Weiner Cautiously Optimistic About New CBA

Michael Weiner, head of the player's union, spoke to reporters about the upcoming Collective Bargaining Agreement while at Yankees camp this morning. Let's recap…

  • Weiner is cautiously optimistic about getting a new CBA in place the end of the calendar year, says Mark Feinsand of The New York Daily News (on Twitter). 
  • As Sam Borden of The Journal News reports, the union head is ready for anything though: "Just this week I've seen a general manager talking about a salary cap and I've seen a national baseball writer talking about rumblings of contraction," said Weiner. "Are we optimistic in a sense? Yes. But do we take anything for granted? Absolutely not."
  • Weiner also said he believes there won't be one hot-button topic that dominates negotiations, tweets Feinsand. A salary cap (1994) and PED testing (2002) were two hot-button issues in years passed.

The draft figures to be a popular topic this time around, with trading picks, hard slotting, and even a worldwide draft being speculated on over the last few months. The current CBA expires on December 11th of this year, and it's worth noting that the two sides agreed to that deal more than a month before the previous one was set to expire. 

Full Story | 53 Comments | Categories: Uncategorized

53 Responses to Weiner Cautiously Optimistic About New CBA Leave a Reply

  1. rzepczynski 4 years ago

    HA HA

  2. MB923 4 years ago

    If that were my last name, I’d think about getting it legally changed.

    • NL_East_Rivalry 4 years ago

      the i and e are switched, so it sounds different, but it does look bad.

      • MB923 4 years ago

        Nope, it’s still pronounced like Wee-ner. There’s been videos on Sportscenter and others of them pronouncing his name, he’s definitely a Wee-ner

  3. hehe weiner hehe

  4. shysox 4 years ago

    Can’t they add his first name as well?

    • Richard?

      • MB923 4 years ago

        In my college, there was a guy on the baseball team named Richard Head.

        • MaineSox 4 years ago

          Did you hear about that town Indiana that wanted to name a town building after a former mayor but they shot down the proposal because his name was Harry Baals?

      • woadude 4 years ago

        No, his name is Harold, but his friend call him Harry.

        • WrigleyTerror37 4 years ago

          And his Wifes name was Miny. Miny and Harry Balls!

  5. MB923 4 years ago

    I heard that Weiner’s good old friend Balls was Cautiously Pessimistic though.

  6. O971 4 years ago

    I don’t get it.

  7. the only bad thing I see about trading draft picks is Kenny Williams will trade those so our farm system will get weaker.

  8. Brad426 4 years ago

    I hope Weiner is right and they aren’t just jerking him around.


    • MB923 4 years ago

      There’s no I in team
      There’s no crying in baseball


      There’s no DH in Weiner

      Jokes aside, umm how about leaving it the way it is? Yes in 1 league, No in another.

      • BradyAndersonsSideburns 4 years ago

        no DH in weiner…national league team I suppose?

    • ultimate913 4 years ago

      How about adding it to the NL? Let pitchers focus strictly on pitching while at the same time, more jobs would become available for older players.

      • MB923 4 years ago

        Exactly. For those who say get rid of the DH, it can also be countered with add the DH to the NL

        Simply put though, NL fans hate the DH. AL fans like it. I’m a fan the way it is though.

      • woadude 4 years ago

        Exactly, how sick of hearing about said future hall of famer going to an AL team solely on the purpose of his being able to DH, its a real kick in the teeth for NL teams to not be able to extend a 34 year old good player for 4 years because you can’t DH him.

    • Keep the DH in AL vs. AL games, Pitchers hit in NL vs. NL games and have neither a DH nor a pitcher hitting in any AL vs. NL games (all inter-league games, All Star game, and World Series).

      • NickinIthaca 4 years ago

        If you don’t have a pitcher or hitter in those games then you’re looking at only batting 8 people, which doesn’t make much sense to me. I’d just rather they keep it the way it is – if the home team is AL then there is a DH, if it’s NL, then there isn’t. It’s really very logical…

    • HerbertAnchovy 4 years ago

      How about getting off the caps lock?

      Seriously though, don’t watch AL games. Problem solved.

  10. stratomaticfan 4 years ago

    We need to break the union even if it costs us a whole season. This game needs a hard cap, we need to modify the free agency rules to 10 years with club instead of 6 years, get rid of arbitration, install one strike and you are out drug policy, get rid of the DH, and to do these things we need to crush the union.

    • ultimate913 4 years ago

      Yea. Cause breaking unions is always a good idea and never risky…

    • Dude, I agree with you about breaking Unions, but those things you mentioned are the reasons why these thug organizations exist in the first place. You offered not a solution to the union but a reason why they keep it in existence.

      So…you don’t like the Dh so you want to get rid of it. Ok I like the DH and I say keep it. Just because you simply don’t like something doesn’t mean it needs to be removed. The DH is a fun addition to the game and let’s keep it in the AL. And I am sick of leagues changing rules every year because a handful of fans complain about something IE the NFL.

      I don’t like the idea of a salary cap in ANY industry. Let these guys make what they want to make. They earned, they can keep it. If there is a salary cap, OK. Then there is a cap on ticket prices, concessions, season tickets, merchandise, and any other salable item in the sport. The NFL has a salary cap and the owners are making MORE money while not bothering to field a decent team (Hellooooo SF).

      If fact, since we are on the “since I don’t like something, let’s just get rid of it” I think we should get rid of the divisional system, add aluminum bats (because I just hat maple), and maybe get rid of the bench coaches (because they are essentially meaningless coaching positions, no?)…and then we can get rid of the DH, throw in a hard cap, get rid of arbitration, and essentially make it even more unappealing for young athletes to play baseball, since the sport is losing more and more players to pro football.

      But hey, the sport isn’t good enough for you now, so let’s change everything and make it “even better” so that no one watches it any more.

      • you make a good point. salary cap is not the answer unless its one everything. in fact look at the three major sport ( MLB, NFL, NBA) there has been more different teams in baseball to win the WS in the last decade then in the other one. the red sox were the only team to win it twice, while in basketball the lakers and spurs dominated and in football the Patriots won it 3x and the steelers 2x.

        • Holy cow I find myself agreeing with a red sox fan. I have renewed faith in mankind now. Two thumbs up to your point.

        • MB923 4 years ago

          Good point, and don’t forget the Steelers have won in 2 and have been in 3 also.

    • woadude 4 years ago

      You must of never been in a union before, man how awesome is it? just ask me when I can actually retire and have a pension, ask how I get raises every year to compete with the rising cost of everything, and then go ask someone who works at Wal-Mart how awesome it is to be at work where you literally get fired if you tell someone what you think of clothing…They have a rule where you can’t sway a customer out of buying something even if it is comparing one shirt next to the other,, they have to say they both look great.

    • NickinIthaca 4 years ago

      Jeffrey Loria is that you?

      Not to beat a dead horse, but who deserves the money that we fans are spending our hard earned money on? The players who are on the field providing us with the entertainment we so desire (walk off home runs, no hitters, perfect games, sac bunts, etc.), or the rich white guys who already have enough money to pay these players? I’d sure as hell rather see it going into the guys with the talent to play the game, as opposed to the guys with the money to finance it.

      The MLBPA is there to ensure that the players get what they deserve, and thats the way it should be. It’s bad enough that congress has held MLB apart from any Anti-Trust legislation, even though they have a monopoly on professional baseball players in the US and Canada. Why don’t we cut into market capitalism even more and put a cap on what the players can earn…. Then the owners will be no differrent from their CEO counterparts who move operations overseas, cut back on quality and raise prices, all in the name of making as much money as possible for the stockholders.

  11. Lawschoolsucks 4 years ago

    I’ll tell you what, Kenny Williams’ stock rose in my book this past week. The lack of salary cap is bad for baseball. The more player salaries rise, the greater the disparity in talent between large and mid/small market teams. You can point to the success of the Rays, for instance, as evidence that these teams can compete, but they are the exception that proves the rule. There has got to be some kind of balance, whether it be through a cap or revenue sharing. Teams that play in larger markets are always going to have the upper hand, anyway, because stars want to play in these cities (Read: Lebron). $30 million annually for one player is absolutely ridiculous–don’t care what anyone says. No athlete is Jesus Christ on the cross. I love the game, but could find myself caring less and less if things don’t change. Baseball is America’s pasttime, not New York, Boston, and LA’s pasttime. The competitive balance in the sport should reflect this truism.

    • lebron went to miami to play with wade and bosh and he took less money then he would of got somewhere else. on the issue of a salary cap then every thing has to come down in the sense of money. the salary, ticket prices, food everything because if thats the case then the owners will be pocketing even more money then ever. my problem with more revenue sharing is that i dont want my team ( red sox fan) giving money to the rays( just a example) to make them better. last thing i want is to know my money is helping some other team that i hate.

      • Lawschoolsucks 4 years ago

        Bringing up that Lebron turned down larger offers to play in Miami is proving my point. (Difference in tax laws make that arguable, though.) Teams in bigger markets already have the advantages that their cities have to offer–the fact that this means they also have far more $ distorts the playing field even further. As for owners, I didn’t mean to imply that reform should stop at salary caps. I think much of that $ should be funneled back into the city–or to the game itself so it can expand–perhaps overseas. Your problem with revenue sharing is everyone’s problem with revenue sharing: narrow-mindedness. Last thing anyone wants is for teams not their own to have a chance.

        • Hey wow! There are at least 4 socialist points in your comment. Lovely!

          So if a business makes money, they MUST give it back to the city. I appreciate the idea that if a team *borrows* money from the city to build a stadium, then yes, pay back time!

          But this socialist liberal idea that “the money should be funneled back to the city” is utterly stupid at best, and Hugo Chavez at worst.

          Yeah, send baseball money overseas to develop the game…right. What a joke.

          • Lawschoolsucks 4 years ago

            S I’m a fan of the game who doesn’t want to see it destroyed, as I think it ultimately will be if low-market teams can’t compete. There is a way to find middle ground in this thing, and your response is sadly the prevailing view–any mention of revenue sharing or steps toward a level playing field reeks of “socialism”. Also, the fact that baseball has an international market doesn’t mean we’d simply be sending baseball money overseas saying “here do what you will with this”; that’s very naive. MLB can expand to the international market and ultimately this will make MLB wealther, and our national pasttime stronger. Also, how about extending the amount of time players are under team control? Not imposing a strict cap, but a revenue sharing ploy in which wealthier teams can not exceed in team salary, say, 3 or 4x that of smaller teams? I get where you’re coming from man, but I don’t think you’re thinking long-term. Yeah, smaller teams love it when the Yanks come to town. But, they won’t at the expense of there being no home-town fans at any game all season long…which is where we’re headed.

      • woadude 4 years ago

        You must hate welfare then, It burns me when I realize my money goes to people who have absolutely no motivation to get off their couch and work for something, but it doesn’t burn me up when it goes to those people who really need it, what we need is to have accountability of the funds that go to the teams, make them prove they spent it on draft picks and FAs, and an idea I was floating around with is a use it or lose it, if you don;t use the money of making your team better, it goes back to the teams that paid it out, how awesome would that be?

    • Jason Werth in DC says hi, BTW.

      Also, add in Philadelphia, Cincinnati, Colorado, and OH yeah….who won the world series last year? I forgot…it must have been a team from NY or LA, right? Woops, it was that poor, poor team in San Fransisco. Yeah, there is NO competitive balance.

      I think an actor making $25mm per movie is utterly ridiculous. Brad Pitt is is not Jesus Christ on the cross. Al Gore made too much money on his kooky film about polar bears dying from heat stroke. In fact, lawyers make too much money. $150/hour is way too much money to pay for someone to sit there in court and then say three lines then go home. You see, it’s all about fairness. I say, let’s cap lawyers’ pay to….$.75/hr off peak, and $1.25 of peak time. That way, we have a competitive balance where all of the less-qualified lawyers can have a chance to make money too.

      You see, trial attorneys simply make too much money, so they need to be capped so that poor people can afford them.

      Funny how when someone says to YOU that YOU need to have your salary capped at a fraction of what you are worth, it all-of-the-sudden is a bad idea.

      Cap one person’s salary…then you must cap them all. It’s all about fairness.

      • Lawschoolsucks 4 years ago

        You are also proving my point. The sports world is cringing at the Werth deal because in order to get decent talent to come to their franchise, teams like Washington (which is not your quintessential mid-market team, btw) have to give more years and more dollars than bigger teams would have to. They have to go all-in because they don’t always have the luxury of holding out for some of the premiere free agent talent. If Boston signs a player for 8 years, 160 million, and they turn out to be a big flop, OH WELL. If Washington makes the same deal, they’re crippled for the next 8 years. Your analogy is amusing. Many lawyers are overpaid also, but in the profession the clients dictate who gets paid what. This would be the equivalent of a fan-base choosing where to be born, and thus, who they root for.

    • woadude 4 years ago

      First of all, the Dodgers just showed you can get a 200 million dollar loan from a cable tv station that was to be repaid in like 5 years and fell through only because Bud Selig didnt give it approval, so if a team can honestly pay back a loan of 200 million in 5 years, what makes you think they can’t over 7-8? And it isn’t like they are going to pay every player that much, just this one in peticuler because of how great he is, I highly doubt we will see a player of Pujols’ caliber by the time his deal is up with whoever signs him.Which could very well be St. Louis.

  12. bcimmet 4 years ago

    Re: DH…

    What would it be like if, in the Western Conference of the NBA, there was no 3-point line? Or if for NFC teams, the penalty for roughing the passer was five yards longer? Or if fighting was illegal for half of the NHL?

    Sure, everything doesn’t have to be the same… But it’s very weird that half of baseball plays by a different set of rules than the other half.

    • That’s really not an issue for the CBA. There’s a rules committee that looks at those things.

      But the compensation system for teams that lose Type A and B free agents will probably be reviewed.

      A salary cap is a complete non starter.

    • woadude 4 years ago

      You are comparing apples to oranges, there isn’t anything different other than the pitcher doesn’t bat, simple, if you guys really wanted to get on fairness, go all out and get on teams with different outfield dimensions, I mean what make a home run really a home run if some stadiums have “short Porches” or some teams that have walls that seem 5 feet away in left (thats you Fenway) or some that just seem to go on like 600 feet away (Petco) it isn’t like the bases are only 70 feet apart, we are talking about pitchers getting rid of that thing called conflict of interest, you see pitchers don’t like hits, it infuriates them, so they don’t want to be on that side of the spectrum.

      • WrigleyTerror37 4 years ago

        nice point. but some pitchers like to hit. Big Z, and Micheal Owings are just a few. But i understand your point

  13. Guest 4 years ago

    I’d like to see some sort of salary cap…
    Although it’d be tough…
    Perhaps start the minimum at 20 million, and the max at 220 million, and slowly work it to 45/160 over the next several seasons… or something like that… because you can’t really just impose it right away, considering all the payroll obligations teams have already…
    But I’m sure there are a thousand problems with this (or one giant one) that I can’t think of, but I’m sure somebody will point out my fault…

    • The biggest problem is that there are several teams that have back loaded contracts that can add up to somewhere between $40-$60mm per year, which means that to implement what you are saying, some teams like NYY, NYM, Boston, LA, SF, SD, ARI, TEX, and others wouldn’t be able to field a team. The Mets are still paying Bonilla and Piazza, and they will for the next 10 years (Bonilla is being paid until I think 2022 or something crazy like that)

      So a salary cap would allow “small market” teams to feign competitiveness (where they in reality would still only have to spend the same or less money on talent) and it would utterly decimate teams like NY, which Yankee haters would love….but NY is responsible for at least 25% of all the gross revenue in MLB, and if if you want to destroy baseball, destroy the Yankees. Ask the Royals ownership if they like when NY comes to town. In fact, ownership should be arguing for a balanced schedule because that means more “big” market teams will be coming through and bringing in the sales.

  14. Ferrariman 4 years ago

    trading draft picks would be near impossible in MLB. there are sooo many rounds, like over 50 i think. Some lowball team like the fish would just keep trading down so they don’t have to pay high bonuses. Now, if trading picks was confined within say the first 5 rounds, than it could be really good.

  15. hahaha i agree on the fist sentence but disagree on taking the dh. i look at pitcher batting as a easy out for a pitcher. baseball is more fun when runs are scored and hr are being hit and dh provide that extra pop. thats why I THINK its fine the way it is.

Leave a Reply