Getty Images

Report: Marlins would accept Joe Panik and two prospects for Giancarlo Stanton

30 Comments

Yesterday Jon Morosi reported that the Giants would be willing to take on nearly all of Giancarlo Stanton‘s contract in exchange for the Marlins’ slugger. Today Morosi reports what the Marlins would accept in return.

It’s substantially similar to an offer the Giants reportedly made to the Marlins in the past: second baseman Joe Panik and top prospects Tyler Beede and Chris Shaw. Morosi says that’d be enough if the Giants committed to taking on at least $250 million of Stanton’s salary.

Paink you know: He’s 27 and has a career line of .282/.345/. 408 in four seasons as the Giants second baseman. That’s nifty, and he’s a fan favorite, but it’s not the sort of thing you hold on to if it means getting the game’s best slugger.

Beede, the Giants first round pick of the 2014 draft, was a top-100 prospect as a starter heading into 2017, but had a poor campaign at Triple-A in his age-24 season, suggesting that the bloom is off of that rose to some extent. Shaw, their first round pick in 2015, hit a nice .292/.346/.525 with 24 homers across Double-A and Triple-A as a 23-year-old this past season. Not a couple of bad players from a thin system, but certainly worth parting ways with for Stanton. The money is a big thing, obviously, but the Giants have an extraordinarily profitable club in recent years. They can afford him.

For the Marlins, this looks like a poor haul for the NL MVP, but as we’ve said many times recently, they seem to be driven primarily by financial considerations in all of this. Marlins fans may enjoy Panik for a bit and may one day enjoy Beede and Shaw on the big league roster, but nowhere near as much as they’ve enjoyed Stanton or, for that matter, nowhere near as much as the team’s owners will enjoy saying money.

All in all, this is starting to sound like the framework of a real deal and not just a rumor. Stay tuned.

MLBPA: MLB’s ‘demand for additional concessions was resoundingly rejected’

Rob Manfred and Tony Clark
LG Patterson/MLB via Getty Images
3 Comments

On Thursday evening, the Major League Baseball Players Association released a statement regarding ongoing negotiations between the owners and the union. The two sides continue to hash out details concerning a 2020 season. The owners want a shorter season, around 50 games. The union recently proposed a 114-game season that also offered the possibility of salary deferrals.

MLBPA executive director Tony Clark said that the union held a conference call that included the Executive Board and MLBPA player leaders. They “resoundingly rejected” the league’s “demand for additional concessions.”

The full statement:

In this time of unprecedented suffering at home and abroad, Players want nothing more than to get back to work and provide baseball fans with the game we all love. But we cannot do this alone.

Earlier this week, Major League Baseball communicated its intention to schedule a dramatically shortened 2020 season unless Players negotiate salary concessions. The concessions being sought are in addition to billions in Player salary reductions that have already been agreed upon.

This threat came in response to an Association proposal aimed at charting a path forward. Among other things, Players proposed more games, two years of expanded playoffs, salary deferrals in the event of a 2020 playoff cancellation, and the exploration of additional jewel events and broadcast enhancements aimed at creatively bringing our Players to the fans while simultaneously increasing the value of our product. Rather than engage, the league replied it will shorten the season unless Players agree to further salary reductions.

Earlier today we held a conference call of the Association’s Executive Board and several other MLBPA Player leaders. The overwhelming consensus of the Board is that Players are ready to report, ready to get back on the field, and they are willing to do so under unprecedented conditions that could affect the health and safety of not just themselves, but their families as well. The league’s demand for additional concessions was resoundingly rejected.

Important work remains to be done in order to safely resume the season. We stand ready to complete that work and look forward to getting back on the field.

As per the current agreement signed in March, if there is a 2020 season, players will be paid on a prorated basis. Thus, fewer games means the players get paid less and the owners save more. MLB has threatened to unilaterally set a 2020 season in motion if the two sides cannot come to terms. It should come as no surprise that the union has responded strongly on both fronts.

There have been varying reports in recent days over the confidence in a 2020 season happening. The MLBPA’s statement tonight doesn’t move the needle any; it simply affirms that the union remains steadfast in its goal to avoid a second significant cut in salaries.

As I see it, the ball is in the owners’ court. The owners can strongarm the players into a short season, saving money but significantly increasing the odds of a big fight in upcoming collective bargaining agreement negotiations. Or the owners can eat more of a financial loss, agreeing to a longer season than they feel is comfortable. The latter would have the double benefit of not damaging overall perception of the sport and would not disrupt labor peace going forward.

The MLBPA statement included a declaration that the players are “ready to report, ready to get back on the field, and they are willing to do so under unprecedented conditions.” If there is no 2020 season, we will have only the owners to blame, not the players.

Update: Cardinals pitcher Jack Flaherty, who has been quite vocal on social media about these negotiations, chimed in: