Both Major League Baseball commissioner Rob Manfred and players’ union executive director Tony Clark expressed optimism last month about reaching a new collective bargaining agreement prior to the Dec. 1 expiration of the current CBA. No deal between the league and the union has come since, but the industry isn’t worried about a shutdown, reports Tyler Kepner of the New York Times. The lack of concern is largely because the next CBA is unlikely to include radical departures from the current one. Instead, the expectation is that the two sides are mostly looking to tweak what’s already in place.
Here’s more from Kepner:
- Shortening the regular season has garnered consideration during negotiations, but the schedule will remain at 162 games in the next agreement. In order to ease the players’ workload, the league and the union could agree to lengthen the season from 183 days to 187, per Kepner.
- Susan Slusser of the San Francisco Chronicle reported earlier this month that expanding rosters from 25 to 26 players was a possibility, and that’s likely to come to fruition, according to Kepner. Moreover, 40-man rosters in September will unsurprisingly go by the wayside in favor of a 28- or 29-man limit.
- The $189MM luxury-tax threshold is set to increase, though it’s unknown how much it’ll rise. That change will have a positive effect on big-spending teams that have been reluctant to exceed the $189MM figure. Bumping the number up from $189MM isn’t ideal for teams that have lesser budgets, of course, but Kepner argues that it’s not necessarily cause for despair. Since the current CBA took effect after the 2011 season, 21 of the majors’ 30 teams have made the playoffs, Kepner points out.
- Owners continue pushing for the implementation of an international draft, but the MLBPA is “deeply skeptical,” Kepner writes. ESPN’s Buster Olney reported in October that a 10-round proposal was on the table for March 2018.
I like the idea of expanding to a 28 man roster with 3 inactives. Would create a roster spot for an extra reliever, 3rd catcher, and a pinch runner/defensive specialist.
So why have inactives? A team is just going to put the last 3 days SP as the inactive players, making it rather useless.
Smart man
Exactly. They aren’t gonna play anyway. Basically now they play with a 21-man roster any given day. Increasing to 28 whether with inactives or 3 starting pitchers just not playing, gives teams more use of the roster. You only need that game’s and the next game’s starters active. This way they’d play with actually 24 with the 2nd starter for emergencies/excessive extra innings.
That can be worked around easily enough.
Allow teams to only “unfreeze” a player two times per month.
Do the math. By the time you’d unfreeze a SP too many times, he’d be frozen for the entire month by the second or third week.
28 seems a bit heavy. 27 ought to do.
That works. A roster-size revision is necessary as long as it comes with some kind of limit on pitching changes. Managers will be changing pitchers on a pitch by pitch basis if this insanity doesn’t stop.
IMHO the International situation needs the most attention. As it stands now, small market teams only get to go shopping once every three years; they can’t afford the penalties of going over allotment. And then there’s 2 years of minimum (300K) bonuses. Meanwhile, the Yanks, Red Sox, Dodgers go merrily along. It really is an unfair system and has done nothing to help the less fortunate.
Not sure a Draft is the best answer, but something should be done…..
Pitching change limits, as well as pinch hitting limits are easy.. NL adopt the DH.
Some AL managers DO use the lefty on lefty and vice versa a bit more.. Showalter prime example and that should have limits to.
Rolling the International draft into the standard Rule 4 draft is the easiest and most logical fit. Why the MLBPA is against it doesn’t really make sense. Owners, IMO, as a sign of giving should be generous and offer bigger slot as a bargaining chip to get the players to agree to rolling the IFA kids to go along. It’s got to be small owner’s holding this up. Makes too much sense otherwise.
Why would small owners hold this up? Because it would give them a fair chance at the top international talent? I don’t follow your (lack of) logic.
Go away you AL fanboy pitchers should have to bat hell some of our tough guys even hit homeruns stop crying NO DH IN NL PLEASE F THAT SHIIIIIIT
It’s been give and give, with little take from the middle to large owners.
The middle to large owners already subsidize smaller ones, then see some of them abuse the cash given. The draft slotting system should be equally applied to the IFA system if the player’s will not go and roll it into the regular draft. it’s not difficult.
Have gone here and explained numerous times (with examples) of how various small market teams were indeed hampered by the last CBA and compensation rules, then how the slotting system forced some teams (hello Houston) to spend when they were not before and other small market teams, like Pittsburgh and KC were hurt, as they were already spending more than the LAD and NYY, big market teams.
Sometimes, as in government? it’s best to stop with rules and regulations and just let free enterprise set the rules.
Haha. You realize all of these rules are in place as gimmicks to keep the large market owners from having a real revenue sharing system in place, don’t you?
Ah yes.. A utopian society in baseball. Right? Where is that magical place exactly? At the end of some rainbow? In someone’s drug induced hallucination?
Doesn’t exist..Only a free and open market that is allowed to work, not something that is forced to prop up a business (this case franchise) which can’t come close to standing on it’s own legs.
Seems like the last few CBA’s have been forcing the issue even worse and getting more radical.
MLB is a closed system, it isn’t a free market. It’s like complaining the electronics section at WalMart is subsidizing the grocery section. Both are needed for the business to exist. They compete for wins, they do not compete for revenue.
If a team goes over the limit, suspend the top three executives from the team for a decade. And switch their forty draft picks for the next six seasons to the last 40 picks of the draft, after the fortieth round.
Nobody would consider going over the limit, then.
International baseball is an important part of the game. I’d prefer to see baseball academies run by teams in more counties, not less. Spread the joy of baseball to Brazil, Africa, China, and India. Challenge teams to scout more, not less.
Prevent teams from “breaking the game’s integrity” by cutting off their desire to overspend. Not by keeping 17 year olds from Venezuela from playing against good competition.
Good point about the unfairness issue, Bob. And here’s another thing that ticks me off: “Since the current CBA took effect after the 2011 season, 21 of the majors’ 30 teams have made the playoffs, Kepner points out.” That is NOT the issue! The issue is that the highest spending “cap” (i.e. luxury tax) busters, vastly improve their odds of going to, or succeeding in the playoffs on a year in year out basis!! And they do that to the direct detriment of the both the small and moderate-sized market teams they compete against. Let’s remember the most salient fact about all this, which is that all these teams need each other to play against, in order to exist. (Samsung doesn’t “need” Apple to compete against it in the cell phone business, in order to exist.) If they they raise the luxury tax threshold (or even if they don’t) but don’t do anything that would genuinely balance the competition at least a LITTLE more, then I say that MLB and the MLBPA are playing a whole lot of their fan base for suckers.
Well said goob! I was attempting to make a similar point above before I read this. If this was a free market, six more teams would set up shop around Boston and assume a large percentage of the Red Sox revenue.
Thanks Funk. I enjoyed your example, but it used to be the Yankees who pushed the envelope to the breaking point, with teams like the Red Sox scrambling to keep up. Now of course it’s the new Dodgers ownership that has just annihilated all restraint on equitable spending (and so the Yankees are going to have a new excuse – as if they needed one – to try to buy the AL pennant). The Dodgers just bought themselves four straight NL West championships but haven’t yet even won a pennant, so I guess that’s temporary justice of a kind…
Agree. I picked the Red Sox arbitrarily. New York has more often been the culprit and now it’s the Dodgers. “The best team money can buy” by Molly Knight is a great read if you get a chance.
I quit my office job and now I am getting paid 92 Dollars hourly. How? I work-over internet! My old work was making me miserable, so I was to try-Something different. 2 years after…I can say my life is changed completely for the better.
Check it out what i do…———–>>> NFTrends10.ml
I’m proud of you.
Wrong site for spam go away
Youre the wind beneath my wings.
fevujidr69, your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
So many things that MLB and the players union can agree to that would improve the sport immensely but they rarely take more than baby steps with each CBA. It’s a pity, especially with more harmony between the owners and union in the recent past.
It’s particularly frustrating to this long time fan who longs for the day when baseball can once again lay claim as the true American Pastime.
I agree I am disappointed that before they agree to any deal they should have clarified or started the new stadium/stadium rights project in Oakland/san Jose and they should have resolved the oriole’s nationals tv deal disputes. Both of these core issues have lagged the game from evolving more then any rule change. I also think the rays situation should be addressed but we know that’s the least priority since they are a small market club.
It’s not just the rays are a small market club, they’re in a terrible location relative to Tampa Bay (St. Pete), and their lease isn’t up until 2027…..it’s not a great place to watch a game….i’m a Red Sox fan and I try to go over for all of the Red Sox versus Rays games…they routinely sell 6-10 thousand tickets per night, except when marquee teams are in town
My personal opinion is that the league should be able to figure out away to help The Rays buy out their lease, and build a new stadium in Tampa, or move them to Montreal, something….
I think a 10 round international draft would be great and also like the idea of a 26th roster spot. Would be great for the Braves we could then pick up Josh Thole and play him once week to catch Dickey. Then platoon Flowers with a hopefull soon to be signed Jason Castro.
Heart in mouth moments for international prospects. You’ve got, on one side, owners pushing for an international draft simply to put a cap on the earning power these guys could have. And on the other hand, you’ve got the MLBPA – who don’t represent these guys in any way – effectively negotiating their futures as the Association feels best for them.
There’s a tug of war going on to decide their future, and neither side cares about them in the slightest.
Actually, a number of Latin players (Willson Contreras was one.) have come out in strong opposition to an international draft. It seems so “cutting off your own foot” to keep 17 year olds out of affiliated baseball.
so many of the members of the MLBPA have actually been through the current system, and so actually know how it actually works…. unlike MLB, who obviously could not care less. They just see dollar figures increasing over the time, and want to stop it, regardless of what it does to the players involved.
The 26 man roster is great. Now teams can carry 13 pitchers and 13 hitters. Or go 12/14 if they want.
I’d love to see a pitching change limit. 5 pitchers a game is enough unless there’s an injury.
How can you prove injury though? Managers will just end up having their relief pitchers feign a cramp when they’re struggling and need to be taken out.
You don’t prove injury it a players says they are hurt and must be pulled they should have to go on the inactive roster for 3-5 days unless there is a DL stint. That way players can rest and not have to prove injury but it still cost the team a roster spot
Why limit it. I’m sick and tired of seeing stuff about about pitching limits and time clocks and all this bs. I love long games. I can’t get enough of the games. If you don’t then do you really love baseball?
Amen
Actually, I watch baseball games on DVR, and typically just buzz to the points when the Astros are batting. I only watch the pitching in the late innings. I can watch whole game in an hour or so.
Guess I’m not real fan.
Doesn’t make you not a fan, maybe a homer, but definitely a fan
Lowering the 40 man to 28 just hurts the teams that suck. They use those spots to test guys out for the next season.
If they suck and are using spots to evaluate players for next year, then they probably don’t have 28 decent players that would be affected by this, or provide roadblocks to evaluating kids If they suck enough to be in that position, then they’ll find a way to get guys PA’s and innings.
If anything, this hurts the evaluation abilities of better teams, because they are more likely to have a significant amount of those spots taken by actual productive players.
40 is just ridiculous and too much.
Nobody wants to drop the 40 Man. They want to increase the 25 Man.
DH and Pitcher in same Lineup,Changes League Names to West-National,East-American and add a central time zone League,get rid of Trade Deadline date,play regular season Games/All Star Game in cities like Orlando,Hawaii and so on, Also change All-Star Game USA versus World. Move Draft to Off Season like in other Sports.
Is this a troll post?
just expand. add another 2 teams. more players in the majors is more money for the players and lowers the replacement level threshold.
International players flowing into the league needs major reform but I’d rather have it be a long discussion to work things out rather than cramming some half-baked system down everyone’s throats.
If the extra roster spot is for yet another specialized reliever, leading to more trips to the mound, more replacements, more warm-up tosses, I’m not for it. What I’d really like to see is more utility players.
I think pretty much everyone would agree with you there including the Union and MLB. We’ll end up like the NBA with a crap load of timeouts towards the end and the last 3 innings taking longer than the previous 6. Nobody wants that. Plus they stop selling beer after the 7th. How is that fair???
How would an international draft work with superstars in other leagues like Japan? I’m sure this would be figured out but if there’s serious spending limits put on those kind of players we’d never see them in MLB because they wouldn’t sign for that kind of money and Japanese teams wouldn’t let them go early without the posting fee.
Simple, eliminate the posting system, Japanese have their own league, if they want to play ball here, they play at by our rules not theirs
Why do people care how many people suit up for a game in September? Is this because of pitching changes or because they believe teams have an unfair advantage by having too many players at their disposal? Or something else?
*IF* it’s pitching changes then that could be fixed in other ways without affecting a kids chance to come up and experience the majors, even by sitting on the bench.
Honestly, some owners prioritize limiting roster sizes. Other teams prioritize winning baseball games.
If the Tarantulas only want 30 or 31 guys on their squad in September, but the Rottweilers in in a playoff race, and dress 37, it gives the Rotts an edge. And the owners don’t like the edge it gives.
But not enough for the Spiders to pay for the added players.
I don’t know that having six extra minor leaguers on the bench would give the Rottweilers much of an edge. Maybe not any edge at all. So I don’t think this is a common objection against the 40-man September roster.
The more common objection people have is that good teams in playoff races who face more bad teams have an edge against their rivals who face other good teams. The former can fatten up on the minor leaguers the bad teams are throwing out there, while the latter face the better teams’ players.
Sorry if this pisses you off…
Stuff that should be considered by MLB and MLBPA:
DH in NL
Free pass intentional walks
Minimum number of hitters a pitcher must face
Limit call ups in September
Best record gets home field in WS
Electronic strike zones
I’m with you on the electronic strike zones. It’s complete crap that an umpire and determine the outcome of a game because they miss a call. Or how they can affect a borderline players chances of staying on the team a while longer and maybe cementing a spot.
The technology is there. It works. We should be using it.
The umpire’s Union will never allow it. I’m all for it though.
All great ideas
The “40-man” September was a good idea…..25 years ago….Now it affects Service Time considerations, in-game strategy, game length (every manager loves going to the mound).
MOST importantly, it changes the nature of the game at a time when a win or loss might mean a playoff trip or a trip home. It’s just an old habit that needs to be changed.
No other sport changes the rules at the most crucial time of its season.
I think there might be a bit of wishful thinking going on here, with commenters assuming that teams will spend their new 26th position on a bench player or 3rd catcher, when it should be obvious to anyone with a passing familiarity with the game that nearly every team will spend it on yet another bullpen arm, so that teams will now start carrying 14 pitchers. Same with expanding it to 27 (teams will carry 15 pitchers) or 28 (teams will carry 16 pitchers).
Helloooooo, four hour average game times.
As with international spending, the devil is in the details.
With 23 of 30 owners thinking that “a fine” would deter execs from buying virtually unlimited talent, close to half the league has now blown through international spending limits.
If accurate safeguards aren’t put in place, a 26th or 27th man would be a welcome to teams using an extra reliever every game. A reliever who likely isn’t league quality. And, without accurate safeguards, team executives will exploit a loophole intended for teams to be able to not have to put a player out six games for fifteen.
If that happens, I’ll return to my refrain of 23 of 30 owners being bad at owning baseball teams.