CBA negotiations are temporarily on hold, but once the two sides resume talking, a deal could be reached quickly, reports Jayson Stark of ESPN.com. Stark says that players and owners are "on the precipice" of a new labor deal, with discussions potentially resuming Thursday and moving quickly from there. Danny Knobler of CBS Sports (Twitter link) believes a deal could be announced as soon as Friday.
Two of Stark's sources agree that a deal will be consummated soon, with one saying the two sides are "within striking distance" and the other saying they're "on the verge of an agreement." Specifics on a few issues still need to be worked out, but barring any unexpected setbacks, none of the issues should prevent a new agreement.
Stark also hears that free agent compensation won't be eliminated, but will be modified so that teams only surrender a top draft pick when signing "elite" free agents. Earlier today, we heard that Type B compensation is expected to be eliminated as early as this offseason, and that compensation for Type A free agents might be tweaked as well.
While most of the news concerning a new deal is positive, Ken Rosenthal of FOX Sports writes that many teams aren't happy about changes that could limit amateur draft spending. One executive called the proposed changes "incredibly short-sighted," saying they'd hurt many clubs.
I love the new draft changes
Depends what they end up being. If there’s going to be strict limits on what teams are going to be able to pay players the talent pool for baseball will grow even smaller. You will see a lot more kids going to school with the hopes of going to the NFL if it’s going to take six years in baseball to get a good payday anyway.
I disagree but i see were you are coming from.What this will do is make the MLB draft look like a true sports draft.This is the only sport in which a person can get drafted in the 2nd round of later can get first round money.These high school kids who say they ar unsignable can now go to college instead of trying to milk a team for every dollar they can get.Seeing teams like the Nats and Sox draft and sign first round talent in other rounds is not fair at all.The type B free agent thing must go as well
First of all, why is it a bad thing that kids (with first round talent) can get first round money in later rounds?
Secondly, the Red Sox are some of the biggest spenders in the draft every year (except they were actually 10th this year, amazingly) and they have averaged under $9mm per year since ’07. Essentially any team in baseball could afford $9mm if they wanted to, so it isn’t like the Sox have an unfair advantage, they are just willing to do something other teams aren’t willing to do.
Yeah, I don’t see that at all. Zach Lee a pro QB?? Really unlikely. Bubba Starling?? A Tebow’s chance in the fires of hell coming out of Nebraska’s spread offense.
If players are drafted in the order of their perceived talent instead of
where teams think they can risk taking them, the elite will be
first-round players and will get a payday that most people won’t make in
their lifetimes at the age of 18, earlier than they could get it from
the NFL and NBA.
I think the “losing players to football” is being completely overblown.
-C
Exactly you have guys like Drew Henson,Chad Hutchinson and Andrew Brackman who have used their other sports they have played as leverage.Now we can finally have the players getting drafted on talent and not bonus demands.This will end the days of players like Mark Texiera dictating which team he wants to get drafted by
The players you would lose wouldn’t be the guys with 1st round talent who fall to the second or third, it would be the kids who have 2nd-3rd round talent but fall further down. And plenty of those kids end up being good-great baseball players.
The best example of this that I can think of would be Red Sox outfield prospect Brandon Jacobs; he had football written all over him (he had a football commit to Auburn, and I don’t think he was even going to play baseball there). He was extremely raw on the baseball diamond, but had the raw tools to go somewhere around the 3rd round despite how raw he was; he ended up falling to the Sox in the 10th round because of his football commit and it took well over slot money to sign him. If the Sox weren’t allowed to go over slot there is no doubt that he would have gone to college and ended up playing football. Instead he is in the Sox top ten prospects and hit .303/.376/.505 with 30 SBs this year.
Most of those multy sports players become bust so let it be.I rather have a kid who realy wants to play baseball instead of a kid who really doesnt love the game but chooses baseball for only financial reasons.The Red Sox every year go over slot to sign players but because of this great new deal that will end.Now because of these new rules we will see who does have the best scouts.No player that gets drafted after the first round deserves first round money.In football if you are a second round pick you get second round money.That is the right way to do it.In fact i think we have had kids that are not even first round talent still getting first round money as well
That’s not even remotely true, most of the players in baseball were multi-sport athletes. Again, why is it bad when a kid gets 1st round money in later rounds if teams decide his talent is worth first rounds money. Also again, any team in baseball could afford to do exactly what the Red Sox do if they were so inclined – $9mm isn’t a lot of money for any team.
Please though, explain to me why the football way is the “right” way. And don’t just tell me you like it better, explain to me why it is better.
I don’t know how I feel about loosing TYPE B picks. I feel like loosing Buehrle deserves some type of compensation. I do not necessarily like him, but do feel he will be hard to be replaced with the club getting some type of compensation. Maybe lower the ratings for TYPE A I guess.
Nothing should take effect until after this off season. It’s not fair to disrupt team planning concerning free agent compensation. That would be changing horses in midstream. If changes take effect on opening day of 2012, that would be fine as it would allow time for teams to adapt their strategy.
I don’t like the draft changes at all. Spending on the draft was one area where even small budget teams could compete if they were will willing to invest in it. (See the Pirates spending $17 mil in the draft this year)
Teams weren’t able to outspend the Yankees in free agency, but they could in the draft. Now they won’t even be able to do that.
You can still spend on the international market so all is not bad.MLB teams have over done it lately with this spending stuff.The Pirates went overboard and will probably get bad returns from it.The teams who have good people working in the front office will do well.What the Pirates and Nats have done takes very little skill
there should be one draft. period. international 16 years olds making millions while homegrown kids have to take slot…that’s load of BS that serves no one but the owners (and possibly those concerned about ticket prices). If you don’t like the cost of competing in the mlb, start up a milb team.
I agree with that but that will take years to happen.I am just sick of players like Josh Bell who claim to be unsignable and as a second rounder he gets more than most players in the first round.If kids like Bell are really serious about it than go to college
they’re basically still kids, and probably think they might still end up playing for the team they liked growing up or something…also college rules (or whatever)? anyway, i’d rather see them get paid than waiting 3-4 years to even get an entry level contract, and then it’s only the best players that even hit free agency before they’re 10 years out of college.
The age and signing rules vary so much from country to country that it would be pretty much impossible to institute an international draft. For example, you can legally sign Dominicans at age 16, and given that the average per capita income down there is less than $10,000 a year, it doesn’t make sense to make them to wait for high school graduation the way you do for Americans.
Are the draft spending rules a limit to the total amount a team can spend on a particular draft?
I would allow for this to vary based on the team. For example, the team with the worst record the previous year can spend the most money on the draft, while the team with the best record can spend the least. Or make if cover the past 5 years or so. This could allow a team that hasn’t been good, to spend money on the draft to improve their ball club. And a team that’s been winning, probably doesn’t need to spend that much money on the draft anyway.
the only way to ensure that teams with the worst record spend the most would be to…..institute a hard slotting system. then teams are left to draft whomever is signable in their slot because they only have $x dollars to spend, and then if you don’t do hard slotting then you have to fudge around with who can sign for what amount of money. that puts teams in an ugly, ugly situation. i mean, imagine a scenario where a team has to choose between signing a 2nd round pick, or not signing their first, or vice versa, because signing either means going over the amount you are allowed to spend? this would probably be pretty common since lower round guys typically sign sooner. so you can either sign lower round guys or not sign them to stay under your cap. adding in spending over x years to determine what you can spend just sounds like a nightmare.
Glad to see that the MLB has the ability to compromise unlike it’s counterparts.