Last night, we learned that the Major League Baseball Player’s Association had extended its deadline to finalize an agreement regarding the transfer system for players moving between Japan’s Nippon Professional Baseball and Major League Baseball. With a new union-imposed stopping point at 8pm EST today, the parties in interest — including the three entities just mentioned as well as NPB’s member teams, individually — are expected to continue negotiating in hopes of finding agreement on posting rules that will allow NPB clubs to make certain players available to MLB teams — including, especially, young Japanese phenom Shohei Ohtani.
We’ll use this post to track and analyze the key news on talks as it hits the wire:
- There’s general optimism that something will get done, Jon Heyman of Fan Rag tweets. Sherman tweets that the talks are “down to [a] few items,” but notes that the signals are that tonight’s deadline is a firm one for reaching agreement.
Earlier Updates
- There has been a critical potential settlement of one major sticking point, according to MLB Network’s Jon Morosi (Twitter links). MLB and MLBPA have resolved their differences regarding the question of when NPB teams would have the ability to “pull back” posted players who do not achieve a contract that would convey sufficient transfer fee value to their would-be former organization. This provision — the details of which remain unknown — will still need to be considered by NPB and its teams, of course, but resolution of the matter might conceivably put the parties on track to finalizing a deal.
- “Pull back” rights are of particular importance to the system’s operation because the new rules under contemplation would allow NPB teams to collect a percentage of a contract’s guarantee as the transfer fee, rather than a fixed transfer amount determined before the player in question tries to work out an agreement with a MLB club. Understandably, NPB teams are interested in protecting themselves if a player’s market does not develop as hoped, while the union is likely concerned with the possibility that too much latitude might engender disruptions in the broader player market, potentially harming MLB free agents.
- While that report generally strikes an optimistic tone, Joel Sherman of the New York Post (Twitter link) hears that “big hurdles” remain. Whether those revolve around the pull-back issue or others is not clear at this moment.
I’m still trying to figure out how overseas players can pick their teams. Not to mention otani being eligible for a new contract after a couple years. You’d think the players association would have issues with this not to mention American boys who are subject to different rules.
Amateur International players are subject to far more financial depressing rules then Amateur American boys are and the teams have the same amount of control over the amateur international player as they do over the American boys. I don’t know of any American player that has to go through the posting system on top of being restricted. Unless of course the player is 25 or older in which case he would be a free agent, the only reason we don’t hear about undrafted American baseball players coming out of no where is because theirs isn’t a place he could hide in the US without going undrafted or scouted.
Yes and no. A player 25 years old in Japan or Korea would not be a free agent if he is still under contract to a team. What he would not be is subject to the bonus pool restrictions on posting and would be eligible for a Major League contract. The reason our “American boys” are treated differently is because Japan and Korea have professional leagues with their own drafts. Neither of these professional leagues want to be turned into nothing but farm leagues for MLB. Japanese and Korean players aren’t hiding out, they were drafted by teams in their home countries to play pro ball in those leagues.
Yes I’m aware of all the different possible situations I was simply responding to his statement so i guess simply put anyone over the age of 25 that isn’t under a teams control would be a unrestricted free agent..
Yes. that’s my understanding.
Ohtani would be eligible after a couple years? He would be treated like any international signing due to his age. He’ll sign for a max bonus of around $3M and then have his rookie contract and arb years……
Exactly. Total rip off for him and all of the Latin American/Caribbean kids who used to be able to negotiate for whatever they could get and all because the players association was willing to negotiate away the rights of anyone who wasn’t already a member.
Precisely. The MLBPA has, does, and will continue to negotiate away the rights of people they don’t represent.
They don’t represent the International Players – but they negotiate restrictions on what they can earn.
They don’t represent Players coming out of high school, college, or in the Minor Leagues, but they negotiate the restrictions on what they can earn and where they can play.
They’re both chips used as leverage in deals with the League, which is comprised of Owners who want to restrict what they spend on Players, and the MLBPA obliges by forcing those restrictions on Players they don’t represent.
It’s quite incredible that a Union can effectively control the parameters and earning potential of Players they don’t represent, and why so many people who dig deeper into the rort, get up in arms about this anti-trust exemption the MLB has.
But, sadly, we’re so used to the system as it is, we often don’t see it for what it is.
What you are doing here is creating an unsolvable riddle for the union. Somehow they have to figure out how to represent ball players who they can’t represent, and until then, it’s completely unfair for them to advance the interests of the players they can and do represent. Did I get that about right?
@ Cam “They don’t represent the International Players – but they negotiate restrictions on what they can earn.”
“They don’t represent Players coming out of high school, college, or in the Minor Leagues, but they negotiate the restrictions on what they can earn and where they can play.”
Sounds like a structured pay scale…kinda like most jobs. Correct me if I am wrong but if you go to work for a GM plant isn’t your pay scale already laid out depending on your job and service time or does a new guy walk in and make the same as some who has been there 20 years. Isn’t that a union and company negotiating pay for someone the don’t yet represent? Doesn’t it work like that in a lot of non-union jobs as well?
Correct, most jobs have a structured pay scale. But most jobs are also part of a free market – if you want to work in a particular industry, GM (for example) isn’t your only choice. Because the MLB has monopolized professional baseball (which the Union has enabled), either you fall into their payscale and play for the one team that chooses you via their system, or you leave the country.
Could you imagine the best lawyers or economists coming out of college, having to go into a draft to determine which firm they have to work for?
Heck, there’s a double standard within Baseball itself – if you’re an Analyst, Legal Executive, or anything along those lines who may slot into a role in the Office, you can field offers from every team in the League – without interference from an archaic structure that forces you into one direction.
Unfortunately, it’s the anti-trust exemption that enables the system to continue as-is. While many could and have argued that the right thing to do would be to abolish the perceived “representation” of those who they don’t represent, there is no incentive to on the Union side, simply because they can continue the existing structure while being shielded by the League’s exemption to anti-trust laws.
As I grew up following non-US sports, I’m conditioned to see significantly less restrictions within sport. Players who are free to sign with whatever team presents them with the best offer – without the League or the Establishment telling them they need to ignore the concept of a free market for the first 6 years of their professional career.
The concept of the draft in particular appalls me, and will continue to do so. In a perfect world, the Union would not be allowed to agree to the mere existence of it, but they’re shielded, and can continue to do so.
“Heck, there’s a double standard within Baseball itself – if you’re an Analyst, Legal Executive, or anything along those lines who may slot into a role in the Office, you can field offers from every team in the League – without interference from an archaic structure that forces you into one direction.” Management in “the real world” are not union employees either. Also, draftees do refuse to sign with clubs that drafted them….they are not forced to sign. Granted they then have to wait a year but they are not forced to work for a team they do not want to.
I am not a big union fan, but it is legal under the CBA and US laws.
I think you’ve missed most of my point here, although you’re reinforcing my point around a free market where the Union is not involved.
And yes, I’m aware that a draftee can refuse to sign as they are not forced to – hence my point above about the enabled monopoly that effectively says to a draftee, move here and play for this amount of money, or leave the US to play elsewhere.
As an example, I work for a company of 25,000 Employees, with approximately 50% of them working in various manufacturing plants. If you are a Union member, you fall into the bucket of whatever was collectively bargained. If you are not a Union member, you negotiate your own terms of employment, outside of the CBA. Whereas prospective baseball players don’t get the option to negotiate their own terms – the CBA governs them automatically. I would venture to say, non-Union members in my part of the world, would represent a much larger portion than non-Union members, of the same type of work, than the US.
Straight to the point – in the MLB, either you fall into the structure created by the MLB and MLBPA, or you don’t participate. There is no negotiating of your own terms. You either fall under the CBA agreed terms, or you don’t work. Which is ridiculously throttled, but it’s a reality for so many, and has been a reality for so long, that observers are numb to how repressive it is.
Problem is, if there are arguments to be made against the anti-trust exemption the MLB has – there’s no one there to fight it. Because the ones that it impacts the most, are the ones with very little leverage and resource to fight it. Those who do have the resource and leverage, are the ones who aren’t overly affected by it.
Pretty standard social dynamic of repression that’s all too common.
MLB’s antitrust status has been adjudicated quite a few times and still stands (although it has not made it back to the SCOTUS with the exception of the Curt Flood case).
As to your examples I don’t see your point. If a person applies to be an apprentice pipe fitter not many qualifications are needed. They gain experience on the job. Sure they may have to have some knowledge but their real experience comes on the job. Ballplayers have knowledge and experience but not at the level they are trying to compete at.
As for non-union, aside from clerical and some lower level positions most large companies require consummate experience and/or a degree relating to their desired job.
Let me ask you this. How many union jobs do you know of that allow you to negotiate your salary after 6 years? Can your companies employees go to the bosses and say “I am now a free agent and would like “X” number of dollars to play for you? I am sure they can quit and go to another company in the same position and if it is also union the can’t negotiate. In MLB they can and do.
When a union signs a deal with a corporation, in this case Major League Baseball, they represent everyone who they want to represent whether that person is a dues paying member or not. In some states unions have a closed shop. In right-to-work states unions contract to represent non-union employees because if they didn’t then the company would just hire non-union employees for less.
As you say, the unions don’t represent foreign players, US/Canada amateurs, or minor leaguers. Yet they do negotiate for them. These people will impact their members at some point and really if the union wasn’t negotiating for them then MLB would make all the rules.
For players without any leverage those rules would be less favorable. Yet Cubans over 25 have a lot of leverage and have negotiated for themselves. But once they do, they become union members and have to abide by union rules.
xcvxcv
I hope they get it done. Love to see what Ohtani can do in the big leagues
Why would this statement get downvoted? lol
The Mad Down-voter Strikes Again!
I don’t see how the percentage system works for the NPB teams when players under 25 and with less than six years playing experience can only be offered minor league contracts and are subject to the bonus pool limits.
lmao leave it to a union to get in the way of things
While I understand that teams are limited in what they can pay Otani as a signing bonus, I have been trying to find something that makes clear why a team can’t agree to additional money in salary or incentives. Can someone explain this to me? For example, even if a team signs Otani using (let’s say) $3.5M in signing bonus and pays him the minimum MLB salary for 2018 ($550K or so), what prohibits the signing team from putting in easily attainable incentives to pay him closer to what he is worth? is there a restriction on giving an incentive, such as $10M if he makes 10 starts and an additional $5M if he makes 15 starts? There are certainly no restrictions on teams providing these incentives to non-foreign players that are not subject to the international restrictions. Seems like a huge loophole that would have been written about by now, but I haven’t read anything that clearly explains why this would not be permitted. Would love some insight on this.
He will not be signed as an MLB player. He has to be signed as a MiLB player and then promoted if applicable. If after a proper amount of time her preforms well he may be extended. All rules regarding IFA signings are in ATTACHMENT 46
International Amateur Talent System
mlbplayers.com/pdf9/5450407.pdf
Cat, thank you. I read Attachment 46 to the CBA and it answers my question. The bonus pool money is the only money that can be agreed to when the minor league contract is signed (there are a few very minor exceptions). The scenario I suggested above would not be permitted. The salary paid to a first year player under a minor league contract is agreed upon in the CBA, so nothing more can be paid in salary either. Only potential loophole is to have a secret verbal agreement with Otani that the team at some point in the future will give him an extension with big money, but doing that after what happened yesterday with the former Braves GM is not advisable. Not sure any GM would take that risk.
The Commish, who just kicked Coppolella out of the league for life fir ignoring league mandates, has warned executives to not write language such as you propose.
How many GMs are feeling that lucky?
This is a great point and I don’t think the timing on announcing this was a coincidence. I am sure this penalty was meant as a warning to all GMs on how they handle the Otani negotiations. Seeking loopholes to subvert the international bonus pool restrictions will not be tolerated,