Speaker 1: Boom. If you thought four hours a day, minutes a
Speaker 1: week was enough, I think again. He's the last remnants
Speaker 1: of the old republic, a sole fashion of fairness. He
Speaker 1: treats crackheads in the ghetto cutter the same as the
Speaker 1: rich pill poppers in the penthouse the clearing House of
Speaker 1: hot takes break free for something special. The Fifth Hour
Speaker 1: with Ben Maller starts right now in the air everywhere,
Speaker 1: and a very very happy Friday to you. Do we
Speaker 1: have baseball ow hell now, but we do have the
Speaker 1: Fifth Hour with Ben Maller and Danny g back for
Speaker 1: another weekend here. And we're always debating the the balance,
Speaker 1: But who do we have on on Friday? We like
Speaker 1: to bring somebody in and chat. And so this week,
Speaker 1: considering the big story that we've talked a lot about
Speaker 1: on the Overnight Show has been the labor dispute in
Speaker 1: Major League Baseball. Who better to comment on that. That's
Speaker 1: someone that has covered baseball for years, that is a
Speaker 1: friend of mine. I've known this guy for many, many
Speaker 1: years from MLB Network and he's all over this here
Speaker 1: on Fox Sports Radio all the time. You have seeing
Speaker 1: him over the years as a reporter on baseball coverage
Speaker 1: on Fox Sports and FS one, and he's multidimensional. He
Speaker 1: covers hockey as well for the NHL Network. John Paul
Speaker 1: Morossi better known It's just John Morrossi, and he joins
Speaker 1: us now on the Fifth Hour with Ben Maller and
Speaker 1: Danny g to talk all things baseball, labor. What We're
Speaker 1: gonna try to make this relatable in layman's terms, because listen,
Speaker 1: I'm not that bright. So let's just get into it
Speaker 1: right now, and we welcome to John to the show.
Speaker 1: And the thing that has annoyed so many, including yours
Speaker 1: truly who love baseball, John, is the delay in getting
Speaker 1: the talk started. Now. I know they talked a lot recently,
Speaker 1: but this should have been done months ago. Why do
Speaker 1: you think both sides ended up procrastinating so long to
Speaker 1: get the negotiation jump started. Well, Ben, it's an excellent question,
Speaker 1: and it's been asked by people close to the process
Speaker 1: and people who are fans of the game and love
Speaker 1: the game. I think the reality is that both sides
Speaker 1: perhaps needed the deadline, which effectively was the deadline that
Speaker 1: we saw pass on Monday or Tuesday. We should say,
Speaker 1: uh to not sacrifice any regular season games that perhaps
Speaker 1: we were not going to see a real negotiation, a
Speaker 1: real grinding of those last details until that arrived. So
Speaker 1: I do think if there is any blame on that,
Speaker 1: it's somewhat universal to say that there were aspects of
Speaker 1: this that could have been worked through earlier. But I
Speaker 1: suppose the facts that deadlines tend to motivate was perhaps
Speaker 1: evident by the reality that we didn't see a deadline
Speaker 1: missed on Tuesday, and then a deal happened the next day.
Speaker 1: This is I think on some level we are all
Speaker 1: creatures of deadlines and and routines, and in this respect,
Speaker 1: and for better or worse, this is a deadline sort
Speaker 1: of a game, whether it's a trade deadline or arbitration
Speaker 1: salary figure deadline. Unfortunately been this was one deadline that
Speaker 1: was missed, and I think the blame is is shared
Speaker 1: around the game, and the reality is the fans of
Speaker 1: those that are are suffering the most right now. All right,
Speaker 1: So I have a theory, John. I was on the radio,
Speaker 1: I do the Overnight show and whatnot, and we were
Speaker 1: on the air when all this was was going down,
Speaker 1: and because they went past two in the morning, and
Speaker 1: my theory is if they had just stayed there until
Speaker 1: the sun came up. They if you believe the reporting,
Speaker 1: they were close to a deal on Monday and that's
Speaker 1: why they came back on Tuesday to to finish it.
Speaker 1: My theory is they would have gotten something done they
Speaker 1: the moment they left. Both sides left. Then then other
Speaker 1: people entered the conversation and were able to change their mind.
Speaker 1: People go to bed, they wake up, they have different
Speaker 1: feelings from the night before. Uh. Do you agree with that?
Speaker 1: Do you think if they just stayed a few more hours,
Speaker 1: we would have had a deal done Monday At six
Speaker 1: in the morning, they would have gone out and had
Speaker 1: eggs and bacon and then played baseball. It's possible, Ben,
Speaker 1: I suppose we'll never know. A couple of points on
Speaker 1: that where I I believe that that your argument is
Speaker 1: valid in a couple of different ways. Number One, even
Speaker 1: on Tuesday morning, we heard different different opinions between the
Speaker 1: union side and the league side as exactly how close
Speaker 1: they were the night before. Perhaps MLB thought they were
Speaker 1: close to a deal, the Union seemed to think they
Speaker 1: were close enough to continue talking. And those are two
Speaker 1: different related but to different conceptions of what was going on. Uh.
Speaker 1: I also think that to your point, it's a correct
Speaker 1: point to make that both sides of this are made
Speaker 1: up of rather diverse constituencies. And on the MLB side,
Speaker 1: this is not always the will and the best negotiating
Speaker 1: wisdom of Rob Manford Dan Halum. It is what can
Speaker 1: I put out there that two thirds of the owners
Speaker 1: will ratify. And on the player side, it's the same
Speaker 1: thing between large salary earning players and those that are
Speaker 1: earning closer to the minimum. The analogy I've made is
Speaker 1: to a majority leader or a minority leader of the Senate,
Speaker 1: and when a negotiation is happening on legislation, the individual
Speaker 1: whims or beliefs of that majority or minority leader might
Speaker 1: be X. But if that set of values is not
Speaker 1: going to pass with the three the two thirds majority
Speaker 1: of of your constituency, of your caucus, if you will
Speaker 1: to use this example, it's not gonna work. And so
Speaker 1: I really think Ben that this is a time where
Speaker 1: the beliefs along those uh continuums of players and owners
Speaker 1: are quite diverse. There are a lot of different interests
Speaker 1: that the Dodgers have or the Yankees have that are
Speaker 1: fundamentally and perhaps diametrically in opposition to the Rays or
Speaker 1: the Pirates or the Royals. It's there's a different set
Speaker 1: of circumstances. And what I think has happened right now, Ben,
Speaker 1: is there's been a real difficulty in arriving at what
Speaker 1: that compromised point is. That the final point I'll make
Speaker 1: on this this particular topic is it is disappointing, vexing, confusing,
Speaker 1: whatever word you'd like to choose. That the issue that
Speaker 1: is probably the most significant one right now, which the
Speaker 1: CBT threshold and what that number is going to be,
Speaker 1: is in it a number and a behavior that is
Speaker 1: entirely within the purview of the teams. Nothing in this CBA,
Speaker 1: Ben says the cb A threshold, or the CBT threshold
Speaker 1: rather is two twenty million dollars and everybody's got to
Speaker 1: spend that amount of money. That's not at all what
Speaker 1: it says. It just says that's the maximum that you
Speaker 1: could spend before you begin incurring penalties, which is entirely different.
Speaker 1: And so it really is up to to the discretion
Speaker 1: of each team if you want to spend up to
Speaker 1: that level or not. And the irony is that you
Speaker 1: consider the World Series two years ago, you had the Dodgers,
Speaker 1: one of the richest teams in the game. We're pushed
Speaker 1: to a sixth game and perhaps could have been a
Speaker 1: seventh had a decision been different with respect to pitching
Speaker 1: against the team with one of the lowest payrolls in
Speaker 1: the sport. So, I I don't know. It's really you
Speaker 1: take a take a step back and consider where the
Speaker 1: economics of the game are on either side. It is
Speaker 1: to meet a little bit baffling that the number that's
Speaker 1: holding everybody up is the number that affects half a
Speaker 1: dozen teams. Really, and even then, is that the discretion
Speaker 1: ben of those teams. No one is ever forcing a
Speaker 1: team to spend close to at or above the CBT threshold.
Speaker 1: And yet it's that number that seems to be the reason,
Speaker 1: the chief reason at least why we don't have spring
Speaker 1: training open right now. Well, and the other thing to John,
Speaker 1: just to follow up and piggyback on what you were
Speaker 1: saying that I used to work in San Diego and
Speaker 1: the Padres always kind of small market team. I remember
Speaker 1: many fire sales for the Padres back in the day
Speaker 1: when I was getting started in radio, and they are
Speaker 1: they're a big swinger now and there you know, to
Speaker 1: my knowledge, the San Diego market has not changed that
Speaker 1: they're one of the smaller market teams in baseball. And
Speaker 1: is it true, John, that there's other teams that are
Speaker 1: upset with the Podres because they went out and spent
Speaker 1: a gazillion dollars on Manny Machado and a couple other guys,
Speaker 1: And so they've got a a hey roll which is
Speaker 1: near the very top of baseball and a market where
Speaker 1: you compare them to some of these other teams like
Speaker 1: Pittsburgh and whatnot that have have spent no money like
Speaker 1: the Podres are upsetting the Apple card, if you will.
Speaker 1: Is that a legitimate opinion. I'm sure there's a lot
Speaker 1: of truth to that. And Ben, that's also not it's
Speaker 1: not a novel concept in the game. Remember back to
Speaker 1: the stories of of when the A Rod deal was
Speaker 1: signed with Texas back in two thousands. Uh and and
Speaker 1: there was the famous press conference given by Sandy Alderson,
Speaker 1: who was obviously not not the GM of the Rangers
Speaker 1: outside the Winter Meetings room where the deal was announced,
Speaker 1: and he was lamb basting the deal about what a
Speaker 1: terrible deal is was for baseball because uh now it
Speaker 1: was going to create this inflation effect on all the
Speaker 1: different wages and oh my gosh, where are we going
Speaker 1: in the sports? So it's that has been a part
Speaker 1: of the game for as long as there has been
Speaker 1: a divergence in team spending. Happens, probably since the dawn
Speaker 1: of free agency. So notable, yes, novel, not at all,
Speaker 1: And and I do think it is representative of of
Speaker 1: I guess what I would say, Ben, is one data
Speaker 1: point because you might have an agent who says to
Speaker 1: another team just let's just say the Rockies for example,
Speaker 1: they're in the same division. Hey, listen, the Padres are
Speaker 1: spending this amount of money. You had better sign my
Speaker 1: player and and bring your money more in line with
Speaker 1: what the Padres have and and the Rockies GM could say,
Speaker 1: we wait a minute, the Padres this past year, we're
Speaker 1: a colossal failure. And teams that were paying significantly less money,
Speaker 1: like the Rays were a success. Why do I have
Speaker 1: to spend for your player at all? So I think, Benny,
Speaker 1: it it's the system. It's it's interesting because we can
Speaker 1: talk about the money, and obviously the money is huge
Speaker 1: part of this at the top line, but at the
Speaker 1: end of the day, for the vast majority of teams.
Speaker 1: If you've raft well and develop well and keep your
Speaker 1: talent and build a good culture, and have a good manager,
Speaker 1: and and and check all these boxes, you're probably going
Speaker 1: to be a successful, sustainable team, even if you're not
Speaker 1: spending the most money. It's it's it certainly said. Yes,
Speaker 1: you've got two teams that spent over the wax Street
Speaker 1: Tax Dodgers pod Race. One was a very good team
Speaker 1: and one wasn't. So there are still multiple pathways to
Speaker 1: getting this this success in baseball that every team is
Speaker 1: is pursuing. And the point men that I would make
Speaker 1: that I think should guide everybody in this conversation. The
Speaker 1: Players Union set out to say at the outset of this,
Speaker 1: we want younger players to be paid more well. In
Speaker 1: the last proposal, the minimum seller ran up more than
Speaker 1: a hundred thousand dollars and and to the credit of
Speaker 1: the union they should be congratulated for that number. And
Speaker 1: also the creation of the arbitration bonus pool to pay
Speaker 1: for the players who have not yet achieved salary arbitration,
Speaker 1: so that the players who have between two and three
Speaker 1: years of service, that is new money, found money, if
Speaker 1: you will, thirty million dollars just put into that to
Speaker 1: incentivize great performances by superior young talent. Then to me,
Speaker 1: that seems pretty darn good. Maybe you could argue that
Speaker 1: that numbers should go up more. But because we've never
Speaker 1: had it before and the Union has put put press
Speaker 1: for it, and mL we put it in there, it's
Speaker 1: really hard for us to know what the fair number is.
Speaker 1: It's never existed. It's like putting something on the market
Speaker 1: and say, well, what what is this worth? Well, we've
Speaker 1: never seen this before, so I don't know. I don't
Speaker 1: know what it's worth. And I think that's part of
Speaker 1: the issue that they're dealing with right now, is what
Speaker 1: that number ought to be. That certainly there are still
Speaker 1: some distances been to be able to bridge. I'm encouraged
Speaker 1: that on on this Thursday, there was a smaller conversation
Speaker 1: reportedly between Dan Ailum and Bruce Meyer, the lead negotiator
Speaker 1: for MLB, the negotiator for the union, Great Small group Workshop.
Speaker 1: The ideas talk about a lot of different ideas, and
Speaker 1: I am still opal that there's enough sense here on
Speaker 1: what this agreement could look like that there is no
Speaker 1: reason for us to lose all of April. And I've
Speaker 1: heard plenty of conversation about well, the national TV contracts
Speaker 1: they pick up in May and the owners will make
Speaker 1: that they'll make more, or that they'll be coming out
Speaker 1: just fine if they don't pay any wages in April
Speaker 1: and then come back and May. That might be true
Speaker 1: for the balance sheets of April and May of two.
Speaker 1: But whether it's the owners or the players, then you
Speaker 1: you host a show that talks about all different sports.
Speaker 1: You understand this frankly better than I do because I
Speaker 1: work largely in baseball and hockey, so I've got my
Speaker 1: two sports that I focus on. This is an issue
Speaker 1: where if if baseball goes away for a while and
Speaker 1: and and fans and people around the country find other
Speaker 1: things to spend their summer evenings doing, they might not
Speaker 1: come back. And then what you gained with some pyric
Speaker 1: victory in April or May of evaporates because the overall
Speaker 1: business is not growing in the fashion that you expected
Speaker 1: to grow. And so ben as much as there's a
Speaker 1: lot of points being scored on either side, frankly, both
Speaker 1: camps have to take a step back listen to what
Speaker 1: the people who are actually paying the tickets have to
Speaker 1: say for them. For themselves, and realize that if we
Speaker 1: don't get this game back on the field and improve
Speaker 1: the quality of the product, with the with the pace
Speaker 1: of play, a lot of other issues, if we can't
Speaker 1: get to a point where we can talk about these things,
Speaker 1: the business is going to shrink. It will become continually
Speaker 1: less relevant, not irrelevant, but just less relevant, which is
Speaker 1: which is to me concerning I love the game, the
Speaker 1: game is my liveli and did it matters a ton
Speaker 1: to me. We have to find a way to get
Speaker 1: it back, end the deal, to talk about the things
Speaker 1: that will actually resonate with the people who buy the tickets,
Speaker 1: and then that will hopefully allow this national pastime to
Speaker 1: get to a better place. All right, So, John, you
Speaker 1: know I've known you for a long time. I love
Speaker 1: baseball as well, and I do talk about everything on
Speaker 1: the Overnight Show. And so I'm at the point now
Speaker 1: when it comes to the fan issue where I am
Speaker 1: convinced both the owners and players they both use the
Speaker 1: fans as ponds, but I don't think they truly either
Speaker 1: side is really concerned about the fan. I think it's
Speaker 1: just rhetoric that they toss out and it's a good
Speaker 1: talking point. People like it, but I'll tell you what's
Speaker 1: gonna happen, John, What's gonna happens. People are just they're
Speaker 1: not gonna worry about baseball. They're gonna do other things.
Speaker 1: We saw this a couple of years ago when the
Speaker 1: pandemic started and there was no sports for a hundred days.
Speaker 1: People just you know, they find Netflix or whatever else
Speaker 1: to watch and then if sports come back. I think
Speaker 1: this is this is the argument that the owners and
Speaker 1: the players both both will make that if it's July
Speaker 1: and it's eighty degrees and you want to take your
Speaker 1: family out to a game, and you know the weather
Speaker 1: is wonderful and you want entertainment, it's an experience, you're
Speaker 1: gonna do it. And so I'm convinced both sides know
Speaker 1: that whenever they get a deal done, assuming there's baseball,
Speaker 1: they'll be they'll be out there. But in terms of relevance, yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean pretty much all we do in sports radio
Speaker 1: these days is obsessed about different free agents in the NFL.
Speaker 1: That's pretty much what we do. And it's it's very frustrating,
Speaker 1: uh you know, from that perspective, because you know, everyone's
Speaker 1: talking about the fans, both Tony Clark and uh and
Speaker 1: also Rob Manford all these other guys that if issue
Speaker 1: statements is all about the fans, this that you listen.
Speaker 1: Let's be honest here, John, just like you and I,
Speaker 1: if we're in the negotiation, you're looking at the players
Speaker 1: are looking out for the players, the owners are looking
Speaker 1: out for the owners, and you know the fans are
Speaker 1: somewhere down the list here. And so I every time
Speaker 1: I hear the fans this the fans lad from owners
Speaker 1: and players, I kind of cringe because being completely transparent,
Speaker 1: that's not the case. You you buy that or you
Speaker 1: don't buy that. Well, I mean been on some levels
Speaker 1: they have to on a macro basis listen to the
Speaker 1: fans because they're their customers and whether or not they
Speaker 1: whether or not they are truly considering the fans wishes.
Speaker 1: And I believe certainly with MLBS moved to the change
Speaker 1: pace of play, eliminate the shift, universal d H, some
Speaker 1: other things that fans want, I do believe they are
Speaker 1: listening to the fans in that respect and want to
Speaker 1: change and improve the game because all these the rule
Speaker 1: change has been When you consider where we're at with
Speaker 1: with a lot of different sports, rule changes happened quite
Speaker 1: frequently all the time in fact, for baseball, that there
Speaker 1: is this retstance change the game too much because it
Speaker 1: is sort of this high bound traditionalist sport. And look around.
Speaker 1: I mean you know what again better than I do
Speaker 1: when you consider the popularity of the NFL, the popularity
Speaker 1: of the NBA. Uh, certainly you look at soccer. Soccer
Speaker 1: is in a very differ in place now that it
Speaker 1: was when when best when baseball was last on strike.
Speaker 1: So there is a tremendous competition for the hearts and
Speaker 1: minds of of people, and certainly young people. And if
Speaker 1: you cannot find a way to develop a passionate following
Speaker 1: among younger people to watch the game for three hours,
Speaker 1: three and a half hours, it's a long time. It's
Speaker 1: a long time for it. Don't to sit and watch
Speaker 1: one thing. And so if we are going to grow
Speaker 1: the game, as we always talk about, so the the
Speaker 1: Zeit guys were talking to hear about growth, mindset, growth,
Speaker 1: business probably going to grow the business, how are we
Speaker 1: gonna make families and young people believe that a baseball
Speaker 1: game traffic, paying for the tickets, paying for the concessions,
Speaker 1: whatever it is, it is worth our time and money
Speaker 1: and if your point been, a lot of people in
Speaker 1: the last two years have reevaluated what that time and
Speaker 1: money ought to go to, and there's been a lot
Speaker 1: of soul searching for out of of a reason, and
Speaker 1: that that process is very much ongoing, and I would
Speaker 1: say been the worst thing that you can do. The
Speaker 1: worst thing that you can do is remove your your
Speaker 1: conversation piece, your sports, your brand from shows like yours.
Speaker 1: And if you take baseball off the airwaves, you take
Speaker 1: baseball out of circulation for a while. Consumer preferences and
Speaker 1: what kids are into and what all people are into
Speaker 1: change so quickly. Now, Ben, and we know this that
Speaker 1: if you take yourself out of circulation for a period
Speaker 1: of time, there's no guarantee that you're ever going to
Speaker 1: get back in the rotation of of the family's mindset.
Speaker 1: In Illinois, in Michigan, in Nebraska, in Texas, in California,
Speaker 1: wherever it might be, they'll move on. And I think
Speaker 1: expecting America to have routines like America has always had
Speaker 1: routines is not really a winning strategy at this point
Speaker 1: in time. You have to stay above and in the
Speaker 1: head of the curve and and just fate and you
Speaker 1: cannot do those things if your product is not being
Speaker 1: played at a given time. So how much money we
Speaker 1: talked about? I read that the salaries per game that
Speaker 1: has been canceled. I read a number. It was like
Speaker 1: twenty million dollars per day if you know all the
Speaker 1: games are canceled, which we've already seen some in the
Speaker 1: teams are gonna lose like a hundred thousand per per
Speaker 1: home game in in revenue. Do those numbers sound right?
Speaker 1: Is that? Does that sound like a ball? That seems
Speaker 1: low to me? On both sides? Is that is that
Speaker 1: where we are? And that is that we've heard there's
Speaker 1: differing estimates, I think based on market size, based on team, uh,
Speaker 1: depending on circumstances. Again, obviously, the the national TV revenues
Speaker 1: for baseball, and that's that's real. Where that that really
Speaker 1: starts to kick in and may there are some make
Speaker 1: goods that exist for the local regional television piece that
Speaker 1: only really start to become a factor if you have
Speaker 1: missed twenty games or more. So those things are admittedly
Speaker 1: a bit on the line, but it's not forever. And oh,
Speaker 1: by the way, April fifteen is Jackie Robinson Day, anniversary
Speaker 1: of his debut, and that to me is as sacred
Speaker 1: of an occasion as we have, certainly in baseball, definitely
Speaker 1: in sports, and arguably in our country when you think
Speaker 1: about what that day means, uh, in American history. And
Speaker 1: so that is to me one of the most hall
Speaker 1: old days that we have to observe in our in
Speaker 1: our corner of the sports universe. And and darned if
Speaker 1: we cannot find a way to get major league games
Speaker 1: played on the seventy anniversary of Jackie Robinson's debut, and
Speaker 1: shame on all of us. Really, I mean, there's there's
Speaker 1: no there is no credible excuse for that for anybody.
Speaker 1: It's just it's it's unforgivable from what I said. If
Speaker 1: that's if that's the outcome, so uh, And if that's
Speaker 1: going to be the outcome. To avoid that, we've got
Speaker 1: to get a deal about the next ten days, which,
Speaker 1: by the way, they can do the number I'll repeat
Speaker 1: the number that is the most significant pediment here is
Speaker 1: the competitive Palace Tax special, which is an entirely discretionary
Speaker 1: amount of spending on a per team basis. If you say,
Speaker 1: as a team, I don't really want it to be
Speaker 1: two thirty eight I wanted to be too twenty. Okay,
Speaker 1: then don't spend more than two twenty. You have that
Speaker 1: right as a team. And and we have seen many,
Speaker 1: many times that teams that spend more money don't always
Speaker 1: benefit from those expenditures. And and so I just I am,
Speaker 1: I am a little bit just dumbfounded, frankly as to
Speaker 1: why that number is the big issue here when it
Speaker 1: is one that a team like Tampa Bay or Pittsburgh
Speaker 1: or Kansas City will never even come close to. So
Speaker 1: what's the difference to them? I just, I just I
Speaker 1: don't I do not get the reluctance of of of
Speaker 1: the teams, frankly to move that number up a little bit,
Speaker 1: because they that's not the concern of a majority of
Speaker 1: the teams on a functional basis, right look at them.
Speaker 1: It is not a number that is entirely relevant to
Speaker 1: that many teams. Well, and I don't, like, you know,
Speaker 1: my head is spinning by all the numbers in these
Speaker 1: negotiations and all the you know, I'm not a math guy,
Speaker 1: but the I'm generally against salary caps and salary floors.
Speaker 1: But that really sounds like the issue that the players,
Speaker 1: they're big complaint. They want a salary floor in here
Speaker 1: where every team has to spend X number of dollars.
Speaker 1: But as we have seen John over the last ten
Speaker 1: years fifteen years in baseball, the owners, uh to their credit,
Speaker 1: are tremendous robber barons of baseball. They they have figured
Speaker 1: out how to bend whatever rules they have. When you're
Speaker 1: talking about Tampa Bay, which is like a Frankenstein's Lab
Speaker 1: for baseball with what they've been able to do with
Speaker 1: finding players off the scrap heep and all that. So
Speaker 1: whatever rules are in place, they're just gonna go out
Speaker 1: and hire a new crop of IVY League guys to
Speaker 1: come in or wherever they find the next crop of GMS,
Speaker 1: and they'll just bend the rules. But it's it's like
Speaker 1: the middle class in baseball just doesn't exist, and is
Speaker 1: there really any way to get back to that. You
Speaker 1: either have guys that are making, by baseball standards, not
Speaker 1: a lot of money, and then all of a sudden
Speaker 1: they get two hundred, three hundred million dollar contracts, but
Speaker 1: there's there's no middle ground. It's not like you don't
Speaker 1: go from zero to a hundred in real life. You
Speaker 1: normally have to stop somewhere in the middle. And then
Speaker 1: go all the way up. But in baseball, it's either
Speaker 1: you're at the very bottom or you're at the very top,
Speaker 1: and you're not in the middle. And I, frankly, John,
Speaker 1: maybe you're you're smarter than me. I don't know how
Speaker 1: you get that middle class at baseball back. I don't
Speaker 1: see a path to that. Is there a path to that? Well,
Speaker 1: A couple of things. I mean, number one, do you
Speaker 1: look at the NLCS this past year, Braves Dodgers, the
Speaker 1: team with low pay roll one Houston. They had the
Speaker 1: richest player, ryland Or was not was not pitching because
Speaker 1: he's hurt. They weren't able to resign Garritt Cole George
Speaker 1: Or left, and they got to the World Series again.
Speaker 1: So it's it's an interesting dichotomy there. And I should
Speaker 1: point out before I go any further, the players. Briefly
Speaker 1: the notion of a salary floor was on the table,
Speaker 1: but then it was discarded. So the players are not
Speaker 1: even asking for that anymore either. So there is no
Speaker 1: there is no minimum to hit that is that is
Speaker 1: not part of the conversation right now. It's just the maximum.
Speaker 1: And even then it's it's it's not a hard it's
Speaker 1: not a salary cap at all. It's not a hard cap.
Speaker 1: It's something that you can go over if you want to.
Speaker 1: You just have to pay a tax on it. That's
Speaker 1: that's all that means. So I think the Braves have
Speaker 1: been a team has been successful while spending somewhere in
Speaker 1: the middle range. Obviously, the Dodgers, they don't win the
Speaker 1: World Series without Mookie Betts, and he's someone that their
Speaker 1: market size allowed them to sign to a multi year
Speaker 1: deal and keep long term. Now, of course, the Dodgers
Speaker 1: they lost Corey Seeger. They can't even spend on everybody,
Speaker 1: and in fact, someone are you It's not even always
Speaker 1: in your best interest to spend on the biggest superstar.
Speaker 1: Look at the free agent contracts of for example, Robinson Canoe,
Speaker 1: Albert Pools, who the biggest contracts ever signed. Uh, they
Speaker 1: have not necessarily aged as well towards the back end
Speaker 1: of those deals. And then, to me, this is a
Speaker 1: little bit of a granular point in baseball, but I'll
Speaker 1: make it because I think it's important. The players ought
Speaker 1: to be thrilled with the reality that there is no
Speaker 1: longer direct draft pick compensation tied to free agent signings.
Speaker 1: Once upon a time as recently as less for example,
Speaker 1: last offseason, I would be talking to team executives and say, listen,
Speaker 1: this player is a good fit for you. Why don't
Speaker 1: you sign him? And the answer would beat John off
Speaker 1: the record. I can't give up the draft pick because
Speaker 1: the draft is the most efficient way that I can
Speaker 1: add talent to my organization, and I'm not going to
Speaker 1: give up that ability to sign a player to a
Speaker 1: multi year deal into his thirties when I'm not entirely
Speaker 1: sure if he's gonna be worth that money the longer
Speaker 1: e place. I might be willing to take that risk
Speaker 1: if I didn't also have to give up a draft pick.
Speaker 1: That draftick compensation Ben is now gone. That is a
Speaker 1: huge deal on a level that I wonder if the
Speaker 1: players fully appreciate how significant that victory is for them
Speaker 1: in this negotiation. I think that part of this Ben
Speaker 1: has not been talked about nearly enough when you consider
Speaker 1: how important that's going to be in the free agent market.
Speaker 1: Well yeah, yeah, I haven't really read much about that.
Speaker 1: But let me ask you this, Jane. As far as
Speaker 1: the rule changes, I've talked to a number I want
Speaker 1: to talk about the shift here because there's always a
Speaker 1: pet peep of mind. You talk to some of these
Speaker 1: old time guys that played in the seventies and the
Speaker 1: eighties back in the day, and they will tell you
Speaker 1: they know how to beat the shift. It's called choking
Speaker 1: up on the bat and you're hitting the ball the
Speaker 1: other way. The players are so stubborn that the owners
Speaker 1: have to put the ban of the shift and they
Speaker 1: have to implement an actual rule because the players are
Speaker 1: unable to adapt that. That to me is very frustrated
Speaker 1: when just like basic baseball, just choke up on the bat,
Speaker 1: hit the ball the other way, get a base it
Speaker 1: They're giving you the entire side of the field. It's
Speaker 1: very frustrated they have to do that. And the pitch clock, Uh,
Speaker 1: that's also the's like certain pictures just take forever. And
Speaker 1: in baseball has always prided itself on not having a clock. This,
Speaker 1: that and the other thing. Uh, those two things. I
Speaker 1: don't think the base thing, the oversized base thing, is
Speaker 1: that that big a deal. But the banning of the
Speaker 1: shift seems unnecessary. And and the pitch clock is that
Speaker 1: is that going to go over like a lead balloon? John?
Speaker 1: And first of all, I agree with you on the
Speaker 1: on the shifting aspect, we shouldn't have to do it,
Speaker 1: but here we are. And I would point out too,
Speaker 1: this is the thing then that I just shake my
Speaker 1: head every single year. You look at the way the
Speaker 1: playoffs playoff, look at the look at the Nationals. Okay,
Speaker 1: when they won the World Series. Who is the player
Speaker 1: that the Dodgers couldn't get out and that even the
Speaker 1: Astros couldn't get out that year? Howarde Kendrick, one of
Speaker 1: the oldest players in that World Series, someone who didn't
Speaker 1: really ever have like a forty homer season, but he
Speaker 1: put the ball in play, had good at baths with short,
Speaker 1: simple approaches late in the game, and Howie Kendricks was
Speaker 1: the reason why the Nationals won the World Series. And
Speaker 1: every year, every winter bend, there are players on the
Speaker 1: open market like Howie Kendrick, and they never get the
Speaker 1: respect they deserve because the skill of putting the ball
Speaker 1: in play, moving runners, having a professional late late inning
Speaker 1: at bath is totally forgotten about until it comes time
Speaker 1: to decide the championship. And everybody says, you know what,
Speaker 1: why fill in the blank? How many times do we
Speaker 1: read the obituary of a particular team in particular series.
Speaker 1: Oh my gosh, we struck out too much. We couldn't
Speaker 1: catch up to their Their relief pitchers were throwing up
Speaker 1: ninety nine and we just couldn't catch up. We struck
Speaker 1: out too much. But yeah, jeez, you could have signed
Speaker 1: Howie Kendrick ten months ago for a song and you
Speaker 1: didn't do it. What were you doing back then? It's
Speaker 1: not like Howie Kendrick won the World Series. In the
Speaker 1: World Series was was in like a black and white
Speaker 1: movie reel from that was like two years ago. And
Speaker 1: I think teams just don't they don't watch. They just
Speaker 1: don't watch the games. You know, they don't watch. When
Speaker 1: when the Royals won the World Series seven years ago,
Speaker 1: putting the ball and play al city Is Escobar, uh,
Speaker 1: players like him, Eric Cosmer, These guys were not like
Speaker 1: fifty Homer players and they were winning players. Okay, they won,
Speaker 1: and I just I it baffles me every year react like,
Speaker 1: oh my gosh, I've never seen this before. Yeah, yeah
Speaker 1: you did. It was like in the World Series two
Speaker 1: years ago, Howie Kendrick, Alfis Escobar, Eric Cosmer, Lorenzo Caine.
Speaker 1: Players like that win you championships, So go sign them.
Speaker 1: And they're not gonna cost you fifty million bucks a year.
Speaker 1: So I I think I'm with you on the frustration
Speaker 1: of the lack of an adjustment. The pitch clock works
Speaker 1: and part of the reason then why it works is
Speaker 1: that you don't have to spend a minute to shift
Speaker 1: somebody from one side of the field to the other,
Speaker 1: get the ball and go. Your defense is more active, Uh,
Speaker 1: throw more strikes. But again when when the whole focus
Speaker 1: is you gotta throw a hundred thirty five hour to
Speaker 1: get scouted now, and and the ball is spraying all
Speaker 1: over the place because they can't control it because they've
Speaker 1: been focused on just throwing the ball to the radar
Speaker 1: gun for their whole lives. Yeah, you get problems with command,
Speaker 1: and they don't work as fast, and you don't have
Speaker 1: a lot of Mark Burley's anymore unfortunately. So it's just
Speaker 1: that it's it's funny to me because a lot of
Speaker 1: these things were talking about. Now, this is not like
Speaker 1: I'm not an analytical genius. I'm not a genius at all.
Speaker 1: I just watched the games and and these are common
Speaker 1: sense things that that are there for any of us
Speaker 1: that actually take the time to watch. And I just
Speaker 1: think there's way way too many calculations, and there's too
Speaker 1: much reliance on the numbers, not enough reliance observing the
Speaker 1: way the game is played and and making your decisions
Speaker 1: based on that. I'm hoping that the CB will represent
Speaker 1: some of these concerns and address them and getting better
Speaker 1: in players like Howie Kendrick respected and paid what they
Speaker 1: deserve in the market. But there are a lot of
Speaker 1: issues right now, Ben, I think we've we've touched on
Speaker 1: a lot of them over the last half hour, but
Speaker 1: there are certainly other things that still sort through here
Speaker 1: in the in the days of weeks to come. Yeah. Absolutely.
Speaker 1: The PR battle is also a big part of this, John,
Speaker 1: I know you a little little time left, So the
Speaker 1: PR battle is not particularly great. Rob Manford did not
Speaker 1: have a good day on Tuesday when he was smiling
Speaker 1: and chuckling and all that. The the other part of
Speaker 1: this is the players and social media. Now. I did
Speaker 1: a rant on my radio show the other night about this.
Speaker 1: I there are many people saying how great this is
Speaker 1: now because we didn't have Twitter and Instagram back the
Speaker 1: last time there was that elongated work stoppage. But I
Speaker 1: say this is actually bad for the players, because there's
Speaker 1: many more players than owners John, and the chances that
Speaker 1: the players are going to be united on social media
Speaker 1: and some of these guys are gonna start snapping are
Speaker 1: very low. So I think this will actually turn out
Speaker 1: to be a net negative for the players. What say you,
Speaker 1: you know, it's a fair question. I don't know, to
Speaker 1: be honest with you, where where the um where the
Speaker 1: public opinion will come down. I think that if if
Speaker 1: anything has been instructive to us in recent years, I
Speaker 1: certainly just know it just from my own experience reporting
Speaker 1: and and uh having to exist in the social media
Speaker 1: sphere that typically you you you don't often hear the
Speaker 1: concordance of agreement from everybody. It's more often than the criticisms.
Speaker 1: So I would imagine that most people involved in the
Speaker 1: process are hearing more negative feedback than positive. We all
Speaker 1: want to see the game on the field. It's not there,
Speaker 1: so we're frustrated. And if we're gonna say anything to anybody,
Speaker 1: let's think about it. We're not gonna say, hey, we
Speaker 1: we don't have baseball right now, good job everyone. No,
Speaker 1: it's it's it's that's not what anybody is saying right now.
Speaker 1: So I think that the feedback universally to everybody is negative.
Speaker 1: The players themselves are are perhaps a bit more accessible
Speaker 1: than the owners in terms of their their public profile,
Speaker 1: and I point this out to it and I heard
Speaker 1: Tim Kirkson talk about this recently on them We Net,
Speaker 1: We're Radio. I think it's a very good point. We
Speaker 1: don't really hear as much from the owners themselves anymore.
Speaker 1: They are not people who are frequently quoted and seeing again,
Speaker 1: maybe they don't want to say the wrong thing and
Speaker 1: have it live forever on social media, whatever it might be.
Speaker 1: But they've been very careful. We don't hear much from
Speaker 1: them individually, and again that's their choice, but I think
Speaker 1: it it's a little harder maybe for the fan to
Speaker 1: understand what the owner wants to do, what the plan is,
Speaker 1: when they only hear from that person a time or
Speaker 1: two a year. And I do think that that just
Speaker 1: accountability availability that helps. And perhaps after this is done,
Speaker 1: it will be important for the owners to get out
Speaker 1: in front of this, be out in front of their fans,
Speaker 1: um be humble about things. The players have to be
Speaker 1: humble about it too, I think once this deal is
Speaker 1: done and focus on how do we grow the game
Speaker 1: at that point in time, once the games have started.
Speaker 1: I don't think that if you pulled fifty thousand fans
Speaker 1: of Dodger Stadium, they're not gonna be talking about who
Speaker 1: was right, who was wrong, CBT. They don't care. They
Speaker 1: just want to see the game back on the field,
Speaker 1: and they want to see the people who are on
Speaker 1: the field and managing the games. Front office folks. Owners
Speaker 1: realize that this is a public trust. Realize that this
Speaker 1: is not uh, this is not the most serious thing
Speaker 1: happening in the world right now, clearly, and so we
Speaker 1: have to have a certain humility about that and and
Speaker 1: earn back the trust of the fans through word and deed,
Speaker 1: and have that ethic hopefully carried the day going forward.
Speaker 1: All Right, Yeah, that's say that is the great point.
Speaker 1: We remember when I was a kid, we had bigger
Speaker 1: than life owners that seem to always be quoted in
Speaker 1: a newspaper. We don't have that. I I I don't
Speaker 1: some of these owners. I don't even know who they are.
Speaker 1: But we'll get you out of here on this, John,
Speaker 1: your crystal ball, the John Morosi crystal ball. Is this
Speaker 1: a short term situation or are we gonna be talking
Speaker 1: to you two months from now and there's still no baseball.
Speaker 1: We'll certainly have baseball, I believe, Ben. By my hope
Speaker 1: is by the early part of May at the latest.
Speaker 1: And I really believe that that there is still a chance,
Speaker 1: and I am an optimist in my core, there is
Speaker 1: still a chance that we have baseball on Jackie Robinson
Speaker 1: Day April. I'm gonna that will be my prayer, by
Speaker 1: hope in the days I had my friend, and let's uh,
Speaker 1: let's all work together towards that goal. Let's hope that
Speaker 1: the negotiations progress. And so I'm gonna say April fifteenth
Speaker 1: is the one that I've got circled for for a
Speaker 1: positive reason for it to be Jackie Robinson Day with baseball. Awesome.
Speaker 1: Thank you, John, Ben, my pleasure, my friend. Keep up
Speaker 1: all they're gonna work that you do. I always enjoy
Speaker 1: listening to you, especially when I'm out the West Coast.
Speaker 1: I'll plate you do a great job of keeping the
Speaker 1: conversation going all through the night, keeping us going all
Speaker 1: the time, Benny, So I always love catching up