MLB CBA/Labor Dispute Thread

[scOtt]

nabob [ ney-bob ]

noun

1. any very wealthy, influential, or powerful person.

 

Basically some random boob who makes a lot of money then suddenly finds himself in a position of great power.

[bobmc]

1 hour ago, scOtt said:

That's a big payroll raise, especially for a team like ours.

 

Which may be what the owners, Manfred especially and all the nattering nabobs, might be aiming for.

Are they negative though?  Balmer's Spiro was a gem.

[interloper]

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2021/11/mlb-proposes-replacing-arbitration-with-salaries-based-off-player-war-totals.html/comment-page-1#comment-2393846

 

We are never going to see baseball if this is what MLB is coming to the table with so far. So dumb in so many obvious ways.

[forphase1]

1 hour ago, interloper said:

https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2021/11/mlb-proposes-replacing-arbitration-with-salaries-based-off-player-war-totals.html/comment-page-1#comment-2393846

 

We are never going to see baseball if this is what MLB is coming to the table with so far. So dumb in so many obvious ways.

I don't know, I think I really like the idea.  For me, in a perfect world, all players would be paid based upon what their production warranted.  Have a Mullins type season on a league minimum salary?  Nope, you get paid based on what you produce.  Be a vet who falls off a cliff, aka Chris Davis, get paid accordingly.  I realize that such as system will NEVER happen, for many, many reasons, but any system that ties the salary to actual production is one I can probably get behind.  

[LookinUp]

1 hour ago, interloper said:

We are never going to see baseball if this is what MLB is coming to the table with so far. So dumb in so many obvious ways.

I never know how to predict how these things will unfold. The only predictable part is the posturing before deadlines. That's why they set the deadlines, because nobody moves until then. 

It's hard for me to believe they'd lock up in the aftermath of Covid, but it's also not so hard for me to believe that they don't think April/May are that profitable so it'd be ok. 

[NCRaven]

I think tying pre-arb salaries to an all encompassing measure like WAR is interesting.  It would reward a player like Trout who was clearly underpaid during his pre-arb and even arb eligible years.  Others would still have a major league minimum salary like they do now.  But, it's such a radical change that I can't see the players going for it.  WAR typically undervalues relief pitchers and DH/1B, even very productive ones, so the players won't like that part of it.  I also like the idea of free agency at 6 years of service or 29 years of age (like Wildcard metioned), which ever comes first, if MLB will come around to that.

[interloper]

Relievers get screwed. It's also an imperfect stat with factoring in unreliable defensive metrics. I love the stat in general, I'm just saying. There's no way the players agree to that. 

[Frobby]

3 hours ago, interloper said:

Relievers get screwed. It's also an imperfect stat with factoring in unreliable defensive metrics. I love the stat in general, I'm just saying. There's no way the players agree to that. 

To me, if the total dollars allocated to pre-FA players was as high or higher than they currently are, there’s no obvious reason the MLBPA should be against this.  It’s just a matter of how the player pie gets whacked up, not how big the pie is.   But, there’s probably some aspect of the proposal that is designed to prevent or limit salary inflation for that pack of players.   

[Can_of_corn]

4 hours ago, interloper said:

Relievers get screwed. It's also an imperfect stat with factoring in unreliable defensive metrics. I love the stat in general, I'm just saying. There's no way the players agree to that. 

I think relievers should get screwed.  They shouldn't get paid like position players that play 140 games or starting pitchers.

 

[Aristotelian]

8 hours ago, NCRaven said:

I think tying pre-arb salaries to an all encompassing measure like WAR is interesting.  It would reward a player like Trout who was clearly underpaid during his pre-arb and even arb eligible years.  Others would still have a major league minimum salary like they do now.  But, it's such a radical change that I can't see the players going for it.  WAR typically undervalues relief pitchers and DH/1B, even very productive ones, so the players won't like that part of it.  I also like the idea of free agency at 6 years of service or 29 years of age (like Wildcard metioned), which ever comes first, if MLB will come around to that.

fWAR or rWAR? Who decides? What a nightmare. 

[NCRaven]

MLBs proposal was tied to Fangraph’s version.  FWIW.

[interloper]

14 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

I think relievers should get screwed.  They shouldn't get paid like position players that play 140 games or starting pitchers.

 

It doesn't matter what you think, frankly, or if you're right. The point is the MLBPA would never go for a worse deal for their players.

[Moose Milligan]

I can't wait for the next 10-15 years, hopefully the brainiacs who are constantly tinkering with numbers can come up with a better stat than WAR, rendering it useless.

It's not that I don't like WAR, I think it's a pretty good stat and it does a decent (not perfect) enough job of understanding value.  

I'd just like to see chaos, personally.

Anyway, I still think this gets resolved before spring training.  At the end of the day, no one wants a work stoppage and everyone involved knows that the damage to the game will be irreparable.  

[Frobby]

10 hours ago, NCRaven said:

MLBs proposal was tied to Fangraph’s version.  FWIW.

What’s interesting about that is (1) pitcher fWAR rests much more heavily on FIP than it does on ERA, hence you get results like Ubaldo being worth 1.7 fWAR in a year when he carried a 5.44 ERA; and (2) fWAR for catchers weighs Fangraphs’ framing metric very heavily.  

[Can_of_corn]

2 hours ago, interloper said:

It doesn't matter what you think, frankly, or if you're right. The point is the MLBPA would never go for a worse deal for their players.

If it's better for 70% and worse for 30?