Thread by @EugeneFreedman

There are two paragraphs in this article that are frustrating. The first:
"A typical negotiation includes offers and counter-offers, but the league’s proposal did not lead to further discussion. Only last week did the league learn that the union had rejected its offer," 1/x

https://twitter.com/Ken_Rosenthal/status/1353733619953643524

"and that the union would not counter it."

The second: Players last season received a combined $25 million in salary per day league-wide, so eliminating 26 days in April would cost them $650 million. But the league probably can make up a chunk of those days with split" 2/x

"doubleheaders, play into mid-October and possibly get to 154 games, at full pay. The players might want other benefits. The postseason would then extend into November, perhaps forcing the league to take a hit in its network television deals. But all of the elements" 3/x

"would be negotiable."

First, this isn't just an offer to buy a car that's for sale. It's an offer to buy a car that's not for sale. The parties have an agreement in place-the CBA. All labor negotiations are based on a duty to bargain. Once it has been fulfilled, there is 4/x

no responsibility to make an offer or counter offer or anything else. It's already a concluded subject. This includes the schedule, the playoffs, the number of games, etc.

What if I offer Ken that he give me $10,000 as a gift. Does he have to counter offer? Nope. So, to say 5/x

that typical negotiations have offers and counter-offers flies in the face of the fact that this isn't a negotiation. It's a unilateral offer to revise an existing agreement. There is no reciprocal duty, as there are in CBA negotiations or negotiations over new subjects. 6/x

Yes, all of these elements "would be negotiable," but that's only if MLBPA chooses to reopen the existing agreement, something they aren't interested in doing. All of the matters described are things that would benefit management.

I can't believe anyone connected with the 7/x

game believes a universal DH has similar value short or long-term as expanding the playoffs. Plus, MLB has the same interest in universal DH. MLB is offering something it wants, but saying that in order to get it, the MLBPA needs to also give MLB something else, even bigger 8/x

The linking of these two subject is management spin. It's not how negotiations take place at the table, where somewhat linked matters or subjects of equal value are sometimes agreed to simultaneously. The more reporters link these subjects, the more the public will believe 9/x

falsely that these are equivalent subjects.

The primary issue has always been the expansion of playoffs and the split of expanded playoff TV revenues. It was the issue last year, although obscured, and it's the issue now. It's the issue for the next CBA as well. /end