Ron Robinsons Beard

Oh, the pandemic did have an influence on the price drop. It wasn't the only factor, though, and my bigger point was responding to several statements that you made that are just not true. I don't see anything drastic that was not pandemic-related... April 2020 prices were 100% pandemic related. I was pointing out several much larger drops in price over the last 20 years that had nothing to do with any pandemic, and that the overall trend over the last 10 years has been a decrease in gas prices. Gas prices dropped from May to Dec of 2019. Prices were already trending down due to other factors. Oil companies are raking in record profits through price gouging, and without getting too political, are using the Ukraine conflict and the current administration as an easy scapegoat to justify that gouging I was pointing out how the oil market works so that you can understand that oil companies are a small factor with respect to gas prices, and what factors over the last 10 years have been a bigger influence on gas prices. You're complaining about something that dropped in price from 2012 to 2020. (Have you been praising the oil companies for that?) How many other things have dropped in price over that time? If you want to complain about price gouging, complain about the housing market - look what happened to those prices from 2012-2020. That's a much bigger monthly expenditure than gas is. You are 100% correct that gas prices to operate on a wave of gradual highs and lows. My whole point, though, is that there is sometimes a tsunami effect where something external causes the prices to either bottom out in a short period, such as the pandemic in early-mid 2020, or skyrocket, such as the current Ukraine situation. There are logical reasons why gasoline prices are increasing right now. But a rise of of 50 to 60 cents per gallon in a week's time is 100% evidence of price gouging. I mean, what statements have I said "that are just not true"? I am paying $4.19/gallon right now, and that is 100% because of price gouging due to the Ukraine conflict. I fully realize that otherwise I would be likely paying in the mid $3s per gallon. If that was the case, I wouldn't be complaining, because that would simply be that accurate point of the wave.

Apparently a National League team. Took a little bit for the heater to kick in, but the Hot Tub is starting to get steamy.

1) What pandemic was going on from June 2014 to Feb 2016 that caused gas prices to drop almost $2/gallon to $1.872 versus the $1 drop in price from May 2019, when the economy was perhaps booming at it's peak, to April of 2020 when gas was $1.938? B) If prices in April of 2020 ($1.938) were "100% pandemic related", then why were gas prices lower in Feb 2016 ($1.872)? The average gas price dropped 70 cents from January to April 2020. Speculators knew COVID was a threat starting in January. Are you arguing that the drastic fall in 3 month's time was not due to COVID? Because I don't think anything could convince me otherwise.

Did you look at the graph? Gas prices were declining long before the pandemic. I don't see anything drastic that was not pandemic-related. You compared April 2020 to April 2004, but April 2020 prices were 100% pandemic related.

Oil companies are raking in record profits through price gouging, and without getting too political, are using the Ukraine conflict and the current administration as an easy scapegoat to justify that gouging. And many are buying it hook, line and sinker. Supply has been shrinking since 2014. While the number of US rigs has increased over the last year, it still is about 1/3rd of the number online in 2014. Since 2014 the US has been trying to get OPEC to decrease output because oil prices got so low that it was threatening to bankrupt the US oil industry, and sanctions were applied to Venezuela that have reduced their oil production, leading to a global supply decrease. Oil is mostly fixed costs - the costs of exploration, drilling/rigging, and financing costs are spread out over the life of the well. When prices go too low, oil companies take rigs offline like they did in 2014 because they lose money producing it. Unfortunately when they take rigs offline, it takes six months to get them back online - thus the industry is subject to supply/demand disruptions. And, like Game said, it's global supply and demand, not US. Gas prices have hardly been subject to inflation over the last 30 years. Gas prices in Feb 2016 were less than gas prices in Feb 2005. Hell, gas prices in April 2020 were about the same as April 2004, and gas prices decreased from 2012 to 2020. Oil is predominantly purchased in futures contracts based on market prices, and the contract pricing is driven by supply, demand, and speculation, thus gas prices are driven by oil supply, demand, and speculation and demand is probably the least influential of the three - unless you have a major global event like a pandemic, it's relatively inelastic. Umm ...?

That looks like a prime "lying season" post to me. I 100% believe the Colts wanted Love in the 2020 draft, tried to move to get him, and were blindsided when the Packers grabbed him.

I think teams are waiting on the first team to make a more to peel off the seal. No one wants to be accused of tampering during the lockout. I expect we'll start seeing moves happen hot and heavy at some point today.

The more I think about Luke Barker, the more I believe he simply may be playing in the wrong system. The Brewers place a premium on bullpen power arms, and while Barker's stats definitely warrant a Big League opportunity, his "stuff" simply doesn't, at least in the Brewers' perspective. The Rule 5 may have been a prime opportunity for him to get a shot somewhere. I hope for his sake that if the Brewers do not intend to give him a shot this season, provided he continue to put up prime pen numbers, they find a way to set him free to pursue a Big League opportunity somewhere else.

Thank you for guaranteeing that the Brewers will be signing Freddie Freeman or Kris Bryant on Sunday morning

One call ... that's all!

Things are gonna be pretty nuts for the next couple weeks.

Who had March 10, at 2:15 p.m.? Lock this puppy down ... finally!

Someone on twitter pointed out that 5 of the 8 executive board are Boras clients. Wonder if that plays a role or not... Starting to look like today won't be the day. Today was the first day I was optimistic and thought the deal might actually happen. I have sensed the tide starting to turn against the players this week. If it doesn't pass today, watch out.

Max Scherzer and his $40+ million per year salary strikes again.

Dropping the 2018 grievance has been part of past CBA discussions in the last couple months. That idea isn't new whatsoever. Unsure on the 2020 lawsuit though.

I can't shake this image. Please prove my pessimism wrong!

Knocking on all the wood I can find in my office right now. Don't want to put the cart before the horse, but the vibes are very positive via the Twitters.

MLB just issued a proposal. Barely moved on CBT and min salaries, biggest move was from 40 to 50 on bonus pool. For me, it seems like that bonus pool is the best chance the players have of getting movement. MLB CBT: 230M in ‘22 to 242M 244M in ‘26 Union CBT: 232M in ‘22 to 250 in ‘26 MLB Bonus Pool: 40M 50M all 5 years Union: 65M in ‘22 to 85M in ‘26 MLB minimum: 700M to 770M 780M Union: 710M to 780M I piggy backed above off a tweet from Jon Heyman and showed the changes that were recently announced. Baseball is probably going to take in 60-70 billion over the next 5 years, I would guess they are arguing over how to split up the last 150 million or so at most...probably less. And that's combined over the 5 years. Arguing over figurative pocket change now. If this doesn't get done this afternoon, I really don't know what to say anymore.

Prediction:MLB will submit their counterproposal this afternoon, players will find something minor in it that the owners apparently tried to "sneak through", they will reject it (or do yet another counter-proposal), and we will be in the same place tomorrow. Sure as heck hope I'm wrong.

It will no doubt be worse for the Brewers and other small markets who aren't close to the CBT thresholds. But not as bad as it could have been had all the MLBPA wishlist been adopted. And an international draft would theoretically help the Brewers in the long run.

If that were to happen, you might as well contract any team that operates in a medium or small market.

Both times this has happened now, MLB made larger concessions, I believe in the hopes of the MLBPA meeting them more toward the middle. MLBPA is holding much more firm, though, which has likely pissed the owners off. I think there is some credence to your idea that MLB is floating "we're close" flyers to their mouthpieces, but as this drags on, it is becoming apparent that the MLBPA shares some fault in this as well. Many feel MLBPA was taken to the woodshed during the last round of CBA negotiations, so now they are trying to make up for that by being stubborn. The only ones who lose in that scenario are the fans.

Tide is seemingly starting to turn a bit pro owner as they have bent quite a bit over the last 36 hours. This seems like it is too close to the finish line to lose it over something as stupid as an international draft. Those players wouldn't even be in the union for several years ... so why would MLB need MLBPA approval to institute it?

Oil companies are raking in record profits through price gouging, and without getting too political, are using the Ukraine conflict and the current administration as an easy scapegoat to justify that gouging. And many are buying it hook, line and sinker.

If we are going to get technical, a ex-college player who exhausted his eligibility could theoretically go this route as well. I'm not sure how long a MLB team holds the rights on a player they drafted (I imagine several years), but I would imagine the same safeguards would apply in an international draft.