. Boys are here, ready
Speaker 1: to go. We'll talk to Steve Phillips, former Mets general manager.
Speaker 1: Now he works for the MLB Network on Serious X
Speaker 1: and get his thoughts on the players and the owners
Speaker 1: and this is the Hatfields and the McCoys and they've
Speaker 1: made it public and it doesn't feel like there's a resolution. Now,
Speaker 1: what happens a lot of times when you have a lockout,
Speaker 1: you know, you have a strike. It doesn't take much
Speaker 1: to get everybody back together. It's usual one or two items.
Speaker 1: Now it feels like there's a lot more. But it
Speaker 1: feels like there's one or two items. This is just
Speaker 1: the monetary aspect of this. You still have to get
Speaker 1: all the safeguards in play said where you're playing and
Speaker 1: the testing and is their fans, and who gets to
Speaker 1: go to the game? What about the media? How many
Speaker 1: members of the media get to go? You know, what
Speaker 1: is the process just to get into the game, to
Speaker 1: cover the game, to play in the game, all of
Speaker 1: these items that are there. But money is the issue
Speaker 1: here and it has been the issue, and the players,
Speaker 1: it feels like, are taking a stand saying no more
Speaker 1: pay cuts here. But we'll talk to Steve Phillips. He's
Speaker 1: got he's a calming voice on this. He's you know,
Speaker 1: seen both sides. He's a former player and of course
Speaker 1: worked in the front office with the Mets, so he'll
Speaker 1: join us. Coming up. I gotta ask Steve, did Steve?
Speaker 1: Was Steve there offering Bobby Benia his contract that the
Speaker 1: Mets are still paying for Could you check that, mclovin.
Speaker 1: I don't want to put this on Steve, but they
Speaker 1: did sign Bobby Beniah to that what twenty five year
Speaker 1: deal where I think he's still getting paid by the
Speaker 1: way he was playing for other teams and still getting
Speaker 1: paid the Mets. But I think it is going to
Speaker 1: go on for a few more years. Yeah, Paul. That
Speaker 1: contract started in two thousand and eleven and ends in
Speaker 1: two thousand and thirty five. The total payout is thirty million.
Speaker 1: But I think a lot of those contracts are the
Speaker 1: gym does a good job in deferring money allowing you
Speaker 1: to sign another player for that upcoming season. So from
Speaker 1: a baseball standpoint, that may have not have been a
Speaker 1: bad move that I think. I mean, always feels like
Speaker 1: it's it's it was a bad move. I don't know,
Speaker 1: but I don't want to put that on Steve that
Speaker 1: he's the one who he did pull off the trade
Speaker 1: for Piazza, so I gotta be fair to him on
Speaker 1: that too. Yeah, Paul, every time you look up on
Speaker 1: the internet Bobby Bania and contract, there's always lots of
Speaker 1: stories of him. And they used this picture of Bobby
Speaker 1: Bania where he's smiling like he just won the lottery,
Speaker 1: Like it's the biggest smile it did have in the lottery. Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: I don't know if we want to bring up Bania
Speaker 1: and the next day it seems like Steve was involved
Speaker 1: ed move on, Oh all right, scrap that then there's
Speaker 1: no reason to bring that up, no reason to bring
Speaker 1: up any history there. But he'll join us, Jerry West
Speaker 1: will join us coming up in an hour from now
Speaker 1: eighty two years of age. Love having Jerry on, so
Speaker 1: we'll have the Hall of Famer. Mister Klutch, I had
Speaker 1: a stat here, and I'll bring it up this hour
Speaker 1: because there's no way I'm going to bring it up
Speaker 1: next hour when Jerry joins us. Jerry west is one
Speaker 1: of eight players to win the NCAA Final Four Most
Speaker 1: Outstanding Player and win the MVP in the NBA Finals.
Speaker 1: But Jerry West is the only one to do both
Speaker 1: in losing efforts. Stat of good day, stat of the day,
Speaker 1: that best stat of the day, stat of good day.
Speaker 1: Here comes that one stat of the day. Why am
Speaker 1: I going negative here? I got Steve phillips On and
Speaker 1: I appreciate that. No need to bring up Bobby Bennie
Speaker 1: or move on Jerry west On. But how good do
Speaker 1: you have to be that you're the most Valuable Player
Speaker 1: in the NBA Finals and you lose, and you were
Speaker 1: in the NCAA Final Four, you're the most Outstanding player
Speaker 1: and you lose as well. So Jerry will join us
Speaker 1: coming up next. Our phone calls are welcome. We settle
Speaker 1: on a poll question or something different. This slur mclovin. Okay,
Speaker 1: we have a couple of different options we did. We
Speaker 1: did the first hour to NBA players or would you
Speaker 1: watch your family there? People said no for whatever reason.
Speaker 1: All right, PAULI threw out this question. With the Lance
Speaker 1: Armstrong documentary out there and Barry Bonds, we talked about
Speaker 1: last hour, who will history treat the harshest over time?
Speaker 1: Barry Bonds, Lance Armstrong, Houston Astros. I'm not suree all
Speaker 1: the astros aren't in there. Yeah, okay, now well it's like, hey,
Speaker 1: they cheated, all right, we move on. Lance Armstrong is
Speaker 1: still Lance Armstrong. I have no idea why he agreed
Speaker 1: to do this documentary be a part of it, because
Speaker 1: he has no self awareness. It is amazing to watch him.
Speaker 1: But then I wonder if he ever had self awareness
Speaker 1: because he's not helping his cause his case, if he's
Speaker 1: trying to ingratiate himself, he's not doing a good job
Speaker 1: at all. And Bonds was like this. We understood that
Speaker 1: this is who Bonds was. Bonds wasn't trying to be
Speaker 1: your friend. He didn't care Lance. It feels like I
Speaker 1: can't understand why you don't admire him, or you don't
Speaker 1: want him to be your friend or whatever. Approach you
Speaker 1: may have or thoughts about that doesn't have self awareness
Speaker 1: during this documentary doesn't come off well. I think Bonds
Speaker 1: probably will be treated harshest because it was baseball. I mean,
Speaker 1: we sort of care. The reason why Lance Armstrong hurts
Speaker 1: a little bit more to people is we feel we
Speaker 1: reduped by live Strong. We feel we reduped by his story.
Speaker 1: You know, him winning the Tour de France. We didn't
Speaker 1: care about the Tour de France, but then Lance won,
Speaker 1: and all of a sudden, we when's the last time
Speaker 1: time you locked in and went can't wait to watch
Speaker 1: the Americans in the Tour de France. Chances are it
Speaker 1: was probably when Lance was racing. Because I don't think
Speaker 1: you'd care if we have a chance to win, we care.
Speaker 1: I mentioned the America's Cup yachting. We don't what do
Speaker 1: we know or care about yachting, But we lost the
Speaker 1: America's Cup then we wanted it back. It meant war, Yeah, probably.
Speaker 1: But don't you think that the Astros will be go
Speaker 1: down in history as the one proven, proven cheating team
Speaker 1: to win a title in American sports history. I don't
Speaker 1: know of another, that's if there is one. I don't
Speaker 1: know of it. We don't know of it, but they're
Speaker 1: gonna go down as a team. There's no question, There's
Speaker 1: very little question. I think there's no question they cheated
Speaker 1: to win a World Series. We don't know how many
Speaker 1: times they cheated. We know they cheated, okay, but we
Speaker 1: don't know how many games they cheated. But the problem
Speaker 1: with them is they won. I'm sure there's other teams
Speaker 1: that cheated and got in trouble and things like that.
Speaker 1: But the season they are accused cheating, they won the
Speaker 1: World Series. So wouldn't they go through the list. It's like,
Speaker 1: remember those guys, Well, what about teams that use steroids?
Speaker 1: Like football teams? The Nebraska Cornhuskers won national titles and
Speaker 1: you know there was evidence that their players were using
Speaker 1: steroids their offensive line. Did they cheat? Did the Pittsburgh
Speaker 1: Steelers with those players on their offensive line? Did they cheat?
Speaker 1: Or was it everybody else's cheating? So it's not cheating
Speaker 1: like Lances, I guess his philosophy is everybody else was cheating.
Speaker 1: I was just better at them at cheating. He's not
Speaker 1: denying that he cheated. I think what he's saying is,
Speaker 1: what's the big deal everybody was cheating, so what Yes, mcclubn.
Speaker 1: I mean I think the Red Sox won an eighteen.
Speaker 1: I can't remember what year they got officially busted for,
Speaker 1: but they were doing the same thing as the Astros, right, yeah,
Speaker 1: but we don't know there was I mean, what were
Speaker 1: the penalties. The Red Sox fired their manager, but their
Speaker 1: baseball didn't come down hard on the Red Sox for cheating.
Speaker 1: I think they did something to them, right, did they exactly?
Speaker 1: We don't even know what they did, right, Yeah. So
Speaker 1: now did the Astros cheat? Absolutely? I just I don't
Speaker 1: know if we're going to vilify the Astros. You know,
Speaker 1: in twenty five years from now. My point was had
Speaker 1: a lot of teams to probably do what the Astros
Speaker 1: were doing. That'll help them in the long term. That
Speaker 1: is true. I think doctoring baseballs. That's why when I
Speaker 1: think there was that moment between Jim Leland and Tony
Speaker 1: LaRussa in the World Series and it's like, you're gonna call, uh,
Speaker 1: you know his picture on that Like Nope, because you
Speaker 1: knew that your picture was doing the same thing. Nope,
Speaker 1: I'm good, yep, that nothing to see year and just
Speaker 1: keep going. Let me see a couple of things. I
Speaker 1: saw where Baker Mayfield Junior the third had a not
Speaker 1: a press conference but a teleconference, and I guess that
Speaker 1: was just meeting with members of the media and the
Speaker 1: Browns writers since he can't be there in person. And
Speaker 1: Baker Mayfield had this to say about his new philosophy
Speaker 1: moving into this season. I have a different approach to
Speaker 1: this year. Everybody that has been interviewed in our team
Speaker 1: is kind of hit the nail on the head over
Speaker 1: and over about you know, it's just time to work.
Speaker 1: It's time to do our thing instead of talking about it.
Speaker 1: So this is the first media thing I've done just
Speaker 1: because there's no need to be talking about it. It's
Speaker 1: just time to go do it. And right now it's
Speaker 1: you know, kind of moving in silence, which is fun
Speaker 1: for me. That's how I used to do it before
Speaker 1: getting on a bigger stage. So I'm happy to get
Speaker 1: back to those roots. Like I said earlier, get back
Speaker 1: to the fundamentals to where I can accomplish the goals
Speaker 1: when the season comes around. Yeah, he finally listened to me.
Speaker 1: No commercials, no nothing, don't challenge anybody in the media,
Speaker 1: just shut up and play football. And you want to
Speaker 1: you want to put people, you want to put them
Speaker 1: in there, their corner there. You can do that by
Speaker 1: playing great football. You can shut everybody else up by
Speaker 1: just playing great football. You don't have to talk a
Speaker 1: good game. You must play a good game. This is
Speaker 1: the most important year of Baker's career because this is
Speaker 1: going to decide if the Cleveland Browns are going to go, hey,
Speaker 1: this is a guy we're going to sign to a
Speaker 1: second contract. Here. You got offensive line help, you got
Speaker 1: a tight end, new tight end, you got your wide receivers,
Speaker 1: you got two running backs here, no excuses here, no
Speaker 1: more excuses. He should have a If he doesn't haven't
Speaker 1: thirty touchdown passes, he had a bad year this year.
Speaker 1: They are a playoff team and he should have thirty
Speaker 1: touchdown passes. And if they take him back to what
Speaker 1: he did his first year or when he how he
Speaker 1: played in college, that will be very important for Baker Mayfield,
Speaker 1: very important. But be quiet. You know you didn't earn anything.
Speaker 1: Now you can prove it and then you could get
Speaker 1: that second contract. But the more he talked, the worse
Speaker 1: had god. The more he challenged people, the worst had gone.
Speaker 1: Just let your play. Tell everybody what it needs to because,
Speaker 1: believe me, it will. Yeah, Paul, I completely disagree with this.
Speaker 1: Baker Mayfield got to where he is, a Heisman Oklahoma football,
Speaker 1: eleven wins, first round pick, his Rookie of the Year,
Speaker 1: all by being brash and in your face. I had
Speaker 1: the feeling of a year from now, we're gonna hear
Speaker 1: Baker Mayfield take you know what. I gotta get back
Speaker 1: to being me. I gotta get back to challenging people
Speaker 1: are getting people's faces. Last year, I try to go
Speaker 1: into a shell and let the media control me. That's
Speaker 1: what we're gonna hear a year from now. Okay, well,
Speaker 1: it didn't go well last year when he was Baker Mayfield,
Speaker 1: and it certainly helps when you're at Oklahoma and you're
Speaker 1: playing those defenses. Yeah yeah, all of a sudden, you
Speaker 1: look a whole lot better. There. NFL humbles you, man,
Speaker 1: they humble you. That's what happened. Good story, underdog story,
Speaker 1: and all of a sudden, you go, oh, look at
Speaker 1: Baker Mayfield. He's been great the second year. Hey we
Speaker 1: got Odell Beckham, and hey we're gonna go to the
Speaker 1: super Bowl. And then all of a sudden, you go, Nope,
Speaker 1: you're not even leaving Cleveland, dude, You're not going anywhere. Yeah. Boy,
Speaker 1: This is kind of how Cam Newton's career started out.
Speaker 1: His first year is in the Pro Bowl, twenty one touchdown,
Speaker 1: seventeen picks. The next year he cooled off. His percentage
Speaker 1: was down, his touchdowns were down, his productivity was down.
Speaker 1: And then following year he's twelve and four. His third
Speaker 1: year in the league, Cam Newton was twelve and four. Yeah,
Speaker 1: and look, I like Baker, I like that personality, but
Speaker 1: there's a time and a place for it, and it
Speaker 1: felt like he would be playing bad and those progressive
Speaker 1: commercials would come on and you go, no, no, that's
Speaker 1: not good. Now, those are funny. If you're twelve and four,
Speaker 1: you know when Peyton did all his commercials and Peyton
Speaker 1: was winning, that's the difference. If Peyton's going five and eleven,
Speaker 1: you're going, okay, yeah, that's really funny. Yeah, it's okay, Yeah,
Speaker 1: all right, Peyton with drawl, Southern drawl, Nation one or
Speaker 1: got Brad Paigeley here, Babe Bran not as funny. Clive
Speaker 1: certainly was clever when he was winning. Man at Peyton.
Speaker 1: He's funny because he's winning. Baker, Nope, I also saw
Speaker 1: this foregone conclusion to a tongue of violoa will start
Speaker 1: in week one question mark. The Dolphins have indicated that
Speaker 1: to a tongua violo. So if you're going to do clickbait,
Speaker 1: you do not put a question mark there. Question mark
Speaker 1: means it's not a story foregone conclusion to a tongue
Speaker 1: will start week one, it's not a foregone conclusion. If
Speaker 1: I got a question mark there foregone conclusion to a
Speaker 1: tongue of violoh will start week one question mark? Okay.
Speaker 1: The Dolphins have indicated that tongue of violoha might start
Speaker 1: the season on the bench until he's ready to start
Speaker 1: in the twenty twenty season. But Bleacher reports Mike Freeman,
Speaker 1: find NFL writer says that tongue of violoa starting week
Speaker 1: one is a foregone conclude. Wait, if your writer is
Speaker 1: saying it's a foregone conclusion, then don't put a question
Speaker 1: mark by it. Is he saying or is he reporting?
Speaker 1: Because those are two different things. Right Seton could say
Speaker 1: that two is going to start, Well, let me see
Speaker 1: if he's got sources here. Well, my sources right now
Speaker 1: are telling me he's either going to start week one
Speaker 1: or be on the bench a bank up. Let me
Speaker 1: see what this says. Uh, my dolphins a week one
Speaker 1: is a foregone conclusion. Let me see if there's anything
Speaker 1: else in here. Oh, let's go with it. Yeah, they probably,
Speaker 1: Let's just publish it. I clicked on the story. I
Speaker 1: think Todd added the question mark because I don't see
Speaker 1: the question mark in the story. Todd, did you ask
Speaker 1: the question? Did you put the question mark there? Did
Speaker 1: you edit this? You got to turn on your mic.
Speaker 1: That's how it works. I put a question mark in
Speaker 1: the headline, but in my headline for the subject of
Speaker 1: the Why are you doing that? Who the hell are
Speaker 1: you to put a question mark in the headline because
Speaker 1: that was my that was my website. But this is
Speaker 1: a surprising piece of news. Patrick, Who's the number one
Speaker 1: where he's supposed to be ahead of two and all
Speaker 1: of a sudden, But you're not the editorial staff here
Speaker 1: for Bleacher Report. I'm not I took I took a
Speaker 1: little liberty there, I guess I apologize to Mike Freemant.
Speaker 1: I didn't know that Todd was all of a sudden
Speaker 1: going to be editing this. That was my question as too. Really,
Speaker 1: this is interesting to it could be starting. Okay, I
Speaker 1: need to wait a minute, hold on a second. Is
Speaker 1: because there's two question marks. Right, there's the subject of
Speaker 1: Todd's email that says to us starting week one question
Speaker 1: mark and then the next part is foregone conclusion to
Speaker 1: a we'll start week one question mark? Todd? Did you
Speaker 1: put both of those question marks in anything in the
Speaker 1: actual copy? I did not put a question mark. But
Speaker 1: my only question mark was in the year subject I
Speaker 1: clicked on the story. There's no question mark. Okay, well,
Speaker 1: I'm glad that you brought that to our attention. Do
Speaker 1: you want to apologize on behalf of this? I have
Speaker 1: to show the journalistic faux pause, but it says foregone conclusion.
Speaker 1: It says foregone conclusion, Todd. That's what he's that's what's
Speaker 1: being reported. I know, but you don't. If you want
Speaker 1: to put after week will start week one period, then
Speaker 1: you put boy, I have a question mark about this,
Speaker 1: but the Dolphins have the Dolphins announced that he's the
Speaker 1: starting quarterback. Don't try it, Todd. Don't try it because
Speaker 1: some some sources are saying, but it's a foregone conclusion
Speaker 1: until the Dolphins come out and say our starting quarterback
Speaker 1: Week one is two. Then that's a question mark to me.
Speaker 1: When does the reporter get to tell the team who's
Speaker 1: too for him? He's not putting a question mark after
Speaker 1: this report. Yeah, the line report. It's still a report.
Speaker 1: It's not back. It's a report. I know, but you
Speaker 1: I understand what you're saying, and I as it's a
Speaker 1: foregone conclusion. That's his report, his opinions, a foregone conclusion.
Speaker 1: That's great. I think the reason why I put the
Speaker 1: question mark in and not to confuse you, and I apologize,
Speaker 1: it's because the Dolphins have not said that he's the story. No,
Speaker 1: that's not the way this works. That's not the way
Speaker 1: this works. So I caused a journalistic piece of confusion there,
Speaker 1: Yes she did, So I will apologize for that. Well,
Speaker 1: it doesn't sound like you want to. I'll be more
Speaker 1: kept with my punctuation in my air. No, you can say, boy,
Speaker 1: I got questions about this, but you've added a question
Speaker 1: mark in the title that he proba. You have put
Speaker 1: really question mark there. That would have been good, that
Speaker 1: would leave it for interpretation after that. So, Mike Freeman,
Speaker 1: we apologize, cleared that up, just move on. Nothing to
Speaker 1: see here, So it looks like two is definitely the
Speaker 1: week one quarterback, regardless of what the Dolphins front officers.
Speaker 1: Here we go. There's the Toddler. There he is passive.
Speaker 1: Here he is Ladies, that's great that Mike Freeman is
Speaker 1: a sistant GM of the Dolphins. That's all. Every story
Speaker 1: you see where somebody makes a declaration, do you put
Speaker 1: a question mark for now on my subject? We are
Speaker 1: gonna be no. Do you do this at all of them?
Speaker 1: Because this is the first time somebody, Oh, you have,
Speaker 1: but but but it has of course this kind of
Speaker 1: rucus in here. You just can't say, you know what,
Speaker 1: my bad. I should probably just say check out this
Speaker 1: story or just ny after the hour, we'll talk to
Speaker 1: Steve Phillips, the former Mets general manager, will join us
Speaker 1: or will we question mark or wait a second? Just
Speaker 1: like I'm getting an up getting a note on the
Speaker 1: wise here, Mike Freeman, new vice president of a player Plason.
Speaker 1: I like, somehow, all of a sudden, because Todd screwed up,
Speaker 1: he's attacking Mike Freeman, like somehow it's his fault that
Speaker 1: on that particulars Mike Freeman did his job, he did
Speaker 1: something he got some information there and in what dot?
Speaker 1: What response was gotten from the Dolphins for the foregone conclusion.
Speaker 1: You would think he or somebody would have went to
Speaker 1: do and say he foregone conclusion. What response has been
Speaker 1: given by the foregone conclusion from him? I want to
Speaker 1: know what the Dolphins response to the report. That's a
Speaker 1: foregone todd This is where you always tried it. Hawk
Speaker 1: yourself out as something you do. I'm the only one
Speaker 1: of a stafflet does that. And twenty after the hour,
Speaker 1: this is the Dan Patrick Show, question mark two. I
Speaker 1: can't wait to see him start week ones. Shut up,
Speaker 1: it's fantastic. Thanks for listening to The Dan Patrick Show podcast.
Speaker 1: Be sure to catch us live every weekday morning nine
Speaker 1: to noon Eastern or six to nine Pacific on Fox
Speaker 1: Sports Radio. Find your local station for The Dan Patrick
Speaker 1: Show at Fox Sports Radio dot com, or stream us
Speaker 1: live every day on the iHeartRadio app by searching f
Speaker 1: s R. Coming up a little bit, we'll talk about
Speaker 1: tailgating at college football games. I brought this up a
Speaker 1: couple of weeks ago article in New York Magazine by
Speaker 1: Will Leach, who lives in Athens, Georgia, and he proposed
Speaker 1: the question that we ask a couple of weeks ago,
Speaker 1: what if no fans are allowed in the stands, but
Speaker 1: you still have people show up to tailgate at the stadium.
Speaker 1: We'll talk about that coming up. One of the right
Speaker 1: baseball minds that I worked with that the Mothership. He's
Speaker 1: Steve Phillips, host of Leadoff Spot on MLB Network and
Speaker 1: Sirius XM, former Mets GM. He joins us on the program.
Speaker 1: Steve full disclosure. I heard you on Mad Dog Radio
Speaker 1: this morning coming in and I said, you know what,
Speaker 1: Steve is making some nice, you know, concrete, bite sized
Speaker 1: answers here, given opinions on both sides of this, and
Speaker 1: I thought, you know what, let me have him come
Speaker 1: on and summarize exactly what is going on with Major
Speaker 1: League Baseball right now. So thanks for joining us on
Speaker 1: short notice, and it's great to see you here. To
Speaker 1: see you too, and be glad to be here. And
Speaker 1: obviously these negotiations going on, Baseball made their proposal and
Speaker 1: it was effectively a non starter for the union, the
Speaker 1: idea of the sliding scale, and I think the way
Speaker 1: to look at it is owners have proclaimed that they're
Speaker 1: going to lose forty percent of the revenues without fans
Speaker 1: in the stands. That includes ticket sales, concessions, parking, all
Speaker 1: of that that it's forty percent. The proposal they made
Speaker 1: to the players on taking a pay cut off of
Speaker 1: the pro rated salary is a sliding scale that impacts
Speaker 1: guys differently depending upon how much winny they make, but effectively,
Speaker 1: on average, they're asking the players to take a thirty
Speaker 1: three percent pay cut now, so effectively the forty percent loss,
Speaker 1: they're actually putting thirty three percent of that on the
Speaker 1: players and only holding seven percent of that themselves. From
Speaker 1: the owner's perspective, so it's a non starter for the players.
Speaker 1: They don't like the sliding scale and the way it's
Speaker 1: sort of spread out, and so the union now looking
Speaker 1: to put together a counter proposal that we're hearing is
Speaker 1: going to be pro rated salaries, that's it, and we
Speaker 1: want more games. And from the owner's perspective, they're looking
Speaker 1: at it saying we lose about six hundred and eighty
Speaker 1: thousand dollars per game paying pro rated salaries without fans
Speaker 1: in the stands. More games is worse for the owners,
Speaker 1: and it pushes the regular season deeper into the fall,
Speaker 1: where the owners have a real concern that they might
Speaker 1: lose the playoffs with the second wave of the virus,
Speaker 1: and the playoffs is the biggest line item of revenue
Speaker 1: for owners right now, that playoff share of the network money.
Speaker 1: They can't put that at risk, and so therein lies
Speaker 1: the problem in this negotiation. All right, let me make
Speaker 1: you the mediator here. You're gonna bring both sides together.
Speaker 1: What is the common ground that will allow us to
Speaker 1: be able to play baseball? Right? So, the first thing
Speaker 1: the players need to understand is the owner's perspective. There's
Speaker 1: two things. One, not having fans in the stands is
Speaker 1: a major issue when it comes to revenues. That needs
Speaker 1: to be addressed. That a player getting one hundred percent
Speaker 1: of his day's pay when the owners getting sixty percent
Speaker 1: of revenue. That's the problem. The players need to acknowledge it,
Speaker 1: and they have to get off of the pro raated salaries.
Speaker 1: The other thing the players need to understand is that
Speaker 1: if they're going to get paid, the owners are going
Speaker 1: to pay them up front and then make themselves whole
Speaker 1: by collecting the playoff money. If the playoffs don't happen,
Speaker 1: then it's catastrophic losses. For the owners, so the players
Speaker 1: need to protect the owners with the risk of losing
Speaker 1: the playoffs. From the owner's perspective, they need to understand
Speaker 1: for the players that pro orated salaries already cripples them
Speaker 1: at half their pay and taking less than that with
Speaker 1: where they are and the fact they have short term
Speaker 1: lifespan as a baseball player, that ultimately they're the ones
Speaker 1: going on the field taking the physical risk that has
Speaker 1: dollar value that needs to be acknowledged. And so ultimately
Speaker 1: the two sides need to understand pro rated salaries at
Speaker 1: one hundred percent will not get a deal done. The
Speaker 1: players are going to have to come off of that,
Speaker 1: and the owners are not going to get a fifty
Speaker 1: fifty share of the losses with the players because they're
Speaker 1: taking physical risk. And the owners can make it up
Speaker 1: in the future by just making different business decisions next
Speaker 1: year and they could have expansion a couple of years
Speaker 1: from now where they could have a billion dollar franchise
Speaker 1: bee and make themselves hold a significant way. So the
Speaker 1: middle ground is get off of the pro rated salaries,
Speaker 1: but the owners are not going to get a twenty
Speaker 1: percent twenty percent split of the forty percent loss. It's
Speaker 1: going to be players take a ten percent reduction in
Speaker 1: your pro rated salary, but you're going to have to
Speaker 1: defer some of that money and it will be paid
Speaker 1: contingent upon whether we have the playoffs or not. And
Speaker 1: if we get there, you get the full share of
Speaker 1: a ten percent pay cut off your poor raded salary.
Speaker 1: We make a deal, we move on. I wonder about
Speaker 1: this looking back on the NFL deal that the owners
Speaker 1: in players struck, and what I thought the Players Association
Speaker 1: did brilliantly was play to the guys that aren't making
Speaker 1: a lot of money, We're going to get you benefits here. Therefore,
Speaker 1: they were going to get the votes they needed to
Speaker 1: have this pass. You have the haves and the have nots,
Speaker 1: and it feels like Mike Trout or Max scherzor those
Speaker 1: guys are taking the biggest financial haircut, whereas it feels
Speaker 1: like the owners or the commissioners playing to the guys
Speaker 1: who are making minimum here, like these guys have to
Speaker 1: come back, Mike Trout or Max Scherzer, they don't have
Speaker 1: to come back. Is there going to be a war
Speaker 1: between the haves and the have nots inside the Players Association? Right?
Speaker 1: So you're one hundred percent right now. I don't believe
Speaker 1: that that was the owner's purpose in their offer to
Speaker 1: split the union, but it could have been a residual
Speaker 1: impact of it now, and it could backfire on them
Speaker 1: because sixty five percent of the players make between the
Speaker 1: minimum salary and one million dollars. Those players, under the
Speaker 1: owner's proposal will play half the season fifty percent of
Speaker 1: the season, and get forty six percent of their pay.
Speaker 1: They're not damaged that significantly. A guy like Mike Trout
Speaker 1: is going to play half the season and get twenty
Speaker 1: two percent of his pay, and so that feels there's
Speaker 1: like an injustice there. But sixty five percent of the
Speaker 1: players are pretty safe. I gotta tell you, I think
Speaker 1: the players are more tightly united than what the owners
Speaker 1: gave them credit for. Now. I know you've got a
Speaker 1: lot of guys out there talking and they may not
Speaker 1: be as united from their leadership to contain themselves, but
Speaker 1: I don't think there's any player that's going to look
Speaker 1: at Mike Trout and say, yeah, you're thirty six million
Speaker 1: should turn into seven million this year, and you should
Speaker 1: take the bulk of the payback to the owners and
Speaker 1: all of this and so I think there's going to
Speaker 1: have to be a reek. That's why I think the
Speaker 1: players response to the owners proposal will be like, yeah,
Speaker 1: that's a nice offer. We don't care anything about that.
Speaker 1: Our counter proposal is not going to work off of
Speaker 1: your system, your format, your structure. We're going to come
Speaker 1: at you completely differently with our proposal. Yeah, but I'm
Speaker 1: concerned about We're talking to Steve Phillips, host of MLB
Speaker 1: Radio Network on Serious six. I'm concerned about when you
Speaker 1: start to look at this with guys wanting to come back.
Speaker 1: This is a star driven league. I mean, we do
Speaker 1: show up for Clayton Kershaw or you know, Aaron Judge
Speaker 1: or Mike Trout if they're not coming back, the guys
Speaker 1: who make all this money. Are people going to be
Speaker 1: that starved to say, hey, I'm okay with watching the
Speaker 1: Phillies without Bryce Harper here. Did they run the risk
Speaker 1: of that, Steve, Yeah, I think they do. I think
Speaker 1: the risk. I think the risk exists. And yet, you know,
Speaker 1: and the other for other reasons, they still might make it.
Speaker 1: Some players might not play Mike Trout's wife's expecting a baby,
Speaker 1: and the notion of you know, does he put himself
Speaker 1: at risk and his wife and baby at risk. Garrett
Speaker 1: Cole's wife's expecting a baby. They're the two highest paid
Speaker 1: guys out there, So that does I think players will play,
Speaker 1: And if they don't, I think I still think it's
Speaker 1: compelling enough product that you're going to get players to
Speaker 1: show up and play if fans are gonna watch, because
Speaker 1: we're desperate, We're desperate to be able to watch some
Speaker 1: live sports here in the States. Yeah, I just wonder
Speaker 1: how this goes horribly wrong. And baseball has to know
Speaker 1: its place in the sports society, this sports landscape here,
Speaker 1: and I think that that it feels tenure with Steve.
Speaker 1: It does look and I think that this negotiation is
Speaker 1: not exclusive about to the twenty twenty season. We've got
Speaker 1: a collective bargaining agreement that's due to expire at the
Speaker 1: end of twenty twenty one. That's just on the horizon
Speaker 1: if and there's a high level of distrust, which I
Speaker 1: thought we had made up a lot of ground with
Speaker 1: labor Piece for a long period of time. But man,
Speaker 1: we went right back to the hat fields and McCoy's here.
Speaker 1: I mean, it has gotten ugly right out of the
Speaker 1: get go, and the players don't trust the owners numbers.
Speaker 1: When the owners say it's going to cost us forty percent,
Speaker 1: the players like, okay, let's show us the books. And
Speaker 1: the owners have never just shown the books. Now, the
Speaker 1: owners may be telling the truth that it's forty percent
Speaker 1: of their revenues, but it doesn't necessarily mean it's going
Speaker 1: to be a forty percent loss, because some part of
Speaker 1: that forty percent might be coming out of some of
Speaker 1: the profits that they were making, and so it might
Speaker 1: turn in a forty percent loss of revenue, might be
Speaker 1: a twenty percent loss this year, And so the players.
Speaker 1: Max Scherzer came out and said, we're not coming off
Speaker 1: pro rated numbers unless you show us the books. If
Speaker 1: you show us the books, we'll make it public and
Speaker 1: then we'll go along with it. And he thinks the
Speaker 1: reason the owners don't want to do it is that
Speaker 1: they're telling a difference. So I gotta tell you that, damn.
Speaker 1: Having been in the front office for thirteen years, I
Speaker 1: never saw the second set of books. If there's two
Speaker 1: sets of books. The way we set it up with
Speaker 1: the Mets was we did we set up the break even.
Speaker 1: We projected revenues work backwards off of that as to
Speaker 1: what payroll could be, minor league expenses, scouting expenses, and
Speaker 1: set up the break even if we one, and what
Speaker 1: in the playoffs we made money if we lost, and
Speaker 1: we were losing money, we traded guys in the deadline
Speaker 1: trying to get back to break even. There wasn't this
Speaker 1: secret set of books with the super sauce somewhere that
Speaker 1: they're hiding money. I never saw it if there were
Speaker 1: those set of books. You of course were the gym
Speaker 1: with the Mets with the Bobby Bania deal, And I'm wondering,
Speaker 1: as I think it allowed you guys to sign Mike Hampton.
Speaker 1: Is that fair to say freed up some money? But
Speaker 1: if you look back on that deal, would you make
Speaker 1: that deal again with Bobby Bania? Yeah? So, so I
Speaker 1: remember we were releasing Bobby Bonilla, and ownership said, you
Speaker 1: know that that his group, his his agency had represented
Speaker 1: Darryl Strawberry back in the day where they had done
Speaker 1: deferred compensation and but he people don't know this. When
Speaker 1: he first signed with the Mets the first time around,
Speaker 1: he had deferred compensation with them too. He still gets
Speaker 1: some payments from that first deal he made with the
Speaker 1: Mets deferred compensation. And so you know, here's the thought
Speaker 1: on that though, was the Mets looked at it at
Speaker 1: time is we had Bernie Madeoff as an investment vehicle.
Speaker 1: So the Mets looked at deferring Bonia's compensation as a
Speaker 1: way for the team to make money. That they were
Speaker 1: going to take his I think it six point eight
Speaker 1: million or whatever that number was, release him and then
Speaker 1: invest that money with Madeoff and put it out for
Speaker 1: ten years not paying Bunie anything, and then spread it
Speaker 1: out over twenty five years of payments of equal payments.
Speaker 1: And so I would just all, hey, Givothy the County
Speaker 1: Department the crunch numbers, and if made Off return this
Speaker 1: percentage or that percentage of that percentage, how much money
Speaker 1: would you make on Bonia's money? And the notion was
Speaker 1: that we had a chance to make millions on his deal,
Speaker 1: even with the payout for Bonilla over that period of time.
Speaker 1: And so quite honestly, it was turning what was a
Speaker 1: loss of six point eight million in a single year
Speaker 1: of releasing him into what would be a win in
Speaker 1: a financial windfall for the organization because of the Madeoff investments.
Speaker 1: Did you invest in made off. You know what's funny.
Speaker 1: I actually you know, one time was suggested, say, you know,
Speaker 1: you get some money saved up, we can maybe get
Speaker 1: you an account with Bernie. And I asked the question,
Speaker 1: what makes him better than everybody else? Like why is?
Speaker 1: Why is he better? Like why don't people just look
Speaker 1: at what he's doing and other people sort of copy
Speaker 1: his investments and do it. And what I was told
Speaker 1: was he keeps everything really close to the vest obviously, uh,
Speaker 1: and and that I but here's the thing, like Fred Wilpon.
Speaker 1: You know, once Fred Wilpon vetted you, he loved you,
Speaker 1: and like I was, I was in that group like
Speaker 1: he like I was one of his people that he
Speaker 1: really treated me with love and respect. And Bernie was
Speaker 1: a friend of his. That's why Fred had no idea
Speaker 1: because when they had me go and have the accounting
Speaker 1: department run the money, they said, you know, if he
Speaker 1: makes what if he loses some money somehere, So they
Speaker 1: did a whole number of iterations on it and ran
Speaker 1: it through the system without any expectation of what the
Speaker 1: return would be, just knowing that that he was better
Speaker 1: than others and they might get a return on it.
Speaker 1: So it was heartbreaking because for the Willponds, knowing Fred,
Speaker 1: it was the relationship. Obviously it lost a lot of money,
Speaker 1: but the relationship and that sort of commitment and connection
Speaker 1: he had was really devastate. Was heartbreaking for me to
Speaker 1: see all of that and go through that from the
Speaker 1: outside looking in at that point. But the aftershocks of
Speaker 1: that relationship between the will Bonds and Bernie Madoff. Is
Speaker 1: that why the Mets are up for sale or been
Speaker 1: up for sale? You know? I think that by the way,
Speaker 1: I never ended up investing with it at all, so
Speaker 1: I avoided it. But I think that, you know, that's
Speaker 1: certainly was part of where they had been. But you know,
Speaker 1: I don't know. I think sometimes what we see with
Speaker 1: ownership is the succession plan. Right when when the owner
Speaker 1: gets a little bit older, how do you you know,
Speaker 1: the estate taxes on a franchise. We saw it back
Speaker 1: in the day. I guess with the Robbie family down
Speaker 1: to Florida and they're selling the team, and you know,
Speaker 1: how do you then pay those taxes on the ownership
Speaker 1: of it? And so I think that there's some part
Speaker 1: of maybe the planning for a succession plan that's coming
Speaker 1: into it. But you know, here's the thing. If expansion
Speaker 1: may be coming, and that may be a way for
Speaker 1: owners to solve their problem. Right put billion dollar expansion
Speaker 1: fees for two new franchises to come in to get
Speaker 1: you to thirty two, which would balance it out. Then
Speaker 1: they can sort of subsidize themselves like they did back
Speaker 1: in the nineties to pay off the collusion payment and
Speaker 1: settlement when they added you know, the Rockies and Marlins
Speaker 1: back in the day. So so I think that that
Speaker 1: they you may see the Mets hold out a bit.
Speaker 1: If expansion is just around the corner, where are we
Speaker 1: going to expand to? Well, I think Montreal seems like
Speaker 1: a potential place. Portland is a possibility. I think san Antonio.
Speaker 1: I didn't know this. San Antonio, what the seventh most
Speaker 1: populated city in the country and one point five million
Speaker 1: in the city. You know. I think that Nashville is
Speaker 1: a place that people are talking about as the possibility.
Speaker 1: Charlotte and the notion is, you know, and there's been
Speaker 1: this thought that Tampa and Oakland need to be resolved first. Right,
Speaker 1: You've got two stadium issues there. The Oakland A's can't
Speaker 1: even pay their rent right now. By the way, one
Speaker 1: point two million dollars have not paid their rent for
Speaker 1: this season, but that the thought all along has been
Speaker 1: you've got to resolve those two before you expand. But
Speaker 1: I think you could find twenty eight owners right now
Speaker 1: who would vote to expand before worrying about what to
Speaker 1: do with Tampa Bay and Oakland, if it's going to
Speaker 1: generate the expansion fees that could come with it, to
Speaker 1: try to make everybody whole after the suffering financially from
Speaker 1: this pandemic. Great stuff, Steve, I hope you're doing well
Speaker 1: and we appreciate you joining us. Yeah, my pleasure. Thanks
Speaker 1: for having me do. That's Steve Phillips, host of MLB
Speaker 1: Network Radio on Series XM. We'll take a break. Phone
Speaker 1: calls coming up right after this. Thanks for listening to
Speaker 1: The Dan Patrick Show podcast. Be sure to catch us
Speaker 1: live every weekday morning nine until noon eastern six to
Speaker 1: nine Pacific on Fox Sports Radio, and you can find
Speaker 1: us on the iHeartRadio app at FSR or stream us
Speaker 1: live every day at YouTube dot com slash the Dan
Speaker 1: Patrick Show. Oh, I'll get a couple of phone calls
Speaker 1: in here at eight seven seven three d P Show
Speaker 1: email address Dpat Dan Patrick dot com. Let me see
Speaker 1: this from Greg and Baytown, Texas. Just watch the opening
Speaker 1: scene from Sibura. Holy schnikey, So I can see why
Speaker 1: Paully's wife doesn't want to watch. I can see why
Speaker 1: Paully does want to watch. That was on Netflix. It's Siburra.
Speaker 1: And then it says like the Blood of Rome. Yeah,
Speaker 1: Siburrah Blood on Rome. There's a movie a few years
Speaker 1: ago called Siburra. It's a it's their version of like
Speaker 1: a mafia. It's a government, politics, the church, organized crime.
Speaker 1: It's subtitled it's all in Italian, but it's subtitled. The
Speaker 1: first scene was so hardcore. Then my wife goes, nope,
Speaker 1: not for me, and she watches. She watched Breaking Bad,
Speaker 1: and she had no problem with Breaking Bad. Just I'm
Speaker 1: not going to describe the scene. Sibura. Yeah, not like Sabarro. Yeah,
Speaker 1: that'd be Fritzie's favorite show because I thought, man, all right,
Speaker 1: they got a food court in Rome. It's perfect. Yeah,
Speaker 1: but there's blood. It's one of those scenes that it's
Speaker 1: not even violent. The first scene it's just so dark
Speaker 1: and cringeworthy. Let's put the way it involves a priest.
Speaker 1: And then in my life goes Nope, no, I don't.
Speaker 1: I know, I know, I'm not interested. But it got
Speaker 1: great reviews. It's one of the more popular shows out
Speaker 1: there on Netflix, and it's supposed to be hardcore. Yeah, nope,
Speaker 1: not interested. I was watching reels last night, as I
Speaker 1: always do. They have mobsters, uh you know, episodes, and
Speaker 1: they had it on Murder Incorporated. The the guys who
Speaker 1: started Murder Incorporated back in the thirties, and they, you know,
Speaker 1: they decided that the Italians and uh well the Jewish mafia,
Speaker 1: like they all teamed up there like Dutch Shouldson some
Speaker 1: of these other guys, and they just talked about how
Speaker 1: many people they killed all over the United States but
Speaker 1: Murder Incorporated and they all die in the end. By
Speaker 1: the way, yes, if you title your company Murder Incorporated,
Speaker 1: you're gonna be a big target with authority. I mean
Speaker 1: the irs. The IRS is gonna have a problem. It's
Speaker 1: not like a flower show. Murder Murder inc LLC. Yeah,
Speaker 1: you get they're up to something bad. Yeah, imagine the
Speaker 1: IRS would probably question that. Yes, we love getting into
Speaker 1: this now. No, I just watch reels and then it
Speaker 1: reminds me of why I don't like Mafia movies. So
Speaker 1: you watch it and you're like, oh man, thank god,
Speaker 1: none of this is real. Yep, yeah, thank god, this
Speaker 1: is all it is called reels. Yes, Todd, were people
Speaker 1: really afraid of Abe the Menorah Goldstein back in the
Speaker 1: day with the thirties of Jewish mobsters. Hard to envision
Speaker 1: that there was nobody called Abe Menorah Goldstein or whatever
Speaker 1: you question, Mark, I can't believe you have like Frankie
Speaker 1: that you know, two fingers maloney or whatever. I figured
Speaker 1: that might be here, you know, Yes, I can't believe
Speaker 1: I'm diving into this with this idiot here. But Mayer
Speaker 1: Lance he's like the third most famous mobster of all time,
Speaker 1: and he was Jewish. Everybody knows that. And I has
Speaker 1: no idea who Maer Lance him? In Roth and Godfather
Speaker 1: one and two Lansky there was some powerful Jewish. Yeah,
Speaker 1: all of like all the ethnic groups in Lower New York.
Speaker 1: They're all nice Jewish boys. They don't do these kind
Speaker 1: of things. They were in uh Brownsville, I think, is
Speaker 1: where they had a couple hundred thousand, uh Jewish families,
Speaker 1: and then that's where some of the you know, organized
Speaker 1: crime got started because of prohibition. Yes, Todd, or yes, mclub. Yeah,
Speaker 1: as long as we're diving is I always found it
Speaker 1: interesting that Todd's dad was a Jewish cop, Yeah, and
Speaker 1: named Fritz, which is not a Jewish name, a German.
Speaker 1: Still have a tough time believing that someone from my
Speaker 1: family would do something that's courageous, to put their life
Speaker 1: on the light every day. I don't know how he
Speaker 1: got some different genes that I didn't get. Obviously a
Speaker 1: tough place to be a cop to New York City, Brooklyn, right, Yeah, Yeah,
Speaker 1: I used to work at the old Yankee Stadium and
Speaker 1: he was right there in the Bronx Brooklyn. Yeah. My
Speaker 1: dad was an ironworker. He worked on high rise building
Speaker 1: specific this is and let's compare our I'm comparing how
Speaker 1: soft I am. Like the idea of being over two
Speaker 1: floors working outside on a building scares the hell out
Speaker 1: of me. I mean, I think we're all scared of
Speaker 1: heights at some point. But that's just it's funny how
Speaker 1: different you could be from your dad. My dad was
Speaker 1: a computer science guy, and you can't work your computer,
Speaker 1: and I am not good at computers. They really make
Speaker 1: me nervous. My dad is a history teacher and I
Speaker 1: was terrible at school. Go figure McLevin. My dad was
Speaker 1: a hostel grocer. I got nothing. Great guy, probably watching
Speaker 1: right now. Oh yeah, we love your parents. They're great.
Speaker 1: A couple of phone calls here Luca in Baltimore. Hey Luca,
Speaker 1: Hi Dan, thank you for taking my call. A long
Speaker 1: time listener. I just wanted to say that the Sabora series.
Speaker 1: I watched it. I think it's absolutely worth the time.
Speaker 1: As an aside, I actually grew up in Italy, so
Speaker 1: I guess I've watched all of the different Mafia movies
Speaker 1: under a different lens. But I'll say that the series
Speaker 1: might not have the same glamour and maybe romanticized aspect
Speaker 1: of it, it gives a really good look into what
Speaker 1: the Mafia has evolved into. And on top of that,
Speaker 1: I have a suggestion for a similar series, Zero zero zero.
Speaker 1: I believe that's an Amazon Prime and that is off
Speaker 1: of a book. Again, similar series about the modern spin
Speaker 1: of the Mafia. So I think, yeah, we were talking
Speaker 1: about that earlier Luca, prior to the show, because Pauli's like,
Speaker 1: do I go zero zero zero or Suburra, and he
Speaker 1: chose Suburra, but zero zero zero, I guess got good reviews.
Speaker 1: That's Amazon Prime. Yeah, that's a combination of like a
Speaker 1: Mexican drug cartel and the setup of that TV show
Speaker 1: is a big load of cocaine gets smuggled out of
Speaker 1: Mexico to Italy and then there's an international war. Yes
Speaker 1: with club, I've seen it. It's way too hardcore. You
Speaker 1: will hate it. It's way too far. Yeah, I mean,
Speaker 1: is that even close to whatever the line of decency is?
Speaker 1: And Gabriel Burns did it though? I like him. Jeff
Speaker 1: and Milwaukee. Hi, Jeff, what's on your mind? Hey? Great show.
Speaker 1: I've always got Fritzie Ramblin, got Jerry West coming up.
Speaker 1: That's he's one of my favorite guests. As you have.
Speaker 1: Nobody gets as much out of guests as you, from
Speaker 1: Jerry West to Kolbe to even Urban Meyer, who's on
Speaker 1: your Monte Rushmore a guest as you have. Well, that's
Speaker 1: too tough to say, Jeff, because it tends to fluctuate.
Speaker 1: It's strange. Who did we say the other day? Is
Speaker 1: Chris Webber is one of my favorite guests. He just
Speaker 1: tells stories. I think it comes down to, is somebody
Speaker 1: going to be able to tell you something that you
Speaker 1: didn't know or entertain your audience because I'm just a conduit.
Speaker 1: When we have people on, I want to get the information.
Speaker 1: Like Steve Phillips, I wanted him to give you information
Speaker 1: so you know what's going on in the baseball situation.
Speaker 1: And if they can tell you stories, you know, the
Speaker 1: Bernie Madoff story of the Mets investing the Bobby Benia money,
Speaker 1: I thought was interesting there. But Guss have been so
Speaker 1: many guests. We've been so fortunate down through the years,
Speaker 1: and one of my faves is Jerry West. Joan is
Speaker 1: coming up in about twenty five minutes from now. Dan
Speaker 1: and The Dan at Stan Patrick Show.