Last week, the MLB Players Association made its second proposal on core economics in collective bargaining discussions with the league, report Evan Drellich and Ken Rosenthal of the Athletic. The new proposal contained only minor adjustments compared to the PA’s first offer, which was made back in May.
Drellich and Rosenthal reported in August that the MLBPA’s first offer included an emphasis on earlier arbitration for young players, but other details on their vision remained sparse. The Athletic now shines more light on that initial offer, suggesting that an alteration to the draft order, a higher league minimum salary, elevated luxury tax thresholds, alterations to the revenue sharing system, and an unspecified change in how service time is calculated were all included in that opening proposal. The union’s initial proposal also included scenarios where certain players could qualify for free agency without reaching a full six years of major league service. Whether all of those goals remained in the union’s second offer is not clear.
Major League Baseball made one counteroffer in August — a radically different setup that would’ve included lowered luxury tax thresholds with an accompanying salary floor, an age-based system in which players first reach free agency at 29.5 years old, and a revenue-based pool system to replace the current arbitration structure. Given the massive differences in what’s publicly known about each side’s offers, it’s no surprise the MLBPA reportedly considered the league’s offer a non-starter.
Drellich and Rosenthal also shed a bit more light on MLB’s first proposal. The league’s proposed salary floor, which was to be set at $100MM, was a “soft” floor, featuring unspecified penalties for teams that don’t reach that mark in annual payroll rather than a firm mandate to do so. To address players’ concerns about rebuilding teams, MLB’s offer included a provision that would prevent teams from picking in the top five of the amateur draft in three consecutive seasons.
MLB’s proposal also included a provision to overhaul the system for teams to acquire international amateur prospects, per Drellich and Rosenthal. Currently, teams are annually allotted a hard-capped bonus pool to sign amateur players from outside of the U.S., Canada and Puerto Rico. While deals can’t formally be signed until the player turns 16 years old, teams and player representatives often come to verbal agreements a year or more in advance. According to the Athletic, MLB proposed to replace the current system with an international draft, the details of which remain unclear.
The potential for a collectively bargained international draft has long been bandied about. Were it to come to fruition, it’s generally expected that draft would be a separate entity from the current Rule 4 draft for acquiring domestic amateur talent. An international draft would foreclose the potential for advance verbal agreements for incredibly young players, but it’d also obviously restrict those players’ abilities to choose their preferred destination.
It’s clear that MLB and the MLBPA remain far apart on core economic concepts, but Drellich and Rosenthal report that the sides have made progress in ancillary bargaining areas and are slated for in-person talks at next week’s general managers meetings. The current CBA expires on December 1, and Drellich wrote earlier this week it’s expected that failure to agree on a new CBA by then would result in a lockout and accompanying transactions freeze. Commissioner Rob Manfred and MLBPA executive director Tony Clark have continued to express hope they’ll reach agreement before that point, but the general tenor on the situation has seemed to skew more pessimistic.
As my old drinking buddy Bill Shakespeare used to say (quite a drinker was Bill), “A pox on both their houses”. Millionaires fighting billionaires,
Without the owners and players there would be no game. I have no sympathy for any of them, but I enjoy the game and it costs me very little to get internet access to all non-local games and if the pandemic ends, to resume attending a few games in person.
Right? I envision MLBPA saying, “They need to split ALL profits among the players. They are making money off us!”
Owners, likewise, “We own the team, if we can implement a cap like everyone says, then we can say ‘sorry we can’t go over the cap,’ and we will make a killing!”
I don’t like the international draft. Way too many complications. Just another way for everyone to try to strip the more popular, money-making teams of talent.
$250 mil upper threshold with 100% penalty up to $20 mil and anything over at 200%. also, $90-110 mil lower one with stiff penalty for going lower. like losing draft picks or less profit shares.
Losing draft picks for going under, especially high-priced ones in early rounds? Are you Bob Nutting, Vizillionaire?
bucs owner pocketed most of $118 mil given to him by other owners who invested and profited. and bucs are not even rebuilding. they have been kept artificially worse for him to get richer.
Actually, bucsfan, I agree with Viz, if I understand his proposal correctly. It’s the other side of the “force big-market teams to get worse and cap their payroll” argument.
The biggest reason for, what many incorrectly label as, a lack of parity is that the smaller-market teams are getting top draft picks, plus they sell-off before they have to pay real money, plus they get CBT money from large markets. All the while they have their fans claiming lack of parity (which isn’t even true) and to tax bigger markets more.
What’s really happening is that the Yankees, LAD and other top third of big markets are virtually carrying MLB and ensuring the union is happy by handing out huge contracts. Not to mention if you take out the LADs, Yankees and other big-market teams they won’t generate nearly the income on the big championship games; why? Because more fans =more viewers, which = more money overall.
Cap teams and you will see a greater lack of parity, as with other sports, in addition to all owners reducing overall payroll to match small markets, resulting in a much worse problem. Not to mention the fact that it’s going far past anti-trust – smaller teams need to help carry some of the load.
I like Viz’s plan, too. I’m good with a salary floor because owners like the Pirates shouldn’t be able to own a team and profit by putting a losing product on the field and still making money since they don’t spend any. At the same time a cap has to be in place. All raising the floor would do is give players a lot more money but the smaller market teams still wouldn’t compete because the bigger market teams would still just blow their payrolls out of the water with no penalties. The Braves have a mid to lower payroll even though they just recently raised it to the $150M range. If they didn’t do that there is no way they can sign Charlie Morton. Without Morton I doubt they even make the playoffs. That’s with a $150M payroll. I can’t imagine how hard it is for teams like Cleveland and Oakland to convince their fans they have a real chance with payrolls less than $100M. A couple teams like the Rays and Brewers occasionally do it but that’s with a lot of losing seasons mixed in to give them really high draft picks and those teams still never win it all. As good as the low budget Brewers and Rays both are they still have a lifetime combined total of 0 world championships and payroll has a lot to do with that. Raising the floor alone won’t help bring fans to the sport because nothing will stop teams like the Dodgers from outspending the other teams like crazy. It will just make the losing teams spend more money but still be losers. The Dodgers played in a division against the best team in baseball. They had their star starting pitcher Clayton Kershaw miss a ton of time with injuries. They paid Bauer well over $30 million just to watch him not really play for the team. They saw Betts end up having a relatively disappointing season based on his past and his current salary. The Dodgers had their former MVP Cody Bellinger completely flop. Those 5 things would absolutely destroy almost every team in baseball. The Dodgers still won 106 games and made it to the championship series. That’s all because they can spend over $280 million on a sport where some teams can’t never spend close to half that. You can’t just tell other teams to spend more like they are the city of Los Angeles and expect it to work. You have to reel in the big spenders some so the teams can come at least close to meeting in the middle. Otherwise every year all the lower market teams will see the big market teams like LA just buy their way out of their problems every year by spending more money and adding guys like Max Scherzer and Trea Turner. Just look at the Dodgers starting rotation they pay for. On top of Gonsolin they have Max Scherzer, Trevor Bauer, Clayton Kershaw, Jose Urias,Walker Buehler and even David Price. Most teams only have 5 starting pitchers. The Dodgers have 6 who all were Cy Young candidates at one point 5 of whom are Cy Young candidates right now. That doesn’t even count their incredible offense or most highly paid player in Betts. The Dodgers have basically bought a guaranteed path to be at least one of the top 4 teams every year. Every other team is fighting for their life to make the playoffs and the Dodgers know for a fact they are going to get there when the season starts. Even if it falls apart they will just spend more money during the season to add more top players like they did this year. In this set up the Dodgers will win several championships every decade while all the other teams fight to average less than one championship every 30 years. It makes for a boring sport to those who aren’t Dodger fans or fans of big market teams. Not every team resides in a metropolis the size of Los Angeles and they can’t afford to spend like they do. If MLB is going to allow such a large gap in team payrolls they should force all the highest payroll teams to compete directly with each other in the same division. If the Dodgers want to spend over $280 million a year that’s okay but they should be forced to pick on teams their own size. Even out the schedules so teams all play each other equally so distance doesn’t matter but put the Dodgers in a division where the other high spending teams. Let them try to buy a playoff spot while going against the other teams that do too. If spending all that money is fair then the Dodgers should take no issue with having to win a division every year that’s filled with the Giants, Astros, Yankees and Red Sox. All that money isn’t quite as impressive when you don’t get to compete against teams like the Diamondbacks and Rockies every season. Meanwhile the Orioles have to face the Blue Jays, Yankees and Red Sox. If the Dodgers don’t think spending that much money gives them an unfair advantage they should have no problem with competing against 4 other teams all year long who also each spend over $200 million. I would love to see how many of those teams keep spending money like that after they end up in last place because all the other teams in their division spend the same. Something tells me once there is a level playing field and that kind of money doesn’t buy them an advantage a lot of teams would stop spending as much. But seriously. Dodgers, Yankees, Red Sox, Giants and Astros. Put them all in the same division and let’s see how that turns out. It’s more fair than letting them compete against teams who can’t afford to spend like they do.
Salary caps actually have a harmful effect on parity. See the nfl. Look up the Patriots, ravens and Steelers record from the last 20 years. Now look up the browns, jags, dolphins. When you handicap teams from spending the organizations with the best front office will win more and continue to win as you see in the nfl consistently. Same thing in the nhl and nba. Mlb has more parity than all those other leagues.
Add to Vizionaire’s proposal….
If a team hits 7 consecutive losing seasons, mlb forces a sale of the team.
Really I want to say 5 seasons, but benefit of the doubt at 7. Certainly no more than that.
The real issue with baseball is one team with $600MM in yearly revenue vs another with $250MM. Huh?????
And the gap widens every year. This has to stop. Much more revenue needs to be shared between teams. TV & revenue from around ballparks need shared, not just in-stadium revenue.
This is the only way to save the game long-term. Teams with hundreds of millions of more revenue than others have such a massive advantage it ruins competitive balance. Can’t have KC be the last small-market team of the next 20 years to win a WS.
If the large-markets don’t “like” it—too bad—go get the other 7-8 like revenue teams and start your own league. It’s about time the SM & lower-end mid-markets force this to happen. This is truly in the best interests of baseball.
Once this is accomplished, there is no need for “salary caps” maybe not even a luxury tax threshold. Now a salary floor can easily be added without any “complaints” from SM teams. This will FINALLY restore competitive balance to baseball long-term, and take the world’s greatest game to new levels.
As far as the revenue pie between players & owners is concerned, gradually get the players share back to where it was before these last 2 CBA’s. This can be done quite easily by gradually increasing the pre-arby minimum salary. Start with a 1.2 million minimum and raise it to eventually get the players share back.
Here’s my input (if it matters any) on the salary cap floor and ceiling. I fully support 100-120 million salary floor with 200-210 million ceiling. For owners who go under the salary floor (unless agreed upon by all MLB owners and commissioner), they lose up to 35% of each draft money, international spending, and revenue sharing pending every 5 million they are under the cap. Repeated offenders or owners who don’t prioritize in giving player’s a “base salary” after 3 years of MLB service, lose draft picks and fined. After 3 years, a base salary for players should start at 5 million dollars go goes up every so million based off metrics like WAR, UZR, and a few other logistics used in the game now. Players want to be paid and I fully support that. I am tired of small market teams like my Pirates who “Penny pinch” players who should be making what they are worth. McCutchen, Sterling Marte, Neil Walker, and so on, I believe were under paid because the system allows owners to undervalue the players for profit. This needs to change immediately. Also, any team 20 million under the cap, loses their top 3 prospects.
I feel with a cap ceiling, any team over 10% of the cap, loses draft picks and fined the full value they are over the cap. 20% or higher over the cap space, they lose draft picks, fined full value over the cap space, loss of the two highest prospects within the organization and can not sign any penalized teams players unless all non-violating teams pass on the prospects. Any “cap floor” team you was being penalized for being under cap has two options, pay 25% to the league on top of the players new MLB contract that is classified as major league Free Agents. These players must remain on the 40 man roster (like the Rule 5 rule) for the whole season or be forced to “buyout” their contract or trade to another team after the July 31st deadline.
Sounds complicated, but it may lower the complete service time, increasing money in players pockets, force owners to spend money, increasing revenue sharing, and gives teams a chance to keep their stars a bit longer.
Iver- Do you have any input rather than negatively commenting on everyone’s thoughts? Nothing original from you.
Salary floors don’t create parity. They create overpriced mediocre players. Paying a player more money doesn’t make them a better player just like having a higher payroll doesn’t mean having a better team.
That is an insane idea. Putting all of the big market teams in one division is like adding Oklahoma and Texas to the SEC and putting bad teams like the Orioles and Pirates in another is like the MAC Conference. Not to mention this:?Why should the Dodgers have to go across the country to play the Yankees, Mets, Phillies and Red Sox 36 times? LA needs to play their biggest rivals: San Francisco and the Angels. Plus why should the Diamondbacks and Rockies lose home games against the Dodgers?
There will always be popular teams. It might help change which ones are those popular teams, and therefore, which teams are the money makers.
i’m not proposing to go to nba route but owners claiming to be poor got $118 mil in profit sharing in 2018. i want that to be invested in players not simply fattening the owners’ wallets.
Stymeedone: So you’re proposing to forcibly change which team will be the next Yankees/Dodgers/Cardinals by taking their money/renown and making everything “fair?” Which, by the way is only a one-sided fair deal, thus not fair at all.
News flash, if you want a team that operates and has the popularity of the Yankees, root for them. To try to make your team them by switching roles will not work, and it will simply make the owners even more money.
I’ve never seen so many people advocate for sports socialism because their team won’t spend its millions. And the small-market argument is obvious – big markets are rewarded, like any business, for having more customers. It’s incredibly naive to think one team’s success should yield direct improvement and income for its competition. Why not just handicap the most successful team each year like in golf? It’s no different and just as stupid.
3 million a team when the business is worth c over 500 million? You obviously aren’t thinking straight, that’s peanuts. Single players are making a 1/3 of that in a year!
The teams that are always popular are Dodgers, Yankees, Red Sox, Cardinals and Cubs. The teams usually popular are Giants, Rockies, Brewers, Mets, Twins, Astros, Angels and Phillies. Teams sometimes popular: Braves, Reds, Diamondbacks, Nationals , Padres, Mariners, Guardians, Rangers, White Sox, Royals and Tigers. Teams usually not popular: Rays, Orioles, Marlins, Pirates and A’s
“I don’t like the international draft. Way too many complications. Just another way for everyone to try to strip the more popular, money-making teams of talent.”
What an aggrieved way to say “you better not take your finger off the scale for MY team!”
funny. I just finished watching the DiCaprio Romeo and Juliet.
How can the older is cry poverty when they just scored a killer television contract with major bucks. It’s time to make it an even playing field just like the NBA
Owners
Al, you propose something that already exists. And the leagues in which it has been implemented has far less parity. That excuse is a worm-out lie. It’s just a way for fans of the less popular teams to try to switch places. Teams that have more fans and more income should be rewarded, not just the owner.
Worn-out*
the large variety of countries that produce baseball talent nowadays really makes an international draft prohibitive…
Because….? Please. Go on.
Because it’s a monumental task that would require an excessive amount of resources all so your team can steal top talent by tanking against the 16-year-old’s will. Deal with being a loser.
because of how spread out the talent is and how much financial work would need to be put in? the current draft system is well defined, but applying a system that is used in two counties vs 200+? and where does that leave players in countries where the draft is not as fully established as in other countries? i feel this will harm the game’s growing global presence and harm kids at the front of these new talent markets.
Darkside: My previous paragraph came out all jacked up because of autocorrect but hopefully my point stands.
Anyway, I agree with you, not to mention some of these kids in impoverished countries work their entire lives in deplorable fields/conditions with garbage, third-rate equipment, and a lack of many other luxuries we have in the US, just to make the international draft, which yields more money than many have seen in a generation of work.
We are going to penalize them by pushing back their draft time, taking away their choice of team and leverage, all so the small-market team can take the top-tier talent (and pay less, mind you)? Uh, no.
Lol! Yankee Clipper has had enough!
Well ignorant people here are spouting non sense and are very vocal about their ignorance. Most haven’t even thought about any drawbacks to their stupid suggestions.
@yankee clipper…
I have to disagree with the basis of your argument. For those ballplayers who truly are coming from the ultra impoverished conditions you speak of, even a modest signing bonus and mlb minimum salary instantly put them into a class of their nation’s wealthiest people… the different in buying power between the USD and their native currency and/or native market prices ensure their family will have generational wealth in their home country except for frivolous spending.
We already have yearly talent pools and rankings for intl free agents. There isn’t difficulty in finding who is available. All players would need to do is declare.
If we want to propose how such a system could work, instead of attacking it, try this – expand upon team built facilities and make some regional MLB-sponsored facilities that hold, effectively, an extended combine type program for potential players to participate in a mock league (almost like a mini spring training leading up to each draft.)
Sometimes we get to talking about challenges in less developed countries and forget the origins of some of our own country’s best athletes. A favorite bio read of mine was Jerry Rice. He learned how to have great cradling receiving hands by catching bricks.
You do have to admit it is unfair that the international prospect gets to pick a team, while a domestic player cannot. That’s part of what is being equalized.
I think the an equally if not more problematic aspect is that a lot of foreign countries have their own professional leagues with their own amateur drafts. You think the KBO owners are gonna want to give up their exclusive rights to homegrown talent AND the potential posting fees they get from MLB teams for star players once they reach free agency requirements? That said I’d like to see an international draft eventually and since it will probably take years of work and negotiations to implement, might as well get the ball rolling. To me an international draft beats the current system in Latin American where handshake agreements with de facto agents for 13 and 14 year old kids is standard operating procedure.
GASoxFan: Your points are entirely valid and I understand your perspective. I was speaking to a specific group and I worded it poorly (16-17 year-olds), but it can impact everyone. Imagine MLB trying to work that out when they can’t even figure out simple contract-based things here – it would be….a train wreck, I think.
In terms of what that garbage equipment can do (the Rice analogy), yeah absolutely right, they can develop greater skills than people here using things at their disposal (again, didn’t mean to imply they couldn’t).
As for your point on equity, yes, it is not fair for kids here who get drafted. My basis is that it would be far too comprehensive and expensive to implement anytime in the near future, especially with Covid losses, plus you would have countries that wouldn’t cooperate, etc.
To be clear, I see the international system as a more convenient way for teams to go directly after talent, without the restrictions implemented here. This can certainly negatively impact homegrown kids that must enter the draft in the US, which is one reason why there are so many players of extra-US origin in MLB.
Your point on signing money/bonuses for impoverished kids was exactly what I was saying in my diatribe, only in my haste I wrote “draft,” but meant “to sign with a team.”
Anyway, JimmyZ below brought up some really good points as well.
I’m still waiting for a suggestion from you bud. And it’s called having fun discussions with different ideas. You should try it. It’s more fun than just being a downtrodden lump on a log yelling at the kids running on your yard.
The NHL pulls it off with half the revenue of MLB.
Nothing like watching Billionaires fighting with Millionaires over money. Instead of fighting over money they should be focusing on how to grow the game more. More fans means more money for everyone
i would nix the 16 year old international signings. 16 year olds can’t sign in the united states, why allow international signings?
i agree.
One reason why drafting concept will not work, among many.
Many teams provide facilities in these countries to help educate the players and try to advance their skills, because it gives them an advantage in signing them. If an international draft comes to be, I wonder how it will effect these investments in the communities.
Teams like the Pirates have invested like this. Not to acquire talent, but for Nutting to increase the value of his franchise. Any talent they happen to stumble upon is just gravy.
every 5 years all players are free agents. teams have a draft of all players available. each team has 6 weeks to sign player. if unsigned, player must play for the qualifying offer. reenters draft folloing year. qualifying offers are now broken down by position.
I really, really hope this isn’t what baseball ever turns to
That’s a concept that will result in a permanent strike by players.
It’s not even worth discussing because it will never happen. It’s like me suggesting a salary structure where players a paid based on the war they produce. Take too salary last year. Who has highest war. They get paid the most. 2nd highest salary etc etc. No chance in hell of that to happen. Also not worth discussing.
i’ve worked jobs where the favorite saying was, ‘that’ll never happen.’ i wasn’t afraid to talk to anybody, from the ceo down. lots of things happened, mainly because i spoke up. the rest of the employees cowered when the higher ups walked by. no one knows if you don’t say something.
Iverbure is proving to be useless. Completely agree timyanksit. Can’t come up with a plan without coming up with some plans. Good or bad. Plans come from ideas and spitballing and brainstorming and discussions. Something this country is failing to do all across the board. Discussions.
Sure hope both sides will realize that baseball is at a crossroads. After the Covid shorten season either baseball gets it act together and progresses forward to continue building it’s tenuous popularity or it returns to union/ management problems of it’s past and risks it’s standing as a major sport in this country. If they can’t do it for their fans, then selfishly do it to protect their own selfish interests! Players and owners need to be smart in order to protect the sport and it’s standing as part of the American athletic scene.
They can’t afford to blow this!!!!
All greed. Pretty soon. 25 dollar beers. 60 dollar parking. 200 shot tickets. Greedy United States. 300 million to hit a ball. Lol
My favorite is when people reflexively side with the owners, and then complain when the owner of the business works for doesn’t give them a raise.
Yeah, the players are millionaires, but they’re still the labor side of the equation.
Why does everything have to be politicized? Owners have massive money invested in their team and its minor league system. They “deserve” a return on their investment, and that means some degree of control over the few successful players so they can recoup their development losses.
After paying their dues as one of the few successful ballplayers, the players should be able to own their talents. The main consideration should be a system that grows the game and gives both sides a reasonable shot at success.
Or leave everything at status quo but players want a bigger piece of that growing TV/streaming revenue so here we are. I also agree with everything you’ve said.
Ditto YBC.
For Love – who politicized anything?
The owners are the biggest idiots and I hope the players play hardball and sit out the season.
With the pathetic leadership of the mlbpa the owners are gonna come out even further ahead. They have better representation and more ability to withstand a strike
I hope the owners take the players to town on this deal. Hopefully free agency is 7 years of service time and teams who spend less like the Rays and still win get more picks to incentives teams to spend even less. Just to further prove the “spending equals winning” crowd their buffoons.
Do you ever make a post that doesn’t include name calling?
Right?! This guy is troubled. Feel bad for him a little.
And gotta love “Their buffoons”
Make every player a free agent after every season like Charles Finley proposed.
That would be a huge mess
Major League Baseball already is a huge mess.
True, but that would almost guarantee worst-case scenario.
Great suggestion. Also, stop giving the top draft pick to the worst team. Give it to the champion and it would provide incentive for owners to win or sell their team to someone who wants to win.
Wait, Old York, you want to….. reward the winning team?!!! How dare you suggest such logic! Soon you’ll be saying we shouldn’t give participation trophies either (gasp).
Why should there be a draft? You’d be upset if a company in your field drafted you out of high school / university and you weren’t allowed to negotiate with any other company. Kids should sign long term development contracts with the team of their choice.
Because there are so many unresolved issues between the players and owners, i’m really hoping for a one-year extension of the current deal and use the next year to work out everything.
Capitalism. Players have difficult to replicate talents and want to make money from that scarcity. Owners want to make as much profit as they can. Neither side is obligated to say…”hey let’s lower our salaries/lower our prices so fans can pay less”. If we get priced out, then we won’t go, and they will have to adjust.. But right now, players, once they hit arbitration, are very well paid and owners sit on billion-dollar plus assets. Good business to be in.
I would just like to see a salary floor. Require teams to at least be somewhat competitive. Tanking may be the trend, but it can’t be good for drawing young fans to your team. I know small market teams may not like it, but if they can’t draw crowds in, then they either need to figure out how to market their product, or let the owners move their teams to a location that can support the teams more easily. Teams like Tampa Bay and Oakland can’t draw a fan base anymore. Can you imagine what a place like Las Vegas or possibly Nashville would do for the market?
Do you watch other sports? Is there tanking in other sports? Other sports has a floor but yet other sports have a salary floor. Therefore a salary floor doesn’t prevent tanking. Congratulations you just made Jason Hayward valueable. Anymore solutions that aren’t actually solutions you have?
Do you have a single solution other than trashing others ideas?
Sorry for the delay in my response, dude. It just took me awhile to sort out your incoherent babbling. Anyways, I can’t imagine how having a salary floor would allow teams to tank as easily. Other sports can turn around a tank job way faster than a Major League Baseball team can. On top of that, MLB struggles immensely at drawing in young viewers and fans. Requiring a team to pay its homegrown stars or dip a little further into the free agent market would at least help keep fans they already have until there are other methods in place to market the game to the younger generations and draw in new fans.
The big problem with baseball is that these teams are owned and operated by people who do not give a damn about the actual game of baseball. That is why the games have become unwatchable and the ratings for the World Series were so low.
but the owners in better successful sports do care?
Sports in general used to be an escape from real world, that’s no longer the case.
In addition, there is so much competition with gaming and esports. Young kids just aren’t wired to pay attention to something for four hours
and the players do? It’s all about money. Your statement is moronic at worst and comical at best.
no, it’s the nerds that are in the front offices.
I’m a mets fan. Especially now, my team has money and will spend money (not wisely I know and hey will choke no matter what). I can see the argument that it’s up to the owners to spend what they want. It’s their money let them do what they want. It’s a business. I can also see the argument that it’s more fun when the league is balanced and it’s not, for the most part, the same core teams competing year in and year out and the same core teams at the bottom of the standings. Of course there are exceptions, the rays, what the astros have done, etc. I don’t know much about it but why not make a floor, and then revenue sharing has to be forced into player salary acquisitions. Just an example, a floor of 60 million and then a team get 40, then their floor becomes 100? I could be talking out my behind and not fully understand how the revenue sharing works, but if I’m close, why not something like that. The teams that want to spend can. Let them do it. Keep some of the taxes on them, and then the teams that don’t want to spend have to to an extent to keep them from only using shared money on players but instead they have to spend and use all shared money.
And if a team really got $100 mil in shared money like I read in one of the comments, then there is a problem that that amount of money is being shared. There should be a cap on the sharing and anything above that cap gets dispersed through the Minors and veterans players and veteran armed forces and charities etc. again, I fully admit I don’t understand fully the revenue sharing aspect of things, but to keep the league semi more balanced for viewing purposes, and to still allow financial freedoms, I thought this was a decent idea.
As for players hitting free agency and arbitration stuff. Why not just have a step system that first year players make this much. Second makes this much. Third makes this much. To five or six years. Options don’t matter. Keep, send down, bring back up. Doesn’t matter. You play in one year the steps begin that year. Teams have control those first handful of years, you can release a player and they can choose to sign their own contract elsewhere at any time. But if a player plays in the one first season, they get that amount of money and the steps begins. it’s a set amount of money that doesn’t involve mismanagement issues of player clocks. Players play in April or September, they make the prorated amount for that first year on the scale and then year two they move to the next level. If a player stinks or isn’t worth the money at that next scale, a team can refuse to pay, that player immediately becomes a free agent to sign anywhere they please for whatever they can earn.
If a stud player is underpaid, that’s where the question comes in. Maybe there is a way to create incentive based payments, where salary scales can go up based on certain stats. What those stats are and how to keep teams from manipulating that is a problem. Or maybe a player has the choice to opt out of the last step year and become a free agent a year earlier should they think they deserve more money than the step allows. Or maybe Have the steps bump up quickly, maybe so the good players earn a decent amount because owners are ok paying them and the lower tier players will be released and or restructured under a release and sign type thing at lower money and outside the scales. Example year 1-500,000, 2- 1mil, 3-5mil, 4- 12mil, 5- 20, 6- 30.
Again just spitballing ideas.
Another obvious example of:
“Even if it’s long, it’s not always right”
?
It was a nice way of saying it was a terrible idea. There’s plenty of articles of proper solutions instead of spitballing nonsense that neither side would agree to let along one.
Let along one?
And so many articles of proper solutions. Soooo, why aren’t they in place?
My comment was made to have a fun dialogue between baseball fans. Come up with fun and different ideas. Thanks for your impeccably intelligent contribution to society, “let along” this posting.
i suppose you’re like me and think outside the box findingnimmo. like i tell them, i built the box, too.
My guess is there’s slightly less than zero percent chance of a new CBA by December 1…
Just say no to NL DH. I don’t see the point of it. If anything, it takes away playing time from the bench players. Look at an AL box score. 9 up 9 down, no pinch hitters or pinch runners (unwritten rules against that) protects pitchers? Quit coddling them. Back in the day a pitcher would throw both half’s of a double header, score 5 runs and hit safely in both.
@citizen Your right quit coddling them. And I mean those part time Baseball watchers that will never stop watching their stupid cage fighting to watch a real sport.. If you want to speed up the game put a time limit on the commercials. I like the 3 Batter rule and wouldn’t mind the pitch clock to keep the batters from putting on their gloves after every pitch. We need to promote Small Ball again. to make games exciting again. But then again I am an old timer. I enjoyed watching Sandy Koufax back in the 60’s. Maybe I am just a dying breed?
The MLBPA’s proposal loses nothing and gains everything. I love the game but this has to end. The increase in players salary only leads to higher ticket prices.
Not true really, even mid market teams are making 70-120 mil in profit a year. Owners could easily afford to make things more affordable for fans and still turn a profit while paying the players a fair share.
There is a reason even teams in smaller markets that haven’t won in 20 years are still worth a billion dollars. It’s a lucrative business.
This is why I hate when people say things like ‘oh the Dodgers or Yankees buy championships’ uhhh that’s what every team outside of tampa and Oakland should be doing.
Player salaries and ticket prices are not well correlated. When teams tank and slash payroll, how often do ticket prices plummet?
Consumer prices are based on worker salaries only when you have a perfectly competitive market driving down prices. MLB is a legal cartel, the exact opposite of a perfectly competitive market, so their prices are set based on demand in order to maximize revenue. They’ll charge you whatever brings in the most money, and who ends up with what portion of that money in the end is a completely separate issue.
International draft – some teams put very little effort in the international market. Those picks should be tradeable. Maybe 5 rounds and then anyone not drafted be free agents and they cant sign for more than the minimum salary of a drafted player.
International Draft order – should be based on a lottery of the top 10 and then losing percentage from then on.
Domestic Draft -a team should be able to draft top 5 3 years in a row. It takes more than 3 years of development to see the results of what you drafted. Order should be based on winning percentage of teams that miss the playoffs. If you just miss the playoffs, you get top pick. It would discourage tanking and promote winning. Teams that are close to being good would get a really good player to give them an edge the next year. Picks should be tradeable also.
A hard cap at some huge amount… $300 mil. They can afford that and gives big markets an incentive to pay top dollar. Salary floor at around 75 mil. That would discourage teams from tanking and encourage rebuilding teams to put some talent on the field.
No team should spend more than 180 or less than 110.
Actually no, make it 170 cap, 140 floor. If NHL, NFL, NBA, MLS can do something like that (small window between cap and floor I mean), MLB can do it too.
Can and should are not the same thing.
They’d never create and approve a cap lower than the existing ceiling. There are 8 teams in 2021 whose luxury tax payrolls exceeded $200MM. Those rosters were constructed under the current system with long-term contracts, players with no-trade clauses, 10/5 rights, etc.
MLB has had eight straight seasons with a different World Series champion, and hadn’t had a repeat champion in 21 years. Big-market teams and small-market teams all compete. MLB has more parity than any of the other sports.
I do believe there’s a need for an escalating soft floor similar to the escalating soft cap, but MLB’s payroll system works quite well. Perhaps the other sports should be following MLB’s model, not the other way around.
Put a decent minimum payroll for all teams. Make the serial non spenders start dishing out money.
Increase service time for new players to 7 years but the clock starts when they hit AA or when they turn 18, to avoid any of the crap service time manipulation that Keeps young stars out of the lineup.
Get rid of Manfred
Cap the number of years a free agent can get in a contract to 6 or 7, give the team losing the player the ability to add an extra year and scrap the comp picks
3 years max on free agent contracts
Players won’t go for that.
@tim – why?
Just do what every other Major League does. Erase financial disparity. Go to a lockout and do not come back without hard cap, hard floor and better revenue sharing.
MLB’s system is better, creating more parity.
Add 6 expansion clubs. in 2024
create a sub division of 12 teams – 6 expansion teams and the 6 worst mlb teams from 2022 – 2024.
each year the worst mlb team gets demoted to second league while the winner of second league gets promoted to mlb.
2nd league teams get no , or vastly smaller portion of, all mlb tv rights etc etc
Owners now have incentive to not tank and you may even see garbage teams with no playoff chances make trades for players to avoid being dropped a league.
on a side note – whiskey makes an excellent breakfast
What MLB has done down through the years is penalize teams like the Yankees by cutting them down to size ( this is why the Draft was created and why they want an International Draft ( no signing top players by the Yankees, Dodgers etc). Very counterproductive. That started the process of MLB going from the Number One professional sport, to being behind the NFL and NBA ( and I hate the NBA). Another example is the ratings of the World Series. Do you think a Yankees/Dodgers match up would have the same bad ratings as Braves/Astros. Even in the NFL Cowboys Thanksgiving ratings are higher then Lions ratings. Why? People want to see Yankees, Dodgers, Cowboys, Lakers etc not the Astros, Lions, Sacramento Kings etc. I have always believed the best approach is “The Free Market” instead of subsiding teams like the Pirates that few care about.
Wrong.
Competitive balance with the other leagues helps them with popularity. Typical Yankees fan that only thinks of themselves with zero understanding of what it’s like to be a small-market or mid-market team. Go take your Cubbies, Bosox, Dodgers, Giants, Mets, Phillies, Angels, Chisox, Blue Jays and start your own baseball league without the rest and see how long your league lasts.
If it was not for the Yankees, Dodgers etc MLB would be the NHL or maybe on the level of MLS or WNBA. Take Pittsburgh. The Pirates are not even on a popularity level of the Penguins ( let alone the Steelers). Same applies to Tampa Bay the Rays beneath the Bucs and Lightning. Who is number one in New York? Yankees. Boston? Red Sox? LA? Dodgers ( even above Lakers). Chicago? Cubs only behind Bears. I guarantee a number of teams would not be in business ( like the Rays) without the Yankees and Red Sox. Do not believe me? Look at how many Yankees or Red Sox fans are in attendance at Rays games.
Once Pittsburgh has a real opportunity to compete with the Dodgers, their fan base will increase. Same with all the small-markets. Things change over time. Keeping all teams healthy financially and able to financially compete decade after decade is the answer. 50 years from now Pittsburgh could rival the Dodgers in popularity with enough WS titles.
The Yankees fans arrogance is unmatched in the sporting world. It’s beyond annoying. 29 other teams fans overwhelm your actual fan base. Think past the next years baseball season. The baseball gods have had enough of your arrogance as well.
Typical salty non-Yankees fan.
I feel as if MLB and MLBPA exist inside their own little bubble and don’t understand how the outside world works. They don’t understand that it is not the most popular sport in America. They don’t understand it is the only pro league whose revenue is not driven by a national media rights contract. They don’t understand that there aren’t enough hardcore baseball fans left to care about the sport should there be a labor stoppage. I think they vastly underestimate how many people will find entertainment elsewhere if this happens, as there will be no Ripken streak or McGwire/Sosa run for 61 to generate interest from the casual sports fan.
I am afraid for the game. I am afraid it is about to be destroyed from within by blind people fighting against blind people.
“Outside the US, Canada, and Puerto Rico”
Puerto Rico is part of the US! This is like the fifth time I’ve seen someone at MLBTR imply otherwise.
Puerto Rico has their own Olympic team, their own WBC team, etc. They’re often treated separately. Before 1989, players in Puerto Rico weren’t part of the MLB draft. So it’s important to note that they now are. It’s certainly not a given.
The best starting point for these negotiations should be the owners and MLBPA to agree to stop rewarding mediocrity. What has revenue sharing really done for teams like PIT aside from making the owner wealthier? Granted Nutting is an outlier who is not only uninterested in winning, he does everything he can to prevent it.
December 1 is a little more than three weeks away, which seems to be a clearly inadequate amount of time to work through these complex issues as far apart as the sides are on them. Both sides have waited too long to begin serious negotiations and so have taken baseball to the brink of a lockout, and so long as the negotiations are being conducted under that threat, the more likely it is that one occurs. The two sides should agree on one thing at least, right now, and that is a lockout would be a disaster for the sport, and that if progress is being made that nothing drastic should happen on December 1 if the CBA hasn’t been signed sealed and delivered. Can they do even that much? I doubt it.