2021 Collective Bargaining Agreement Discussion Thread

[Spanky99]

Jesus…Tulo is the best prepared defender to walk the earth..could’ve been a little lighter with that

 

He's not going to slag a guy he went to see, lol. And Tulo was a great defender.

[jerb]

 

Evan Drellich

@EvanDrellich

 

Sources: Angels, Diamondbacks, Reds and Tigers owners opposed MLB luxury tax increase to $220 million. MLB also proposed including player meal money in calculation of luxury tax, which irked players.

https://t.co/gBKrqAx9wV

[Jimcanuck]

Meal money included in luxury tax calculations, lol. Just stupid. Tell me again the negotiators are top drawer.

[Grant77]

 

Evan Drellich

@EvanDrellich

 

Sources: Angels, Diamondbacks, Reds and Tigers owners opposed MLB luxury tax increase to $220 million. MLB also proposed including player meal money in calculation of luxury tax, which irked players.

https://t.co/gBKrqAx9wV

 

That's a strange stance for a Tigers team that is pretty unaffected by luxury tax, much like the Blue Jays.

[Olerud363]

That's a strange stance for a Tigers team that is pretty unaffected by luxury tax, much like the Blue Jays.

 

I think it is more that Tigers, D-Backs, and Angels are all mid-market who expect to have payrolls just around 200 million. Same as Blue Jays will likely have in a couple of years.

 

These teams don't want the Yankess/Dodgers/Mets to have payrolls 50 to 100 million higher then they do.

 

This is going to be tough to work out. Not just players vs owners, but owners vs. owners and not just big market vs small.

 

The second level 'big markets' (Toronto, LA Angels, Tigers, etc) have no reason to let the Yankees/Dodgers have a payroll way higher then theirs.

[Olerud363]

I'm not sure what the D-backs current payroll is, but I think they have had a higher payroll a few years ago. Didn't they sign Greinke to a ridiculous deal?

 

I think the D-backs are the example of the team that doesn't want a floor and wants a lower luxury tax threshold. They seem happy to cut payroll for a few years, then gear up. They don't want to be constrained with a floor in their build years, and they don't want the Dodgers to be able to spend 100 million more than they can in their go-for-it years.

[JaysAllMighty]

[Brownie19]

Do all MLB Owners have to agree to each bargaining options? Why isn't it majority rules (or maybe something like 70%)? Good god we're never going to get change if every Owner needs to agree are we?

[Olerud363]

Do all MLB Owners have to agree to each bargaining options? Why isn't it majority rules (or maybe something like 70%)? Good god we're never going to get change if every Owner needs to agree are we?

 

I don't think so. My understanding is they vote on the total package and need 23 to vote for it.

 

Last time 26 voted for it and from what I heard they would not have had 23 votes if they increased the luxury threshold any more.

 

It is still going to be hard to get 23 to agree on a package the players will agree on. And it will get worse as the missed games add up because players will want service time and pay, and the owners don't want to give them that.

[John_Havok]

 

Kind of a genius move by the PA, as long as they are doing it because it's the right thing to do, not just to throw shade at the owners and score some PR points.

[Brownie19]

Kind of a genius move by the PA, as long as they are doing it because it's the right thing to do, not just to throw shade at the owners and score some PR points.

 

I would never assume the PA is doing something because it's the right thing to do.

[John_Havok]

I would never assume the PA is doing something because it's the right thing to do.

 

you're probably right.

[jerb]

 

Buster Olney

@Buster_ESPN

 

Hearing from sources on both sides of the CBA talks that they are hopeful that a renewed discussion of the 14-team playoff field could be a potential breakthrough -- for talks that need a breakthrough.

 

Buster Olney

@Buster_ESPN

 

Keep in mind that the teams most invested in the expanded playoff field are small- and mid-market teams -- which are also the teams that prefer a more restrictive CBT. So there could be some badly needed room created for horse-trading in this overture.

[Ehjays]

[Ehjays]

Multiple Teams Ask MLB To Attempt To Cancel This Year’s Rule 5 Draft

By Anthony Franco | March 4, 2022 at 10:13pm CDT

 

Front office executives with multiple teams have asked Major League Baseball to explore the possibility of canceling the major league phase of the Rule 5 draft this year, report Kiley McDaniel and Jeff Passan of ESPN. Because the Rule 5 is part of the collective bargaining agreement, MLB would need approval from the Players Association to do so.

 

Ken Rosenthal and Jayson Stark of the Athletic wrote this afternoon that front office personnel “almost (unanimously)” support the Rule 5’s cancelation as the lockout continues. Both The Athletic and ESPN explore various reasons behind the thinking, but they all revolve around the discrepancy between major league and minor league play. MLB Spring Training games won’t begin until March 18 at the absolute earliest; minor league Spring Training is already underway, as players not on clubs’ 40-man rosters are unaffected by the lockout.

 

The major league phase of the Rule 5 draft — which typically takes place at the December Winter Meetings — provides an odd middle-ground regarding the 40-man roster. Only players not currently on a team’s 40-man are eligible for selection (assuming they’ve spent enough time in the minor leagues). If selected, however, they immediately jump onto their new club’s roster. With all 40-man transactions frozen by the lockout, the Rule 5 was suspended indefinitely on December 2. However, the players who would be eligible for selection are all able to participate in minor league camp, since they’re not on their current club’s 40-man.

 

That culmination of factors has led to most teams closing their minor league camp to scouts from rival teams. The fear is that they’d identify Rule 5 eligible prospects who have taken steps forward in their development over the offseason. Rather than allow clubs to spot and potentially poach improving young players for essentially nothing — selecting a player in the Rule 5 costs only $100K — many teams have shut scouts out entirely. McDaniel and Passan report that the Reds, Brewers, A’s, Mariners and Rays are the only teams still allowing other teams’ evaluators into their minor league camps — and those clubs have just formed a reciprocal agreement with one another.

 

ESPN writes that some evaluators have expressed concerns that teams shutting out scouts to keep their Rule 5 eligible players could have an unintended deleterious effect on the post-lockout trade market. Teams are shutting the doors to minor league camp entirely, as it’s not feasible to prevent opposing scouts from seeing only Rule 5 eligible players. Therefore, pro scouts are mostly prohibited from getting a look at prospects of all ages and levels. Some of those players could be trade targets — the Reds and A’s, in particular, are expected to move multiple established big leaguers for controllable young talent — but scouts are generally unable to get eyes on them right now.

 

Pulling off the Rule 5 draft would only become more challenging if the lockout lingers into April. The Triple-A regular season is scheduled to open on April 5. (Minor league schedules are unaffected by the lockout). Clubs presumably couldn’t keep scouts from attending those games; they’ll be open to the general public, after all. Selecting players out of regular season minor league play to report to big league Spring Training could prove difficult. If the MLB lockout remains in place when MiLB games start, the Rule 5 would figure to be in particular jeopardy.

 

That said, MLB’s inability to cancel the draft unilaterally may prove its best hope of happening this year. At its core, the Rule 5 is a player-friendly provision. It’s designed both to incentivize teams to add prospects to their 40-man roster within a few years — which teams still had to do last November — and to give players who aren’t getting an MLB opportunity in their current organizations broad exposure around the league.

 

Rule 5 draftees have to stick on their new team’s active roster or be waived and offered back to their original franchise if they clear. Those who break camp with their new team receive major league pay and service time, in addition to the opportunity to prove themselves against big league competition. Red Sox reliever Garrett Whitlock and Tigers outfielder Akil Baddoo, for example, both look to have broken through as long-term big leaguers after impressing as Rule 5 draftees last year. As JJ Cooper of Baseball America points out (on Twitter), even those who don’t stick with their new team receive higher minor league salaries upon being returned to their original organization because they’d previously been on a 40-man roster.

 

Because of those benefits, it stands to reason the MLBPA won’t be enamored with the idea of approving the Rule 5’s cancelation. Minor leaguers aren’t members of the MLBPA, but the union does have some amount of influence on provisions that would affect non-union players (i.e. its opposition to the league’s efforts to implement a draft for international amateurs). McDaniel and Passan report that the league and union haven’t discussed the Rule 5 draft’s fate to this point in CBA negotiations. At some point, there figures to be more clarity on the draft’s future, but its delay is yet another of the ways in which typical offseason business has been thrown off-track by the lockout. The Rule 5 draft, rather remarkably, has been conducted in some form every offseason since 1920.

[saskjayfan]

Do all MLB Owners have to agree to each bargaining options? Why isn't it majority rules (or maybe something like 70%)? Good god we're never going to get change if every Owner needs to agree are we?

 

That's the problem. The spectrum of owners is all over the map. Cohen spending decisions have nothing to do with generating a reasonable return on his investment. If he breaks even or loses money he doesn't care. They players want 30 owners like this. Bob Nutting is the exact opposite. Rogers is public company. They will never spend money to a point where they will break even or lose money. Our case is a unique one because we aren't a small market. When we spend and win the revenues swell and can be incredibly profitable. When we spend and lose, we don't generate a decent return. It's a risk reward situation and we are more likely to see resets, but will spend when the time is right.

 

CBT going too high just stacks the deck for the Yankees and Dodgers. The majority of owners realize this, even large owners like the Angels don't want that shift in power. Moving higher on the bonus pool and minimums is the path to a deal. They might move very marginally on CBT, maybe up to 225. I just don't see the majority of owners going much higher when you hear 4 owners didn't want to go to 220. They need to find a way to penalize tanking teams. You can't be in the draft lottery more than 2 years in a row. If you win less than x percentage of games 2 or 3 years in a row your international signing pool is cut in half, or revenue sharing is reduced if you don't achieve a certain winning percentage over a 2 or 3 year period.

 

The simple thing would be implementing some sort of floor. I feel like if you had punitive measures for tanking and implemented a floor of 90 mil with expanded playoffs you would address a lot of issues. Teams will still reset and build for a couple years. It is possible that I want a floor because some team who wants to lose next year would actually approach us and take on Grichuk. Hey we need to take on salary, but we still want to lose. Can we get Grichuk from you!

[Jimcanuck]

The pressure will be sufficient for a deal around the end of the month, and baseball season will start in May

 

All this stuff right now is just noise

[saskjayfan]

The pressure will be sufficient for a deal around the end of the month, and baseball season will start in May

 

All this stuff right now is just noise

 

So which side will give up?

[Jimcanuck]

So which side will give up?

 

Neither, as long as one side sees no urgency in getting a deal done, they will play hardball and it doesn't get done. Both sides need to be motivated to get a deal

 

Deadpool is right, April is a loser month for baseball

[saskjayfan]

Neither, as long as one side sees no urgency in getting a deal done, they will play hardball and it doesn't get done. Both sides need to be motivated to get a deal

 

Deadpool is right, April is a loser month for baseball

 

OK, so fast forward to March 31 or April 7 and still no deal and time is now on no one's side. Who caves?

[Jimcanuck]

OK, so fast forward to March 31 or April 7 and still no deal and time is now on no one's side. Who caves?

 

Neither, they compromise, meet in the middle for most things

[Spanky99]

The pressure will be sufficient for a deal around the end of the month, and baseball season will start in May

 

All this stuff right now is just noise

 

You said that last month, as did I, we were wrong. Kenny Ken thinks May 1st is a must, or it gets uglier.

[BigCecil]

The pressure will be sufficient for a deal around the end of the month, and baseball season will start in May. All this stuff right now is just noise

 

Negotiation is about leverage. Without the Sword of Damocles over their heads they were never going to close the gap. I'm not sure on the timing but the real talks only just started. The bitterness will play some, and these things can get entrenched and take on a life of their own.

 

But at the end of the day its billionaires and mega millionaires who aren't stupid in business. Those realities will eventually take over and they will close a deal. I don't know when, but it will be based on numbers/economics/brand and I don't see them blowing a whole season. Pressures will mount. I see games in May/June. The process just sucks for us fans.

[jerb]

 

Evan Drellich

@EvanDrellich

 

NEW YORK — Major League Baseball’s negotiating team — Dan Halem, Pat Houlihan, Morgan Sword and Reed MacPhail — has arrived. The players today are expected to make a proposal to the league, formalizing previously discussed positions and introducing some new ones.

 

Evan Drellich

@EvanDrellich

 

The meeting between MLB and the MLBPA has ended. Went a little more than an hour and a half. More TK.

 

Evan Drellich

@EvanDrellich

 

MLBPA proposal per source:

 

• Would grant MLB ability to implement 3 specific on-field changes w/45-day notice, starting w/2023 season: pitch clock, larger bases, shift restriction. MLB also wants robo umps w/45-day, players didn’t offer

• Prearb pool starting at $80m, down $5m

 

Evan Drellich

@EvanDrellich

 

More union proposal today:

• No change on CBT or minimums.

• If direct draft pick comp (qualifying offer) goes away, MLBPA now OK w/other CBT-related penalties (sometimes called non-monetary penalties)

• Some revenue sharing changes still on table for PA

 

Evan Drellich

@EvanDrellich

 

• MLBPA is still at 6 picks for amateur draft lottery, MLB Is at 5 (and there’s other disagreements)

 

Dan Halem and Bruce Meyer had a one on one today after the group meeting. TBD when next meeting will be.

[jerb]

 

Jon Heyman

@JonHeyman

 

MLB doesn’t see much progress in union proposal today. Players did make some moves but made no change in CBT request of $238M to $263M over the 5 years. MLB offer goes from $220M to $230M over the 5. Still a ways to go.

[Laika]

 

Jon Heyman

@JonHeyman

 

MLB doesn’t see much progress in union proposal today. Players did make some moves but made no change in CBT request of $238M to $263M over the 5 years. MLB offer goes from $220M to $230M over the 5. Still a ways to go.

 

why is that being framed as if they are miles apart. that's pretty close

[connorp]

What’s the players stance on robo umps. You’d have to think they’re looking at an internal 50/50 split I’d imagine lol

 

Meaning it benefits hitters more than pitchers?

[jerb]

 

Evan Drellich

@EvanDrellich

 

MLB’s Glen Caplin: “We were hoping to see some movement in our direction to give us additional flexibility & get a deal done quickly. The Players Association chose to come back to us w/a proposal that was worse than Monday night & was not designed to move the process forward”

 

Evan Drellich

@EvanDrellich

 

MLB’s Glen Caplin cont’d: "On some issues, they even went backwards. Simply put, we are deadlocked. We will try to figure out how to respond, but nothing in this proposal makes it easy.”

 

MLB suggested that the MLBPA had verbally offered something different on prearb pool.

[jerb]

 

Jon Heyman

@JonHeyman

 

The sides today were still working off the 12-team postseason they temporarily agreed to in Jupiter. Players are open to the 14 preferred by MLB but they are apart on the format for 14 — the games, the ghost win, etc.

[Stangstag]

 

Jon Heyman

@JonHeyman

 

The sides today were still working off the 12-team postseason they temporarily agreed to in Jupiter. Players are open to the 14 preferred by MLB but they are apart on the format for 14 — the games, the ghost win, etc.

 

So the owners were going to reject this proposal either way. Seems to me that owners want 14 or its a hard no deal