Baseball's owners and players have agreed to a new collective bargaining agreement that should be announced early next week. Here are some details on the CBA, which ensures 21 years of labor peace for MLB:
- There are rumblings that there will be a tax on teams that don't spend enough on their MLB payroll, according to ESPN.com's Jayson Stark (on Twitter).
- Dan Knobler of CBSSports.com reports (on Twitter) that teams can lose future draft picks if they spend beyond the recommended bonuses.
- Several GMs are livid over the restraints on draft spending, according to Ken Rosenthal of FOX Sports. Rosenthal also points out that commissioner Bud Selig, Rob Manfred of MLB and union leader Michael Weiner deserve credit for coming to an agreement peacefully.
- There won't be hard caps for draft choices under the new CBA, according to Jon Heyman of SI.com (on Twitter). However, there will be recommended bonuses and tax implications for teams that go way over the suggested limits.
By the time Selig retires, nobody will be happy with the CBA
He’ll probably retire sooner than we think, but, yes, a collective bargaining agreement document that’s in effect for 5 (or 21) years does not necessarily ensure labor peace for 5 (or 21) years.
Maybe I’m missing it, but where does the Rosenthal article even mention draft spending?
FTA “The new agreement will not be perfect; several GMs already are livid over the new restraints on draft spending.”
As long as it’s not a hard cap it shouldn’t be a issue. I just would like to know where is the tax going to go?
Is draft spending going to level the playing field (stop the Red Sox and Yankees from loading up on free agents while re-stocking their farm system with over-slot picks)?
If the slotting includes a penalty system for going over slot, then indeed it is a rotten deal. This money in all likelihood would serve no other purpose but go to DOA teams, like Loria’s Marlins, Houston, Oakland and eventually pretty much stop teams, or really slow down many from spending large on top talent players.
Think of it like this.. That risky player drafted in the..10th round with a heavy college commitment that might be swayed into baseball..BUT has a football scholarship to maybe Auburn? Boston takes those kind, we don’t even know if 2 sport are going to be allowed and pro rated down any longer, but I have a feeling that with Selig’s grubby paws on it..More dirt has been thrown into this than we know about yet.
I agree, John. But I’d also suggest that it’s a problem when trying to sign almost all high level talent, regardless of whether they’re potential 2 sport athletes or not. What about the great HS player who tries to use the leverage of going to college instead of the pros? Those types can drive up bonuses as well.
Also, there’s a mention about potentially losing draft picks for over spending. That doesn’t see any better either.
Everyone (well, not everyone really) thinks the large market teams spend more than everyone else, but it is not true. Most here know I am a 1) Red Sox fan and 2) marlins fan. Boston almost always spends 10m +/-, which is usually just in the top half of teams spending on draft picks, but never top 5, but just because they are “big market” fans always pick them out.
Teams like the Pirates are up there now every season, which of course they should be with a top 5 pick, but they are also going “high” on lower picks now as well.
What the rules may start penalizing is just plain old simple biz smarts for teams that have good scouting departments and ones that draft players who are long shots, rather than safe bets.
John, you should also remember that I’m also a Red Sox fan.
Regardless, I don’t disagree with anything you’ve written here.
Should have made draft picks eligible to be traded.
Sounds like the new CBA is going to hurt the smaller market teams that have to spend big money in the draft to be able to get talent
Questions about the new CBA……
1. Can 2 teams from the same division be the 2 wild cards?
2. Will the season still be 162 games?
3. Is the division series still 5 games?
4. And are type A FA are now type B’s(2013)?
1. I’d assume so, but still a good question.
2 and 3. I’d definitely assume so.
4. Don’t know.
thanks
so lets say for example the nats(pulling name outta hat)draft a player in the 1st round and he wants way over the reccomened slot the nats initially say no we cant go over the slot and decide to wait til the deadline to sign picks the deadline passes and player isnt signed
wouldnt the nats be losing a 1st round pick either way as in theyd lose the 1st rnd pick they used to draft this year cause player wouldnt sign and had they signed him theyd lose a future 1st rnd pick for going over slot
not signing a 1st round pick cause of the team playing by the rules and not going over the recommended slot is losing a 1st rnd pick in itself
teams should get some sort of compensation in a case like this should they lose out on signing a player cause they refuse to go over the slot
It’s the small market owners who wanted draft slotting, so its their own fault if it hurts them.
The only thing draft slotting will do is water down the talent pool in the mlb.
I don’t understand the point of it. What is it they are trying to accomplish? Parity? Doesn’t spending big in the draft help the small market teams compete?
always there to kiss the rear; rosenthal!!!