This year’s qualifying offer will be worth $18.4MM, ESPN.com’s Buster Olney reports (via Twitter). This represents a drop from last year’s $18.9MM figure, and the second time in the history of the qualifying offer that the value has declined from the previous season. The QO was worth $17.8MM in the 2019-20 offseason, slightly below the $17.9MM price tag for the winter of 2018-19.
The qualifying offer is recalculated annually, as it is determined by averaging the salaries of the 125 highest-paid players in baseball. The $500K drop from last year therefore looks like a reflection of the slower market of the 2020-21 offseason, as several teams spent less in the wake of reported and claimed revenue losses from the pandemic.
Still, the lower figure still counts as a surprise, as the general feeling was that the QO would end up rising to somewhere in the $19-$20MM range for the coming offseason. Originally instituted for the 2012-13 offseason, the qualifying offer has varied annually but generally increases year-over-year:
- 2012-13: $13.3MM
- 2013-14: $14.4MM
- 2014-15: $15.3MM
- 2015-16: $15.8MM
- 2016-17: $17.2MM
- 2017-18: $17.4MM
- 2018-19: $17.9MM
- 2019-20: $17.8MM
- 2020-21: $18.9MM
- 2021-22: $18.4MM
To recap the QO process, teams can issue a one-year contract to any of their free agents who a) have never received a qualifying offer, and b) have been with the team for the entirety of the previous season. For instance, impending free agents like Starling Marte, Kris Bryant, Javier Baez, Anthony Rizzo, or Kyle Schwarber can’t receive qualifying offers since they were traded at midseason. MLBTR’s Tim Dierkes recently compiled a list of every player who has already been issued a qualifying offer in the past, for reference purposes.
Players who receive a qualifying offer have 10 days to make their decision, and if a player accepts a QO this winter, he’ll return to his club on a one-year contract and earn an $18.4MM salary in 2022. (A player can also work out a longer-term extension with his team after accepting a qualifying offer, as Jose Abreu did with the White Sox in November 2019.) If the player rejects the QO, his new team will have to give up at least one draft pick and potentially some international spending pool money in order to make the signing, and his former team will receive a compensatory draft pick.
Back in August, MLBTR’s Anthony Franco broke down which of this winter’s free agents are likeliest to receive a qualifying offer, and which players might be more borderline cases. As we’ve seen in the past, a QO can have a significant impact on a player’s earning potential, if teams are hesitant about surrendering significant draft capital or a hefty one-year salary to a free agent who might be a riskier candidate to provide elite value going forward.
This potential dampening effect of the QO has long been a thorn in the side of agents and the MLB Players Association, and the future of the qualifying offer figures to be a notable topic in negotiations over the new collective bargaining agreement. It is quite possible that 2021-22 will be the last offseason featuring the qualifying offer in its current form, though it isn’t likely that owners will be keen on removing signing compensation and/or penalties from the free agent process.
Qo shouldn’t be dropping
Why? Let’s not act like 500k is going to break the bank for these guys that receive 18 million dollars which is generational wealth.
Now if you want to complain about the QO system. You shouldn’t be able to QO a guy for 18.4 million if he made more than that the previous year. Teams should have to QO them for more at least 10% more or something from last years salary.
It’s not the 500k that matters it’s they put this system in place so it would go up every year. Clearly average salaries of the top guys aren’t going up like they have historically. It further proves teams are colluding to keep top salaries from going up. If you look at how the elite free agents keep topping out at 35-36 million a year it shows teams aren’t really trying to out bid each other. The system is being manipulated in every sense. That goes without your point. Players who are the best want paid to be the best, this frankly isn’t happening, therefore the system is being heavily controlled that isn’t a free market.
You can’t say teams aren’t repressing the market, most elite talents have one shot at getting paid why should teams be allowed to do this when they already control guys for most of there prime seasons.
There are 8 guys with $300M+ contracts. The players are trading away higher annual salaries in exchange for longer contracts, not realizing that this affects the QO for 6 or so players per year.
It’s not collusion; it is the contract that the players signed.
bravesiowafan
You can’t say teams aren’t repressing the market
==================================
Unless you can show proof of collusion, then there isn’t collusion. And, if proof of collusion existed, do you think this is something the players would ignore?
Math dude.
Teams aren’t colluding. Get over it. It’s an average of the top 125 contracts.
There will be years where fewer tier 1 superstars sign mega deals and more tier 2-3 above average/average players sign smaller deals pushing the top 125 avg. down.
Found colin kaepernick!
Math and pandemic. Between 2017-2021, the QO went up approximately 2.3% a year, which is roughly what the salary cap went up. The two numbers don’t necessarily have to be related, but probably are.
And in 2021, the players took a hit because of attendance restrictions.
So the owners not only colluded to give the players what they bargained for, they also colluded to create a pandemic.
Yeah the AAV isn’t necessarily going up, but I’m seeing that as player’s choices. Bryce Harper choosing 13 years at a lower AAV for a more guaranteed contract than Trevor Bauer negotiating a 3 year contract with opt outs an a higher AAV.
There’s been a ton of longer term deals for today’s best stars. The longer the contract, the greater the risk and thus compromise. Sure, I’ll take 13/325 versus 5/200.
@ioebrady you really think gm’s and pobo are dumb enough to put collusion in writing or on a text or email? They talk all the time, same with owners who put these mandates. All it takes to see what’s going on is looking at how the last several seasons the elite free agents aren’t getting paid more then contracts of the past. Really looking into the numbers isn’t hard. And btw QO isn’t decided by how many $300 million dollar contracts there are. Plenty of talented guys make high aav on shorter deals. My point is clearly owners/leaders of teams are putting ceilings on how much guys are making to lower the general cost, this system was set up for the qo to go up every year due to the fact they saw the trend of contracts when they made this stupid rule.
@stanthefan they are taking these deals because teams aren’t offering higher AAV. If they offer the same money with a higher AAV less years they are making the same money but helping with the free agent market.
@5tool that’s just not true. With how the system was made (based on contract trend for 20 years now) guys are making more then ever problem being they highest paid players aren’t getting raises. Does nobody remember the last ten years before covid? Record deal after record deal almost every year, there is no reason that should happen now with more money in payrolls and being made then ever before. Not sure why everyone wants to justify this broken system
braveslow – Cole set the $36M AAV record for free agency just two years ago.
Strasburg and Rendon followed right behind him with $35M AAV in December 20219.
You’re not gonna have a record high amount every year, superstar players don’t grow on trees.
And why are you looking only at AAV of just free agents?
FACT: The four biggest contracts in MLB history were just signed the past couple years.
Mookie – $365M last year (12 yrs)
Trout – $360M in 2019 (10 yrs)
Lindor – $341M this year (10 yrs)
Tatis – $340M this year (14 yrs)
That last contract was given to a guy whose career games were less than a full season!
I don’t even know what you’re trying to argue here.
“…guys are making more then ever problem being they highest paid players aren’t getting raises. Does nobody remember the last ten years before covid? Record deal after record deal almost every year, there is no reason that should happen now with more money in payrolls and being made then ever before.”
True point joebrady!
Not sure why everyone wants to justify this broken system
======================================
The system is not broken. It is a negotiated deal between players and owners. By definition, it is what both sides wanted.
Further, do you have any proof that players aren’t getting paid more? The top five contracts ever were signed in the past couple of years.
System isn’t broken, that’s why and those constantly bad mouthing it always have this blinders on mentality..
WHO takes the risks for employees up and down the chain within the said company? is it the *1* single many here cannot get their grubby little minds off of? or is it the company, which has hundreds, even thousands sometimes to look out for i the long run to take care of and pay?
This all for 1 mentality has to stop. It’s getting worse in this country day by day.
Laborers (which employees/players are) will always come and go. companies must be strong for the country and game to survive. Constantly trying to change the wheel is nothing but tearing down what made it strong.
I suggest players wanting more money starting a new league..In like venezuela for example.
We’re worried about an 18mil contract offer with teams not willing to push the market higher for profits while Neal Huntington and others are over here running entire payrolls worth 3/4 of those players contracts. Problem starts at thefe being no minimum cap to force spending. If they had a 140mil minimum cap more teams would be forced to hand out lucrative contracts and automatically push the market further ahead.
I agree, The only way to fix all of this is to end the anti-trust exemption. Then new owners won’t be blocked and the small market false narrative will end.
I know there’s been talk of a minimum team payroll requirement, but I don’t see how it can be reasonably enforced.
Let’s say you’ve got a team with a bunch of good players that have less than 4 years of service time. Perhaps the only positions where you could use a free agent is catcher and CF. What if there is simply nobody good at catcher or CF on the open market? Are you forced to pay a free agent ten times what he’s worth, just to make the minimum payroll requirement?
It’s a good concept, but the minimum payroll requirement would be hard to enforce. I think at the very least they’d have to establish the minimum over a 3-5 year period, perhaps require $500M in spending over a 5-year period. That way you’re not forced to massively overpay players that you don’t really want.
The thing that gets me is, why do people even care? Players and owners collectively make billions. I couldn’t care less how they carve up my money.
new owners won’t be blocked and the small market false narrative will end.
=============================
I doubt anything good would come out of it. There is nothing out there to prevent 30 people from starting a baseball league right now. All an owner would need to do is to spend $300M building a stadium in Tampa Bay, Minneapolis, etc.
Then spend another $200M trying to siphon players from the MLB.
I think at the very least they’d have to establish the minimum over a 3-5 year period, perhaps require $500M
=====================================
I’ve been saying this for a long time. In the long-run, small market teams cannot compete with large market teams. But they have the ability to cycle in and out of competition.
If you had a min/max, then the $125M team could spend $75M while rebuilding, and then $175M when they become contenders. The league should also encourage ticket price manipulation in the same manner. If your average ticket price is $55, make it $50 when rebuilding and $60 when you are contending.
Normally I would agree with you. Owners have been known collude in order to save money and keep the players down.
However, in this case this is simply a reflection of the loss of revenue in 2020 causing less money spent during last off season.
If the system remains in place, it will go back up next year, or the following year as revenues weren’t back to 100% this season.
You couldn’t be more wrong.
^^ @bravesiowafan
Joe – I’m pretty sure all teams have dynamic pricing already, no?
It’s no different than car rental rates, airline rates, hotel rates, etc …. can change at any time.
Joe – I don’t know. There’s been so many attempts to form rival football leagues, but they’ve all failed. And having a competing league is a lot harder when you’re trying to fill each team’s stadium 81 times a year instead of just 8-9 times a year. There’s simply not enough demand for a rival baseball league, even if baseball isn’t declining in popularity.
Just curious, I understand why you singled out Tampa … but why Minnesota?
Joe – There’s a direct correlation between payroll spending and competitiveness.
If my favorite team won’t spend money to acquire great players because my team’s owner deems said great players to be too expensive, that negatively impacts their ability to win and subsequently negatively impacts my ability to enjoy following that team.
Really? That probably explains why Tampa Bay and Milwaukee did so poorly this year compared to the Mets, Phillies and Angels. Don’t confuse correlation with causation. Spending to competitiveness is only one way and, like all the other ways, is not a guaranteed way, though it is probably the easiest if you have money to burn.
Also, not all rival leagues have failed. The ABA was absorbed by NBA and the AFL was absorbed by the NFL. Both the ABA and the AFL fundamentally changed the way the game was played.
$300 M to build a stadium? On what planet?
Skeptical, I said there’s a direct correlation between spending and winning. I did not say spending big money guarantees winning, or spending little money guarantees losing.
Money is no different than analytics …. when used wisely, both can increase your chances of winning. And you basically wrote the same thing, so it seems we are in agreement.
As for rival leagues, the fact they are no longer in existence makes them a failure IMO. However you can certainly interpret the definition of failure differently if you wish, but I think few would agree.
You mite care down the road (a few years) when it’s $75 dollars to park and $500.00 a seat to see a game $25.00 a beer $18.00 a soda $20-25 dollars for a hot dog or hamburger.
Already seeing’s it in the NBA, top players making $500,000 a to play A game and sit out a game every 10 games for rest.. People work a lifetime and don’t make what they make in one day. It’s coming are you ready for it?
Vtncsc: I wish I could give more thumbs up; your comment is seriously underrated.
Fever Pitch Guy: The more you post on here the more I find we agree on a host of different topics, even though you do have misplaced fandom (but we can work in that).
#EvilEmpire
found donald trump!!
yeah, this has nothing to do with either guy, but pretend it does.
thank sky daddy 700k of you can’t breathe anymore.
Why? If the players do not want that, they can decline the QO.
Yeah, true, 1984, but 18MM is hardly enough to live on with rising gas and milk prices.
What if the player had a lousy year or was on the down side of his career? I think the QO as is makes more sense, especially when the player can chose to accept it or not.
And if their performance sucks, they should be subject for a reduction in pay, not consistent increases.
The system was never set up for the QO to rise every year and was never supposed to be. It was set up for the QO to follow market trends based on the average revenue the teams made. Revenue went down steeply in 2020 but the QO still went up in 2021 because it’s based on a market that valued the previous year. Now it’s going down because a lot of teams spent less money on the top players because of the fact revenue went down drastically in 2020. Players don’t deserve a raise even when the owners lose money. That’s a good way to bankrupt a company really quick. The idea that “the QO should always go up every year” is an extremely non-analytical statement based on zero knowledge of how business works whatsoever. It also would be much higher if players didn’t demand contracts that paid them their peak salaries years and years past their primes. As a result the peak salaries are going to be lower since they are being forced to last longer. The main reason for it happening this season is the revenue the owners lost in 2020. It will very likely go up again after next season. If revenue dropped during the 2020 season the QO SHOULD be dropping. Sometimes pandemics happen and people make less money. When that happens EVERYONE makes less money. That’s the way it should be. The losses get spread around. You don’t get to pick and choose who has to take the losses and demand other people still get raises that aren’t contractually guaranteed to them.
And Covid should be over
Cool. Literally has nothing to do with the convo
FYI – A third wave with another variant is expected, so don’t toss your masks too soon.
I wonder why the QO doesn’t vary by position?!
Because that wouldn’t make any sense.
“The qualifying offer is recalculated annually, as it is determined by averaging the salaries of the 125 highest-paid players in baseball.”
Okay so does Matz get one?
He would definitely accept
Oh I agree he would be he’s definitely a bubble QO guy. If it wasn’t for a Covid IL stint just as he was getting really hot he was pitching really well besides a bad month or so
Really happy for Matz. Went through some injuries when he was younger. Great guy.
According to a jays scout on here Matz is a #47 starter and dfa candidate prior to this season.
Tough call.
He doesn’t get 18mm a year on the open market, but probably at min gets 3-4 years at 12-15 per.
With the uncertainty in the Jays rotation and the inability to successfully bring up pitchers who are ready to contribute (outside or Manoah) I would give him the offer, knowing it’s an overpay. But it’s a one year deal, and Matz was really good in the second half. He will give you a strong #4 starting option
No way they offer Matz a QO. Unless they’re crazy
A comp pick between first and second round is worth several million bucks.
Not really that crazy at all. No such thing as a bad 1 year deal.
Jays have a cheap roster right now, if they have to overpay Matz a bit to stabilize the back of the rotation it’s more than worth it.
there is if it limits where you spend elsewhere. Matz is not a ~$19 million player, plain and simple.
Lazy take with zero context. Not sure why you jump in.
Have you seen the starting pitchers available this offseason? Matz without a QO probably gets a 3 year deal worth 13-15 per year, easy.
So the jays would be overpaying him 3-5 mil for 1 year. Add the fact that they have to pay someone externally to cover those innings as they don’t really have a prospect that’s ready for 150+ innings in a contention year.
So minimal overpay, limited term and lack of internal/external options and it’s really not that hard to see them doing it, and if overpaying 3-5 mil for a starter in 1 year limits them in other places then they aren’t going to be able to replace his innings anyways unless they find another Ray.
Not crazy at all. Like one commenter said, there’s no such thing as a bad one year deal. And, in the highly unlikely case he rejects, they get a pick (or, maybe more likely, get to negotiate a more favourable deal if the other teams don’t want to give a pick up to sign him).
Certainly doesn’t mean they’ll offer it to him but it’s not ‘crazy’ to think they might.
I accept.
It’s enough money that if someone wanted to upgrade from fries to onion rings (+$1.50) it shouldn’t adversely affect their future generation’s material well-being.
You can get onion rings instead of fries at BK without an upcharge.
….but if you want cheese..THAT’s an upcharge….
Most places if you don’t want cheese they still charge you for it. That is the scam
Can the Blue Jays put qualifying offers on Ray and Semien? Being they’re free agents? Or they don’t have enough time with the Jays? Someone let me know please.
Ray and Semien are both eligible, and the Blue Jays will definitely issue the QO to both players.
Thanks! Great to know. Wasn’t sure.
Yes they can and will. Matz could be a short term extension candidate ala Robbie Ray last year. 10-12 million for Matz maybe?
I doubt he agrees to a one year deal
did you read the full article? Because it clearly says players with the previous (2021)Full Year with the Same Team are qualified to receive the qualifying offers
Calm down man. Maybe he was just unsure if either player had already received a QO previously.
That’s not what his question said though?
“Or they don’t have enough time with the Jays?”
DeScalfani? I think I’d do it if I were Farhan.
Wood would be more likely. Descalfani could be offered one if you were sure he’d decline it.
Plus, he can’t beat the Dodgers. He had cy young numbers against everyone else.
Syndergaard taking the Mets QO with an infield of Correa, Lindor, Baez, Alonso will be off the charts next year
Of course, but it ain’t likely to happen. Including Cano, they would have maybe a $125M infield.
But if Cohen wants them, he’ll just sign everyone. I have that on good authority.
Seriously, I’m trying to figure out why some Mets fans seem to believe Cohen will ignore the CBA and all the tax thresholds yearly. He will have to operate within the framework. He can go over for a couple seasons, but he’ll have to retreat.
Cohen will spend because, unlike the rest of the owners, Cohen is rich.
And then you’ll wake up.
When the Yankee fans tell you that you’re delusional, it’s serious.
And will still finish 5 games back of the braves
I would bet it’s more likely to see McNeil, Lindor, Cano, Alonso. I know Cohen is loaded, but signing Baez and Correa, especially when Cano’s huge deal is coming back, doesn’t seem feasible.
Between the QO going up(admittedly not much), players eligible for arbitration, and all of the players that have options there should be plenty of players available for aggressive teams. Not even to mention the free agent class. The new collective bargaining agreement will be really interesting.
Oops my mistake the QO went down slightly. Point is plenty of players for aggressive GM’s.
Angels should offer the QO to Iglesias, right? I know for a closer that’s a lot of cash (and they have more than closer as a need), but I feel like they will offer.
Over a two or three year extension for less AAV?
This pretty much guarantees JD Martinez will not opt out of his contract. If he opts out, Red Sox will pounce on offering him the lower QO number. That means it would be a pay cut if he stays. And if he leaves, he would have to sell himself to other teams while carrying a QO offer (penalty).
The 50/50 chances he gave last week, just jumped to 80/20.
You think 500k means that much to him lol
If a team is going to give him 85m he is going to take it.
‘you think 500k means that much to him’
Martinez can take 19.35m guaranteed, or get 18.4m when he accepts Red Sox tender, thats $950,000 less. If he wants to give the Red Sox a free $1m, he can go right ahead.
JD’s decision to opt out will have -0- to do with the amount of the QO. Either he will become aware of a pending $45M/3 offer, and he will opt out, or his agent will tell him that there is no one willing to pay him, in which case he will opt in.
JD’s decision to opt out will have -0-
=======================================
But it has EVERYTHING to do with whether the Red Sox make a QO. Which in turn changes JD’s decision.
Had the QO gone up, to say 19.5, it would be less likely that the Red Sox would offer him a QO, and if they did, he could accept it, and get a nice little raise. If they don’t offer QO, he’s able to shop around and probably find something close to your 3/45. At 18.6m, Red Sox are guaranteed to offer him QO (why not, its a paycut, or a free draft pick).
Very doubtful a team is offering him 45m/3, and giving away a first round pick, to sign this guy. This is a very bad year to be a good, but not a great FA. The teams with money will be throwing it at big names (Correa, Seager, Bryant, Freeman). Leaving little for the meddling FAs. Also, CBA negotiations will cause many teams to pause on big expenditures. More likely, he would opt out, find no one offering that kind of green, and have to accept a Million dollar pay cut.
You’re fixating on the fact that it’s a small cut in QO number. It has very little to do with that. It’s the fact that his salary sits (19.35m) right in the middle of where QO was suppose to be (19.5m) and where it actually is (18.6). This makes it easy for the Red Sox decision (making a QO), which in turn makes it much tougher for JD to get big money. Meaning JD will not opt out.
It all revolves around the question of whether or not he can get a better contract. I agree with you that he probably can’t. But if he can, then he automatically opts out. And whether the QO was $19.5 or $18.6, I think the RS automatically offer him the QO.
But I’d also wager that other teams would take that into consideration. Maybe have someone let it be know that they’d have an interest in JD at $45M/3 or $35M/2, but that, if a QO was attached, then the offer would be maybe $40M/3 or $32M/2.
It all revolves around the question of whether or not he can get a better contract.
===================================================================
The question of whether he gets a better contract revolves around whether he gets a QO, and that possibility, became a reality, when the figure was published. The Red Sox are guaranteed to offer QO now.
I don’t think Red Sox would have wanted to give him a raise, because they’d rather see him walk, hence they wouldn’t offer QO at 19.5m. Freeing up DH, when you have at least 3 other players that should currently be DHing is important. But at 18.4M they’d be foolish not to.
I just don’t understand how you can say it has “-0-” to do with, when it definitely does.
I figured all along JD ain’t going anywhere this winter. Sox will want him to help defend their title next season.
What you’re overlooking is JD accepting the QO which he won’t, otherwise why opt out????
This will have zero influence on Martinez’s decision.
Great indepth comment there. Flawless, tell us some more.
To be honest, I am not surprised in dropped a little bit after a short season and most stadiums run at 70% capacity because of the Covid. Even with revenue sharing, clubs are being cautious right now. And that is leading to how players are going to be paid.
Think E-Rod gets a QO?
I don’t think ERod gets the QO.
Sox will be perfectly content going into next season with a starting rotation of Pivetta, Sale, Eovaldi, Houck and maybe Whitlock or Seabold as their #5 guy.
I like ERod, but $18M can be better spent elsewhere … and I do think he would take that offer if given to him.
This will be some additional ammunition for the MLBPA during the CBA negotiations. I suspect the season of COVID is responsible as teams pulled back after losing nearly 100 games of the 2020 season, but overall the game’s revenues have skyrocketed over the years. A decrease in the QO won’t go over well.
And the owners will tell the MLBPA to advise the good players to stop asking for 10 years and focus more on higher aav, or to just learn how the math works.
The most interesting point to this whole topic is the new CBA. I believe MLB and the players are miles apart and will be surprised if they get this done by Spring Training. I doubt they will and therefore expect a long delay to the start of the season. We’ll be lucky to see ball by July 4th. Hope I’m wrong, but…
The one issue I have with the QO is that the player needs to make a decision very quickly whether to accept it, while it depresses the market. I think the player should get at least until the start of Spring Training to accept it at full value, then be able to accept it at half value before the start of the regular season. Once the season starts, not only should the QO go away, but the compensation should go away as well. A couple seasons ago you had Keuchel and Kimbrel twisting in the wind until the compensation went away.
Teams wouldn’t offer it for nearly as many guys if the acceptance period lasted until Spring Training.
Yeah a team can’t wait that long to find out if they’ve got a hole to fill or not. Let’s say ERod tells the Red Sox on February 20th he won’t accept their QO, then the team wouldn’t have much of an opportunity to find another decent SP before the season starts.
I agree with both sentiments, maybe give them till day 1 of winter meetings
They chose to twist in the wind and you can’t have a team plan out an off-season with 1 or more potential $19m expenditures up in the air the entirety of free agency. How would you expect a team to appropriately budget their spending? Horrible suggestion
the player needs to make a decision very quickly whether to accept it
=======================================
Most players have years to decide. Syndergaard’s value, for example, has not changed in month’s.
For a real world example, it’s a bit like turning 66.6 years old and making a decision on retirement and social security. The decision was probably already made months earlier, or maybe years earlier. Outside a market crash the week you retire, it is likely that you already know what your decision is.
Wonder whether Carlos Rodon gets a QO?
I say yes, because his mechanics have changed, allowing him to avoid injury. Now it’s just building up arm strength and endurance. He’s worth the QO, plus it would give some recompense to the Sox should he leave.
This just may keep Castellanos with the Reds 1 more year. If he opts out of his $16MM salary next year & the Reds extend the QO, Nick gets a $2,4MM raise. In 2022 he will be an unencumbered FA 1 year into a new labor agreement.. Could mean bigger bucks if he has a good 2022.
Should make for an interesting QO season. Would suspect that would lead to more QO’s for potential free agents. Less salary risk for the team if they accept. True, only $500K drop but given that it was expected to go up, the net effect is a bit higher. But that also might lead to more players rejecting the QO. Think about a guy like Justin Verlander for example. Crane said “probably” would make him a QO. This makes that more likely. But on the flip side, will it make Verlander think about rejecting it?
Players work so hard to get to free agency in baseball. Most don’t get their until they are past their prime (around age 30). To have this extra ‘penalty’ of requiring a team to forfeit draft pick(s) goes against the entire spirit of free agency. The MLBPA will require this to change in the upcoming CBA.
MLB should adopt a plan similar to the NFL of compensatory rounds where teams get extra draft packs for losing talent to the free agent system. A team should not be penalized for signing a free agent. It’s good for the player, the team and the sport. Instead, give the teams who lose talent extra draft picks in separate rounds to account for their losses. I don’t think the players or the owners would have an issue with this. There would be caps on the total amount of picks a team could receive to prevent them from ‘selling off’ free agents to rebuild through the draft but I’ve always thought it was ludicrous for a team to forfeit their second highest pick to sign a player who reaches free agency. That’s not what free agency was designed for in the first place.
Exactly
There is some rationale for compensating teams who develop a player and lose them to free agency, although history shows that most of the comp picks go to wealthier clubs. But the only purpose in penalizing teams for signing a free agent is to suppress salaries. It should end
MLB offered to end payment of free agent compensation in exchange for an International draft last round, but the MLBPA balked. They wound up giving hard bonus limits without getting rid of compensation
MLB will give up compensation, for a price, but so few players are affected that the price may not be worth it. So many more issues are more important to players that affect way more members
It’s obvious something needs to change. Teams now realize these super long contracts are a terrible idea, meanwhile most players are relatively old once they reach free agency. Too bad the commish and the union brass are incapable of having a civil conversation to resolve things. Everyone loses.
It seems like there are a great deal of uninformed comments being made. No system is perfect but the owners and players association have agreed on the current system. It’s a compromise. The NFL comes closer to a true salary cap than any other league/sport that I know. MLB has all these luxury taxes that allow rich teams to spend more money. The NBA has so many exceptions that allow a team to keep their players if they pay them $45 million a year. There is more parity in the NFL than any other league. A good team can catch a lucky break, be well run and make a run for a few years at most before they have to rebuild. The Packers and the Patriots have bucked this trend and even they haven’t their dynasties haven’t won the SB year after year. When Rodgers retires or leaves the Packers, they’re going to become an also ran, just as the Patriots have since Brady left..
QO should not exist…a player has already fulfilled his contract obligations, why should he be penalized? Te team controlled him for x amount of years and It’s like he still owes something.