MLB Lockout Thread

[RZNJ]

Yeah, nothing huge there.  Probably the two biggest things are the DH and playoffs.   I assume the players union wants the universal DH and the owners want expanded playoffs?

[Sports Guy]

28 minutes ago, RZNJ said:

Yeah, nothing huge there.  Probably the two biggest things are the DH and playoffs.   I assume the players union wants the universal DH and the owners want expanded playoffs?

I think that’s probably accurate but not sure why each side would care about either.

I think the money is the issue.  How does it get distributed and how cheap are those early years.

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, Sports Guy said:

I think that’s probably accurate but not sure why each side would care about either.

I think the money is the issue.  How does it get distributed and how cheap are those early years.

The playoffs are disproportionately profitable for owners.  I can see why the players would want something in return.

I've never understood the issue with the DH.  It won't do much at all to roster construction.  Teams just don't tend to have 35 year old DH only guys on their teams.

[connja]

1 hour ago, Sports Guy said:

Good article by Passan:

https://www.espn.com/mlb/insider/story/_/id/32964064/why-mlb-labor-negotiations-gone-nowhere-baseball-path-back
 

IN THE SPIRIT of avoiding a winter more nuclear than the one already underway, ESPN asked more than a dozen major league sources what they believe a path to a deal looks like. Most of the group -- a mixture of one owner, two league officials, two general managers, one assistant GM, four players, one union official and two agents -- offered a version of an agreement that looked something like this.

1. Raise minimum salaries to around $650,000 -- a 14% bump

2. Add a performance bonus pool for pre-arbitration players

3. Implement the universal designated hitter

4. Expand the postseason from 10 to 14 teams

5. Remove indirect draft-pick compensation for free agents

6. Make significant changes to the draft to disincentivize tanking and reward small markets

7. Raise the CBT threshold into the $230 million-plus range and remove other restraints, including nonmonetary and recidivism penalties

First I heard of #2 - I like it.   DOn't love the expanded playoffs, but seems inevitable.  Would like to see a salary floor so the O's would have to get to like $100mm this season.  Otherwise, all good and get 'er done!

[Can_of_corn]

1 minute ago, connja said:

First I heard of #2 - I like it.   DOn't love the expanded playoffs, but seems inevitable.  Would like to see a salary floor so the O's would have to get to like $100mm this season.  Otherwise, all good and get 'er done!

First I've heard it expressed that way.  I have seem a fair bit about doing something for the pre-arbitration players performing at a very high level.  A bonus could theoretically reward them while not skewing future arbitration awards.

[jamalshw]

3 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

The playoffs are disproportionately profitable for owners.  I can see why the players would want something in return.

I've never understood the issue with the DH.  It won't do much at all to roster construction.  Teams just don't tend to have 35 year old DH only guys on their teams.

I agree to an extent. It will make the market for a guy like Nelson Cruz a bit bigger, but not much. I think the players point of view is it makes teams more likely to offer the extra year in contract talks if there is concern of a player being able to stay in the field the entire length of the contract. Having an option for a good offensive player to phase into more DH time later in a contract could provide an argument for teams to bump an offer from 5 years to 6 or something of the sort on various players if their bats are good enough and the bat is what holds most the value on a player. Teams may also be more inclined to sign a player that doesn't quite fit on the roster with the idea of rotating him in the DH spot. Say a team has 3 starting OFers but a solid OFer is a Free Agent, that team may still play on the free agent (if the bat is the right fit) and rotate the 4 OFers in the DH spot. 

I don't think the DH will all of a sudden make a guy that was getting a 5 years/$75M offer get a 8 year deal or a guy that struggles to get a 2 year deal get a five year deal. But I do think it offers potential for older players to stick around an extra year and teams to spend a marginal amount more on that 9th position player who would become a starter at DH or a starter without a set position that rotates with others to fill the DH spot. Teams may throw an extra couple million or an extra year to a guy that will see 500 ABs versus someone who will struggle to get 300. 

[NCRaven]

I haven't seen the MLBPA make an issue of the DH whatsoever.  They've made it clear that the "cheap young players - expensive older players" model no longer works.  The owners continue to take advantage of cheap young players and no longer are willing to reward veterans unless they are perenial All-Stars like Scherzer and the mid level vets get squeezed.  That is their first priority and I doubt any ownership proposals that fail address the issue in a meaningful way will be DOA.  The second most important issue for players - and it's related to the first - is service time manipulation and they were particularly pissed about Bryant's situation.  Tanking has been mentioned, as well, but I'd bet it's a distant third behind those two core economic issues.  I think the players assume the DH will happen but even if it doesn't, it would not have a huge economic impact for the players anyway.  For reason #1, above, it's not like there are many Lee Mays or Harold Baines hanging around to DH anymore.  Although Nelson Cruz is a notable exception.

[DrungoHazewood]

6 hours ago, Can_of_corn said:

The playoffs are disproportionately profitable for owners.  I can see why the players would want something in return.

I've never understood the issue with the DH.  It won't do much at all to roster construction.  Teams just don't tend to have 35 year old DH only guys on their teams.

Over the last five full seasons the median age of a player who DH'd at least 50 games was 32.  I'm going to guess that the average 32-year-old MLBer makes a lot more money than a typical MLB player.

[DrungoHazewood]

2 hours ago, NCRaven said:

I haven't seen the MLBPA make an issue of the DH whatsoever.  They've made it clear that the "cheap young players - expensive older players" model no longer works.  The owners continue to take advantage of cheap young players and no longer are willing to reward veterans unless they are perenial All-Stars like Scherzer and the mid level vets get squeezed.  That is their first priority and I doubt any ownership proposals that fail address the issue in a meaningful way will be DOA.  The second most important issue for players - and it's related to the first - is service time manipulation and they were particularly pissed about Bryant's situation.  Tanking has been mentioned, as well, but I'd bet it's a distant third behind those two core economic issues.  I think the players assume the DH will happen but even if it doesn't, it would not have a huge economic impact for the players anyway.  For reason #1, above, it's not like there are many Lee Mays or Harold Baines hanging around to DH anymore.  Although Nelson Cruz is a notable exception.

The problem from the players' perspective it that the owners have an avenue that they're fully willing to go down where they don't have to pay free agent salaries.  They talk about young players not getting their fair share, but the issue is that teams like the Orioles and Pirates and even to some extent the Rays can basically opt out of ever paying free agent rates because other cheaper players are available.  The problem is there are still ways to have a $40M payroll.  The players would probably stop talking about old/young split altogether if the owners proposed a $100M floor.

[DrungoHazewood]

6 hours ago, connja said:

Would like to see a salary floor so the O's would have to get to like $100mm this season.

What's their current projected payroll?  $30 or $40M?  They would have to phase in a floor.  There's no way a 53-win team is going to add the equivalent of four $15M a season players in one offseason.  Certainly not with something like 10 other teams trying to sign everyone to meet the floor at the same time.  If they really had to many teams would end up with below-average players who'd otherwise be trying to sign 1/3 deals instead making $10, 15, 20M a year.

[Sports Guy]

3 hours ago, NCRaven said:

I haven't seen the MLBPA make an issue of the DH whatsoever.  They've made it clear that the "cheap young players - expensive older players" model no longer works.  The owners continue to take advantage of cheap young players and no longer are willing to reward veterans unless they are perenial All-Stars like Scherzer and the mid level vets get squeezed.  That is their first priority and I doubt any ownership proposals that fail address the issue in a meaningful way will be DOA.  The second most important issue for players - and it's related to the first - is service time manipulation and they were particularly pissed about Bryant's situation.  Tanking has been mentioned, as well, but I'd bet it's a distant third behind those two core economic issues.  I think the players assume the DH will happen but even if it doesn't, it would not have a huge economic impact for the players anyway.  For reason #1, above, it's not like there are many Lee Mays or Harold Baines hanging around to DH anymore.  Although Nelson Cruz is a notable exception.

To be fair, every sport takes advantage of the cheap young talent.  I mean, after all, they do enter the league unproven.

In the NFL, they used to give guys like Sam Bradford 50M before he ever played a game.  I think you can argue that the old model was equally dumb.

There was a time when most people on OH didn’t think the Os would sign Wieters.  There was no official slot then.  It was whatever.  People thought they wouldn’t get it done.  

Yusniel Diaz signed for like 37 million before a slot cap was there.  Lots of dumb money was thrown around for players who couldn’t even vote or have a drink on public, much less actually ever accomplishing anything.

[SteveA]

52 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

What's their current projected payroll?  $30 or $40M?  They would have to phase in a floor.  There's no way a 53-win team is going to add the equivalent of four $15M a season players in one offseason.  Certainly not with something like 10 other teams trying to sign everyone to meet the floor at the same time.  If they really had to many teams would end up with below-average players who'd otherwise be trying to sign 1/3 deals instead making $10, 15, 20M a year.

How about:  If you don't make the floor you contribute the $ amount you are under to the pool of money that provides incentives/compensation for pre-arb players who do great things.

[NCRaven]

24 minutes ago, SteveA said:

How about:  If you don't make the floor you contribute the $ amount you are under to the pool of money that provides incentives/compensation for pre-arb players who do great things.

The MLBPA has already rejected an owners' proposal to pay younger players from a pool based on performance using fWAR as a measure.

[connja]

2 hours ago, DrungoHazewood said:

What's their current projected payroll?  $30 or $40M?  They would have to phase in a floor.  There's no way a 53-win team is going to add the equivalent of four $15M a season players in one offseason.  Certainly not with something like 10 other teams trying to sign everyone to meet the floor at the same time.  If they really had to many teams would end up with below-average players who'd otherwise be trying to sign 1/3 deals instead making $10, 15, 20M a year.

It would be easier than you think if they locked up guys like Rutschman, Mancini, GRod, Moutcastle to decent long term contracts, and added a few free agents.

[Frobby]

I’d like to see arbitration start earlier but perhaps with a cap in those early years.  So a really good player with 1.5 years of service could make, say, $2.5 mm.  And, raise the floor after the first year a bit too.