Thread by @EugeneFreedman

A thread on today's proposal by MLB and what it means before I go throw BP to my daughter.

Part of figuring out end-game proposals is not only making a proposal that takes a step toward the other party, but also giving them the space to take a step too. MLB's proposal was

essentially the same as prior proposals. The Commissioner, although privately accepting that the PA won't negotiate to reduce the pro rata March agreement on pay, has not accepted it publicly or at the table. We don't know what the internal processes are within MLB. Maybe he's

on the hot seat with his owners. Perhaps the new class of owners who haven't been through the labor wars don't understand how deals get done. Maybe he still thinks that he will win in the court of public opinion by reducing the season. Who knows.

But, because the offer doesn't

accept the March agreement as final and binding, it really doesn't step toward the PA at all. The PA cannot bargain with itself. It cannot lessen its own offer just because a false step has been made by the other side. It's really creating a difficult situation. Had MLB proposed

60 games, the PA could have come back with a lesser number than they previously did, and the parties could have resolved this subject. But, by continuing to offer less than full value for every game, it forces the players to stand firm.

I'm having trouble figuring out where

the PA goes next. Perhaps it has to be to take the expanded playoffs off the table. That's a step backwards in reaching a deal, but it may be the only thing that moves MLB.