Source: MLB players, owners close in on new 5-year labor deal Read more: http://sportsillustrated.c

[DrungoHazewood]

What?? What are you talking about "strict slotting" for? Ticket prices? Where exactly was that mentioned? I have no clue what you are talking about, but anyway....

The conversation was about making all players go through the draft process instead of the wild wild west and the "to the highest bidder" model that is currently in place. Pretty simple concept that has worked for oh.....a long time in every other major sport

You must be one of the "everything is great!" in baseball people, and content just continuing on this path to small and mid market destruction one CBA at a time.

The fact that they are close to a deal without hardly issues in negotiations and minor "tweaks" to the system is a perfect example on the sad state of the sport. I am now pretty much completely hopeless that anything will EVER change if that is how easy they just "re upped" the old deal essentially.

If we're working in unfounded generalities, you must be one of those people willing to sacrifice $billions in MLB revenues to the cause of parity.

When an organization has moved revenues from $2B to nearly $8B in a decade or so, you usually don't have calls for revolution. Yes, there are issues with MLB, and from an Orioles perspective one of the most pressing is the imbalance between small and large market teams. But you don't necessarily have to blow up a system that already works well for most teams to get there.

Right now MLB has a system that allows teams to make a profit, but not too much profit (too much, IMO, defined by not having some teams make massive, $100M profits while others can't meet their budget obligations no matter what, as happens in the NHL and NBA.) MLB has a system that allows expenditures to roughly match payroll. Once you start limiting what teams can spend (on payroll, amateur acquisition, whatever) without addressing revenue imbalances, then you end up with some teams that make crazy profits while others still have to spend nearly 100% of revenues to have any hope of competing. The big market teams making $100s of millions in profits will find ways to exploit that asset for on-field gain.

Capping various expenditures may somewhat level the playing field between small and large market teams, but you're not going to really fix anything until you address the fact that the Yanks bring in half a $billion or more a year, and the Rays are lucky to bring in 20% or 25% of that. Just capping or slotting the draft, or including everyone in the draft will be even worse, in that it takes away a lower-cost avenue for teams like the O's or Pirates to acquire talent, and makes things like very expensive MLB free agency more important.

[EddieEddie]

Offhand, it doesn't sound like these changes will help the Orioles much. But we'll see.

I have a question. Why is no one talking about this:

Among other things, it will pave the way for realignment of the sport into two 15-team leagues, adding a second wild-card team in each league, spreading interleague play throughout all six months of the regular season and...

Does this not change absolutely everything and give us a fighting chance for the playoffs in the foreseeable future?

What am I missing? Are they keeping the divisions? Or actually going to just two leagues? Wouldnt this entail teams moving leagues?

[Fan4Life]

I have a question. Why is no one talking about this:

Does this not change absolutely everything and give us a fighting chance for the playoffs in the foreseeable future?

What am I missing? Are they keeping the divisions? Or actually going to just two leagues? Wouldnt this entail teams moving leagues?

Yes they give you the impression it's 2 15 team, leagues only. But they plan to divide them into 3 divisions and without a balanced schedule, it doesn't matter.

[Aglets]

How can adding a 5th playoff team from each league not mathematically improve our odds of making said playoffs?

Of course that helps. It's good for us and good for the game because it encourages teams to fight more for the division title.

I would RATHER there be a balanced schedule (not to mention make the DH a rule for all teams not just half of them) but the changes they're planning on implementing now are at least moves in the right direction imo.

[EddieEddie]

OK I got the impression they were throwing out the divisions. They absolutely need to go to a balanced schedule. This is like, critical for us, even for the future of the franchise I believe. Too bad we have an owner who is against it.

At least another wild card spot makes it slightly more feasible to make the playoffs. But we are still an eternally screwed franchise because of our division and no one seems to care.

[joeyc]

No cap means the O's have zero chance of competing, with the current owner.

[Can_of_corn]

No cap means the O's have zero chance of competing, with the current owner.

The owner is the problem, not the lack of a cap.

[SilentJames]

Does this not change absolutely everything and give us a fighting chance for the playoffs in the foreseeable future?

What am I missing? Are they keeping the divisions? Or actually going to just two leagues? Wouldnt this entail teams moving leagues?

No it wouldn't because we still have to be better than the Yankees, Rays and Sox. If anything that would just ensures that boston and New York make the playoffs almost every year.

[Dipper9]

The owner is the problem, not the lack of a cap.

Exactly. And he can't live forever....

...or can he?

[csgordos]

Exactly. And he can't live forever....

...or can he?

His sons can cryo preserve him and run the team into the ground for another 40 years.

This is the point where a line from Cheers comes to mind:

Norm: "Women (Orioles) cannot live with them....."

or

Norm: "Women (Orioles) cannot live with them, pass the beer nuts!"

yet, I will continue to follow forever.

[Frobby]

Update -- a handshake deal is reportedly done and should be announced on Tuesday. http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/7251557/major-league-baseball-players-owners-reach-handshake-deal-labor-contract-sources-say

Some key points:

- Teams will have to determine whether they make a qualifying offer for a free agent at a one-year guaranteed salary based on a formula. That number is likely to be upwards of $12 million, making it highly doubtful teams would use it on players who aren't superstars. If the player rejects the offer and signs with another team, the signing team loses its spot in the first round of the amateur draft and moves to the end. Teams will no longer lose a pick for signing a premium free agent.

- There will also be changes in the amount of money clubs will spend on drafted players, getting rid of the current slotting system and giving each team a pool of money to spend on its draft picks. There will be penalties for exceeding the threshold, which would range from 75-100 percent for each dollar over the line.

Changes in free-agent compensation rules won't take effect until the 2012-13 offseason, but there are expected to be temporary revisions that affect the compensation rules for certain free agents this winter. In other words, a team that signs an elite player such as Prince Fielder would still lose a top draft pick, but a Type A set-up reliever such as Darren Oliver would no longer cost the team signing him a top pick.

[TonySoprano]

If the player rejects the offer and signs with another team, the signing team loses its spot in the first round of the amateur draft and moves to the end.

Buy that's some penalty (not) for a team already at, or near the bottom of the first round, which generally includes Philly, the Yankees, the Red Sox...

[Oriolidae85]

Boy that's some penalty (not) for a team already at, or near the bottom of the first round, which generally includes Philly, the Yankees, the Red Sox...

Was thinking the same thing, but certainly hope this means that a snake like compensation penalty takes effect. That is, if the Yankees picked up CJ Wilson this offseason, their 1st round pick would be pushed back 31 picks (or more into the second round). Otherwise, this is complete BS

[scOtt]

Buy that's some penalty (not) for a team already at, or near the bottom of the first round, which generally includes Philly, the Yankees, the Red Sox...

I had to read Frobby's quote about ten times before I understood it...

That is an advantage for the top teams (late first round picks...) but I think the much bigger advantage is no losing picks (for us) if we'd sign a top FA. The Yanks wouldn't think twice about losing a 1st round pick to sign say, CJ Wilson, even under the old system. We'd have to think long and hard if we wanted to spend the money AND the pick.

Couple questions... to the ether, not to anyone on the board...

I guess (?) if you sign a top FA early you move to the front of the queue of FA signers? Say we signed Fielder tomorrow, and the Yanks signed Wilson next week, we'd move to #30 pick, then when the Yanks signed Wilson we'd be #29 and Yanks #30? If so it makes for some urgency to move if you're going after top talent.

The reverse... Yanks sign CJ tomorrow and we sign Fielder next week. Do we move ahead of the Yanks based on record? That would be better for us.

I'm assuming there's a deadline for both team offers and players accepting and rejecting.

Do you still gain a pick by not offering a player a contract? Supplemental round is gone?

EDIT: And the big question... is this in effect right now, once they finalize it?

[Can_of_corn]

There might also be a mechanism in the new deal to punish teams financially that fall under a certain threshold in regards to major league payroll. I am hoping they set the floor to at least 50 million.