The owners and players met today to discuss core economic issues for the first time since the start of the lockout, even if today’s talks seemingly didn’t result in much (or any) common ground being found between the two sides. Ronald Blum of The Associated Press reports that the session lasted roughly an hour, with the league presenting its proposal, and the players then agreeing to make an official response and counter-proposal at an unspecified future bargaining session.
As one might expect, reports have already begun to filter out about the players’ dissatisfaction with the league’s proposal well in advance of any official response the union might make. For starters, MLB’s proposal didn’t address luxury tax thresholds or free-agent eligibility whatsoever, and the MLBPA has made clear their dissatisfaction with the current rules regarding both issues.
According to Blum, The Athletic’s Evan Drellich, ESPN’s Jeff Passan and Jesse Rogers, and other reporters, here are some of the proposals floated by the league in today’s talks…
- In regards to the top pick in the amateur draft, the teams with the three worst records would be involved in a lottery, with the winner receiving the first overall pick. This is similar to a previous league proposal, except this time, MLB added that a team wouldn’t be allowed to take part in the lottery for three consecutive seasons (to help address tanking). The MLBPA has also wanted a draft lottery, except a larger process involving the eight teams with the worst records.
- A draft for international players, as opposed to the current “July 2” international signing window and bonus pool system.
- The elimination of the “Super Two” arbitration system, as players who would count as Super Two-eligible in the future would have salaries determined by a formula. The league’s proposal offers some leeway, as players with even one day of MLB current service time would have the option of taking part in this new system or opting to remain in the old system. Regardless of this grandfather clause for current union members, the MLBPA isn’t keen on the idea of any statistical-based calculation tied to salary, such as the league’s prior proposal to entirely eliminate the salary arbitration process.
- If a team has a top 100-ranked prospect on its Opening Day roster, and that player finishes in the top five in voting for a major award (the MVP, Cy Young, or Rookie Of The Year) during one of his arbitration-eligible seasons, the team would receive a bonus draft pick. The idea is to provide a benefit for teams so they won’t hold back top prospects for service-time reasons, as extra playing time might help a player earn an award like the ROY as soon as possible. According to Passan/Rogers, players have some reservations about this idea, including concerns over how the list of “top prospects” eligible would be determined. (MLBTR’s Tim Dierkes is more bullish on the concept, as outlined in this Twitter thread.)
- An expanded playoff bracket, with 14 teams reaching the postseason. The players have expressed an openness for a 12-team postseason in the past, though as Sportsnet’s Ben Nicholson-Smith notes, an expanded playoff is “arguably players’ biggest bargaining chip” given how much the league and the owners want that extra postseason TV revenue.
- The use of the DH in both the American and National Leagues. The universal DH has widely been expected to be part of this CBA, and Susan Slusser of The San Francisco Chronicle writes that the players union seems agreeable to the idea as long as the universal DH isn’t “tied to something else as a bargaining chip.”
Wow. Bad proposal by the owners. They want an international draft and a 14-team postseason and offered the players nothing of value.
14 is ridiculous. You might as well make it 28 teams and only the worst team in each league is left out.
Why even have a regular season. Just go to double elimination tournament.
What makes baseball special is the 162 game regular season. it mattered and having a deep team was important. Why not change the format so it was like the NFL? One game per week, then the playoffs with a one and done rule. Max Scherzer can become the next Time Brady and pitch until he’s 50 under those rules. Eventually, fans will rebel and the golden goose will be killed. it won’t happen in the near time because baseball married itself to fantasy and gambling. But it will eventually happen.
We don’t need 162 games. We could go back to 154 and no one would even notice.
JoeBrady -I don’t think that’s the point BudgetBall and atomicfront are making. It’s that why bother to play 162 (or 154) games, only to have half the league in the playoffs. THis is where the owners greed destroys the game, and —as mentioned above— they’ll kill the golden goose.
14 of 32 NFL teams make the playoffs. 16 in hockey? 16 in basketball? 10 in baseball?
Joe, those other sports are all showing what baseball is doing right in terms of playoff participants.
Especially in a sport where getting hot at the right time could make you win it all.
Which is fine for deserving teams in the postseason. But 14 of them? Screw that.
Yeah, I don’t like any sports league where half the teams make the playoffs, but it especially doesn’t make sense in baseball. The reason the baseball season needs to be > 140 games is because that’s how long it takes for the standings to generally reflect the true talent of the teams involved. If almost half the teams make the postseason regardless, that nullifies the point. It’s far too easy for a mediocre team to go on a hot streak against a superior opponent in a 5 or 7 game series. As a baseball fan, I want the World Series winner to clearly be one of the best true talent teams in the majors.
Yea that’s sh!#. What else you got? Ahahahaha!
Why is an international draft unfair? Why would a single draft with international and U.S. players be unfair? Or a separate draft for high school versus college players? To me, none of them are per se unfair, it is just something to bargain. What is unfair is that owners are given a monopoly without more benefits extracted for taxpayers and fans. What is unfair is the benefits, insurance and pension plan for minor league players.
I personally prefer ten teams in the playoffs. Three division winners and two wild cards who play a three games series with all three games at the park of the wild card team with a better record.
Eventually, I prefer a 32 team league with two divisions each for the NL and AL. At that point I would support 12 teams in the playoffs. Two division winners with byes and four wild card teams. The top two wild card teams get all home games for the three game wild card series. All playoff series thereafter would be seven games.
Manny, not sure if your question was directed at my comment. I didn’t say an international draft was necessarily unfair. My point is the owners desperately want an international draft. They want to expand the playoffs. Two HUGE gets for management. What are they offering in return? A lottery for the three teams with the worst record? That will change no behavior, and actually it might make it worse. More teams might try to tank hard to get into the three-team loser circle for a chance at the #1 pick.
The players should remove the Universal DH from all discussions since both sides want it.
This entire proposal is a win for owners with little for the players. Reject. Let’s see what the players come back with.
I would come back with:
Minimum salary one day of service $700K
Minimum salary one year of service $800K
Minimum salary two years of service $900K
Payroll “sort-of” floor of $80-$90 million where a dollar for dollar tax is imposed on owner if you go under two years in a row (so you could still go 45-80-45-80 . . . .)
Payroll cap of $325 million with an automatic COLA
Become free agent one year sooner.
Agree to DH.
Agree to 12 playoff teams (even though I do not like it)
(Top two teams get a bye, third division winner and top wild card get to host all three games of a three game wild card series)
Get a small 401K, better health insurance, and career-ending injury insurance for minor league players.
International players added to draft in under a certain age, say 24-25. (If under 24-25, but at least 18, you will draft an international player and then develop them just like with domestic talent)
For contracts longer than four years, teams can cut a player and make them a free agent and for years 5+, only have to pay $1 million per year plus 80% of the amount of the original salary over $1 million.
Why is the minor leagues with little pay and benefits unfair? Similar to actors working small jobs looking for that break to fame and glory. I worry more for the older actors and supporters like theatre techs who have been hurt by COVID.
Dewey.. Kind of agree there.. My mind says just pay what market will bare and no need for anything agreement wise in that area in any industry.
MLBPA should only have to worry about when they can become FA, insurance, pensions etc and actual pay rate determined by free market in general, instead of kept artificially low because of caps and such. it’s just wrong any way one looks at it.
And the union will come back with an offer that is a total win for the players and a loss for the owners. We’ve already seen this movie several times before and it sucks.
$700k for one day of service is way too much. The RS had 16 players that accumulated less than 20 PAs or 10 IPs. Teams are not going to add another $11M in payroll for what amounts to (for the RS) 48 PAs and 42 IPs.
The players do get service time for pensions, which is important for players that will never make it. You might be able to be able to give them something on that end, like a minimum pension service time of 25 days for each promotion. Your #27-28-29 guys might pop up 3x a year. That would be worth something to the guys that need it the most.
Why is the minor leagues with little pay and benefits unfair?
======================================
I say this all the time. The dreamers are buying lottery tickets. You go to school for accounting, and you do pretty well, but seldom great. If you study guitar, 99% of the time you pick up a couple of weekend gigs, or play for your local church for free.
And 1% of the time, you break the bank.
are you part of MLBPA…..they think owners are billionaires and are in business to lose money by paying players whatever they want… They did not become billionaires by running companies into the ground..
Not sure why this hasn’t been thought of (or at least I haven’t seen it) I wonder if someone could figure out a formula for that lottery that would change on a year to year basis how many teams actually make the cut there, and that wouldn’t be final or able to be 100% forecasted until the final 2 weeks or so of the season. Maybe factoring in metrics that aren’t currently a direct indicator of W/L? Runs scored/run differential may or may not be part of that? Attendance as a % of capacity? Etc. Removing that certainty of ‘worst 3 by record only’ should be a recipe for more competitive play. And while any formula can be gamed, the more variables in it, and the more dependent on OTHER teams’ variables, the harder it is to control for them.
They should at least be paid minimum wage, but the owners convinced Congress to “Save America’s Pastime” by creating legislation allowing them not to.
Manny why would the owners agree to any of that and get nothing. The players aren’t agreeing to a salary cap and have for years bargained against it. Get that through your skull. So they can’t reasonably expect the owners agree to to a salary cap floor.
JoeBrady,
I believe Manny’s intention was the new minimum would be $700k, and players with under one year of service time would accrue pay at this new rate for their first year in the majors, just like now. So if a player gets called up for a month, he would get roughly 1/6, or $117k, for that month. I don’t think Manny meant every player who appeared even a day in the majors would get the full $700k.
Isn’t that what we already do? Albeit at a lower rate?
That’s 700k annual rate for days spent as major leaguer..
Yes, the point being to raise the minimum significantly and increase it further for those with one and two years of service time.
Whether minor league salaries are fair isn’t the point. Paying minor leaguers better will create a better major league product. Because the better conditions will attract more talent. More high school and college kids will choose baseball if the minor leagues are less dire. Less of the talent will give up early in search of other opportunities. They’ll be able to hone their skills and conditioning in the offseason instead of working at a grocery store. They’ll report to spring training fully prepared.
And that’s the point: making the game better. I’d hope the owners and players can be convinced to be interested in that.
Joe Brady:
What GPS said.
The 700K is pro rated per game so it is approximately a $900 per game pay increase over the present salary. Just like now, if a MLB team calls up a minor league player for one day with less than a full year of service time, they do not get the full 550K, they get a prorated amount.
GBS42:
Exactly what you said.
It’s unfair to negotiate in this manner because the MLBPA expressly does not represent minor league players. How can two entities, neither of which represents the third in any way, negotiate away the rights of the third? It’s ludicrous.
This is a good point.
I agree to a point…. I’m a brewers fan and we spend what we can but an nl vs Al I’m not on board…. I understand the dodgers situation but if you don’t like it win your division nfl has same rules… dodgers where a wild card because they didn’t win there division… regular season you compete with your division
International draft is good. I am not sure why the players would be against it as it doesn’t effect them.
atomicfront, what is good about an international draft other it saving the owners money? That’s what drafts do.
what is good about an international draft other it saving the owners money?
===============================
There is already a cap on international spending. I’m not sure how much money would be saved with a draft.
Yes, the cap already limits spending, and a draft would prevent players from determining which team they would play for. The free market is cited when it works to the owners’ advantage, downplayed when it doesn’t.
That’s what you get with early offers. The players’ will likely be similarly bad. But differences will narrow a bit.
Hey, at least they’re talking!
Which would be fine if spring training wasn’t a little over a month away. But since it is…
They offered the draft lottery and the fact no team can pick in the top 3 for more than 2 seasons in a row. That’s a foundational change that the players have been talking about wanting all offseason. It seems they want a bigger lottery than that but considering this is the first time it would happen in over a century and a half of MLB baseball they shouldn’t expect to totally change the draft in one offseason.
I don’t think the universal DH is a bad idea but more importantly the rules need to be the same in both leagues since they compete against each other. They should either allow the DH in the NL or take it away in the AL. If that were to happen it would make the system more fair. It would also definitely be considered a bargaining chip that helps the MLBPA. All these guys making 8 figure annual salaries who can’t field wouldn’t make nearly as much. How does the DH not help the union when players like Nelson Cruz would make almost no money at all without it? Any rule that helps 1 dimensional players make more money is good for the players.
Overall, I agree with you though. I don’t think the proposal was that great. I am eager to see the unions counter offer. I just hope it is an actual counter offer that could benefit the owners in some way they didn’t benefit last year. If the union is only going to ask the owners to compromise while they offer no give in return it isn’t negotiating. That would just be demanding with the threat of a work stoppage happening as the only reason owners would accept. Negotiating is how deals get made. Demanding is how lockouts and strikes happen. If the players only ask for more and expect the owners to only take less around every turn we can expect the season to be delayed. I wouldn’t blame the owners for that at all, either. Personally, I would never bother negotiating with anyone who expects me to be the only one who makes sacrifices.
So it’s a bad proposal because one proposal is bad?
Anyway, was the fact the owners banning compensation picks listed? I saw it on the MLB site, I didn’t see it here. It may be here, I’ll have to read it more carefully.
I despise expanded playoffs. It takes out the incentive for teams to build winners. All they need to do is win enough games for a playoff spot. The playoffs are a crapshoot. Don’t become the NBA.
Exactly. It’s a terrible idea
@jonbluvin I agree, but it’s going to happen unfortunately.
Not exactly. If you are a small market team, the prospect of getting in with a .500 record supplies incentive to play .500. If you need to play .550, some team will just give up since they won’t be close enough.
Similarly, for the large market teams, they will want to come in 1st to avoid early crapshoot playoffs. All things being equal, the RS and NYY, by having to play a one-game series, effectively became a 16-1 shot instead of an 8-1 shot that coming in 1st would give them.
If there’s a first round bye for the best teams, there’s an incentive to win more. If not, then yes terrible idea as the best team might have nothing to care about in August or September.
Of course the fairest thing would be to just crown whoever has the best record after 162, but fair doesn’t matter, what we want is the most entertaining result.
It would be nice if they would make wild card a best of three vs one and done
Budget:
Agree, I like a three game wild card with all three games at the park of the team with the better record.
One and done should never happen in baseball. Agreed.
I see nothing wrong with it. If you invite in two additional teams with .500 records, I don’t think they have much of a claim to expanded playoffs. And it already exists in the playoffs via the one-game WC play-in.
The problem is, if you have all the other teams sitting around doing nothing for almost a week that affects their play. The wild card winner ends up with an advantage.
I’d love to see a wild card triple header though. Make them play all day to get in, then the division winners have a real advantage in the next round too.
Maybe just a double header and the third game, if necessary, the next day. The real advantage would then be that the WC winner would have used their best 2 or 3 starters to get to the division series, which could begin before they have rested.
Thats why you make it double elimination for the higher seed and do a doubleheader. All done in one day still.
Don’t care about the details.
Just get it done before the end of February!
So the league basically offered nothing.
What did you think would be offered?
So the league basically offered nothing.
========================
That’s the attitude that has the players losing the public opinion wars.
They offered a substantial increase in minimum salary.
They offered a draft lottery.
And they offered a bunch of other stuff. This is how deals get reached. if your attitude is you don’t have to counter, a deal will never be reached.
Take out the expanded playoffs and I’m actually into this idea. Sure they might make the draft lottery five while bargaining but it’s not a bad proposal. The international draft is the move and the new super two system is a smart motion. I also like the incentive to have a top 100 prospect in the roster. That one likely will fall but it’s a good idea to prevent service time manipulation even if they can simply demote them after opening day…
It’s a start.
I do like the NL having the pitchers take at bats, but it’s time for the DH. Gotta keep pitchers healthy.
Szc:
I agree. Watching pitchers bat is fun. Learning to bunt to move the runner over should be part of every player’s game. But with so much money invested in top pitchers? What about a rule that you can DH for the starting pitcher but not for the relievers. This would reduce openers and bring back the starting pitchers of the old days. But again, there is the high salaries and the injury risk.
Watching pitchers bat is funny…not fun.
Get rid of the DH too. Just have the 8 position guys bat.
I don’t agree, but that is a very interesting idea and I definitely give you credit for thinking outside the box.
Make pitchers hit. Braves of the 90’s (Smotz, Glavine, Maddox and others) used it to their advantage. Makes managers work harder and smarter.
It used to, but 90s baseball is long dead. The small ball advantage is gone. It’s all swing for the fences, and so pitchers hitting is useless.
To me, the reason that the players poll as badly as the owners in these types of negotiations is that their proposals only benefit the top players. Things like the luxury tax puts a cap on how much and how many top tier players can make the most dollars. Put out things that benefit the guys in the minor leagues, actual benefits for any players that makes the major leagues, little more money for the end of the bench type of players, etc… Might get some of the fans on board to their way of thinking. There’s plenty of money to go around, so let’s get them to sit down and work around the issues to start the season on time. So tired of both sides strutting around like peacocks and nothing getting done.
MLBPA does not represent minor league players. Do not expect anything concerning minor leaguers in this CBA
I like your ideas a lot except THERE IS NOT A LOT OF MONEY TO GO AROUND…ask the Padres, the Mets…
MLB brought in a mere piddling $10.7 billion in revenue in 2019 (can’t find 2021 numbers). That works out to $357 million per team.
Why not have designated hitter for catchers as well. They don’t hit that great. I don’t like the DH. Everyone should bat. Let them bat in the minors and they might hit better in the majors.
Or a DH for one player, be it pitcher, catcher or shortstop. But it has to be the same position for the whole game. If you have a pitcher who can hit, then you weigh the risk.
Owners, you do not own baseball. You have the privilege to own a team in Major League Baseball. You go through an approval process and at any time can be removed from that privilege (see: Frank McCourt).
Players, there are millions, -millions-, of kids and adults alike that would kill to be in your shoes. Keep that in perspective.
Rob Manfred, other than threatening to add robot umpires and pitch clocks, this is the first time sports fans really get to see you in action. You’re failing, miserably.
These guys hide behind “it’s a business” but it’s MUCH more than that. It’s the game of baseball. We all own the game. They have an enormous responsibility to get this right and time is running out.
None of them have failed for another 4-5 weeks. If baseball starts by the end of April, I am ok with that. Hopefully, the timing will coincide with the Omicron variant having subsided.
What’s this big deal about omicron variant? The doctor from South Africa who discovered it said it is much more mild, only more contagious.
It would impact play if ten members of a team catch Omicron at the same time. Games would be canceled. Most reports suggest that it is WAY more infectious than earlier variants, but less deadly, especially if you are vaccinated and boosted.
It hasn’t proved a big deal for those vaccinated and boosted. Cold like symptoms usually. It’s still deadly for the unvaccinated, which is what is taxing the ICU’s to their capacity limits.
Which is why if baseball starts a few weeks late and the peak of the omicron cases has passed, it is a win-win.
But let’s not over do it. Let’s have baseball by the end of April.
96% of the people hospitalized today and over 99% of deaths in the last quarter of 2021 were unvaccinated.
For people under 65 the chance of death is half of one percent. And for those under 40 it’s in the 0.0’s. On average the chance of hospitalization is between 1-5%. Not only that but when the vaccine’s were being rolled out they said that people were not going to get Covid and were close to being 100% effective.
Actually, they made the investment into a baseball franchise, so they do own it. That is a ridiculous statement. And lets see you try to start your own league, which I would be in favor of. Go fight the anti trust laws in court and you’ll see just how much the owners do OWN baseball.
I’m more with nuke on this one. While owners indeed own their franchise, Baseball is an institution and no one is looking out for it.
My proposal, which the owners are too short-sighted to agree to, would be to have a neutral Commissioner of Baseball. His (or her) job would be to look after the well-being of the institution of baseball. The Office of the Commissioner would consist of the Commissioner, the owner rep (Manfraud, if they still want him) and the player’s rep (Clark, if…).
I nominate George W. Bush.
For Love of the Game:
If you have George W in that job the only thing that would happen differently is a conspiracy between the CIA and Isreal to crash a plane into the stadium during the World Series with some ridiculous explanation that required the US to go bomb the crap out some piss poor Middle Eastern country for no reason for the next 15 while spending trillions of dollars and getting more of our own citizens killed needlessly.
I suppose that they could also use “the incident” to pass legislation that allows the government permission to further spy on every citizen without their permission and also allow for the creation of some new Department of Blah Blah Blah, that really just specializes in facilitating rather than eliminating things like drug & sex trafficking.
I mean that’s just my feeling when it comes to The Bush family, something like that could never happen right?
Some of you guys are acting like these owners bought themselves a Taco Bell franchise. There are extreme barriers to enter this league and strict rules to follow. Yes, it’s their team, they own it, but they (and Rob Manfred) have a great responsibility to the game and the fans to bring their best efforts forward in resolving this labor dispute.
It’s not about creating a new league (that argument was horrendous) or questioning ownership, it’s about working this out with the players as efficiently and fairly as possible. Anyone who feels both sides are doing a good job needs to watch tennis.
The MLB is a sports league not the game of baseball itself.
Apparently the owners agree with you that Manfred has failed miserably. That’s why he was just fired.
Oh, wait.
Don’t tease me.
-Love the idea of a lottery draft but a 3-team lottery doesn’t disincentivize tanking.
-An international draft has been a thought for a long time, good idea but it always seems to fail miserably.
-A new super-two formula… can’t really call it an improvement on the system without looking at the formula.
-The top 100 prospect thing… as they say, who determines the list and how?
-Expanded playoffs. I don’t see it incentivizing teams to win. It just means that more teams might shoot for the middle.
-Universal DH. Dear god no.
Agreed on the lottery. A 3 team also just seems pointless. Unlike the NBA and NFL there is rarely a can’t miss, no brainer #1 overall pick in MLB.
This is what the owners consider important. Next the players will counter with what the consider importan and may or may not include some of what the owners want. I don’t think this will come together quickly. They are at the stage they should have been months ago.
It’s really kind of inexcusable that both sides wasted a month and a half without even attempting to negotiate. They let a lot of precious time go by for no good reason.
The international draft would be fine were it not for the fact you eliminate any incentive to fund international development teams.
It’s a start, they have the universal DH, and expanded playoffs for sure. Next meeting add 100 million to a starting salary, and give bonuses for great performance and awards.. Eliminate the shift, and increase the cap to 220 next year, and increase it to 230 in five years. Hopefully they make an agreement by March 1.
At least now we have some details. But an incomplete proposal may be worse than no proposal at all.
How so? They have to start somewhere.
The owners should just use non union employees from now on. The MLBPA is destroying the game with their greed. Get rid of them. I would be fine watching minor leaguers for a couple years.
The players demands are so unrealistic. Clark negotiating with Manfred, is a recipe for no baseball this season. Clark isn’t smart enough to understand that most of the players demands will never be acceptable to the owners. Unless Clark is removed, and someone ( like Max Schertzer), appointed to replace him, no progress will be made. The level of stupidity is almost beyond belief.
You do know that Clark is not negotiating this time, right? You didn’t? Then maybe you shouldn’t be commenting on subject until you learn at least the basics of what is going on.
Yeah, that worked out so well the last time.
That’s hilarious. No one watched scab players the last time the owners tried that nor did they go to games. Today the broadcast contracts say that they won’t pay to put scabs and minors leaguers on TV. If you were fine watching minor leaguers, you would be going to many more minor league games now. People don’t in near the numbers as major league games and certainly are not willing to pay major league prices to see inferior talent.
This is not a very serious proposal.
My views:
14 team playoff is a joke. Not happy about 12 teams either. The beauty of baseball is the season – making it too irrelevant is a HUGE mistake.
Universal DH – I love the NL game, but fine, not worth fighting over.
International draft – hard no, the current system is pretty fair and working.
Extra pick for a top 100 prospect who wins and award is stupid, unworkable and too uncertain to be of any real motivational value.
Not sure how much putting the lowest three teams in draft lottery helps motivate anything – maybe an 8 team lottery would – but there have to be better ways of preventing tanking. Not being able to participate in the top 10 for three years in a row might be a pretty good hammer though.
I like the idea of a draft for international players.
International players don’t have the high school and college system they do here in the States. They come out of academies and from “schools” run by buscones. Most players there are signed at 16 and most were not in high school at all when signed. Unless MLB wants to finance high school and college level baseball systems in the DR, Venezuela, and other Latin American countries, a draft is not possible.
Based on that proposal, this offseason will last until 2023.
Hmm does nothing to address a cap or revenue sharing. You can make all these changes but baseball will never change as long as teams can spend 250 mil on their payroll while others struggle to hit 100mil.
Revenue sharing should be an issue for between the owners. Its got to be hard enough for the big markets to give to the small markets without the players throwing in their opinion.
Not when the rules for revenue sharing affect the player incomes. They deserve a voice in how the revenue they create is spent.
There is not one team in MLB that made less than $250 million in 2021 and only 3 made that little. They all can afford to pay $125 million or more in player payroll and still come out with a healthy profit. That is an excuse. The way revenue sharing is done now is a problem. When teams like the Pirates that got more than $70 million in revenue sharing and made nearly $300 million in revenue in total are spending just $61 million in payroll then the system is broke. If a team receives revenue sharing they should have a salary floor based on total revenue they have to meet. For the Pirates that should have been at least $125 million. Maybe more.
I feel like all of these changes are just going to create more apathy toward the game that will eventually kill it, not increase viewership. I’m not totally against change, as I like some of these ideas and ones in the past (Instant replay for example), but there are a lot of things that I don’t like that are instilled in todays game already (trucking the catcher was fun to watch, breaking up double plays, throwing 4 balls to intentionally walk a hitter) now all we see is the players take a right turn toward the outfield or slide 5 feet before the bag and not making any effort to try and disrupt a double play, no can make a mistake with a guy on base to intentionally walk someone, and because Posey unfortunately got nailed and Utley took someone out at second (also unfortunate), the entire things are gone. These weren’t the only times it happened but were examples of more bigger names that eventually drove the decision to have them gone.
The playoff format is bad unless you shorten the season. There’s no incentive to field teams as good as they can be if they know they can just half ass their way into the postseason. People complain all the time about their teams not spending, well I think it’s safe to assume that this won’t help on increasing spending when teams know they can put together a mediocre team that can make the postseason.
I’m still mixed on the DH. Most of the pitchers are putrid hitters that is true, but certain ones like Max Fried are entertaining to watch. I remember one specific game I was at when the Braves were playing Philly and were losing (IIRC) when Fried kept fouling off pitch after pitch it seemed like and the crowd was ecstatic, and was a big takeaway after the game at how cool it was to see that with me and my family. Now that’s going away. When a team is losing big a DH hitter getting a hit means nothing.
I just want my favorite game in the world to remain as exciting to me now as it was some odd years ago and when I was younger. Unfortunately I’m getting more and more apathetic toward the game with every passing bad rule change.
Yeah I remember a few years back Chris Volstad once fought off a 13 pitch AB then singled to left and a year or two later fought off a 11 pitch AB and singled to right center. Both times the fans went crazy.
When Daniel Camarena hit a grand slam off Max Scherzer it was one of the top ten moments of the regular season. He was a relief pitcher, it was his first hit, and it changed the outcome of the game. In fact, since Giants won the division by one game over the Dodgers, it changed the outcome of who won the division. When Max is deservedly voted into the Hall of Fame, people will still be talking about that grand slam. Maybe it will be the last grand slam hit by a pitcher. (Ynoa hit one earlier in 2021) It was one of my three favorite moments of the 2021 regular season and I was rooting for the Dodgers over the Padres that day.
So, the things you find most exciting about your “favorite game in the world” are players getting hurt by needless collisions, the wild pitches that occur maybe once every couple of years during the issuance of intentional walks, and pitchers fouling off pitches. Got it.
Was that really your takeaway in my statements? YIKES.
Wow, after a month of NOTHING they met for a WHOLE HOUR! Wow! A holes.
6 weeks. which makes it even worse.
— Players are right – expand it to 8 teams. Love the idea that you can only be in the lottery for 2 years consecutively. I would add another wrinkle – you can only be in the lottery if your payroll is above ‘x’ amount (say $100M in today’s dollars). This would prevent complete tanking for the sole purpose of acquiring cheap young talent.
— Love the draft for international talent.
— Go back to arbitration for performance. Best performing players should make the most money. I would start in year 1.
— Extra bonus pick for award winner … get the idea but I’m not a fan.
— 14 team playoffs … every single player talks about wanting to play for something. This makes it happen for more of them. The trick is creating enough incentives for the top teams (all games played home/byes, etc).
— Universal DH is a slam dunk. The players pretend like it isn’t a big deal but it is. This will absolutely extend the career of many union members. Even the ones that won’t be full-time DH’s – being a defensive liability still makes you viable knowing that SOME of the time you won’t be wearing a glove.
It’s not perfect but for a starting point, these all seem reasonable.
My next big recommendation would be around service time. Go with 5 years or age 29 … whichever comes first.
Next, install a hard cap and floor. In today’s dollars, use $100M minimum and a $240M maximum (with amounts increasing with inflation). Dollar-for-dollar penalty in either direction plus for those that tank and are under the $100M they lose the ability to participate in the lottery. Violate the cap in either direction for 2 years in a row and you pay $2-1 in either direction. ex. If it’s your 2nd year under $100M and you land at $90M you would be writing a check for $20M. Money collected is earmarked to be used in community charities where big-league clubs play.
Finally, no draft pick compensation for departing FA’s. This will lead to one of two things – more excitement around the trade deadline or more incentive for clubs to work hard to keep home-grown talent.
Why would you, as a fan, want a floor? What will happen if they adopt a salary floor is players who aren’t worth the money will get paid above and beyond their ultimate value to a team, and that will be passed down to the customers, us, the fans. I don’t understand why anyone would punish a team for running it’s business efficiently. just because some teams, like the Pirates, do this, others, like the Rays have great success, and keep it under $100 mil, all while trying to get a ballpark built, and offering to pay for half of the cost. A salary floor is vying for one of the worst ideas of this bargaining session.
Theoretically, you could have a dollar for dollar tax if you go below the floor but it is waived if you win 75 games, i.e., are competitive. I am not suggesting this, I am just saying there is room for creativity. Personally, I like the floor but it only applies to two consecutive seasons. A one year rebuild and saving money to reload is OK. Two or three years in a row at $50 million is not ok when you own part of a monopoly.
My problem with the floor is that it would just mean players are paid more, not that teams would really be more competitive. Washed up veterans would get fat contracts just because teams sat out most of the off-season and are now grabbing up just enough players to get over the threshold. You’d still have the same number (and probably same culprits) as perennial cellar-dwellers. Maybe their record improves slightly, but it’d still be an unsightly product overall. Having every team have a legitimate shot at the playoffs every year is a pipe dream.
The salary floor is probably unworkable, but not for any of the reasons you invented. They are completely divorced from basic economics.
Why would you prevent tanking to grab talent? Tanking, imo, is only problematic when it’s perennial. The way the Cubs, Astros, White Sox, and Tigers have done it is totally fine with me. Suck for 4 years, get high draft picks, make trades, finish off with FA acquisitions. It’s how you build a contender if you’re not elite at drafting / development like the Rays or as rich as the Yankees and Dodgers. It’s teams like the Orioles and Pirates that I have a problem with, but they won’t care about where they pick in the draft because they don’t care about ever winning.
hyraxwithaflamethrower
Why would you prevent tanking to grab talent?
============================
If you disallow tanking, that would be a huge blow to the small market teams, as would a salary floor. without occasional high draft picks, and without being able to have higher and lower salary, they have no shot. A team like KC accumulated a few good picks, upped their payroll from $170-180M, and went to the WS B2B. If all we do is to have NY, RS, and LA spending $230M, and the small market teams spending $100M, they won’t compete.
And, imo, PT and BA aren’t perennial tankers. They were just poorly run for a long time.
You’re making my case for me with the first point.
I disagree with you on the second. I know they’ve each had a moment in the sun in the last half dozen or so years, but the Pirates trade away anyone making a certain amount and the Orioles haven’t doled out a big deal since Davis and also trade away their expensive pieces. Those moves aren’t indicative of teams trying to win.
What I want to know is why this game has to continually change? Too much change in a short period of time makes the game unrecognizable to those why have been watching most of their lives. Having watched this game for almost 50 years I’d have to say it has changed for the worse in too many ways. Time to figure out the economics with the MLBPA, and leave the rules alone. A bye for teams will not work in this sport. If a team doesn’t see live pitching for a week, they will be worse for wear when they need to be at their best. Employing players who are well past their prime because they can hit, and can’t run, or field the ball any longer makes the game slower, and boring. I’d rather watch a fast guy leg out a triple than a Prince Fielder looking guy shake the ground as he tries to make it to 2nd base without having a heart attack, clog up the bases for guys who can still run, and so on. This DH in both leagues garbage needs to go.
Jdt:
I agree and disagree.
Personally, I prefer no DH. I also prefer four playoff teams in each league and no bye. But these things are not happening. I used to think that inter-league play should be limited to the first month of the season as well.
14 games against other four teams in your division = 56
10 games against 10 teams in other divisions = 100
Inter-league games = 6
But now I sort of enjoy inter-league games.
I do not like 7 inning games. I would rather rather just cut the number of games from 162 to 152.
BUT . . . all sports need to change with the times. Fans do enjoy quicker games, more home runs, etc. Personally, I like to see pitchers, and light hitting catchers or shortstops bunt with a runner on first and less than two outs.
If you’re going to adopt a universal DH, make it so no player can DH in back-to-back games.
Also, I really like the lottery system, but think it should be expanded to all teams that miss the playoffs. Add another lottery for teams that make the playoffs. It would add a new event with excitement for the fans (World Series, draft, trade deadline, etc.). Then add the ability to trade draft picks, which might help expedite a rebuild.
What do you think of a rule that the DH must bat 9th?
that is an interesting idea…paying a DH over 15 million is a lot… has no chance but interesting… would have to be phased in….
DH can’t play in back to back games? There’s players who make their money off of hitting and hitting only (Cruz, Ortiz). Why make it so they can only play in 81 of the 162 games?
I have been throwing that idea of 2 years with a draft lottery of three worst teams in the league for the top draft pick. Then break it down from 2-8 of the worst teams. After a team has three consecutive worst losing seasons(finishing within Top 5 in the draft), I feel they should draft behind the World Series winners in the third year. 5 straight years of losing baseball, the league uses a “court room” to determine the fate of the organization or multiple organizations. If MLB can move Montreal Expos, they can do something about the Pirates, Marlins, Rays (due to payroll only, still competitive team), A’s, and Royals. I am not saying every club needs to spend money because that doesn’t work either. Look at Mets, Angels, Phillies, Padres, Rangers, and Blue Jays, spend money and miss out on the playoffs each year. Some of those teams even spending still can’t hit the .500 mark. So, spending isn’t the key to success. I do feel any major league player earning less than 1.2 million, is unfair to them. Not many can say they made it to the majors and they should be millionaires. Minor leaguers need better benefits and be able to earn a living even under a (shut down like with this Covid). It’s common for minor leaguers to have 5 in an house or apartment to pay rent and survive. There is no safety net or protection of these guys trying to prove themselves to be able to make it to the majors. They are an afterthought throughout the long journey to get a possible chance at the majors. These guys may only have enough money to eat Cheerios for dinner at times. Pay the boys!
Maybe I’m the odd one out but I actually think this is a good start.
1. International Draft – relatively meaningless but helps bad teams get better.
2. Draft lottery – just meet in the middle at 5 and tick it off
3. Super 2 / Arbitration – tick – arbitration should be tied to performance. Just need to agree on a 15% increase on current scale
5. Top 100 incentives – tick. Adds incentive to promote kids
6. Universal DH – tick. It was always going to happen.
7. Expanded playoffs – easy tick – this is how you fund increased salaries. MLBPA uses this to increase revenue pool for owners so they can increase salary floor. Given only 3 of 30 paid luxury tax in 2021, all the pissing contest over luxury tax limit is somewhat pointless. Focus on increasing minimum salary to $1M by the end of 5 year CBA (65% increase over 5 years is about 5 times inflation rate).
Just my two cents worth.
It’s worth half that. Ahahahaha!
The international draft is not gonna work. Most players from overseas are gonna pass on coming if they not have a choice of where they going to play especially if they are a veteran player.
Let them pass then.
Why not let them sign a free-market contract instead of being limited to negotiating with just one team on a take-it-or-leave-it deal?
The biggest gains the players will get here are more directional, moves that will pay greater dividends with each CBA negotiation.
I think the draft pick compensation for top award finishes is interesting but would be a more fair proposal if the player putting up the production gets a double minimum salary after the production while the club gets a pick corresponding to the player’s award finish for ROY (1st-after 1st rd & 4th after 4th rd) and after 1st round for Cy Young and MVP finishes.
Make it for all rookies, not just top ones. If the player achieves a finishes in multiple awards a la Kris Bryant, his salary doubles again. Seems like it escalates quickly but in reality a 1.2 or 2.4 million dollar deal for a young ROY or MVP caliber player is peanuts for their actual value.
I also like the idea of a “Loss Cap” for the league. Set it at 100 this year and if a team loses 110 games again, it gets treated like 90 losses for draft purposes. Then walk the loss cap forward to 90 losses by the end of the CBA. That would be better for competitive balance than the lottery system proposed.
I’m shocked MLB didn’t include anything about the CBT or Free Agency service time in their proposal. They knew these were two key issues for the Union so at least present something to them, even if their proposal is similar to what it used to be in the last CBA.
I agree 100% with the union on the draft order. Put the worst 8 teams into a equally-weighted lottery to see which team gets the #1 pick, the #2 pick, etc. The owners proposal of only including 3 teams in the lottery will lead to even more tanking amongst the league’s worst 4-5 teams as they will all try to lose and secure a chance for the #1 pick.
The idea of getting an extra draft pick for adding a Top 100 prospect to your opening day roster and seeing him place in the Top 5 for league awards seems counter-intuitive to me. You are just rewarding teams with good prospects with extra draft picks. That makes no sense. Just change service time to a full year for anyone who is on the roster for more than 1/2 a season (82 games). Teams won’t be able to afford to keep talented players in the minors for over a 1/2 season if they are trying to win and/or develop their rookies appropriately.
At least it looks like both sides are on board with the DH and some sort of international draft, but those are nominal issues. There is still a ton of work to be done to come to an agreement on the core issues. Let’s hope the union comes back with some reasonable proposals. If it’s just a regurgitation of their initial proposals presented in November then this is going to drag on much longer than we had hoped.
Love the draft compensation idea to incentive player promotion. And expanded playoffs are the players only bargaining chip. They have nothing else. They essentially gave the owners a salary cap in the last negotiations.
Friendly reminder salary floors and minimum spends have been utilized repeatedly with disastrous unintended consequences (most recently by the NHL). Cheap teams simple obtain junk contracts to meet their requirements and cut players. Creates a massive competitive disparity. Absolute undisputed, based on mountains of hard evidence, NO.
The 2022 season is not happening. Focus on the 2023 season. MLB and the players need time to deal with all their issues. The managers may start a season without the union players though.
Both sides seem intent on having NLRB declare an impasse in negotiations.
Please remember that every single penny MLB and MLBPA haggle over comes directly or indirectly from the fans. These negotiations are nothing more than a way of determining ticket prices and how much TV we’ll get to watch. It will affect the price of the goods and services we buy based upon those TV revenues and snazzy ads we all love.
I wish the little RICH boys would quit screwing around and understand it’s the fans they are inconvenienced.
The price of goods and services are determined by what we are willing to pay for them. Econ 101, my friend.
Blue Skies:
Yes and no. It is a monopoly. This artificially restricts supply causing inflated prices. If every city that offered a cash upfront billion dollar buy in could have a major league team, prices would be lower. Not saying that would be realistic or even good.
So yes Rick is correct that the fans pay for the owners and the players, and yes Blue Skies is correct that the fans could withhold their money, but with a monopoly small increases in player salaries probably do not impact fan prices much because owners will try to squeeze all they can either way. But government should insist on more freebies for fans like increased free televised and internet games (MLB.com already gives one free game on most days) in return for the monopoly.
While it’s true that baseball is a closed market (a monopoly, if you prefer), the economic impact of this is entirely on the players, as they are the only ones whose marketable skills are completely dependent on a closed market for their livelihoods. For the customers of the game, their participation is completely optional. Whenever I see someone at a game sitting next to me who is on his third $15 beer I know that the basic rules of economics still apply in ballparks. The price of that beer is never going down so long as it sells at that price. Same goes for tickets. They are priced using sophisticated demand-pricing systems in order to maximize profits. Whatever the market will bear is how much they cost, and how much the teams pay their players has no impact whatsoever on the price.
For teams dependent on public financing this is a different story entirely but it has no real impact on how much the teams charge their customers for anything.
Blue Skies:
We may not use the same words to get there, but we are both concluding that small or medium increases to player salaries will not likely increase ticket or concession prices as the owners already to get squeeze as much as they can. All this impacts is the cash flow for a couple of the poorest owners and the extent of the profits and equity increases for the others.
Give me 14 playoff teams and a salary floor of $100 million and I’m a happy camper as a fan.
There is a way to make the 14 team playoff work without watering down the regular season, but it’s probably not what they have in mind. Team’s 4-7 in each league could follow a mix of the NBA’s play-in format and double elimination. 5@4 & 7@6; loser of 7@6 is out; winner of 7@6 goes to loser of 5@4; loser of that game is out; winner of that game goes to winner of 5@4; away team in that game must win twice to continue to divisional round whereas home team just needs to win once. Playoffs would follow traditional format thereon.
The problem with the Manfred majors is that he’s all about the gimmicks.
Raise the minimum major league salary to $750k, drop compensation for teams who lose a free agent, take the playoffs to 12 teams, Raise the minimum based on number of months in the majors, so super two can’t be gamed, and you’re done.
I think there can be compensation for losing a free agent, but instead of getting or losing a pick, maybe it can be adding an amount of dollars (say an extra million or two based on the salary of the departing player) to the team losing the player before you get hit by the luxury tax or a smaller added amount (say 100 or 200K) toward international free agents (if they still exist). That would benefit competition and the players.
14 teams is perfect. Reduces a lot of tanking going around. Immediately increases the competition. Best record in each league gets a bye. WC round 3 games and the other rounds stay the same.
Glass:
Perfect if you want teams playing star position players maybe 100 games a year and pulling starting pitchers after four innings. Sounds crazy, look at the NBA.
In 2021, you would be adding the 83-win Reds and 82-win Phillies to the playoff mix. How does that make the post-season better?
And with a three-game wild card, the difference between winning the division and a wild card is lessened. Maybe the Dodgers don’t bother to try to catch the Giants and rest all of their pitchers a lot more bring up some A-ball guy to eat some innings.
Now I am sure that the number of teams in the playoffs will go up, that it benefits owners and players will use it as a chip for some other gain. But as a fan, no way, 8-12 teams in post-season is preferred, not 14.
With the exception of the formula pay it’s not a bad start
The Players have done a piss poor job of communicating what their priorities are in this CBA.
Both the union and owners clearly want a system that favours large market teams. But then players get bent out of shape when small market teams refuse to extend offers to more expensive older players and accuse teams like the Pirates of tanking when their best hope for success lies in acquiring top talent through the draft.
Makes zero sense to me.
What I’d like to see is both sides put out their offers on the same day, and have the press line them up side-by-side. Have places like MLB-R set up polls for each issue. If, for example, the owners offer $700k minimum salary, and the players ask for $1M, readers can opine of which one seems greedy or fair.
Than give both sides a week to respond.
I’m ok with an int’l draft, but if we’re going to do that, just lump in those players with the US draft. Boost the pools for each team, have it go a few more rounds, and that’s it. Then make these picks tradeable, both before and after the draft like every other major team sport does.
For the rest, raise the CBT to $225M, then up by $5M/yr for life of deal.
No changes to the draft. Instead, to address tanking, start taking away owners’ revenue sharing money. If you lose 100+ games 3 straight years, 95+ 4 straight years, or finish last in your division 4 years out of 5, you get a penalty to your revenue sharing. It caps at the 3rd year at half of your revenue sharing, with that money going to teams that receive revenue sharing and have the best records. Also, change the rule for revenue sharing money so that 80% of it has to go to players, with the owners kicking in an equal amount. In other words, If you get $50M of revenue sharing, your team salary has to be $80M+. I hate the Yankees, but they shouldn’t be lining Bob Nutting’s pockets. If a major market team isn’t getting revenue sharing, but is perennially tanking, charge them an additional amount of revenue sharing, up to 50% of what they pay already. This would be divided evenly among teams receiving revenue sharing.
Both sides want the universal DH. Don’t tie it to a concession. Just agree to it and be done.
If a rookie spends at least 132 of his team’s games on the roster, he gets a full year of service time and toward arbitration. If he’s on the roster for 82-131 games, he gets a year toward arb, but not service time. 81 games or fewer, he gets neither. Rookie deal ends at sooner of six years or age 29.5 season.
Get rid of losing the draft pick for teams signing a QO player. The team losing such a player gets the draft pick, with slotting going by record for the first such player lost, then by lottery after all teams losing such a player have picked if a team loses multiple such players.
Raise the minimum salary to $700K for first year, then have a cumulative WAR formula with a small multiplier for relievers to calculate years 2-3. Set the max to $2M and $3M, respectively. Players would get paid more sooner while still letting small market teams not worry about their salaries.
I’d like to see the playoffs remain the same, but since that’s unlikely, let it go to 14 (to placate owners), but let a percentage of the TV revenue go to the players. That takes care of guys on rookie contracts for almost half the league.
Did I miss anything major? Thoughts?
Did I miss anything major? Thoughts?
==============================
I like it. It’s a substantial raise for the players. But since the owners made out pretty well last time, it doesn’t seem unreasonable.
In exchange, the owners get the bigger playoffs structure they want and still get to hold on to a player for an extra year by keeping him down five weeks (instead of the current two). Yankees, Dodgers, and their like would appreciate that their revenue sharing money is being used to field competitive teams rather than just going to the owners. Small-market teams would appreciate being able to hold on to their young stars with just relatively modest increases in what the players make now ($2M is next to nothing in baseball terms). I don’t think either side would be happy with it, but it seems like both sides win some of their bigger points. Thanks for reading all that.
If you want to disincentive tanking, tie the current revenue sharing to order finished. Tanking is mostly done by the same market teams who don’t have enough money to buy their way out of losing. The highest rank small market team gets the largest share and the lowest ranked team gets the least. Money is the only motivator for these owners. Penalize them for losing.
What’s interesting about the offer from management is that it doesn’t actually offer very much at all to the players, while including management’s wish-list.. It isn’t that some points couldn’t be agreed on…it’s that, in bargaining, both sides should be getting something, and universal DH isn’t much of a get, given the owners want it as well.
Like many commenters here, I loathe the proposed 14 game playoffs. These teams play 162 games, that ought to count for a lot. I don’t want to see “Cinderella stories” when Cinderella is a 76 win team who goes on a hot streak , benefitted by one game and three game playoffs
It can be very similar to the current setup, except adding a few more 1-game and 3-game series. You can make it so the three division champions don’t have to play until they hit the ALDS, same as it is today.
Not sure how that works. First of all, that means four WC teams, so are you suggesting two sets of one game playoffs between the four WC, followed by a one game playoff between the winners of the first round of WC, or a three game set? If it’s one game and then another one game, it’s about 5 down days for the division winners (season ends Sunday, first round of WC on Tuesday, winners play on Thursday, then WC winner plays Saturday against division winner a best of five. If the second round of WC is best of three, then the period stretches to as much as 10 days: Last game, Sunday, first round WC Tuesday, Second Round, Game 1, Thursday, Second Round, Game 2, Saturday, travel day, 3rd Game, Monday, and then 1st game Division Series, Wednesday. That’s minimum and while some teams might welcome the time off to heal, more, especially the pitchers, might not like being taken out of rhythm.
And I still have a “fairness” problem.
Last year, you would have added the Reds (83 W) and Phillies (82W) to the WC stack. The 106 win Dodgers have to play the 82 Win Phillies in a one game, and then, potentially, the 83 W Reds.
Much better to lose to the 88-win Braves in 6 games!
CHOKE
Personally I’d like to see the Fans do a walk out or a no show for a month or longer at least until we get both the players and owners attention. As much as I love baseball it has gotten to damn expensive. This is a game we love to watch and NOT necessary to life. It costs me $8.00 to see a movie so why does it cost so much more to watch a baseball game? It would be nice to let the whole entertainment business to take notice.
Why does it cost you so much more to see a live concert or a play? Could it be because you are watching actual people, as opposed to a recording? See how easy that was?
Some are suggesting that out of spite the teams should hire scab players. We’ve seen how that works. Ironically fielding players nobody wants to see play would have exactly the impact you are hoping to see. So let’s get with the inept baseball! Fans would stay away in droves, and at the same time you can screw the season ticket holders royally, and who cares about them?
It’s hard for many fans, who just want to see baseball to not want to come to grips with the obvious:: We know scabs or replacement-level players or AAA (or AAAA) players won’t draw because they don’t. If they did, given the tiny amount of money Minor Leaguers are paid, those teams would be insanely profitable. But they can barely make ends meet. The “marker” makes it clear the fan will not pay a premium price without seeing the best and the brightest
Make every player a one year contract free agent. Let them negotiate their own deal. Sure there will be disruption but it would be fun to watch thousands of players fight for 1200 40 man slots every year. Owners would not be stuck with bad contracts. Players will be compensated based on performance. No multi year deals. Let the slaughter begin!
That’s a terrible idea. One of the reasons I don’t follow the NBA anymore is the rise of superteams. I hate that a roving band of players just teams up here or there for 2-3 years, wins a title, brags about how awesome they are, then goes elsewhere to try it again with another combo. An All-Star team beating up on the rest of the league isn’t entertaining to me. I’d rather have some actual excitement in a playoff chase. When Jordan, Bird, and Magic were all playing, they didn’t team up. They were friends off the court, but they were having way too much fun competing against each other to form a superteam.
Plus, anti-NBA rant aside, the players would never, ever go for it. They want job security. That’s why the big stars always seem to be looking for deals at least 6 years long.
Job security? Shouldn’t you get that by performing?
All the experts know that nothing gets done in these big negotiations until they are under the gun. Everything now is just window dressing. I would think they start getting serious the end of Feb. or the beginning of March. If there is no settlement by March 10, then it will be hard to have a full season . Players need 3 weeks of spring training.
I get the feeling the owners are going to wait beyond April before they get serious. May 1st Opening Day.
I’m surprised that so many people are hating more teams in the playoffs???
There are always a few teams within a few games of making the playoffs. The more teams that have a chance to make the postseason makes the entire season more interesting. Including offseason and trade deadline. People hated the second wild card and it has been awesome. I hate 7 inning double headers and runners starting at second base way more than more teams involved in postseason play.
No the second wildcard is still a terrible idea. Just because the one and done game can be exciting doesn’t make it any better as an idea. So a team earns a wildcard spot sometimes by a large lead and has to play a team that barely survived the season. That second team does not deserve the spot and worse sometimes that second team will win the game. The 14 team playoffs the owners want will definitely be worse. Baseball teams don’t need a bye, they get rusty waiting for the next opponent.
It is not a great first offer form the league but it leaves both sides room to maneuver. The real key to how quick we can get back to hot stoves & Spring training is the counter offer coming [in my guess] in a week or so.
If the league feels like there is some progress this may get ironed out faster than feared. But if the players are intent on entrenching their position….
it will be shades of ’94
Why not take some of that money and have MLB hang on to it and tell the owners to drop concession prices 50% so the fans can afford to go to games again. Then some of that can be reimbursed evenly after the season to all teams. The fans are always the losers in these talks so I thought maybe I’d suggest something to help us out. Crazy talk, I know. A player making 2.2 million a year would lose out on 2.3 million a year. He couldn’t support himself of his family. He depends on those $15 dollar beers to be sold.
Here’s an idea: eat 50% less at games. You’ll suddenly be able to afford to go to games again, and you’ll be healthier too. And it’s a whole lot easier to achieve than expecting owners to suddenly forget the laws of supply and demand and decide to operate their stadiums like charities.
Personally I never buy food at games. Do you really have trouble going 3 hours without eating? Don’t you do that every day several times a day?