I know we are in a Lockout but...

[CSF77]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1491957628649414662

 

[CSF77]

Manfred Expresses Optimism For Full Season, Says MLB Has Proposed Universal DH And Elimination Of Draft-Pick Compensation​

By Steve Adams | February 10, 2022 at 10:59pm CDT

Major League Baseball commissioner Rob Manfred met with the media for about 30 minutes Thursday morning as the quarterly owners’ meetings drew to a close, discussing the status of the ongoing labor dispute with the MLB Players Association. Among the more concrete takeaways, Manfred said that the league has “agreed” both to the implementation of a universal designated hitter and the elimination of draft-pick compensation for free agents who reject qualifying offers.
However, as MLBTR’s Tim Dierkes reports (Twitter links), the use of “agreed” is a bit misleading. The two parties have not reached a formal agreement on either issue. Rather, Manfred’s use of “agreed” merely indicates that both the universal DH and elimination of draft-pick compensation were included as components of a broader proposal put forth by MLB some time ago.
Still, with regard to the universal designated hitter, this is one of the most concrete indicators of its likely implementation. Both parties, after all, have in the past shown a desire to add a DH to the National League. For the players, this creates another spot in 15 lineups and could create a handful of jobs for free agents. For teams, this all but eliminates the risk of pitchers being injured at the plate and on the bases. Because of that mutual interest, though, the league’s desire to frame the universal DH as something of a concession is somewhat questionable. It’s not clear the union will perceive it as a concession.
With regard to the elimination of pick compensation, Dierkes reports that the league’s proposal instead would award draft picks to teams for losing free agents, based on the quality of player, with no offer of any sort required. That raises issues on how to specifically determine that player’s value, however, and the MLBPA likely harbors concern that by giving teams a pick for losing a free agent, the league is actually disincentivizing clubs from re-signing some of their own players.
Beyond those two more concrete elements of his side’s recent proposal, Manfred offered little in the way of definitive statements. Asked about the status of Spring Training (i.e. whether it will be delayed), the commissioner replied that the “status of Spring Training is no change right now.”
We’re only a week out from the original report date for players and have, to this point, seen no meaningful progress in negotiations between the league and union. A delayed Spring Training feels like a foregone conclusion, but Manfred at least kicked the can down the road a couple days on any such formal declaration, suggesting that the decision was contingent on how Saturday’s meeting with the MLBPA plays out. That said, while Manfred didn’t explicitly state that Spring Training will be delayed, he addressed the possibility, acknowledging that the three-week ramp up period to the pandemic-shortened 2020 season was insufficient.
“The injury data shows that,” Manfred said of 2020’s training period. “We’d like to be [at] 28 [days] — we think four weeks makes sense.” A four-week Spring Training would still fall a good ways shy of the typical six-week period, but the extra week of build-up time in that theoretical scenario would prove beneficial to players, particularly to starting pitchers.
Manfred declared himself an optimist, stating more broadly that he believes the two sides will reach an agreement in time for the regular season to begin, as planned, on March 31. Missing regular-season games would be a “disastrous outcome to this industry,” Manfred said, adding that MLB is “committed to reaching an agreement to avoid that.”
Upon being asked about the league making just one proposal in the ten weeks since implementing the lockout, Manfred demurred and stated that “phones work two ways,” painting the lack of meaningful talks as a two-way street. Whichever side you take in the increasingly ugly battle — and it’s plenty fair if your answer is, “neither!” — it was ownership that locked out the players in, as Manfred stated at the time, an effort to “jumpstart” progress toward a deal. A silent period of more than six weeks followed. It’s plenty defensible to say the union should have been more proactive in instigating talks, but at the very least, the players have spent the past two weeks publicly declaring a desire for daily negotiations.
In one of the more eyebrow-raising moments of the press conference, Manfred was asked whether purchasing an MLB franchise was a “good investment.” He bizarrely implied the contrary, stating that between the purchase price of the team and the money invested into the club on a year-over-year basis, the “return on those investments is below what you’d expect to get in the stock market,” adding that there was greater risk in owning a team. Comments of that nature are sure to further galvanize a union that has repeatedly suggested the league isn’t being genuine or negotiating in good faith.
That term, “good-faith,” is a recurring theme when both sides discuss negotiations, as each indicates that the other is effectively neglecting to operate in such a fashion. For his part, Manfred vowed to make a “good-faith, positive proposal” to the players when the two sides meet Saturday, implying that perhaps this weekend could serve as a turning point.
“One correct move sometimes opens the way to an agreement,” said Manfred. “My view of the world is you always keep looking for that one move that creates that opportunity.”

 

[CSF77]

Short story:

Yes to DH. Teams don't want to risk injuring pitchers. Players want 15 more jobs for F/A's.

Team will get a draft comp for losing a F/A based off the quality of the player. I'm guessing avg war value as a gauge. So the team will get something. The players wont get screwed for turning down arb.


I see this as a streamlining effect. As is the past system was jaded.

 

[CSF77]

Cubs will almost certainly try to ‘buy’ prospects by taking on contracts

For months, we've seen the Cubs tied to players like Eric Hosmer and Kevin Kiermaier - and there will be more of the same once the lockout ends.

cubbiescrib.com

Interesting article. Take on Kramer and Hosmer and a few plus prospects as a payroll dump for these teams.

I kinda makes sense. Both players most likely will be plus adds and to be honest will make the Cubs semi competitive. Then trade out Contreras for a few prospects and let Gomes start.

This should push the Cubs closer to a top 10 farm.

As far as send backs your are looking at control and low cost. So we are talking about Mills Alzolay, Abbott and other arms that were decent prospects. Some close players that have little chance of making the team and so on.

It is a interesting take at least. Jed takes on the one thing that the Cubs can as in bad contract while adding to the lower farm then send back ready or near ready or low top end MLB talent.

I don't see Jed going all in on Correa. They are not there right now. Even with him they are not winning 90+. Sure if the want-a-bee crew had a few years in to prove that they are legit I would get it.

 

[knoxville7]

Cubs will almost certainly try to ‘buy’ prospects by taking on contracts

For months, we've seen the Cubs tied to players like Eric Hosmer and Kevin Kiermaier - and there will be more of the same once the lockout ends.

cubbiescrib.com

Interesting article. Take on Kramer and Hosmer and a few plus prospects as a payroll dump for these teams.

I kinda makes sense. Both players most likely will be plus adds and to be honest will make the Cubs semi competitive. Then trade out Contreras for a few prospects and let Gomes start.

This should push the Cubs closer to a top 10 farm.

As far as send backs your are looking at control and low cost. So we are talking about Mills Alzolay, Abbott and other arms that were decent prospects. Some close players that have little chance of making the team and so on.

It is a interesting take at least. Jed takes on the one thing that the Cubs can as in bad contract while adding to the lower farm then send back ready or near ready or low top end MLB talent.

I don't see Jed going all in on Correa. They are not there right now. Even with him they are not winning 90+. Sure if the want-a-bee crew had a few years in to prove that they are legit I would get it.

I like the idea of taking on bad contracts for prospects since the cubs won’t need that payroll in the short term.

That said, I could still see the cubs signing Correa because he’s still only 27. He could be the guy that shows the kids coming up how to approach being a big leaguer. And as he ages, you can move him off of SS as one of those young kids takes it over for him. And by the time the young kids are hitting FA, Correa’s contract won’t be an issue either.

 

[zack54attack]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1494376199241416704

 

[Chicagosports89]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1494376199241416704

Odds they miss the entire year?

 

[CSF77]

I like the idea of taking on bad contracts for prospects since the cubs won’t need that payroll in the short term.

That said, I could still see the cubs signing Correa because he’s still only 27. He could be the guy that shows the kids coming up how to approach being a big leaguer. And as he ages, you can move him off of SS as one of those young kids takes it over for him. And by the time the young kids are hitting FA, Correa’s contract won’t be an issue either.

Maybe. Hernandez is finally hitting stateside this year and there are predictions that he will end up in low A ball this year. His time line is very soon. Triantos just put on 15 lbs of muscle and looks to be a 3B going forward. We could be talking about those two plus Crow-Armstrong as the #2 prospect and all 3 being 2 years out

The Cubs have a strong core pending and to be honest hitting is not the issue. Pitching is and investment should be made there.

Self development has always been a heel for them. Marquez has not pitched for in reality 2 years. Their best prospect was just drafted in round 1 last year.

Let's face it. Buying bad contract to get plus farm talent is the correct move. Build up the farm depth. As far as short term success they are not there. Long term Hernandez might end up higher rated than Davis and it is not even a reach

So Kramer as lead off and CF. Add A LH bat 1B. Move Schwindel to DH. Provides more stability and a larger LH presence.

Then Jed could platoon LF with Ortega and Frazier. RF Happ. Eat Heyward's deal.

Then trade Contreras for more prospect depth.

As far as pitching goes I would sign anoth 1 year flip. Set up this year as building trade wealth to off load to contenders.

I'm done expecting a hail Mary signing to save the the boat. Jed needs to keep doing what works. That starts from with in then add when it is on the field.

 

[CSF77]

Odds they miss the entire year?

MLBPA is asking for stupid amounts on max tax. MLB is playing the give you 5M more ever other year.

They settle that part and the rest will fall to the side. I would think start as is and have 5 mil escolators every year for the CBA duration. Gives the Union a increase with out robbing the bank.

The real problem is they are not working it out.

One side presents a offer. Then wait a week and the other counters. They are not sitting down and working out the numbers and finding a solution.

 

[Diehardfan]

Odds they miss the entire year?

I'm up for it. The owners and players deserve each other.......they can both kiss my ass.

It would be really cool to have the fans lock out MLB whenever they decide to play any games.

 

[CSF77]

Evan Drellich

@EvanDrellich

Source: MLB’s only proposal so far today added $10,000 to minimum salary per year. 2022: $640k 2023: $650k 2024: $660k 2025: $670k 2026: $680k MLB also withdrew its proposal for an alternate minimum system that was tiered based on service time. They’re not done talking yet.

2:00 PM · Feb 23, 2022·Twitter for iPhone











Evan Drellich

@EvanDrellich

Included in MLBPA’s offer today: • Instead of 80 percent of players w/2-3 yrs of service being eligible for arbitration, now 75 percent. • Dropped from 8 picks in the amateur draft lottery 7. • Some increases in minimum salary. There was no new proposal on CBT.

2:03 PM · Feb 22, 2022·TweetDeck

https://twitter.com/EvanDrellich/status/1496244276749033479/retweets

 

[CSF77]

Minimum Salary

• MLB: $640K in 2022, $650K in 2023, $660K in 2024, $670K in 2025, $680K in 2026
• MLBPA: $775K in 2022, $805K in 2023, $835K in 2024, $865K in 2025, $895K in 2026
• Current gap: $135K in 2022, $155K in 2023, $175K in 2024, $195K in 2025, $215K in 2026

Competitive Balance Tax

• MLB: Base tax thresholds at $214MM in 2022/ $214MM in 2023/ $216MM in 2024 / $218MM in 2025 / $222MM in 2026. Also proposing significant increases in tax rates on overages and new draft pick penalties.
• MLBPA: $245MM in 2022 / $252MM in 2023 / $259MM in 2024 / $266MM in 2025 / $273MM in 2026
• Current gap: $31MM in 2022, growing to $51MM in 2026. Gap also includes MLB’s proposed increases in tax rates and addition of draft pick forfeiture

 

[CSF77]

Draft Pick Compensation

• MLB: Has proposed eliminating draft pick forfeiture for teams that sign free agents. Their plan still calls for teams to get draft picks for losing free agents, depending on the quality of the player. This offer seems to be tied to MLB’s CBT proposal as sort of a trade.

Pre-Arbitration Bonus Pool

• MLB: $20MM pool. MLB has agreed to fund a bonus pool for pre-arbitration players, which would be a new addition to the CBA. They have proposed “a six-person panel — three from each side — to develop a mutually agreeable WAR statistic to allocate the funds,” according to ESPN’s Jesse Rogers. He adds, “The top 30 players in WAR and award winners would be eligible for the bonus pool.”
• MLBPA: $115MM pool, distributed to 150 players.
• Current gap: $95MM

 

[CSF77]

Arbitration Eligibility

• MLB: No change in which players are eligible for arbitration. In the previous CBA, the top 22% of 2+ players were arbitration eligible, known as Super Two players.
• MLBPA: Top 75% of players in the 2+ service class eligible for arbitration

Service Time Manipulation

• MLB: Offering two draft picks within the player’s first three years if he finishes in the top three in Cy Young, Rookie of the Year or MVP voting (per Jesse Rogers)
• MLBPA: “Players receive a full year of service time in their rookie season if infielders and catchers finish among the top seven for their position in WAR in each league, with outfielders, relief pitchers and starting pitchers finishing among the top 20. The union also said it would accept a modification of MLB’s proposal that would reward draft pick compensation to teams whose players finish among the top three in the Rookie of the Year, MVP and Cy Young voting.” (per USA Today’s Bob Nightengale)

 

[CSF77]

Anti-Tanking Measures

• MLB: Lottery for top four picks
• MLBPA: Lottery for top seven picks. Under the union’s offer, teams would find themselves excluded from the lottery for finishing below certain thresholds in the standings for two to three consecutive seasons. The specific thresholds for exclusion varied depending upon market size, with larger-market clubs facing stricter requirements for lottery eligibility.

Revenue Sharing

• MLB: No change to revenue sharing
• MLBPA: $30MM reduction

Expanded Playoffs

• MLB: 14 teams
• MLBPA: 12 teams

Universal Designated Hitter

This seems to be generally agreed upon by both sides.

 

[CSF77]

The big one is still the tax cap.

MLB is being a bunch of tight wads here. 214 for 2 years then 216, 218 then the bone of 222M. for a avg net gain of 1.6M. That is a fucking joke.

MLBPA is asking crazy cash caps. -245-273M over a 5 year span. Greedy fucking bastards.

I was thinking 215/220/225/230/235. 5M per year added.

At the end of the day a team can choose to not spend that much.

This is the biggest issue going on.

The rest is peanuts. arguing about less than a Mil on a player is a joke. Super 2 doesn't change control. It just makes the teams pay for the production that they are receiving. If a team doesn't want to deal with that then offer said player a deal like the White Sox are doing with their young players. Keep control of the money and keep it out of arb.

Most of this is bullshit. They need to work out the cap. 5M scaling is not shitty. This feels like the small market saying no way in hell are we letting the big markets to monopolize the game. The big markets have the choice to pay or not and get more room to keep from paying tax. All good.

Union wants more space so their players can make more money.

It really makes you hate pro sports.

 

[WELL USED PUCK]

I feel so bad for these poor babies.
Meanwhile my social security check is direct deposit & I'm still repairing appliances and I'm 83.