Headlines

Go To Pro Hockey Rumors
Go To Hoops Rumors

Collective Bargaining Agreement

MLB To Pay $185MM To Settle Class Action Minor League Suit

By | at

Major League Baseball is set to pay $185MM to settle the class action lawsuit brought by minor league players nearly a decade ago, as Jeff Passan of ESPN was first to report. Evan Drellich of the Athletic adds (Twitter link) that the league will lift any “contractual prohibitions against (teams) paying minor league players wages” for work outside of regular season play. The agreement is pending final approval from the court.

It’s the culmination of a suit first filed in 2014. Among other aspects of minor league pay, the litigation was concerned with the process of unpaid spring training. MLB came under public fire for arguing for players to remind unpaid for Spring Training as recently as February. That proved unsuccessful, however. The following month, the trial court rejected the league’s argument that minor leaguers were seasonal employees exempted from minimum wage laws.

The case was set for trial on June 1, but the parties came to a settlement agreement in mid-May. Terms were unreported at the time, but the league has apparently agreed to dole out $185MM in backpay. Passan notes that more than $120MM of that figure will be distributed among the class of players involved (with the rest presumably going to court costs and attorneys fees). One of the plaintiffs’ attorneys, former minor leaguer Garrett Broshuis, tells Drellich more than 20,000 players are expected to share those funds.

“This settlement is a monumental step for minor league players toward a fair and just compensation system,” Broshuis said (via Passan). “As a former minor league baseball player, I’ve seen first-hand the financial struggle players face while earning poverty-level wages — or no wages at all — in pursuit of their major league dream. For the better part of a decade, it has been my honor to help lead this fight and to shine a light on the unfair labor practices that have long plagued America’s pastime.”

MLB released a statement of its own. “We are only in the second year of a major overhaul of the 100-year-old player development system and have made great strides to improve the quality of life for minor league players,” a league spokesperson told Passan, referencing a 2021 uptick in minor league salaries and this season’s requirement for teams to provide housing to players. “We are proud that minor league players already receive significant benefits, including free housing, quality health care, multiple meals per day, college tuition assistance for those who wish to continue their education and over $450 million in annual signing bonuses for first-year players. We are pleased we were able to come to a mutually agreeable resolution but are unable to comment on the details until the agreement is formally approved by the Court.”

The proposed lifting of the ban on payment outside of regular season play, meanwhile, has the potential to impact countless of players moving forward. Whether and how many teams will begin to pay minor leaguers for things like Spring Training and instructional league is unclear. Nevertheless, the removal of the ban has to be viewed as a win for groups fighting for better pay for minor leaguers, most of whom are not part of the Major League Baseball Players Association and do not have a union of their own.

Latest On International Draft Negotiations

By | at

Major League Baseball and the MLB Players Association agreed to a new collective bargaining agreement on March 10, ending a lockout that froze the sport for more than four months. In order to reach that agreement, the two sides had to find the middle ground on a wide variety of issues, but there was one issue that both sides agreed to kick down the road and deal with at another time.

The league wished to replace the existing international signing system with an international draft, suggesting that this would be a way of improving a system that has its fair share of problems. MLBTR’s Steve Adams took a look at many of the issues back in March, relaying reports from many sources who had concerns including players being evaluated even before they become teenagers and making verbal agreements as young as 13 or 14 years of age. Other concerns include steroid usage among those youngsters as well as corruption among the “buscones” who often arrange deals between the teams and players.

The players pushed back, however, with many pointing out that there are already rules against such behavior but little to no enforcement, and that the real motivation for MLB wanting the draft is to stifle the players’ earning power and ability to choose their employer.

The league tried to sweeten the pot by offering to get rid of the qualifying offer system in exchange, which has a negative impact on the earning power of players who receive one. But it wasn’t enough to get the union to bite. In the end, both sides agreed to putting this particular standoff on ice until July 25. If the two sides can agree on an international draft by then, the qualifying offer system will be eliminated. If not, the existing international system of hard-capped bonus pools will remain, as will the QO.

With that deadline now just over two weeks away, the sides met today to discuss proposals. Jeff Passan of ESPN was among the reporters to relay word of the meeting, noting that the two sides are separated by significant gaps in their proposals. Bob Nightengale of USA Today added that the union proposal involves a higher pool of money for the drafted players and noted that players from Puerto Rico and Japan would be excluded from the draft. (An earlier report from Jorge Castillo of the Los Angeles Times noted that inclusion or exclusion of Japanese players was still being negotiated.) Hannah Keyser of Yahoo! Sports added that what the two proposals had in common was the same number of rounds and age limits.

Alden Gonzalez of ESPN then broke down the key differences when it comes to the numbers. MLB’s proposal is for a 20-round draft with hard slot values, meaning that the player and team would have no ability to negotiate for a higher or lower amount. The total pool of money for the draft would be $181MM, with undrafted players limited to a maximum bonus of $20K if they subsequently sign as free agents. The MLBPA counter proposal is also 20 rounds, but comes with no cap on player bonuses, a $260MM pool and a $40K limit for undrafted players.

For reference, the current draft includes players from the United States, Canada and Puerto Rico. Each team is given a bonus pool, with those pools varying in size depending on which picks the team possesses. Each pick comes with a slot value, though teams are free to sign players for above or below those assigned slot prices, as long as the total price tag of those signings doesn’t exceed the value of their bonus pool. It’s not a hard cap, as clubs are allowed to exceed their bonus pools, though there are increasing penalties depending on the extent to which teams go beyond their limit.

In that existing draft system, players at least have some leverage in negotiations with teams. If a player doesn’t get a bonus to their liking, they can refuse to sign and play college ball instead, returning to the draft at a later date. It seems that the players value this bit of agency, as they are trying to implement it for international players as well. The league, on the other hand, is more interested is tamping down costs, both via hard slots and the smaller pool of total available money.

Whether or not the two sides can bridge those gaps and come to an agreement will have huge ramifications for many players, both current and future. As Evan Drellich of The Athletic points out, 28.2% of the 975 players on Opening Day rosters are foreign-born, with hundreds more in the minor league systems of each club and more joining every year. The current youngsters who will one day follow in their footsteps could be facing the status quo or looking to navigate a new system that is finalized in the coming weeks.

The agreement, or lack thereof, will also have a big impact on current players. It’s been known for years that the qualifying offer system has a drag on the earning power of free agents, as it’s tied to draft pick forfeiture. Most teams that are interested in signing a QO’d free agent will consider the loss of the draft pick as part of the acquisition cost and lower their financial offer accordingly. This only affects around a dozen or so players each year, however. It was 14 this year, for example. Although the union would surely love to be rid of the QO, the international draft impacts so many more players that they likely won’t accept an unsatisfactory draft framework just to eliminate it.

More news will be forthcoming as the two sides will surely continue negotiating over the coming weeks. Of course, it’s possible the two sides could agree to another extension and push the deadline beyond July 25, but that would come with complications. Players who are traded mid-season are ineligible to receive qualifying offers at season’s end, meaning teams will likely want to know whether the QO system is in place before deciding on how to approach the August 2 trade deadline.

Rob Manfred Discusses Automated Strike Zone, Pitch Clocks And Potential Expansion

By | at

In a wide-ranging piece, Don Van Natta Jr. of ESPN chats with MLB commissioner Rob Manfred about possible changes to the sport that could be implemented over the coming years. Of particular note are Manfred’s comments on a trio of issues: an automated strike zone, pitch clocks and the possibility of league expansion.

Manfred expressed support for the implementation of the robotic strike zone at the major league level in 2024. Precisely what form that’d take isn’t clear, as the commissioner raised two possibilities for such a setup. The first would be to have all ball-strike calls computer-generated, with the result relayed to the human umpire via earpiece. An alternative possibility is to leave the home plate umpire in charge of initial calls but institute some form of challenge system, whereby each manager would have a finite number of chances to contest a ball-strike call during the game.

MLB has tested the automatic strike zone in the Triple-A Pacific Coast League for the past five weeks. The possibility of taking calls away from human umpires has been discussed for some time, with the proliferation of pitch-tracking technology making that a more viable possibility. The process hasn’t always gone entirely smoothly, however. Last month, Guardians manager Terry Francona opined to The Athletic that an automated zone used in exhibition play in 2020 was “not ready.” Francona suggested that while the zone tended to be precise on the corners of the plate, “up and down it’s got some work to do.”

In addition to having every pitch called by the robotic zone, MLB has experimented with the challenge system during certain minor league games. Two weeks ago, Manfred told reporters (including Evan Drellich of the Athletic) that the league was likely to continue both systems in the minors and didn’t intend to institute the automated zone next season. “We’re continuing to experiment in the minor leagues,” Manfred said at the time. “Big kind of development in the challenge-system alternative. The idea of using two different formats is a big change this year.”

While the automated strike zone seems unlikely to be a factor at the major league level before 2024, the pitch clock seems to be trending towards implementation next season. MLB has been testing with as few as 14 seconds between offerings when no runners are on base at certain levels of the minors. Van Natta writes that the 14-second marker would also be a target for major league implementation, while pitchers would have 18 or 19 seconds to throw when runners are on base. Manfred’s affinity for the pitch clock as a means of expediting pace of play is hardly a new development. He’s supported its testing in the minor leagues, and he expressed a desire last November for it to be part of the most recent round of CBA negotiations.

On-field rules changes ended up on the back burner as the league and Players Association focused on bigger core economics issues late in CBA talks. Yet the sides did agree to the implementation of a rules committee that’ll go into effect in 2023. The committee will be made up of four active players, six league appointees and an umpire. The league’s majority gives it de facto authority to implement many on-field rules changes it desires, and the committee will have the right to institute a new rule within 45 days of informing the MLBPA. (Under the previous CBA, the league had to wait one year after informing the PA before making a unilateral on-field rules adjustment).

This week, Andy Martino of SNY reported the identities of the people expected to be on the 2023 committee. Making up the players’ contingent are Jack Flaherty, Whit Merrifield, Austin Slater and Tyler Glasnow, with Ian Happ and Walker Buehler tabbed as alternates. On the league side will be John Stanton (Mariners), Bill DeWitt (Cardinals), Greg Johnson (Giants), Dick Monfort (Rockies), Tom Werner (Red Sox) and Mark Shapiro (Blue Jays). Bill Miller is expected to serve as the umpire representative. Along with the pitch clock, the committee is widely expected to examine the possibility of enlarging the bases and limiting defensive shifting.

While on-field rules changes figure to be relatively simple to implement, league expansion would be a much more complex process. Manfred tells Van Natta he’d “love to get to 32 teams,” although he didn’t elaborate a timetable or possible target cities for two new franchises. MLB’s last round of expansion was in 1998, when the Diamondbacks and Devil Rays were added to push the league from 28 to 30. Each of the NFL (2002), NBA (2004) and NHL (2021) have added teams to their respective leagues within the past two decades.

Manfred himself is under contract through 2024, having been unanimously approved for an extension by the league’s owners in November 2018. Van Natta reports the commissioner has a $17.5MM annual base salary under that deal, which also includes unspecified performance bonuses. Asked whether he wanted to continue in the role beyond 2024, the 63-year-old Manfred said he “hasn’t made a decision about what I’m going to do, whether I want to continue. I love the job, but I haven’t really made a decision about what’s next.“

Senate Committee Examining MLB’s Antitrust Exemption

By | at

This week, the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee reached out to the non-profit group Advocates For Minor Leaguers for further information on Major League Baseball’s antitrust exemption. Evan Drellich of the Athletic and Jeff Passan of ESPN (Twitter thread) were among those to cover the development in detail.

The focus of the current inquiry is on how the antitrust exemption affects minor league player pay, the 2019-20 reduction of the number of minor league teams, and the league’s acquisition process for international amateurs. Senators from both parties released statements, which can be found in Drellich’s piece, expressing support for a reexamination of the exemption. MLB has not commented on the matter.

The exemption has been in place for a century. It dates back to a 1922 case in which the Supreme Court ruled that MLB was an intrastate affair outside the purview of the interstate commerce being regulated by federal antitrust law. In subsequent cases, the Court has acknowledged its original reasoning was overly simplistic and no longer applicable in declining to expand the exemption to other professional sports leagues. The Court has nevertheless left the onus on Congress to overturn MLB’s exemption with a new piece of legislation, which it has yet to do.

Passan and Drellich examine the implications of the antitrust exemption in greater detail. Its arguably biggest impact has been in allowing teams to fix low salaries for minor leaguers, most of whom are not part of the MLB Players Association and do not have their own union. Drellich notes that other issues like television blackouts and the process for relocating MLB franchises may also be impacted were Congress to modify or lift the exemption.

While an overhaul of the antitrust exemption could have wide-ranging effects on affiliated ball, this is hardly the first time Congresspeople have hinted at the possibility. In recent years, legislators on different sides of the political aisle have publicly expressed a desire to reconsider or revoke the exemption. Those have come in response to MLB decisions as varied as the minor league restructuring and the call to move the 2021 All-Star Game from Atlanta to Denver. To this point, Congress has not moved forward with any serious threat to the exemption; it’s possible, seemingly likely, this inquiry from the Judiciary Committee also winds up blowing over without an alteration to the existing system.

The Committee’s examination into the international amateur market comes at a time when that process may be nearing an overhaul anyhow. MLB’s desire for a draft to replace the international signing period proved a sticking point in last offseason’s collective bargaining negotiations — one which has yet to be resolved. The MLBPA refused to sign off on an international draft during the winter, and the parties agreed to extend their window for those talks. If the league and union agree on an international draft by July 25, the qualifying offer system — which serves as a drag on the market for some free agents by attaching draft pick forfeiture for signing them — would be eliminated. If the parties do not agree on an international draft, the current amateur signing process and QO will remain in place, likely to again be a key topic during the post-2026 CBA negotiations.

In a separate post Wednesday, Drellich reexamined many of the potential effects that could arise from an overhaul of the international amateur system. MLBPA executive director Tony Clark declined to delve into specifics on the status of negotiations, telling The Athletic:

“We agreed in March to explore whether a negotiated and mutually acceptable agreement could be reached for an international draft. Additional time on this complex issue was needed precisely because the league’s proposal was not and is not anywhere close to acceptable. The league committed to further negotiation on these complex issues, and we expect those discussions to continue in the coming days and weeks. Whether in the end a negotiated, mutually acceptable agreement can be reached remains to be seen.“

MLB, MLBPA Agree To Extend 14-Pitcher Limit Through June 19

By | at

Major League Baseball and the MLB Players Association have agreed to extend the current 14-pitcher limit through June 19, per a league announcement. (Ken Rosenthal of The Athletic reported the news before the official announcement.) From June 20 onwards, teams will be limited to 13 pitchers on their active rosters.

The 13-pitcher limit was agreed to way back in the 2019-2020 offseason but has been kicked down the road several times over the past 2 1/2 years. First, the COVID-19 pandemic put the 2020 season on hold, eventually resuming with a shortened Spring Training and regular season. In response to the unusual conditions, the pitcher limit was scrapped, both for that season and the following one.

After this winter’s lockout led to yet another shortened Spring Training this year, teams were allowed expanded rosters at the beginning of the campaign. The initial plan was to implement the 13-pitcher limit on May 2, though the plans changed as that date neared. MLB and the MLBPA agreed to a 14-pitcher limit, which was planned to shrink to 13 on May 30. With that date fast approaching and many teams still dealing with strained pitching staffs, the league and union have agreed to extend the 14-pitcher rule for at least another three weeks.

At least one club is certainly happy about the news, as Tigers’ manager A.J. Hinch responded thankfully to the announcement, telling Cody Stavenhagen of The Athletic “We need it.” Detroit has been arguably the most snakebit team in the league this year, as they currently have nine pitchers on the injured list, including six starters. Tarik Skubal is the only member of the Opening Day rotation that is still taking regular turns for the club.

MLB, MLBPA Allowing 14 Pitchers On Active Rosters Through May 29; 13-Pitcher Limit To Take Effect Thereafter

By | at

Major League Baseball and the MLB Players Association have agreed to a 14-pitcher limit on active rosters between May 2 and May 29, the league announced this morning. As previously announced, the active rosters will still shrink from 28 players to 26 on May 2.

The league and union agreed to expand active rosters by a pair of players for the season’s first couple weeks this year. That was in response to the shortened Spring Training period that followed the lockout, with concerns that players did not have enough time to prepare for a typical regular season workload right out of the gate. That was particularly true of pitchers, who require a few weeks to gradually build their pitch counts.

Alongside the temporary roster expansion came a relaxation of the league’s 13-pitcher limit, which is being put into effect for the first time this year. Initially enacted over the 2019-20 offseason, that provision was suspended in each of the past two seasons as part of the COVID-19 health and safety protocols. It’ll make its debut in 2022, although the full extent now won’t come into play until Memorial Day.

Today’s announcement marks a small change to afford clubs a bit more freedom in managing their pitching staffs, although they’ll still have to make some cuts next Monday. Teams will need to reduce their roster by two players six days from now, and even the higher 14-pitcher threshold will force a change from the early-season status quo. The pitcher limit was scrapped entirely through May 2, and many teams had carried 15 or even 16 arms in the early going as they stockpiled bullpen options.

Along with the expanded rosters, the league and union agreed in March to delay the implementation of the new option limits and the return of the 15-day injured list for pitchers. Teams can no longer option a player to the minor leagues more than five times in a given year, and pitchers who go on the IL for non-COVID reasons will have to miss at least 15 days instead of 10 this season. Neither change was in effect through the season’s first month as the league and union afforded teams more flexibility with their pitching staffs. Today’s announcement from the league made no mention of further delay to either of those features’ implementations, however, which seems to suggest they’re still set to take effect next Monday as originally scheduled.

Looking At The Early Results Of The Prospect Promotion Incentive

By | at

In recent years, a major source of contention between MLB teams and players has been service time manipulation. In baseball, each day spent on the active roster is counted towards a player’s service time. The Major League Baseball season is typically 186 days long and a “full year” of service time is defined as 172 days. A player kept in the minors for a few weeks to start the season cannot accrue a full year of service time, thus delaying his free agency by an extra year. The most egregious and frequently cited example of this is Kris Bryant. Despite being considered one of the best, if not the very best, prospects in baseball, he wasn’t called up to start the 2015 season. That year, he spent 171 days on the roster, falling exactly one day short of a full year, which allowed the Cubs to control him through the 2021 season, instead of 2020.

Bryant was just one of many examples around the league, with service time manipulation becoming one of many issues that had eroded the trust between the league and the players, making the most recent lockout so prolonged and contentious. In an attempt to improve the situation going forward, the new Collective Bargaining Agreement features a provision that will potentially reward teams for promoting prospects for the full year. Under the Prospect Promotion Incentive, teams can earn an extra pick in the draft if a rookie-eligible player with 60 days or fewer of major league service who is included on a preseason top 100 prospect list by two or more of Baseball America, ESPN.com or MLB.com is promoted and finishes high in award voting in any year before he is eligible for arbitration. A Rookie of the Year win or a top three finish in MVP or Cy Young voting in his pre-arbitration seasons would net the team that extra draft pick. If the international draft is implemented, he could earn the club a selection if second or third in Rookie of the Year, or fourth or fifth in Cy Young. A team can gain at most one PPI pick in the amateur draft and three total PPI picks for any individual prospect, two international and one amateur, with a max of one such pick per year. (Further details about the incentive are laid out by Evan Drellich of The Athletic.)

This year, it has certainly felt like more top prospects were cracking Opening Day rosters, with Bobby Witt Jr., Julio Rodriguez and Spencer Torkelson being some of the high profile examples. Matt Eddy of Baseball America took a look at the data from this year and compared it to previous years to see if any meaningful conclusions could be drawn. Ten of BA’s top 100 prospects made Opening Day rosters this year, which is the second-largest such number in their data set, which goes back to 1990. (The piece points out that Riley Greene could have made it 11 if he hadn’t got injured, and the same could possibly be said of Adley Rutschman as well.) The only year with a larger crop was 1995, where 12 guys made the cut. As pointed out in the piece, the 1995 season followed the extended layoff of the strike that began in August of 1994. Presumably, that would have delayed the debut of any prospect that was on the cusp of debuting in August or September of ’94 until the start of the ’95 season, artificially inflating that number. Therefore, it can be argued that this year’s group of rookies is the largest in the past 33 years.

Of course, this is just a single year of data and it would be unwise to draw far-reaching conclusions from it. However, another reason for optimism in the piece is that the trend in recent years had been for fewer prospects to crack the Opening Day rosters. Eddy breaks the recent past into five year buckets and looks at how many top prospects played in the first week of a season. From 1995-99, there were 35, followed by 26 in 2000-2004, then 22 in 2005-2009, 16 in 2010-2014 and just 14 from 2015-2019. “The number of qualifying prospects has declined by 60% in the past 20 years,” Eddy says. Now there are ten in just this year alone, eleven if we add in Roansy Contreras, who was recalled today after Duane Underwood Jr. was injured in the team’s first game. (The Pirates, incidentally, were the one team who appeared to still be trying to play the service time manipulation game, with both Contreras and Oneil Cruz being left off the team’s Opening Day roster, despite both getting brief MLB experience last year.)

It’s worth reiterating that this is just a single year of data and it can’t be hastily assumed that the new CBA has improved the situation. It’s entirely possible that this was just an incredibly strong class of prospects that would have bucked the trend with or without the changes to the CBA. However, it’s at least encouraging for those fans that want the best baseball players to be playing in the majors as soon as they are deserving that the trend has indeed been bucked for this year.

MLB, MLBPA Reach Tentative Agreement To Reimplement Ghost Runner In 2022

By | at

Major League Baseball and the MLB Players Association have reached a tentative agreement to bring the extra-innings ghost runner back for the 2022 season, reports Joel Sherman of the New York Post. Additionally, they have agreed to expand active rosters from 26 to 28 players this season until May 1. The league’s 30 owners need to vote next week to officially ratify the conditions, but Sherman writes that only a simple majority is needed and the provisions aren’t expected to have any issue passing.

Neither development is especially surprising, as reports emerged a couple weeks ago that both were under consideration. The lockout lingered into the second week of March, compressing the Spring Training schedule by two weeks even with the start of the regular season pushed back eight days. The concern is that the shortened ramp-up period might not afford enough time for players to get ready to shoulder a typical regular season workload. By adding a couple players in the early going and limiting the potential for marathon games, the league and union will give managers some extra flexibility in keeping playing time in check.

Sherman adds there won’t be any restrictions on the number of pitchers teams can carry in April. MLB is instituting its 13-pitcher limit this year. That rule change was originally slated to go into effect in 2020, but MLB scrapped it in each of the past two seasons due to concerns about overworking arms while teams were facing the possibility of COVID-19 outbreaks on their rosters. That’ll eventually be a challenge for clubs, but they’ll have some extra leeway on the mound for the first couple weeks of the season.

The return of the extra-innings runner figures to be the more notable development for fans. It was first implemented in 2020 as part of the pandemic protocols. There’s little doubt the rule has indeed served its purpose of preventing marathon games. There has only been one MLB game that exceeded thirteen innings in either of the past two seasons; there were 23 such games in 2019 alone. Nevertheless, the rule has predictably proven divisive among fans, many of whom perceive the placement of a free runner on second base to start extras as gimmicky.

Sherman writes that the ghost-runner rule has only been approved for 2022, but it wouldn’t be a surprise if the league and union revisit it again down the line. The other big on-field pandemic rules change — the seven-inning doubleheader — will not return this year.

One rule that will be in effect permanently is a modification to the designated hitter, albeit one that only seems likely to affect one player. If a team uses the same player as both that day’s starting pitcher and as their DH, he can remain in the game as a hitter even after being removed from the mound. That’s obviously a provision designed to allow the Angels to keep Shohei Ohtani in the lineup deep into games he starts.

Details On The Athletics’ Revenue-Sharing Status

By | at

Reports surfaced in February that the new collective bargaining agreement would see the Athletics once again become a recipient of revenue-sharing funds, and indeed, that proved to be the case once the CBA was (at long last) finalized between the league and the MLB Players Association.  Susan Slusser and Matt Kawahara of The San Francisco Chronicle reported on the details of the Oakland revenue-sharing situation on Thursday, and The Athletic’s Ken Rosenthal had some more specifics in his recent notes column.

For one, it will take four years (of the five-year span of the collective bargaining agreement) for the A’s to receive a full share of revenue-sharing monies, as Rosenthal notes that the team will be phased in via 25 percent increments.  For instance, Oakland will get 25 percent of a full share in the first year, 50 percent in the second year, etc.

It is also possible that the A’s won’t even get to that full share unless they make significant progress on their long-desired new ballpark.  As per the terms of the CBA, if the Athletics don’t have “a binding deal” for a new ballpark in place by January 15, 2024, they will no longer receive any revenue-sharing funds.  If an agreement for a new stadium has been arranged by this date, the A’s will retain their revenue-sharing recipient status until they move into that ballpark.

Of particular note to Bay Area fans, the agreement specifies that the 1/15/24 deadline applies to a new deal for a ballpark in any city, not just Oakland.  The A’s have been exploring the possibility of a move to Las Vegas, and yet most recently, it seems there has been renewed momentum to a stadium in Oakland at the Howard Terminal site.  Back in May, the league publicly supported the Athletics’ plans to look outside of their home city for potential new stadium sites, so it makes sense that the CBA wouldn’t put any limit on where the A’s might direct their search over the next 22 months.  The club’s lease at the RingCentral Coliseum is up following the 2024 season.

CBA Notes: Arbitration, Waivers, Schedule, PED Testing, Minor League Salary

By | at

MLB and the MLBPA finally reached a deal on a new collective bargaining agreement on Thursday, ending a contentious lockout that spanned over three months. The major elements of the deal, such as the CBT levels and the bonus pool for arbitration-eligible players, were reported on as the negotiations transpired, but some of the minor details are still trickling out. Mark Feinsand of MLB.com revealed one such detail on Twitter, writing that, “Beginning after 2022, salary arbitration eligible players who settle with their teams on a salary for the subsequent season without going to a hearing will be eligible to receive full season termination pay, even if released prior to the start of the season.”

This is a small change that could potentially have significant ramifications. Under the previous CBA, arbitration contracts were not fully guaranteed until Opening Day, with players cut during Spring Training only earning a portion of the agreed-upon salary. If a team released a player more than 15 days prior to Opening Day, they only had to pay the player 30 days’ salary as termination pay. If the player was released less than 15 days before Opening Day, they would get 45 days’ pay.

This makes for an interesting tradeoff. On the one hand, this could be viewed as a gain for the players, as they now have access to greater security, knowing that the salary they accept will be locked in once they agree to it. But this also gives them incentive to accept terms without the hearing, perhaps leading to them accepting lower terms than they otherwise would have earned, thus benefiting the teams. It is well established that teams put a high priority on stifling salaries as much as possible. In 2019, it was revealed that MLB holds an annual symposium where the team that best succeeds at opposing the players in arbitration is awarded a wrestling-style championship belt, something that surely didn’t help with the animosity that’s lingered between the players and the league since the signing of the last CBA. This wrinkle in the new CBA could help the teams further those goals, but at least could give some borderline non-tender candidates the silver lining of greater financial security.

Elsewhere in the CBA, Jayson Stark of The Athletic provides an interesting nugget on Twitter. “If a team has already claimed a player once on waivers that season, it can’t claim him again until every other team has passed.” Stark aptly refers to this as the “Jacob Nottingham Rule,” in reference to the fact that Nottingham was the centerpiece of a game of hot potato between the Brewers and Mariners last year. Beginning the season with the Brewers, the catcher was put on waivers in April, claimed by the Mariners, who put him back on waivers on May. The Brewers brought him back on a waiver claim, only to send him back onto the waiver wire two weeks later. On May 2oth, Seattle claimed him again, before putting him back on the wire in early June, when he finally cleared. Waiver claim priority generally goes in reverse order of the current standings. (For the first 31 days of the season, the standings of the previous season are used.) In the case of Nottingham, there would have been some teams that never even had the ability to make a claim on him for most of that sequence last year, as he would have been scooped up before their turn. Going forward, they will have a greater chance to interrupt such a unique back-and-forth as occurred with Nottingham last year.

In a detailed column about the CBA, Stark adds some details about the schedule changes that will begin in 2023. While it had been previously reported that teams would play all 29 of the other squads in the league each year, with the number of divisional games being reduced, the details were not known at the time. Stark lays out the format that will begin next year, with each team playing its divisional rivals 14 times per season, down from 19, for a total of 56. Teams in the same league but not the same division will be played six times each, a total of 60. When it comes to interleague play, each team has a “rival” that they will play four times, with three games against the other 14 teams in the opposite league. That amounts to 46 total interleague games. All of those categories are evenly split between road and home, except for the final one. In the case of the 14 non-rival teams that are in the opposite league, the home team for the three-game series will alternate from year to year.

Roch Kubatko of MASNsports.com has a couple of other details in his rundown of the CBA. In terms of PEDs, he says, “There will be an increase in the number of in-season urine tests for performance-enhancing substances and drugs of abuse, as well as adjustments to the scheduling of these tests to make them less predictable.” He then adds that, “the program will now utilize dried-blood spot-testing rather than venous blood draws for hGH testing, making Major League Baseball the first professional sport drug testing program to adopt this new technology.”

Finally, while the increase in the minimum salary for MLB players was reported throughout the negotiations, there is also a bump for some players in the minors. From Kubatko: “The minor league minimum salary for players signing a second major league contract or with prior big league service will increase from $93,000 in 2021 to $114,100 in 2022, $117,400 in 2023, $120,600 in 2024, $123,900 in 2025 and $127,100 in 2026.”

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