10:45pm: Rosenthal tweets a quote from someone connected to the CBA talks: “There is very positive dialogue right now. More meetings to come tonight.”
NOV. 29, 7:04pm: Following Olney’s report that the competitive balance tax is the “last big hurdle” to be cleared, Rosenthal reports (Twitter links) that the owners have proposed forfeiting draft picks as the penalty for going over the luxury tax limit, though the MLBPA is sensitive “sensitive to any adjustment that would cause [the] threshold to act as [a] de facto salary cap.” MLB Network’s Jon Morosi tweets that there’s some growing optimism about a deal being reached before the 12:01am ET deadline on Thursday.
NOV. 28, 7:07pm: Despite the apparent concession from the ownership side on the international draft, the “desired effect” of “mov[ing] talks forward” has yet to occur, Rosenthal adds on Twitter.
6:16pm: The owners won’t insist that an international draft be a part of the next CBA, Ken Rosenthal of FOX Sports reports (Twitter links). There is still disagreement regarding modification to the luxury tax system, he adds; it’s not clear whether the sides are simply haggling over where to set limits or, instead, considering larger changes. Presently, teams are hit with a tax if their payroll exceeds $189MM in a given year, which functions to restrain spending on major league rosters.
5:21pm: Teams may not participate in the upcoming Winter Meetings, according to a report from ESPN.com’s Buster Olney (via Twitter). Club officials, he says, have been given the understanding that they won’t take part in the meetings if the ongoing collective bargaining talks don’t make “sufficient progress.”
This report represents the latest indication that there’s a real possibility of a disruption in the offseason due to the stalled CBA talks. The current CBA expires on December 1, and prior reporting suggests that the league’s owners may consider a lockout depending upon how talks unfold. It’s worth noting that Olney had previously downplayed the potential for problems.
While potential disruption to the 2017 season is still months away from being a concern, a labor stand-off would surely have a significant impact on the way in which the winter signings and trades unfold. Many of the biggest moves take place at baseball’s annual Winter Meetings, which are scheduled this year for December 5-8.
All told, there are several notable upcoming dates of importance, each of which will pressure the sides to come to an agreement. While the league and the MLB Player’s Association seem to be dug in on some matters, there’s also plenty of incentive for both to avoid a work stoppage and find common ground. That’s all the more true given that the issues reportedly still open for negotiation appear to represent a relatively small slice of the game’s growing financial pie.
Among the other topics still under discussion, the possibility of an international draft — which the league has pushed — has drawn strong pushback from the union. Indeed, several Latin American big leaguers reportedly made in-person appearances during talks today, Jeff Passan of Yahoo Sports reports in a series of tweets (all of which can be seen here). While prior reports indicated that the league side was willing to scrap the qualifying offer system in exchange for the ability to institute a draft, the union appears to be taking a hard line on that particular issue.
I swear to bob if they fudge this up…
They can strike and have lock outs all they want. The idiot fans will keep coming back.
Yah. Damn those idiot fans that want to watch the sport they love. Morons.
I love it , its not like the Owners ant’ making enough money they want to stiff arm the Players on this !
The players aren’t broke either. Maybe they can raise ticket prices and what not so we can pay to make all of them wealthier.
Lol
You obviously never go to games they are outrageously expensive
He’s being sarcastic.
What are you talking about? You could see a Braves game for $2 for each of the last 7 seasons.
If you’ve watched the braves lately I think you agree that 2 dollars is still too much.
Well played.
This logic baffles me and is a new epidemic of the millennial (entitlement) generation. The OWNERS deserve to make all of the profit they possibly can because they OWN the team. It’s just like every other job in this country, you work for whatever pay they decide to pay you, and that only changes when you quit, get fired, or have enough cash to own the entity yourself.
This entitled mentality that the players are somehow owed more than their SIGNED contract is baffling and explicitly ill-informed. It is because of these owners and their ability to shell out millions to own these teams that allow these players the ability to “earn” their millions playing a game. These owners were billionaires well before they owned a team, and they won’t be any less filthy rich when they sell it.
It does not appear as if you understand what is even going on here. There’s no suggestion of any player getting more than their “SIGNED” contract. And no, it’s not true that “you work for whatever pay they decide to pay you,” in this particular line of work especially (at least, if you’re good enough).
This is collective bargaining, in which the employing entity (MLB) and the union (MLBPA) agree to rules binding their respective members (teams/players) in their employer/employee relationships. You may feel free to prefer one side to the other, but the notion that either is at fault for negotiating is beyond silly — it’s the fundamental nature of the process.
Was not referring to the situation at all, I was referencing the commenter with the typical whine of owners have too much money and they screw the players, blah blah blah.
Then what are you talking about? Did the Millennials cause the 81 work stoppage? or the 1994 strike? Just rambling nonsense.
I’m not sure about the delivery of your comment but I do agree with the content and know where you’re coming from. It’s not about the collective bargaining, it’s about specific comments.
Right on point. These are two organizations with very significant economic interests at stake, and both have every right to bargain, and bargain hard. Players are asking for what we would ask for–the right to get paid what the market pays for a skill set.
Back in my day we had to collectively bargain uphill.
Both ways!
This is the most interesting part of the negotiations to me so far. I’m not sure how close to reality what has been released to the press is to the Union’s actual thinking but I was under the same impression as bobtillman – that the Union didn’t care about kids (who were not yet in the MLBPA) and would only use the international draft as a bargaining chip for unfettered FA. Not only have they turned down that offer at the negotiation table, but they have also come out and said they aren’t that concerned about the QO being attached to guys since, they will be well taken care of in any case (either $17+mil for a year of work in a worst case, or way more over several years in most cases).
Now, maybe the bigger prize for the Union is elimination of the luxury tax threshold, but right now it looks like the MLBPA is actually doing a nice job of fighting for the little guys who are currently most at risk of being taken advantage of at the expense of seasoned MLBers who have traditionally had the greatest clout in these negotiations and would have provide the greatest amount of support/risk via strike to make it happen.
You found a way to turn this on millenials? Lol you’re clawing at air man
The comment that he’s referencing is more of an anti-big business and anti-rich sentiment. The person who made it may or may not be a millennial, so I don’t know if it’s fair to say such a comment is indicative of any generational trend or attitude.
I will agree that is an unfair assertion of that person being a millennial, however I was not wrong in stating that is the mentality of the millennials. They want something for nothing and they think that they are owed everything.
I will apologize for the assumption that he is one though.
This is teetering in the edge of politics. I BEG Tim and the staff to not let this crap fill these boards.
This is the one place I go because I can talk about what I love and not look at this garbage.
But if you’re paying to watch the best athletes in the world, wouldn’t you rather they be the ones getting paid instead of the business men who jack up the prices. And there’s no need to apologize, there’s nothing wrong in calling someone a millenial, it’s just a time when someone was born
Using something in a derogatory way is wrong no matter what it’s referencing. People use where people are from in a derogatory sense, it’s wrong.
Life isn’t that hard. Don’t be a jackass and take care of your family. At best that guy is 1 for 2. PS. I’m not a millennial.
I don’t pay to watch baseball players get paid. I pay to watch them play baseball in a fair and competitive league. Or I wish that’s what I was doing anyway.
Amen
Perhaps next time you decide to go on some incoherent rant about the selfish whippersnappers, direct it towards a topic that it applies to.
Baseball is not free of tax supported stadiums and sweetheart deals that keep owners happy. Baseball is in bed with local governments who stick the taxpayer for much of the costs of running the ‘business’ of baseball. The non-fan pays right along with everybody else.
I quit attending games after the voters turned down the plan to build a stadium for the Mariners and the local government over-ruled the voters. I supported the Mariners… but build the stadium without tax dollars. Hell, I couldn’t afford to go now if I wanted to anyway. I spend the money on homebrew (on tap) and listen on radio while sitting on my dock. A quick dip in the lake between innings works great.
The ‘entitlement generation’ is paying part of the tab and should not be doing so.
Tax dollars are used because (most) teams provide a benefit to the city that tax payers also receive.
Study after study has shown this just isn’t true.
I can’t see them skipping the winter meetings.
How did they not get a deal done last year. Just agree to something and make it for 10-15 or even 20years. Instead of skipping the winter meetings why not just delay them til a deal is made. Its that simple
Oh jeez that would suck
Look-
Get rid of the current QO system. Rank players on WAR and get a pick if you lose a FA
1-1.5 WAR 6th and 5th
1.5-2 WAR 5th and 4th
2-2.5 WAR 4th and 3rd
2.5-3 WAR 3rd and 2nd
3 and beyond extra 1st.
Teams can only extend 5 QO to players set to hit FA, the team signing doesnt lose a pick, but gets pushed back in the draft. Also make picks tradeable and slot value, including the QO ones.
International draft same format as the regular draft except no QO picks. Slot values, trade picks, and spending limits enforced.
Not a bad idea but I don’t think most would like using WAR as a judgement of what round pick they would give up
I agree that it is a good idea, but implementation based on WAR would be difficult. I like the line of thinking though.
WAR is too subjective. Plus there are at least 2 different organizations with their own. It’s not an official, accepted statistic.
They do way dumber things than that in arbitration.
What others have said- not a perfect solution but a good thought. Something like this would remove the punitive aspect for teams that sign FAs, but would protect teams with FAs departing.
Think people misread it
In the scenario nobody loses any draft picks. But- the team that loses a player who they gave a QO too will net a pick sandwiched between the indicated rounds based on WAR.
For instance, say someone signs Ian Desmond. That team gets Ian Desmond, loses no pick, and the rangers net an extra 1st. So it doesnt limit desmonds market but the rangers still receive compensation for his departure.
I like your idea (works similar to the NFL in some ways), so just playing devil’s advocate here: isn’t that almost encouraging the former team to not re-sign their player?
You mentioned the new team getting bumped back in the draft? How far? Do they also lose the slot value difference in such a move?
Anyone who thinks this is about International players is just silly. Most players (and their agents) don’t give a rat’s rump about some barefooted 16 year old kid in Venezuela.
What all this “concern” is really an attempt to attain a bargaining chip. They want complete unfettered Free Agency and want to “bargain away” something they don’t give one iota about. Happens all the time in labor negotiations.
If you give them unrestricted Free Agency, they wouldn’t care in MLB rounded up all the foreign kids, trained them, fed them, and shot the ones that didn’t make it.
Give it to them. Most supplemental and second round picks never get passed AA. Only MLB owners and players would kill the golden goose that has made millionaires and billionaires of them all.
As I pointed out in the post, prior reports suggest the league offered unfettered free agency in exchange for the international draft. The union did not, apparently, accept that offer.
The entire drafting system is flawed and as bobtillman pointed out, the vast majority never make anyways. Baseball needs a salary cap and an international draft, the free and errant spending are the main reasons why ticket prices and concession prices are so absurd.
Even with these in place the pricing structure would raise at a rate higher than inflation, however it would/should be more of a controlled cost increase.
MLB has existed just fine over 100 years without a phony salary cap and sure as hell doesn’t need one now! A cap only makes more $ for owners who definitely do not pitch, hit, catch or run. Whatever the players can get in a free market — the same financial principle most owners used to make their money. Amazing how after owners make their $ in a free market, they want to restrict the players from a free market.
So why are ticket prices so absurd in the NBA and NFL where a salary cap is already in effect?
Ya, lets go back to the days when the players played for peanuts, were held in indentured servitude, drugged up to perform for men who wore top hats and monocles, and all kept apart from the darkies!
Ticket prices are a function of Supply and Demand— simple Econ. This proves the point that a phony salary cap only aids owners in making more $. It doesn’t make for a better product on the playing field or more reasonable prices for fans.
It is totally about the international draft. The small market teams have no financial way of competing with the big market clubs.
I don’t get how MLB can have the least competitive financial system in American major pro sports and it’s barely even a conversation.
actually it’s about an international draft to save teams like the dodgers from wasting 28 million dollars on the Alex Guerrero’s of the world.
two of the biggest IFA spender last July were the Braves and the Padres, two franchise known for rolling in cash…
This is about curbing the signing bonuses, not making it fair. If they wanted ‘competitive balance’ they could simply give everybody the same spending pool and a hard cap on how much they can spend overall. This is about saving money on high-risk, untested players.
Your comment is so stupid and ridiculous that I don’t even feel the need to point out what’s wrong with it, it should be very clear.
How come nobody else said this, maybe because it was actually a valid comment.
Teams May Skip Winter Meetings If CBA Talks Don’t Progress
Oh this would be a crisis of the most high for Dan Duquette!!!
He won’t be able to get his Rule V pick.
This is terrible news!!!
Baseball is up. Football is down. Lets get a deal done
Does this mean we won’t know if the big panda gets traded back to SF!!!???? Oh the suspense
Panda’s going to the Tigers for Verlander and/or Miggy……..I want a cookie if that happens…….
The Cornish always has that Russell Westbrook, “bruh, what are you talking about?” look.
I get the feeling the union wants more than just doing away with the DQ and are using the international draft to put pressure on the owners(who want it badly) to get what they want. My guess, would be they also want to either do away or dramatically raise the luxury tax..
The MLB player association represents Major league contract holders, not those that would enter a draft. At least, not those that don’t sign a major league contract.
Obviously the players and some teams, don’t like the luxury tax because the deeper pocket teams are up against it and don’t want to spent above it. A much higher tax, say, $250M would allow teams like the dodger, Angels and Yankees to spend more.Increasing players salaries.
MLBPA wants 23 teams to grow players for 7 teams to sign for $50m AAV
VOILA! You got it there, young man. The MLBPA is trying to represent a class they have no right to represent…..Let me provide an example. Can you not see the obvious conflict of interest if ALL bus drivers in training were represented by current bus drivers? On what basis? That current bus drivers “know what’s best” for drivers-in-training?
In fact, such young players have an adversary relationship with the MLBPA; they want their jobs. How can such be “fair faith negotiations”? Moreover, we assume that monies given to international players may come right off the top, or current players’ salaries. So not only can the MLBPA possibly REPRESENT international players, they may have motivation to suppress earnings (bonuses).
I’m no labor guy, but no one is going to convince me that, in this fight between millionaires and billionaires, someone is concerned about a 16 year old whose name neither could pronounce. Whether it’s unfettered Free agency (apparently reports are that it’s not) or expansion of the cap, THAT’S the interest being represented here.
I’m a CDL trainer, watch it
UH_OH>>>>>>>LMAO
I totally agree we already saw cashman whining about having to pay luxury tax and it has crippled the Yankees. which to me is crap so raise more than the 200 million reported to 215-225 and then make any team reviving the tax has to put into players salaries instead of just a unrestricted buck of cash. then the Yankees, red Sox, dodgers etc can stop acting like spoiled children
The players that are currently represented by the MlBPA have family members, brothers, cousins, close friends that will be impacted by an international draft. An international draft would limit the salaries and earning potential of these people. Additionally you would see less people learn baseball because it would be less incentivized. One could argue this would be a good or not. Depends on what kind of product you want. Ticket prices don’t even factor into it imo. The owners will do everything they can to maximize profits. Additionally players have every right to demand they get a share of it. A union allows this to happen. Otherwise the owners would make more money, still charge the same for tickets because the market can bare it, and the product would be less attractive because the talent would go elsewhere, i.e. Focus their attention on sports where they can make more money.
Why should Gerrit Cole from CA have to pitch for $500K a year with the only team he’s allowed to play for while some kid from Cuba gets to pick which team pays him $72 million?
ONE draft for all players.
It’s the only thing that makes sense.
You’ve hit the nail on the head! I’ve always thought that. The kids that are drafted get screwed compared to the young player prospects from the international teams!
There’s all kinds of complications which is why it’s not going to get done at this point, but the idea that the earth’s crust is going to disintegrate if we even have a conversation about it makes me want to switch my main sport to professional water polo.
This is not based in reality. There are a handful of Cuban players who are able to sign big deals. That’s mostly because of the unique situation there. The vast majority of international players sign small contracts. The best few 16 year olds get a few million, like the best few drafted players.
I agree wholeheartedly with what you said.
One draft would be nice, it works fine with hockey. In order to do that though, MLB would have to run a junior league or something like that in South America since the scouting wouldn’t be as extensive as it is in other sports.
Gerrit Cole had a choice between playing college ball, and playing for the Yankees out of high school. He chose college.
Kids from the Dominican and Venezuela don’t have that choice.
Cuba is problematic, though.
That’s not really the point… The point is that the kid from Cuba, if good enough, can basically choose which team he plays for and make crazy amounts of money, Gerrit Cole coming out of college could not. He either chooses college or signs an extremely cheap (relatively speaking) longterm deal with the one team that chooses him.
As I said,, Cuba is problematic. Cuba has almost fully developed players that are 23 years old and older.
MLB, Latin teens, and Cuba should be dealt with separately, if there’s any interest in doing things properly. My opinion, of course.
That’s going to be a more or less one time issue. There’s lots of “fully developed” players in Cuba because they never went through all the wrangling it took to defect. Once things shake out however they’re going to shake out there’s probably going to be a one-time influx of older Cuban players.
It’s probably going to suck to be a fan of the Cuban league in a few years as all the upper level players are likely to head up here eventually.
MLB could have a minor league system down there? I like that idea. It’s close enough to a bunch of the SE MiLB teams to make it work.
Cole got a $8MM signing bonus. Only a handful of Cuban players have gotten more, the vast majority of them veteran players. And as I’ve said repeatedly — but people largely ignore — even those few big contracts will go away once a new system for bringing Cuban talent stateside is put in place. There just really isn’t some injustice being perpetrated against American teenagers by Latin American ones.
every article mentioning the CBA you post this same ill-informed nonsense even though the glaring flaws in your thinking process have been illustrated to you multiple times. Is it because you can’t grasp the facts or because you simply don’t want to?
He’s right tho
Talk about both sides shooting themselves in the foot. Once again the fans will be the big. Losers!!!!!
I think this would be going better if we replaced Clark and Manfred with seven year olds who have just been denied ice cream cones
I like the way you think. Even if nothing gets accomplished, it’s still fun as hades to watch. I fear the current stalemate will be lengthy and overdramatized. Ultimately sometime near spring training it will be “worked out” and they will claim they never would’ve let a lockout happen because they love us fans too much.
So help me Jesus H Christ himself
Have you been watching Monty Python Movies in particular: The Search for the Holy Grail?
Maintaining parity should be the goals of the new CBA. Parity in the sport is what brought baseball back from the doldrums. Most fans should feel every spring that their team has a chance to win it all that particular year. There were years back 15-20 years ago when half the teams fans had no hope of winning at all. Keep parity in the game! If they takes a draft/no draft, Qualifying offer/no QO, whatever, you negotiators are supposed to be smart….figure it out!
It’s evident to me that a fair and competitive league isn’t even on the front page of a list of priorities for the benighted fools running the league and the union.
The league artificially created most of its parity by increasing the number of playoff teams from 4 (pre-1994) to 10 (since 2012)
Seems like owners are conceding a lot. Now time for players to step up.
Forfeiting draft picks as the penalty for going over the luxury tax limit is not a concession. It’s the QO on speed
“owners have proposed forfeiting draft picks as the penalty for going over the luxury tax limit, though the MLBPA is sensitive “sensitive to any adjustment that would cause [the] threshold to act as [a] de facto salary cap.” Somehow I just don’t see the MLBPA going for that.
Now we are getting to the nub–forfeiting draft picks. Well, it would certainly act as a salary drag, and it’s a direct hit at the big market teams. It also ore closely ties in aggregate free agent spending to team payrolls, and will force certain free agents to sign as early in the cycle as they can, to get the first dollars out. A terrible proposal from the players perspective, and if that’s been on the table, you can well understand why we are going to see a work stoppage. The union would be idiots to accept it. It will fundamentally transform the offseason and ultimately impact salaries across the board.
I absolutely agree with you. The MLBPA would have to be brain dead to accept that proposal.
On the other hand, the owners would be just as dumb to throw open the floodgates and eliminate any and all disincentives to cutail the big money clubs from poaching all the highest quality talent.
They already offered open free agency to get the International draft, and that was turned down. That’s already perilously close to going too far the other way. Penalties for exceeding the cap, especially over multiple consecutive seasons, are a big part of keeping the game somewhat balanced. If the league cannot at least keep the APPEARANCE of parity, the sport will suffer for it.
Loss of pick creates adverse unintended consequences–especially in this iteration. First, the harder it is for a big market team to draft well, the more likely it will be that they have to go to the FA market and bid up prices. Second, the QO system now at least ties the pick to compensating the losing team–if you want, say, EE, you have to pay him and lose the pick. But if you just want a good hitter, you can look to others, less expensive, not tied to a pick–or you can trade. By making it only penalty tax related, you take away the direct linkage. Third, and it’s relevant in a way that might not be immediately apparent, is that payrolls grow organically as players get more service time.,so you can approach luxury tax levels even if all you are doing is paying your existing roster. That’s going to lead to more non-tenders and more weird trades, as teams need to wait for arbitration awards to see how much room they might have. I’m not suggesting getting rid of the luxury tax–but losing a draft pick is too disruptive.
cap floor cap floor cap floor
Tune in again tomorrow on this same station for the next exciting episode of “As the CBA Turns.”
These luxury taxes are too damn high!
The QO system appears to work for most of the free agents except the ones on the bubble that do not want to return to their former team. They only need a remedy for this case.
Currently, if a player does not to return to their former team and if no team wants to give up a pick, the player needs to sit out until May 15. Perhaps there is a way that a QO player that goes unsigned after the first day of the season can request a hearing so that a lesser round pick can be forfeited (2nd round pick for unprotected teams, 3rd round pick for protected teams), and the player needs to sit out only the first week of the season, with the caveat being that the player cannot sign for an aav of over 90% of the QO (all incentives are considered earned for these purposes).
So then you are capping and reducing the players compensation and it appears you are also limiting him to a one year deal. That will not work.
Come to an agreement and make it for 20-25 years. No.more of this bs. Don’t know why they didn’t get a deal done last winter or during the season.
Why would they make it like a TV deal? The MLBPA locking their representees to a 25 year deal in an ever changing world is stupid
Pretty typical CBA negotiation, critical issues remain on table until 11th hour, or beyond. MLB, union, and players all want a deal to get done
With Selig and Fehr/Weiner in a post 1994 world there were all kinds of problems of course but as far as negotiations went it all stayed in the conference room and they had virtually nothing in the way of work stoppage threats. For all their flaws (of which there were many) they both knew what 1994 did to fans.
Update from Rosenthal which will probably be posted any second now:
Owners, players met late into night on CBA. “Progress, but tough issues still to be done,” one source said.