Email a copy of '2016 Non-Waiver Trade Deadline Moved To Aug. 1' to a friend
Loading ...
By Steve Adams | at
Email a copy of '2016 Non-Waiver Trade Deadline Moved To Aug. 1' to a friend
MLB Trade Rumors is not affiliated with Major League Baseball, MLB or MLB.com
hide arrows scroll to top
Out of place Met fan
Something I would like to see in next CBA, moving it back to Aug 15 permanently.
mack22 2
Agreed
Matt Galvin
August 31st at Midnight. It can on July 31st at Midnight.
EndinStealth
Definitely need to move it to mid August. With the wild card teams are reluctant to trade. But two weeks later can make or break a team.
MeowMeow
Is that even a CBA thing? If it is I’m sure the players would be for it: more time to trade means more trades, means more QO players traded, means fewer QOs
Out of place Met fan
Not sure if it is a CBA thing. I questioned myself as I typed it, but left it be since it was popped to mind.
jimmyz
More time to trade also means more time for teams to fall out of contention as its closer to the end of the season with less time to make up a 5-8 game difference to make playoffs. However I doubt this issue is anywhere near as significant to CBA negotiations from the players’ side as arbitration regulations, such as top prospects being held in AAA to avoid super 2, and the QO system as a whole.
lazorko
So we still have the same trade deadline date as when only four teams made the playoffs.
Should have been moved back a long time ago.
kingfelix34
This changes everything… Not really
Matt Galvin
Just means more Trades happening at Deadline because might be less Wavier Trades.
jd396
If anyone asks, what I think is that they really should do is get rid of September call ups and let teams carry what they want of their 40-man roster until May 1. Gives more time to sort out positional battles and such, and it won’t interfere with playoff races.
Adam 17
Players and agents would be all for that. A team would have a harder time justifying holding down a Kris Bryant type player for a few weeks at the beginning of the year to get an extra year of control if there was an expanded roster. It would make a grievence an almost slam dunk win against the teams.
jd396
They really have to reform the system a bit so that doesn’t happen. Obviously everybody wants the best players on the field but there really shouldn’t be a whole year at stake for the team over a couple of weeks. I’m not sure what it is, but there’s gotta be a balance somewhere.
Players move to and fro for all kinds of non-performance related reasons. Think of how many superior players with options have gone down to AAA so inferior players without options could stay with the team? Or an MLB-ready prospect had to wait because there was an aging vet with a long term contract at his position? I get why we don’t like Bryant et al getting held down but at some point if 5.171 is not free agency and 6.000 is, teams would be stupid not to make the most of the rule. Getting essentially 7 seasons out of a guy instead of 6 is good long term planning at the cost of a couple of weeks right at the start of the season. Give teams a good incentive NOT to do that.