Headlines

Go To Pro Hockey Rumors
Go To Hoops Rumors

Collective Bargaining Agreement

Collective Bargaining Issues: Expanded Playoffs

By | at

Last week, we covered what figures to be one of the top priorities for the MLB Players Association during collective bargaining discussions — alterations to the service time structure. Today, we’ll look at what should be one of the most important issues for Major League Baseball: potential postseason expansion.

An expanded playoff has looked to be a key issue for the league for quite some time, as MLBTR’s Tim Dierkes discussed in January with labor advisor Eugene Freedman. More playoff teams simply means more games for MLB to offer television partners — deals which have proven extremely profitable for the league in recent years. Under past collective bargaining agreements, playoff TV revenue has gone exclusively to the league. The creation of additional rounds to sell to FOX, Turner or any other broadcast partner would figure to provide the league and its owners another windfall.

The league and Players Association already agreed to one playoff expansion, bumping to 16 teams during the 2020 truncated season. That was a one-off agreement, but commissioner Rob Manfred publicly voiced support for a permanent playoff expansion last year. Manfred has previously floated 14 teams as the league’s ideal number, and Jesse Rogers of ESPN reported last week that MLB has had a 14-team playoff format on the table during its early collective bargaining proposals.

According to Rogers, MLB’s proposal would contain seven postseason teams from each of the American and National Leagues. In addition to the three division winners, each league would feature four Wild Card clubs. The team with the best record in each league would receive a first-round bye, while the remaining six teams in each league would participate in a three-game Wild Card series.

Under MLB’s vision, the two division winners in each league that don’t receive the bye would choose their Wild Card series opponents. The division winner with the second-best record would choose its opponent from the bottom three Wild Card clubs; the remaining division winner would have its pick of the bottom two Wild Card teams still available; the remaining Wild Card winners would face one another. The higher-seeded team in each league would host all three games of the opening series.

While potential postseason expansion looks to be an obvious positive for MLB, its effects on the players could be more mixed. The introduction of a playoff round would have a direct financial benefit for some players. Under the terms of previous CBAs, players on postseason teams received varying shares (dependent on team finish) of gate revenues in October. More playoff games would mean more gate revenues, which would stand to benefit some players each year.

That alone doesn’t seem enough to convince the players to wholeheartedly embrace postseason expansion. For one, the league’s interest in larger playoffs is greater than that of the MLBPA, giving the union a powerful bargaining chip to possibly extract concessions on other issues (i.e. service time structure, luxury tax thresholds) of more import to the players. And the MLBPA no doubt has concerns about playoff expansion’s potential indirect effects on team spending habits.

A bigger playoff field inherently means a greater possibility for every team to make the postseason. With increased odds could come complacency. A club with an already-strong roster may not be as motivated to improve under a 14-team field as they’d be under the current system, reasoning that they’re already comfortable with their current odds. Removing the Wild Card game reduces the incentive for teams to win their divisions, since division winners and Wild Card clubs alike would find themselves in an opening round three-game series (although the potential bye for the top seed would increase the incentive for clubs to pursue the league’s best record).

That’s particularly true in MLB, a league with a comparatively high level of variance in small samples. Playoff series in MLB are less predictable than they are in leagues like the NBA and NFL, a trend reinforced in 2021 when the playoff team with the worst regular season record (the Braves) won the World Series. Based on that high level of playoff volatility, many teams could be content to make the postseason — even as one of the lower seeds — and simply hope for a hot stretch once there. Lowering the bar to entry could make it easier for organizations with already strong big league rosters to be less active in free agency, an obvious concern for the players union.

MLB could counter that possibility would be offset by higher desire to improve among mid-tier clubs. After all, that small sample volatility gives teams with even average or marginally above-average rosters an opportunity to go on a lengthy playoff run. Improving from, say, a 76-win roster to an 84-win roster would be significantly more impactful under this vision than it is under the current system.

Still, the MLBPA has seemingly had reservations about the competitive incentives that come with potential playoff expansion. That’s reflected in their counterproposal, as Rogers reported that the union’s most recent offer involves a 12-team postseason, not MLB’s desired 14 clubs. Details on the MLBPA’s offer aren’t clear, although Rogers noted that proposal involved a significant restructuring that would see each league modified from the current three division setup to two divisions apiece (one containing eight clubs, one with seven).

With the MLBPA already showing openness to a 12-team playoff, it’d be a surprise if the next CBA didn’t involve some form of expansion. Keeping the 10-team status quo seems unlikely, since MLB would presumably prefer a 12-team setup to the current system even if the MLBPA doesn’t go for a 14-team tournament. Union amenability to playoff expansion could go a long way towards landing more favorable outcomes in some other areas the MLBPA finds more pressing.

As for fans, playoff expansion seems largely to be a matter of aesthetic preference. Some will naturally recoil at the idea, which would likely eventually result in a new mark for worst regular season record for a World Series champion (currently held by the 83-78 Cardinals of 2006). MLB has traditionally had a smaller postseason field than other major leagues, a point of great appeal for some fans. On the other hand, some viewers are likely to relish a bigger field. Greater opportunity to reach the postseason means more teams remaining in contention. That’s likely to keep more fanbases invested in August and September each season, which will be a feature for many observers.

Rob Manfred, Tony Clark Discuss Start Of Lockout

By | at

Major League Baseball’s first work stoppage in more than a quarter-century went into effect last night, with the owners unanimously voting to lock the players out until a new collective bargaining agreement is reached. Each of MLB commissioner Rob Manfred and MLB Players Association director Tony Clark met with the media this morning.

Both Manfred and Clark suggested the other side was primarily to blame for the lack of progress to date. Manfred justified the call to lock out within minutes of the previous CBA’s expiration — a decision the owners weren’t legally bound to make — by indicating the MLBPA hadn’t previously been anxious to move talks along. “People need pressure sometimes to get to an agreement, but candidly we didn’t feel that sense of pressure on the other side during the course of this week,” Manfred told reporters (including John Shea of the San Francisco Chronicle).”The only tool available to you under the act is to apply economic leverage.”

Unsurprisingly, Clark pushed back at the assertion the MLBPA had been dallying in negotiations. “From the outset, it seems as if the league has been more interested in the appearance of bargaining than bargaining itself,” Clark claimed (via James Wagner of the New York Times). He also took a swipe at the lengthy “letter to baseball fans” MLB penned in announcing the lockout last night, quipping that “it would have been beneficial to the process to have spent as much time negotiating in the room as it appeared was spent on the letter” (via Chelsea Janes of the Washington Post).

The game’s core economics structure has long been the biggest divide between the parties. Such issues as the service time structure, the number of playoff teams and the competitive balance tax threshold are the particularly strong concerns. Economic discussions have unsurprisingly been the focus of early negotiations, as Manfred said the parties haven’t yet begun to discuss potential on-field rules changes (via Scott Lauber of the Philadelphia Inquirer).

It is generally expected that there’ll be some alterations to the on-field rules. Most around the industry anticipate the introduction of a designated hitter to the National League. Manfred has previously gone on record to voice support for the potential introduction of a pitch clock. Seven-inning doubleheaders and the extra-inning runner of the past two seasons — to date temporary measures — have been topics of debate for fans. It seems those are ancillary negotiation points MLB and the MLBPA will address at a later date, with the broader economic divide the more pressing matter.

It’s not clear when the sides will get back to the table to discuss anything, though. After fairly brief discussions earlier this week seemingly didn’t make much progress, Manfred told reporters this morning no further meetings are currently scheduled (via Evan Drellich of the Athletic). The commissioner added that it was the league’s desire to “get back to the table as quickly as we can.”

The sides will no doubt reconvene at some point, and Manfred again expressed optimism a deal will be reached before the potential loss of any Spring Training or regular season games (via Bob Nightengale of USA Today). That’s a particularly important date for owners, who would first stand to lose revenue in the event of cancellation of games. Manfred has already drawn a clear distinction between an offseason work stoppage and one that threatens play, and we’re still months away from the specter of lost Spring Training revenue.

The players, however, are no doubt less thrilled with the freeze on free agency — and, to a lesser extent, their ability to access team facilities and personnel. While players aren’t in danger of losing salary until games start up, there’s some risk that a shortened transaction window on the eve of the season could leave some players in the cold. There was a flurry of activity before December 1, and the free agent market remained quite strong. Yet the MLBPA has always resisted the possibility of a formal offseason transaction deadline, fearing that teams would have increased leverage to wait players out until the very final stages of free agency in hopes of lowering asking prices.

While the MLBPA has expressed disappointment with the lockout, Clark pushed back against the notion they’ll need to acquiesce to end the transaction freeze quickly. “Players consider (the lockout) unnecessary and provocative,” he said today (Shea link). “The lockout won’t pressure or intimidate players into a deal they don’t believe is fair.“

Collective Bargaining Issues: Service Time Structure

By | at

The process for determining free agency and arbitration eligibility figures to be among the more contentious aspects of collective bargaining negotiations transpiring over the coming weeks. The MLB Players Association is expected to push for an overhaul of the existing system to get more money to players earlier in their careers; MLB, on the other hand, would seem to prefer the status quo.

Under the current structure, players are first eligible for free agency after logging six full seasons of big league service. Most play their first three seasons on salaries right around the league minimum, first qualifying for arbitration after three years. (The top 22% of players in the two-plus year service bucket also reach arbitration via the Super Two exception).

Jeff Passan of ESPN wrote earlier this week the MLBPA is hoping for players to reach free agency after six years of service or after five years of service and 29.5 years of age, whichever comes first. The Athletic reported in August they were also seeking arbitration eligibility arising after two seasons. The former ask would be an unprecedented development; since the 1975 abolition of the reserve clause, every collective bargaining agreement has set a six-year service threshold for free agency qualification. There is some precedent for the latter proposal, though. Between 1973 and 1987, players only needed two years of service to reach arbitration.

The league, unsurprisingly, hasn’t been keen on either idea. Over the summer, MLB proposed scrapping service time considerations altogether and making players first eligible for free agency at 29.5 years old. That was an obvious non-starter for the MLBPA.

While an age-based threshold would certainly be of benefit to some late-bloomers (hence the MLBPA’s desire to incorporate age into the equation to some extent), it’d also have a negative effect on many of the game’s top young stars. Carlos Correa and Corey Seager — each of whom is either expected to command or already has commanded one of the largest deals in major league history this offseason — would still be multiple years out from free agency under that kind of setup.

An age-based system would, however, address another concern players have expressed: service time manipulation. Calling up a player just days after the threshold passes for a player to earn a full season of service can give clubs a de facto seventh year of control, a loophole multiple teams have exploited when deciding when to promote their top prospects. That’d no longer be a relevant consideration under an age-based system, but even the MLBPA’s modified “age/service time hybrid” proposal could lead to gaming of players’ service clocks.

Evan Drellich of the Athletic wrote yesterday that the MLBPA has resigned itself to the potential for manipulation in any system with service time considerations. As a means of somewhat offsetting that issue, Drellich writes they’ve considered more creative ways of players “earning” service time beyond simply counting days. He floats the idea of a player who narrowly missed a service time threshold picking up additional service credit depending upon All-Star nominations or MVP voting.

Regardless of the specific form it takes, it’s clear that getting more money to early-career players is a priority for the MLBPA. Last week, Mets right-hander Max Scherzer — a member of the Players Association’s eight-person player subcommittee — told Drellich “unless this CBA completely addresses the competition (issues) and younger players getting paid, that’s the only way I’m going to put my name on it.”

Earlier free agency eligibility seems to be a non-starter for the league, however. Drellich wrote yesterday that the league refused to make a counter-offer to the MLBPA’s proposals on service time and luxury tax issues unless the union dropped its push for earlier free agency. Drellich reported this morning that the league has been similarly steadfast in its objections to arbitration eligibility after two years.

MLB has shown a willingness to revamp arbitration, albeit not in a manner the MLBPA has found acceptable. Over the summer, MLB proposed abolishing arbitration altogether and replacing it with a revenue-based pool system to be distributed to younger players based on performance. In MLB’s vision, salaries would be fixed based on objective performance metrics — likely some form of Wins Above Replacement statistic.

At a press conference this morning, Commissioner Rob Manfred reaffirmed the league’s objection to earlier free agency and arbitration eligibility (link via Bob Nightengale of USA Today). Manfred argued that the league “already (has) teams in smaller markets that struggle to compete. Shortening the period of time that they can control players makes it even harder for them to compete. It’s also bad for fans in those markets. The most negative reaction we have is when a player leaves via free agency. We don’t see that making it earlier, available earlier, we don’t see that as a positive. Things like a shortened reserve period … and salary arbitration for the whole two-year class are bad for the sport, bad for the fans and bad for competitive balance.”

Manfred echoed competitive balance concerns in pointing to another issue of contention: revenue sharing. The MLBPA has sought to cut back on the amount of money being distributed from higher-revenue franchises to their lower-revenue counterparts, Drellich wrote this morning, believing the reallocation “goes too far in keeping teams afloat without having to invest in players.”

The MLBPA has expressed concern about whether smaller-market clubs adequately reinvest those funds, filing grievances against teams like the Pirates, Rays, A’s and Marlins in years past. The 2016-21 CBA required teams to use revenue sharing money “to improve its performance on the field,” but investments in such things as scouting and player development staffs fit that criteria without offering direct financial benefits to players.

Manfred implied this morning that the MLBPA has expressed a desire to reduce revenue sharing by around $100MM, a development he said would further harm small-market clubs’ ability to compete. How significantly those proposals would harm competitive integrity is up for debate. MLBPA negotiator Bruce Meyer argued they’d have the opposite effect.

“Our proposals would positively affect competitive balance, competitive integrity,” Meyer told Drellich. “We’ve all seen in recent years a problem with teams that don’t seem to be trying their hardest to win games, or put the best teams on the field. Our proposals address that in a number of ways. And we’ve offered to build in advantages for small-market teams.”

There’s some room for debate about the competitive balance impacts of the MLBPA’s goals. There’s little question, on the other hand, that shrinking teams’ windows of contractual control would get more money to younger players. Unless paired with a drop in spending on older veterans, that’d raise the players’ overall share of revenues — a development with which Manfred and league ownership groups certainly wouldn’t be enamored.

Certain Players Remain In DFA Limbo Over Course Of Lockout

By | at

With the lockout formally in place, teams are barred from making any major league transactions. That includes any move involving a player who was recently designated for assignment, MLBTR’s Tim Dierkes has learned (Twitter link). This had also been the case for players DFA’d shortly before 2020’s pandemic-driven transaction freeze.

Angels left-hander Sam Selman, Phillies right-hander Adonis Medina and Dodgers infielder Sheldon Neuse were all designated for assignment within the two hour span preceding the transaction freeze last night. They lost their roster spots as teams scrambled to find space for other last-minute additions before the previous collective bargaining agreement expired. Those players will remain in DFA limbo throughout the duration of a work stoppage.

Only a small handful of players find themselves in this particular predicament, and they’d have been prohibited from contact with team personnel during the lockout even had they not been DFA’d. Yet that group now finds themselves in an extended window of uncertainty regarding their 2022 employment. They remain members of the organizations that designated them for assignment yesterday, but they no longer occupy a spot on clubs’ 40-man rosters. Upon agreement on a new CBA, teams will have a window to explore trades or expose those players to waivers.

Major League Portion Of Rule 5 Draft “Postponed Indefinitely”

By | at

9:55AM: Glaser provided an update on Twitter, saying that the draft is “postponed indefinitely”.

8:49AM: The MLB instituted a lockout yesterday after the expiration of the Collective Bargaining Agreement. Until a new CBA is agreed to, the lockout will remain in place with teams prohibited from making transactions during that time. This apparently will include the major league portion of this year’s Rule 5 draft, as Kyle Glaser of Baseball America reports that it has been canceled. The Triple-A section of the draft will still take place as scheduled, however.

As noted by Glaser, the draft has taken place each year since 1920, even going ahead during past MLB work stoppages such as the 1994 strike. However, 2021 will see that century-long streak come to an end.

The Rule 5 draft has long been used as a way for players to get opportunities to play at the MLB level when not given them by their previous club. Teams with open 40-man roster spots can select a player with four to five years of pro experience from other organizations if said player hasn’t been given a spot on the 40-man roster. Players who signed at 18 years of age or younger but have five years of experience can be selected, as can players signed at 19 or older who have four years of experience.

As Glaser points out, the most recent iteration of the draft led to the breakout seasons of such players as Akil Baddoo, Garrett Whitlock and Tyler Wells. From a historical perspective, the draft also led to the first MLB action of such stars as Johan Santana, George Bell, Joakim Soria, Roberto Clemente and dozens of others.

It’s fair to wonder whether teams knew that this decision was going to be made since, just a couple of weeks ago, they still went through the usual process of adding players to their 40-man rosters in order to protect them from being selected in the draft.

Major League Baseball Institutes Lockout

By and | at

Major League Baseball has officially instituted a lockout. The 2016-21 collective bargaining agreement between MLB owners and the players’ union expired at 10:59pm central time tonight. It has long been clear that Major League Baseball and the MLB Players Association would not have a new deal signed before the current contract ran its course.  With no agreement reached, the league’s owners unanimously voted to institute a lockout, according to a report from Jon Heyman of the MLB Network (Twitter link).

Commissioner Rob Manfred announced the lockout as part of a pre-prepared letter to fans (full text available here), Manfred wrote in part:

“Simply put, we believe that an offseason lockout is the best mechanism to protect the 2022 season. We hope that the lockout will jumpstart the negotiations and get us to an agreement that will allow the season to start on time. This defensive lockout was necessary because the Players Association’s vision for Major League Baseball would threaten the ability of most teams to be competitive. It’s simply not a viable option. From the beginning, the MLBPA has been unwilling to move from their starting position, compromise, or collaborate on solutions.”

Manfred went on to state that the MLBPA “came to the bargaining table with a strategy of confrontation over compromise” and “never wavered from collectively the most extreme set of proposals in their history, including significant cuts to the revenue-sharing system, a weakening of the competitive balance tax, and shortening the period of time that players play for their teams. All of these changes would make our game less competitive, not more.”

The MLB Players Association released a statement of its own (on Twitter). It reads in part:

“Major League Baseball has announced a lockout of Players, shutting down our industry. This shutdown is a dramatic measure, regardless of the timing. It is not required by law or for any other reason. It was the owners’ choice, plain and simple, specifically calculate to pressure Players into relinquishing rights and benefits, and abandoning good faith bargaining proposals that will benefit not just Players, but the game and industry as a whole. … We remain determined to return to the field under the terms of a negotiated collective bargaining agreement that is fair to all parties, and provides fans with the best version of the game we all love.”

As the MLBPA suggested, the league was not under a mandate to lock the players out. Even in the absence of a CBA, the offseason could have proceeded. As MLBTR’s Tim Dierkes explored a few months ago, the sides continued to conduct offseason business during the last winters (1993-94 and 94-95) that proceeded without a CBA in place.

There’s been little expectation MLB wouldn’t institute a lockout once this CBA expired, however. Locking out in the absence of an agreement has become the typical practice in other professional sports leagues, as management hasn’t wanted to afford players the choice whether to go on strike at a later date. The players eventually went on strike during the 1994 season, for example, spurred on by ownership’s imposition of a salary cap. The sides didn’t reach a new agreement that year, and that season’s World Series was ultimately cancelled.

MLB commissioner Rob Manfred implied the league would take this course of action a few weeks ago. Pointing to the ’94 strike and other sports leagues as justification, Manfred indicated a lockout would be on the table if no agreement were hammered out by December 1.  “I don’t think ’94 worked out too great for anybody,” the commissioner told reporters earlier this month. “I think when you look at other sports, the pattern has become to control the timing of the labor dispute and try to minimize the prospect of actual disruption of the season. That’s what it’s about: It’s avoiding doing damage to the season.”

With the lockout in place, teams will be prohibited from making any major league transactions until a new CBA is agreed upon. We’ve seen a flurry of activity — particularly via free agency — in the days leading up to the CBA expiration in response, as many clubs and players have wanted to pin down some certainty before a potential work stoppage.

A transactions freeze will be the most visible semblance of the lockout for fans, at least until the potential for game cancellations if no deal is agreed upon within a couple months. A ban on transactions is certainly not the only effect, however. Jeff Passan of ESPN explored some intricacies of the situation earlier this week in a piece that’s well worth a full read. A few of the less visible effects: injured players will not be allowed to communicate with team training staffs, players are no longer allowed to use team-run mental health services, and some foreign-born players may run into visa issues.  Don’t expect press conferences for newly signed players or interviews with GMs, either.

The lockout is unfamiliar territory for a generation of baseball fans; this is the first work stoppage in this website’s 16-year history. It’ll mark the first official work stoppage since 1994, snapping a run of nearly three decades of labor peace. The parties had discussions each day this week, but it doesn’t seem they made much progress. Evan Drellich of the Athletic reported this afternoon that the league refused to make a counter-offer on the service time structure and luxury tax thresholds unless the MLBPA dropped its efforts to push earlier free agency eligibility for players, a demand the union reportedly refused.

The league did give some ground on the competitive balance tax, with Drellich reporting MLB proposed a gradual increase of the lowest tax threshold to an endpoint of $220MM. However, that remains a fair bit shy of the MLBPA’s $240MM goal, and it’s not clear if the league’s proposed increase also involved a corresponding uptick in penalties paid for exceeding those markers.

There’s certainly plenty to be hammered out beyond the luxury tax. The service time system, arbitration and fundamental competitive structure of the league (including the number of playoff teams) will all at least be discussed over the coming weeks. That’s saying nothing of potential on-field rules changes like the extra-inning runner and the universal designated hitter. With so much yet to be determined, it’s generally not expected an agreement will be reached in short order.  The 2022 spring training schedule could potentially dictate when the lockout ends, with owners likely reluctant to forgo exhibition game revenue.

The Winter Meetings, originally scheduled for December 6 through 9 in Orlando, have been cancelled, reports Jeff Passan of ESPN (Twitter link). The commissioner is scheduled to conduct a press conference tomorrow morning.

No More Negotiations Scheduled Between Owners, Players Prior To CBA Expiration

By | at

2:04PM: This afternoon’s session between the two sides concluded after seven minutes, according to ESPN.com’s Jeff Passan (Twitter links).  There won’t be any more negotiations today, and the lockout is expected to begin this evening once the current CBA officially expires.

12:46PM: Negotiators from Major League Baseball and the MLB Players Association continue to meet this afternoon, though there is still an expectation that the league will commence with a lockout as soon as the current Collective Bargaining Agreement expires at 10:59 CT tonight.  Several reports have suggested that the two sides are far enough on several core issues that there is virtually no chance that an actual deal could be reached prior to the deadline, yet that doesn’t mean progress couldn’t still be made as the baseball world enters a work stoppage and a transactions freeze.

In response to the league’s most recent proposal of a 14-team playoff field, the MLBPA has responded with a new proposal of its own, according to ESPN.com’s Jesse Rogers.  The union’s latest offer would increase the playoff field to 10 to 12 teams, and also involve a huge overhaul of the current three-division alignment in the AL and NL.  Under this new idea, each league would have 15 teams split into two divisions — one with seven teams and one with eight teams —  and six AL and NL clubs apiece heading to the postseason.

The union’s proposal also included such notable details as advertising patches to be worn on jerseys, and more big-picture changes to baseball’s revenue-sharing system, the free agent system, and the arbitration process.  As well, the MLBPA are looking for a substantial increase in the luxury tax threshold, up to $240MM from the 2021 threshold of $210MM.

Looking at these last two proposals between the two sides, there does appear to be some room for common ground on at least a couple of fronts, even if many of the larger issues remain harder to solve.  For instance, it would seem like the postseason will probably end up being expanded in some form, with the specific size to be determined.  Also, while one of management’s proposals back in August involved lowering the luxury tax threshold to $180MM and installing a salary floor of $100MM, that idea seems to have been scrapped, based on natural resistance from the union.  As per ESPN’s Jeff Passan, MLB’s last proposal involved the idea of the luxury tax line once again being raised by a slight extent, though it wasn’t clear if the threshold would continue to be increased on an annual basis (as in the current CBA).

Therefore, it seems reasonable to speculate that the next CBA will include an elevated luxury tax threshold of some kind, even if the $30MM jump desired by the union doesn’t happen.  Left unknown, of course, is what types of penalties will be faced by teams that exceed the tax threshold, as the current system penalty system (an increasingly surchage on the overage and, at maximum, a drop in the draft order and international draft pool subtractions) have already proven to be deterrents to a large portion of baseball’s teams.  The MLBPA, of course, would want to see lesser or even no penalties at all in order to create more incentive for teams to spend on roster upgrades.

“When you look at how the 2016 CBA agreement and how that has worked over the past five years, as players, we see major problems in it,” Max Scherzer told The Washington Post’s Chelsea Janes (Twitter links) and other reporters.  “Specifically, first and foremost, we see a competition problem and how teams are behaving because of certain rules that are within that. Adjustments have to be made to bring up the competition.  As players, that’s critical to us to have a highly competitive league, and when we don’t have that, we have issues.”

MLB Reportedly Proposes 14-Team Playoff Field In Collective Bargaining Negotiations

By | at

Major League Baseball has proposed expanding the postseason field to fourteen teams in collective bargaining discussions with the Players Association, reports Jesse Rogers of ESPN. That’s hardly a surprise, as Commissioner Rob Manfred has publicly advocated for expanding the playoffs (reportedly preferring a 14-team setup) going back to last year, when the league and MLBPA agreed to a 16-team playoff during the shortened 2020 season.

Under the proposed format, the top seed in each league would receive a bye — as is the case with the NFL’s current structure. However, Rogers adds that MLB’s proposal would allow the other two division winners in each league to choose which Wild Card team they’d prefer to face in the first round, which would take the form of a three-game series. The division winner with the second-best record in each league would have its pick of any of the four Wild Card clubs in its league; the final division winner would pick to face one of the other three Wild Card teams; the two Wild Card teams remaining would face one another.

The league has long been expected to prioritize an expanded playoff field in collective bargaining talks. An increased number of postseason games comes with an associated uptick in gate and television revenue, an obvious appeal for ownership groups. The effects for players could be more mixed. While some players could stand to benefit from increased playoff shares, Rogers notes that the MLBPA is concerned that an expanded playoff field could reduce the incentive for teams to aggressively try to bolster their roster.

A broader playoff field increases every team’s odds of getting into the postseason, and front offices may find the greater odds a disincentive to upgrading their roster via free agency or trade. Small-sample postseason series have an inherent high level of randomness. It seems the fear among some on the players’ side is that teams could be satisfied to build a slightly above-average roster (which would stand a much greater chance of making the postseason in a 14-team field than under the current 10-team system) and hope that a hot streak can carry them deep into the playoffs.

MLB, on the other hand, contends that the first-round bye would offer such a significant advantage to the teams with the best record in each league that very good clubs would remain motivated to improve. Meanwhile, the expanded field could offer a greater incentive for teams with mediocre rosters to add short-term impact, since the proposal would significantly increase those teams’ chances of getting to the postseason at all.

Rogers notes that the expanded playoff proposal has been on the table for months, but he reports that MLB recently put forward a new suggestion: a lottery for the top three amateur draft choices. Rather than setting the draft order as the inverse of the league standings — as is the current setup — this proposal would introduce a weighted system that injects more randomness into the process. Teams with the worst records would still have a greater chance of securing higher picks, but any non-playoff team would have a chance at a top three selection.

That offer is in response to players’ concerns that the current system rewards teams that orchestrate long-term rebuilds with perennially high draft choices. Of course, it’s not entirely clear that a weighted lottery would serve as much of a disincentive for tanking, since teams would still have higher probabilities of top picks with worse records.

Rogers’ colleague at ESPN, Jeff Passan, shed some further light on CBA talks this afternoon. Passan reports that the league recently offered a slight raise over the luxury tax thresholds set in the 2016-21 CBA. That’s a turnaround from the league’s earlier efforts to tie a lowered tax threshold to a soft salary floor, an offer the MLBPA rejected. It’s not clear how high the league is willing to set the thresholds, though, and Passan adds that the league’s willingness to raise them might come with associated stiffer penalties for exceeding them. Unsurprisingly, the MLBPA expressed concern that’d counterbalance high-spending teams’ willingness to surpass those thresholds.

Passan further reports that MLB has expressed openness to a “minimal” bump on the league minimum salary, which sat at $570.5K in 2021. MLB’s offer also included the introduction of the designated hitter to the National League, an on-field alteration widely expected to ultimately be put into place. Passan offers an in-depth breakdown of the labor dynamics that is well worth a full read for those interested in the topic.

The current CBA expires on Wednesday at 11:59 pm EST. It’s widely expected that the league will lock out the players if no deal is agreed upon at that point, a move that would come with an accompanying freeze on major league transactions. (Players who were not on a major league roster last season could still sign minor league contracts with clubs, Passan notes). Jon Heyman of the MLB Network tweeted this afternoon that while there’s been “incremental” progress between the two sides of late, there’s “basically no hope” of a deal getting done within the next 48 hours. That reality has been reflected in the flurry of free agent activity we’ve seen in recent days, as many players and teams have been highly motivated to lock in deals before the expected MLB transaction prohibition.

Latest On CBA Negotiations

By | at

In a lengthy piece for The Athletic, Evan Drellich profiles Bruce Meyer, who is the MLBPA’s senior director of collective bargaining and legal. Meyer was hired in 2018, after many players were reportedly dissatisfied with the current Collective Bargaining Agreement, which was ratified in 2016. The piece notes that Meyer will meet with league representative Dan Halem near Dallas this week for some final negotiations before the CBA expires at 11:59 ET on December 1, which is this Wednesday. It’s been widely reported that, without a deal at that time, the league is expected to implement a lockout and transaction freeze, to be maintained until a new deal is reached.

As to exactly what points will be negotiated, both sides are understandably being cagey about revealing their positions, though the piece does have a few hints. “We want to find ways to get players compensated at an earlier stage of their careers when the teams are valuing them the most,” Meyer says. “And we want to preserve the fundamental principles of a market system.” This sentiment was echoed by star free agent and Players Association executive subcommittee member Max Scherzer, who was quoted in the article. “Unless this CBA completely addresses the competition (issues) and younger players getting paid, that’s the only way I’m going to put my name on it,” Scherzer said.

There is indeed a tremendous gap between the salaries of younger players and veterans. Until players reaches three years’ service time, they have no ability to negotiate their salary, with their clubs allowed to pay them around the league minimum, which is currently under $600K. After three years, a player can start earning raises through the arbitration system, but is still usually paid well below what they could garner on the open market. (Some players will reach Super Two status each year, reaching arbitration early.) Only after accruing six years’ service time does a player earn the right for free agency and the ability to maximize their earning potential. If the players want that system to change, it could come in many forms, such as a higher minimum salary or a reduction in the amount of service time needed for either arbitration or free agency.

However, there does seem to be some awareness that the players won’t be able to get everything that they want this winter. Free agent righty Collin McHugh, who previously served on the subcommittee, framed it thusly. “We’re not gonna change the game completely for players in one CBA,” McHugh said. But that shouldn’t be taken as a sign that the players will just roll over in negotiations. When asked about the possibility of a lockout, Meyer had this to say. “I think players understand why it’s a possibility and the reasons for it, and what it will entail. At the end of the day, it’s about what players are willing to fight and sacrifice for. I think players understand that.” Lefty Andrew Miller, another member of the subcommittee, also chimed in about the potential lockout. “If we’re truly serious about making changes, improving the game and improving the position of players, it’s an unfortunate reality of the system. But we are absolutely prepared for it.”

One thing hanging over these negotiations, beyond the usual tensions between athletes and owners, is the lingering resentment over the pandemic-shortened 2020 season. Commissioner Rob Manfred doesn’t seem to think it’s a big deal, based on his comments in the article. “I’ve been in charge of labor in this industry since 1998,” Manfred said. “Every single time, I have found a way, we have found a way, to make an agreement and keep the game on the field. One sort of mid-term negotiation in the middle of a crisis of a pandemic — I just don’t put that much weight on it.” The players, however, may not see it quite the same way. “Rob and the commissioner’s office kind of held the season hostage for a minute when everybody was ready to play,” says McHugh. The union filed a grievance over this 2020 season back in May, and it seems the bitterness over that might still carry on into this winter.

MLB, MLBPA Agree To Move Tender Deadline Up To November 30

By | at

Major League Baseball and the MLB Players Association have agreed to move this year’s deadline for teams to tender contracts to arbitration-eligible players up from December 2 to November 30 at 8:00 pm EST, according to reports from Robert Murray of FanSided and Ken Rosenthal of the Athletic (Twitter links).

The decision moves the tender deadline before the expiration of the current collective bargaining agreement, which is scheduled to happen at 11:59 pm EST on December 1. If a new agreement is not reached within the next eight days, it’s generally expected that the league would institute a lockout and subsequent transactions freeze. The MLBPA recently put together a 36-page document outlining the potential parameters of a lockout for players and their representatives, according to a report from Evan Drellich and Rosenthal.

Leaving the tender deadline on December 2 would’ve left arbitration-eligible players in a state of limbo over the course of a potential transactions freeze. Many could’ve been left with uncertainty about whether their current clubs intended to bring them back next season while awaiting a bargaining process that could take weeks or months to resolve.

Against that backdrop, the final few hours of the current CBA could present a hectic time for teams eager to finalize moves before the potential transactions freeze. Certain players, meanwhile, might feel pressure to sign contracts for 2022 rather than risk having to linger in free agency over the course of a lockout and face a potential rushed free agent period were CBA negotiations to linger near or into next year’s Spring Training. By forcing teams to make the final call on their arbitration-eligible players early, some non-tendered options could look to catch on with a new club on December 1 and avoid that uncertainty altogether.

Show all

MLB Trade Rumors is not affiliated with Major League Baseball, MLB or MLB.com

hide arrows FOX Sports Engage Network scroll to top