Thread: MLB, MLBPA fail to reach new labor agreement; league in 1st lockout since 1990

Could YOU live on $750,000 a year???

I see some middle ground on two contentious issues. Per Evan Drellich on the latest union proposal:

• The union ceded no ground on its request for the Competitive Balance Tax to begin at $238 million and grow to $263 million. The league has countered with a CBT threshold that starts at $220 million and slowly climbs to $230 million. This has been arguably the hottest button issue in negotiations, with four owners reportedly voting no to the proposal based solely on the CBT threshold.

Here's a solution that makes both sides grumble but it fair: The CBT starts at the union minimum of $238 million but it does not go up over the course of the contract ending at $238 million which is within $8 million of where the owners wanted to wind up with. At the front end of the deal, union gets what they want and, at the back end, the owners are close to what they want.

• The union also made no movement on its ask for a higher league minimum salary, of $725,000 with annual raises of $20,000. The league has offered a minimum of $700,000 with annual raises of $10,000.

Solomonic solution here. Settle on league minimum of $712,500 with raises of $15,000 each year. Split the baby in half. How hard can that be?

and as a bonus:

* The union wants a draft lottery to determine the top six picks every summer as a means of curbing anti-competitive behavior. The league wants that lottery to cover only the top five picks.

Okay, at this point, somebody just has to say "**** it" and flip a coin.

The last offer has added some screwy stuff like pitch clocks on the pitcher (14 secs if bases empty, 19 secs if man on base). Just wait until the baserunner can time his jump to match the pitch clock expiring.

Max Scherzer was also peddling an idea of the first playoff round having a "ghost win" for the higher seed so the best-of-5 series can be settled by the higher seed with only two on-field wins while the lower seed has to win 3-of-4 to advance.

Originally Posted by OrangeHoof

I see some middle ground on two contentious issues. Per Evan Drellich on the latest union proposal:

[/LIST]

Here's a solution that makes both sides grumble but it fair: The CBT starts at the union minimum of $238 million but it does not go up over the course of the contract ending at $238 million which is within $8 million of where the owners wanted to wind up with. At the front end of the deal, union gets what they want and, at the back end, the owners are close to what they want.

This is what Ken Rosenthal just wrote. It looks like your proposal has some teeth to it.

Major League Baseball is willing to increase the first competitive-balance tax threshold from $220 million if the Players Association makes moves in other areas, people with knowledge of the league’s thinking say.

For the league to move closer to the union’s desired thresholds, which start at $238 million, it would want a variety of adjustments, including a pre-arbitration bonus pool lower than the union’s latest proposal of $80 million and sharp penalties for teams that exceed the thresholds by the highest amounts. Perhaps most important, it would want the union to accept a streamlined process for implementing rules changes beyond the 2023 season.

Well, I wasn't proposing givebacks in other areas. Mine was just a straight one-issue proposal. The way MLB is apt to pose this is to include some poison pills in their proposal knowing the union will reject it and then run to the media to say "See? The union doesn't really want a deal..."

Originally Posted by OrangeHoof

Solomonic solution here. Settle on league minimum of $712,500 with raises of $15,000 each year. Split the baby in half. How hard can that be?

and as a bonus:

Okay, at this point, somebody just has to say "**** it" and flip a coin.

The last offer has added some screwy stuff like pitch clocks on the pitcher (14 secs if bases empty, 19 secs if man on base). Just wait until the baserunner can time his jump to match the pitch clock expiring.

Max Scherzer was also peddling an idea of the first playoff round having a "ghost win" for the higher seed so the best-of-5 series can be settled by the higher seed with only two on-field wins while the lower seed has to win 3-of-4 to advance.

The minimum salary difference reminds me of a few years ago when the Padres had an arbitration hearing over a $60K difference. Basically went to war with a player and told him how he sucked over $60K. I think the arbitrator got paid more than the difference for the hearing.

I don't even know why the MLBPA is even going for the draft pick lottery proposal as some means to encourage competitiveness. Some teams don't even draft the No. 1 player on their board first overall. They take a player they like and have their agent agree to a signing bonus figure and use the savings to spend on later round picks. For instance, Pittsburgh's first overall pick Henry Davis ($6.5 million) got a lower signing bonus than second overall pick Jack Leiter ($7.9 million) got from the Rangers last year. Same with Baltimore's fifth overall pick Colton Cowser ($4.9 million) compared to Jordan Lawlar ($6.7 million), who went sixth to Arizona. It's going to have minimal impact and all it's going to do is bring up the conspiracy theories when a generational player is available first overall.

I don't like the 14-team playoff idea at all. I wonder if the ghost win is enough of an incentive for a team to win the division. I'm worried about a load management MLB.

Originally Posted by OrangeHoof

Well, I wasn't proposing givebacks in other areas. Mine was just a straight one-issue proposal. The way MLB is apt to pose this is to include some poison pills in their proposal knowing the union will reject it and then run to the media to say "See? The union doesn't really want a deal..."

What I should have said is that I'm just happy the owners are reportedly willing to budge on CBT because I feel like there are some hardline owners that are dead set intent to stick with their $220 million figure. Four already voted no on $220 million, so there's not much margin for error when a 23/30 yes vote is needed to approve the framework of a CBA.

Last year before the lockout, they reportedly offered a $180 million CBT with a salary floor to the MLBPA, which Tony Clark, Bruce Meyer and company of course laughed at.

Originally Posted by San Juan Mountain Man

The minimum salary difference reminds me of a few years ago when the Padres had an arbitration hearing over a $60K difference. Basically went to war with a player and told him how he sucked over $60K. I think the arbitrator got paid more than the difference for the hearing.

I don't even know why the MLBPA is even going for the draft pick lottery proposal as some means to encourage competitiveness. Some teams don't even draft the No. 1 player on their board first overall. They take a player they like and have their agent agree to a signing bonus figure and use the savings to spend on later round picks. For instance, Pittsburgh's first overall pick Henry Davis ($6.5 million) got a lower signing bonus than second overall pick Jack Leiter ($7.9 million) got from the Rangers last year. Same with Baltimore's fifth overall pick Colton Cowser ($4.9 million) compared to Jordan Lawlar ($6.7 million), who went sixth to Arizona. It's going to have minimal impact and all it's going to do is bring up the conspiracy theories when a generational player is available first overall.

I don't like the 14-team playoff idea at all. I wonder if the ghost win is enough of an incentive for a team to win the division. I'm worried about a load management MLB.

Unfortunately my Orioles are a good example of this. We did draft Rutschman a few years ago, who was arguably the #1 player, but since the new regime, we've continued to draft under slot so we have more money for over slot guys later. It's something that small market teams have to do in order to attempt to be competitive. I just see small market teams suffering even more with the desires of the players and the concessions of the league. I mean, to a degree, i get the desire to dis incentivize teams from tanking, but it's usually only the larger market teams that do it in an off year. The Baltimores and KC's and Pittsburghs draft in the top 5 every year for a reason and it isn't because of a 5 year tank plan.

Originally Posted by CoachChaz

Unfortunately my Orioles are a good example of this. We did draft Rutschman a few years ago, who was arguably the #1 player, but since the new regime, we've continued to draft under slot so we have more money for over slot guys later. It's something that small market teams have to do in order to attempt to be competitive. I just see small market teams suffering even more with the desires of the players and the concessions of the league. I mean, to a degree, i get the desire to dis incentivize teams from tanking, but it's usually only the larger market teams that do it in an off year. The Baltimores and KC's and Pittsburghs draft in the top 5 every year for a reason and it isn't because of a 5 year tank plan.

You know what ticks me off is that Adley Rutschman is a blue chip prospect and a highly accomplished Division I baseball player, and he's already turned 24 and he still hasn't debuted in the majors. That's a disgrace.

MLB, MLBPA Reach Provisional Agreement Regarding International Draft
https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2022/...-deadline.html