They are moving inches. Feet are needed. Probably yards. So more and more it is looking as if the Major League Baseball regular season will be 50-ish games imposed by the commissioner.
MLB made a second proposal to restart the season on Monday and the union countered 24 hours later. Neither side liked the other’s offer much or saw enough concessions on the key issues of pay and season length.
If MLB holds firm that it will not play the regular season beyond Sept. 27 and the union sticks to not accepting anything less than full prorated salaries, then time is expiring on a chance to play much more than a 48-54-game season, the amount for which MLB has indicated it is willing to pay players their prorated salaries.
The players association’s counter Tuesday called for an 89-game regular season in which players would receive their full prorated salary.
Asked if this newest union proposal moved the ball at all toward an agreement, an influential management executive not directly involved in the negotiations, but briefed on them, said, “Zero.”
That was essentially the union sentiment Monday after receiving MLB’s last proposal.
So do the sides even have anything to talk about at this late date or is it just a matter of days now until commissioner Rob Manfred implements a schedule and players are obligated to show up, a resolution that will worsen the management/player relationship (if that is currently possible) and further disenchant fans?
![Tony Clark](https://vip.nypost.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2020/06/tony-clark.jpg?quality=90&strip=all&w=664)
For MLB, both the length of the regular season in the union’s latest bid — particularly that it would stretch until Oct. 11 and force part of the postseason into November — and the full prorated pay for a season of that length are issues it has so far been inflexible about.
MLB’s offer Monday was for a 76-game season in which players collectively would receive 50 percent of their salary, then an additional 25 percent if the postseason was played to its conclusion. The union, which has never come off its insistence of prorated pay, did not see that as much of a concession because all the players would be guaranteed is half of their prorated salaries while assuming the risk of the World Series being concluded to get another 25 percent, but not be made whole.
MLB has contended it will lose too much additional money by paying full prorated salaries over that many games, but say players would make more in total even with the cuts over 76 games than full prorated over, say, a 50-game season. The union has contended it does not believe the financial distress MLB has portrayed and, to date, has stuck with the principle of receiving full salaries — even if they are less than could be made by taking a lower percentage over more games.
The union’s proposal would have the regular season run July 10-Oct. 11, the end coinciding roughly with when the NBA Finals are scheduled to conclude, allowing baseball’s playoffs to avoid competing simultaneously against the NBA playoffs and the NFL regular season.
Manfred told The Post on Monday that MLB’s medical authorities have been insistent the league avoid stretching into November for fear cooler weather increases the odds of a stronger next wave of the coronavirus. In addition, TV dates with broadcast partners are locked in for October and MLB is not sure that the networks will want to try to find dates with a presidential election and a potentially jammed sports landscape.
On Monday, MLB believed it was making a concession by eliminating the qualifying offer for the 2020-21 offseason and any draft pick compensation tied directly to a free agent signing with a new team. The players association did not include those removals in its counter, in part because the union does not believe the outright removal of the qualifying offer helps players in the current problematic financial environment in which a one-year deal at the $18 million-ish level could be beneficial for a few players.
Where is there common ground?
The players association confirmed the MLB position that players who are not at high risk for bad outcomes with the coronavirus who opt out of playing this year would not receive salary or service time. The union insists, though, that players with high-risk family members can opt out and get salary/service. This is important because MLB wants players showing up even if they do not like the outcome of how a season is restarted or they would face consequences.
The union proposal also calls for playoffs that could expand to as many as eight teams per league and — if there are no or limited fans for the postseason this year — that the players would receive the same playoff pool allocation of $50 million as MLB offered Monday.
But a deal is not going to be made on those beachfronts. The big issue is pay followed by length of schedule, and the two are intertwined.
Manfred’s history is that he prefers not to impose what is within his power and would rather reach a deal with the union. But as time elapses to play games in the window MLB is willing to play — a regular season through Sept. 27 — there will come a point when Manfred plans to simply order a season that the owners are willing to play with prorated salaries, which is in the 50-ish game region. As part of the March 26 agreement with the union, Manfred has control of the schedule as long as the players are paid full salaries for the games played.
That scenario is becoming more and more likely as the sides move inches when there are feet, yards, maybe miles still to go.