Headlines

  • Rob Manfred Downplays Salary Cap Dispute With Bryce Harper
  • Tanner Houck To Undergo Tommy John Surgery
  • Yankees Release Marcus Stroman
  • Cubs Release Ryan Pressly
  • Cubs To Host 2027 All-Star Game
  • MLB Trade Tracker: July
  • Previous
  • Next
Register
Login
  • Hoops Rumors
  • Pro Football Rumors
  • Pro Hockey Rumors

MLB Trade Rumors

Remove Ads
  • Home
  • Teams
    • AL East
      • Baltimore Orioles
      • Boston Red Sox
      • New York Yankees
      • Tampa Bay Rays
      • Toronto Blue Jays
    • AL Central
      • Chicago White Sox
      • Cleveland Guardians
      • Detroit Tigers
      • Kansas City Royals
      • Minnesota Twins
    • AL West
      • Houston Astros
      • Los Angeles Angels
      • Oakland Athletics
      • Seattle Mariners
      • Texas Rangers
    • NL East
      • Atlanta Braves
      • Miami Marlins
      • New York Mets
      • Philadelphia Phillies
      • Washington Nationals
    • NL Central
      • Chicago Cubs
      • Cincinnati Reds
      • Milwaukee Brewers
      • Pittsburgh Pirates
      • St. Louis Cardinals
    • NL West
      • Arizona Diamondbacks
      • Colorado Rockies
      • Los Angeles Dodgers
      • San Diego Padres
      • San Francisco Giants
  • About
    • MLB Trade Rumors
    • Tim Dierkes
    • Writing team
    • Advertise
    • Archives
  • Contact
  • Tools
    • 2025 Trade Deadline Outlook Series
    • 2025-26 MLB Free Agent List
    • Contract Tracker
    • Transaction Tracker
    • Agency Database
  • NBA/NFL/NHL
    • Hoops Rumors
    • Pro Football Rumors
    • Pro Hockey Rumors
  • App
  • Chats
Go To Pro Hockey Rumors
Go To Hoops Rumors

MLBTR Originals

MLB Owners Ratify CBA; Transactions Officially Unfrozen

By Tim Dierkes | March 10, 2022 at 5:28pm CDT

5:28pm: Bob Nightengale of USA Today reports (on Twitter) that the owners unanimously voted to ratify the new CBA. After 99 days, the lockout and accompanying transactions freeze have officially been lifted.

3:47pm: MLB owners are expected to ratify the new collective bargaining agreement at 6:00pm eastern/5:00pm central time tonight, according to Andy Martino of SNY.  Transactions are set to unfreeze immediately thereafter, meaning teams will again be able to sign free agents and make trades.  Upon locking out the players on December 2, MLB also instituted a transaction freeze, which ended up lasting 99 excruciating days.

We’re expecting an unprecedented level of MLB hot stove action crammed into a 28-day period, with Opening Day set for April 7.  Hundreds of free agents are still without jobs, including 20 of MLBTR’s top 50 of the offseason.  Click here to review the best remaining free agents, led by Carlos Correa, Freddie Freeman, Kris Bryant, Trevor Story, Nick Castellanos, Kyle Schwarber, Carlos Rodon, Michael Conforto, and Seiya Suzuki.  Check out the full free agent list here.  To review which free agents signed prior to the lockout, click here.  My ballpark estimate is that around 60 free agents will sign MLB deals between now and Opening Day.  Old qualifying offer rules remain in place for this group of free agents, meaning that if new teams sign Correa, Freeman, Story, Castellanos, and Conforto, they’ll be subject to draft pick forfeiture.

Several factors will affect exactly how aggressive teams are in pursuing free agents.  One is how many executives bent the rules and communicated with agents during the lockout, potentially laying groundwork for instant agreements.

Another is the new competitive balance tax thresholds.  The base tax threshold will rise from $210MM in 2021 to $230MM this year, a 9.5% increase.  By 2026, the base tax threshold will reach $244MM.  There are three additional tax tiers beyond the base threshold at $20MM increments, the last of which is a new addition with this CBA.  In 2021, only the Dodgers and Padres exceeded the base tax threshold, but five other teams came within $3.4MM of it.  The teams that prefer to treat the base tax threshold as a soft salary cap now have an additional $20MM to play with in 2022.

It’s also worth considering the new anti-tanking measures agreed to by MLB and the players.  They’ll be instituting a draft lottery for the first six picks, and also penalties for landing near the bottom of the standings multiple years in a row (we’ll explore that fully later).  In theory, rebuilding clubs could become a little more active in the market.

An additional major CBA change that may affect free agency is the move from 10 to 12-team playoffs.  The bar for entry into the playoffs has been lowered.  That could push a fringe contender to acquire players.  On the flip side, a team projecting itself for 90+ wins may feel certain additions are now unnecessary with fewer wins required to make the playoffs.

The universal DH is also part of the mix, with bat-first free agents like Nick Castellanos, Nelson Cruz, and Jorge Soler now becoming more palatable for National League teams.

Trading was minimal prior to the lockout, so expect a burst of activity in that area as well.  MLBTR covered the 14 likeliest trade candidates, impact players with a chance to move, and 27 more regulars with a plausible chance of being traded.  The Athletics, Reds, and Mets figure to be in the thick of many trade discussions.  Again, it’s possible executives were conducting covert trade talks during the lockout, but we don’t know for sure.  What we do know: we’re excited to switch from lockout coverage to free agency and trades.  Thanks for hanging in there with us.

Share 0 Retweet 2 Send via email0

MLBTR Originals

185 comments

Canceled Regular Season Games Raise The Possibility For A Dispute Regarding Service Time

By Steve Adams | March 3, 2022 at 6:02pm CDT

Major League service time is awarded not based on games spent on a big league roster but rather by total days spent on the Major League roster (or injured list). The Major League Baseball season is 186 days long and a “full year” of service time is defined as 172 days.

A full year of service can be accrued over multiple seasons, of course. A player called up with 72 days left in the regular season, for instance, would accrue 72 days of service time in the current season and need 100 the following year to get across that one-year threshold. Assuming said player spent that entire second season on the roster, he’d have a year and 72 days of service time. For written purposes, service time is displayed as: [years].[days]. So, the player in this example would have 1.072 years of service following that second season. Two more full years of service, and he’s at 3.072 and into arbitration by virtue of crossing three years. Three more years on top of that, and he’s at 6.072 and eligible for free agency by virtue of accruing more than six years of service time.

With that quick and admittedly rudimentary crash course for the uninitiated out of the way, I thought it would be pertinent to take a look at how the recent cancellation of Opening Day by commissioner Rob Manfred could potentially impact players from a service-time vantage point — specifically those who could, at least in theory, stand to see their free agency delayed by a season.

At present, the league has only canceled the season’s first two series. Theoretically, if MLB and the MLBPA were to agree to a new deal this weekend and Opening Day were pushed back only a week — a pipe dream, I realize, but humor me for the purposes of this example — the season could technically still contain 179 days. Players could, then, receive a full year of service even in the absence of a week’s worth of games being wiped from existence.

What if, however, we reach the point where anything more than two weeks of games are canceled? The moment 15 or more days are nixed, there are 171 days on the schedule — which is technically not enough for any player to accrue a full year of service in 2022 alone. For players like the hypothetical one I described in the first couple sentences, that might not be a huge deal. My 1.072 player would only need 100 days of service this season, and so long as he got those 100 days, he’d cross into the two-plus service bracket and his timeline to free agency would remain unchanged. However, a player entering the season with exactly three years of service time (or two years, one year, etc.) would suddenly be looking at a calendar that literally doesn’t have enough days on it to keep their free-agent trajectories on track. Since arbitration is also based off service time, there’d be major implications on that front as well.

It’s for this reason that the union is widely expected to fight tooth-and-nail for full service time to be awarded even in spite of missed games/missed calendar days. The MLBPA will argue that it was the league who implemented the lockout and the league who canceled games early in the season. An attempt to withhold service time would quite likely be perceived by the players as something so damaging that they’d be willing to sit out indefinitely. That service time is worth hundreds of millions of dollars to the players.

The union is also expected to push for full pay rather than prorated salaries on the season, although it’s quite arguably the service time that’s more valuable, given its future implications. The two sides will butt heads over these issues, to be sure. MLBTR’s Tim Dierkes tweets that he expects the eventual compromise to be one that sees the players still receive full service time but not be paid for any missed days. As Tim points out, there’s precedent for both of these in the past.

At the moment, there’s a fair bit of talk about the possibility that all of April is lost to the current lockout. Much of that stems from Ken Rosenthal’s recent report at The Athletic, wherein he revealed that most television contracts don’t call for teams to issue rebates to their broadcast partners until “around 25 games” are missed. This has led to several players, Willson Contreras and Jason Heyward among them, accusing the league of deliberately seeking a reason to wipe April games from the schedule. April attendance is generally poor relative to the rest of the season, and the allegations put forth by the players accuse ownership of effectively only taking on the operating costs of five-sixths of a season while still receiving a full season’s worth of television revenue.

Feel free to discuss that theory all you like in the comments, but I’m setting it aside because the specifics of why we might miss the month of April are irrelevant for the purposes of this exercise. What matters here is which players would be most harmed by the possibility of April being wiped from the schedule and MLB subsequently trying to withhold their service. It’s quite unlikely that the league would succeed in these efforts, to be clear, but the hypothetical is still worth investigating.

Opening Day had been slated for March 31 (one day of service), and there are another 30 in April, of course. Striking April from the record would drop the season to 155 calendar days. Any player with even 17 extra days of service toward another year (i.e. 1.o17, 2.017, etc.) would be able to move their service time up a year. Any player with 16 or fewer toward another year (i.e. 1.016, 2.016, etc.) would be out of luck. MLBTR has obtained a full record of official service time for every current Major Leaguer, which is the source for the service-time data used in this exercise.

First, a few caveats. As this pertains mostly to players who have not yet accumulated six total years of service (i.e. reached free agency) or signed a long-term contract that renders such service time considerations largely moot (e.g. Fernando Tatis Jr.), I’ve excluded those players. I’ve also, admittedly subjectively, chosen players who have a decent chance to last the whole season on a big league roster.

All that said, let’s take a look at each service bracket and who’d technically come up short. As you might expect, there are some rather notable names:

Five-plus years of service time: Trey Mancini, Manuel Margot, Grant Dayton
Four-plus: Frankie Montas, Jack Flaherty, Ryan McMahon, Reynaldo Lopez, Isiah Kiner-Falefa, Jordan Hicks, Brad Keller, Shohei Ohtani
Three-plus: Lucas Luetge, Austin Adams, Lucas Sims, Tyler Kinley, Brett Phillips, Adrian Houser, John Means, Kyle Higashioka, Josh James, Rowdy Tellez, Dylan Moore, Chris Paddack, Nick Anderson, Pete Alonso
Two-plus: Jorge Alcala, Lane Thomas, Nico Hoerner, Adrian Morejon, Jared Walsh, Aristides Aquino, Kyle Finnegan, Jorge Mateo, JT Brubaker, Jake Cronenworth, Anthony Misiewicz, Brady Singer, Codi Heuer, Cristian Javier, David Peterson, Tejay Antone
One-plus: James Kaprielian, Chas McCormick, Akil Baddoo, Andrew Vaughn, Garrett Whitlock, Jake Brentz, Jonathan India

Put another way, if the league were to somehow succeed in not only canceling the first month of the season but also withholding service time, you’d see the likes of Shohei Ohtani, Pete Alonso, Trey Mancini, Manuel Margot, Jack Flaherty, Frankie Montas, Ryan McMahon, etc. all watch their gateways to free agency be delayed by a full year. The huge loss of earning power that comes with getting a year older — to say nothing of the potential for injury and/or decline — is where the aforementioned “hundreds of millions of dollars” in value to the Players Association that I referenced stems. And, if we see a portion of May, June, etc. canceled, further names will be added to this list.

Again, this is an exercise in hypotheticals, and I can’t imagine a scenario where the players willingly shrug and accept the loss of service time for days that were lost to a league-implemented lockout. But the two sides are absolutely going to negotiate over this, perhaps in heated fashion. If you find yourself asking “what’s the big deal” regarding the potential for missed service time — the “big deal” is another year that the likes of Ohtani, Alonso, Flaherty, etc. are under club control via arbitration rather than having a chance to hit the free-agent market.

Share 0 Retweet 11 Send via email0

Collective Bargaining Agreement MLBTR Originals

147 comments

An Overlooked Lefty Slugger In Free Agency

By Steve Adams | February 23, 2022 at 12:37pm CDT

Much of fans’ time during the lockout is spent playing armchair general manager and looking at ways to address their teams’ perceived needs — whether it be blockbuster trades, free-agent mega-deals, or under-the-radar value plays. There’s probably more focus on those first two, but we’ve already taken pretty lengthy looks at the top free agents and the top trade candidates who could change hands throughout the offseason here at MLBTR. As such, my own focus has turned to some of the lesser-heralded free agents who probably deserve a bit more love than they’ve gotten to this point in the winter. In the case of Brad Miller, his lack of appreciation probably pre-dates the current offseason.

Brad Miller | Steve Mitchell-USA TODAY Sports

Over the past three years, Miller has played on a one-year, $1MM deal in Cleveland, a one-year, $2.5MM deal in St. Louis and a one-year, $3.5MM deal in Philadelphia. Those three teams have guaranteed a combined $7MM to Miller and received 40 home runs through 718 plate appearances, with an overall batting line of .236/.331/.480. Obviously, the batting average isn’t ideal, but the leaguewide average during that time is .248 (or .251 excluding pitchers). Miller hasn’t been that much below par in terms of his batting average, and he’s above average in terms of on-base percentage and, particularly, in his power output.

This isn’t to say Miller should be lumped into the mix of most appealing free-agent bats available. He’ll play the coming season at age 32, making him older than the market’s high-profile names, and his skill set has obvious flaws. We’ll get those out of the way first.

Miller’s lefty bat has been a nonfactor against southpaw pitchers, evidenced by a .168/.230/.336 output over the past three seasons. He’s punched out in nearly 38% of his plate appearances when facing same-handed opponents. It’s not a new phenomenon, as Miller’s career numbers indicate, but his struggles against lefties have increased in recent years, even as his output against righties has improved.

Defensively, Miller is something of a man without a position. His days as a shortstop early in his big league career never yielded strong ratings from metrics like Defensive Runs Saved and Ultimate Zone Rating. More rudimentary marks like fielding percentage and his error totals agreed that Miller probably wasn’t well-suited as an everyday shortstop. That’s all the more true as he trends toward his mid-30s. Miller has seen plenty of action at first base, second base, third base and in the outfield corners over the past few seasons; his best statistical showings in those relatively small samples have come at second base and in left field. He’s not a premium defender anywhere, but Miller can capably handle those two spots and fill in as needed around the diamond.

Setting aside those noted deficiencies, there’s one thing thing Miller also does quite well: mash right-handed pitching. Over the past three years, Miller has hit .251/.352/.512 against right-handed pitchers — good for a 127 wRC+ that ranks 47th among the 321 hitters who’ve tallied at least 400 plate appearances (that is to say, he’s been about 27% better than the league-average hitter). At least against right-handed pitching, that wRC+ puts him alongside heavy-hitting names like Jose Ramirez (126), Carlos Correa (126) and Marcus Semien (129). Miller obviously isn’t as good overall as anyone in that trio, and it’s not realistic to shield him from left-handed opponents entirely over the course of a season. Nevertheless, the damage he offers against right-handed pitching is real.

The productivity when holding the platoon advantage doesn’t appear fluky in nature, either. Miller has walked in 12.9% of his plate appearances against a more defensible 26.3% strikeout rate. His .293 average on balls in play doesn’t scream for regression. A quarter of his fly-balls against righties have left the yard, which is a strong mark — 19th among that previous subset of 321 hitters, right alongside George Springer and Nelson Cruz — but not so lofty that one should expect it to come crashing back down in a major way.

Moreover, the general quality of Miller’s contact is excellent. His 2021 percentile ranks in average exit velocity (91st), max exit velocity (91st), hard-hit rate (84th) and barrel rate (80th) all stand out. He’s also above average in terms of sprint speed (62nd percentile) and in his ability to lay off pitches outside the strike zone (71st percentile both in 2021 and in 2020). Miller’s contact rate on pitches in the zone is a good bit shy of the league average (about five percentage points), but he’s not going to get himself out too often by flailing at pitches off the plate.

Miller’s flaws are easy to see, and again, the point of this certainly isn’t to suggest he will or should be paid along the same lines as Kyle Schwarber, who just put up a fireworks display for the ages when healthy in 2021. But Miller’s .251/.352/.512 slash against righties over the past three seasons is a whole lot closer to Schwarber’s .247/.348/.555 slash against righties in that same time than their eventual price tags will suggest, and Miller has actually been a much better hitter against righties than free agents like Joc Pederson and Eddie Rosario in recent seasons. Fans looking for left-handed bats might not have Miller high on their wishlist, but when used properly, his production is closer to some of the bigger names than most would expect. Whether the market will treat him as such this time around is yet to be determined, but the forthcoming addition of a universal designated hitter won’t hurt his stock.

Share 0 Retweet 6 Send via email0

MLBTR Originals Brad Miller

48 comments

Johnny Cueto Can Still Help A Rotation

By Steve Adams | February 21, 2022 at 3:20pm CDT

If you were to sit down and make a list of the best pitchers in baseball from 2010-16, you’d be hard-pressed not to include Johnny Cueto in some capacity. The two-time All-Star finished among the top six in National League Cy Young voting three times in that stretch, including a runner-up finish to Clayton Kershaw in 2014. He received at least one down-ballot MVP vote in all three of those seasons as well. From 2010-16, Cueto turned in a 2.86 ERA, a 20.6% strikeout rate (at a time when that number was much more impressive than it is in 2022) and a terrific 6.2% walk rate. Cueto was viewed as a No. 1 or No. 2 starter, and rightly so. He ranked fourth out of 228 qualified starting pitchers in ERA during that time, and his 1294 2/3 innings were the 16th-most in baseball.

Given that context, it’s no surprise that Cueto hit the open market as one of the most in-demand free agents in the game following the 2015 season. He’d struggled a bit following his trade from Cincinnati to Kansas City, but Cueto’s final impression on the Royals was a two-hit, one-run complete game in Game 2 of the World Series, which the Royals won 7-1. Not a bad way to set out into free agency for the first time.

Cueto’s six-year, $132MM contract with the Giants made him the third-highest-paid pitcher of the 2015-16 offseason, trailing only David Price and Zack Greinke’s pair of $200MM+ deals (and beating MLBTR’s expectations by a year in the process). For the first year of his contract, the signing looked quite strong. Cueto hurled 219 2/3 innings of 2.79 ERA ball, made the All-Star team, and enjoyed both Cy Young and MVP votes in his first year with San Francisco. The Giants’ “even-year” dynasty was cut short at three years (2010, 2012, 2014) — but not for any fault of Cueto’s. He made one appearance in the playoffs that winter and took a brutal complete-game loss that saw him allow just one run on three hits and no walks with 10 strikeouts against the eventual-champion Cubs.

Cueto missed a handful of starts in 2017 due to an ongoing blister issue and wasn’t at his best when healthy. His 4.52 ERA that year was his worst since his rookie campaign back in 2008, and it was a particularly poorly-timed slump, as Cueto could’ve opted out of the final four years of his contract and tested the market a second time, had he turned in another healthy season of Cy-caliber results. Ankle and elbow injuries wound up hobbling Cueto in 2018, and by August of that season, he was headed for Tommy John surgery. Cueto returned late in the 2019 season and tossed 16 pedestrian innings, and his work in the shortened 2020 campaign was the worst of his career (5.40 ERA, career-high walk rate).

Expectations for Cueto were light heading into the 2021 season, then, which made his rebound effort with the Giants something of a pleasant surprise. Cueto missed nearly a month with a lat strain and was on the IL for much of September with an elbow strain. The latter of those two injuries is particularly concerning, since we didn’t see much from Cueto after he hit the IL. He made a lone rehab appearance in the minors (1 2/3 innings) and pitched 2 1/3 innings of relief in the Majors on Sept. 30.

It’s not a great note on which to end a season, but Cueto’s 92 mph velocity in that final outing was right in line with what he’d done throughout the season. And, when he was healthy, Cueto was the best version of himself fans and opponents had seen in years. No, this wasn’t Cy Young runner-up Cueto, but it was a very serviceable version of the quirky right-hander, who slotted nicely into the fourth spot in a deep San Francisco rotation.

At 35 years old, Cueto wasn’t the fireballer he was earlier in his career, but his 91.9 mph average fastball velocity was the highest mark he’d posted since that outstanding 2016 campaign. His 6.1% walk rate was also his best mark since that ’16 effort, and Cueto’s 9.7% swinging-strike rate and 31.4% opponents’ chase rate were his best marks since 2017. Cueto’s average exit velocity, hard-hit rate and barrel rate were all better than the league average, and his walk rate was in the 81st percentile of MLB pitchers.

Cueto was much more effective through his first dozen starts of the season (3.63 ERA) than over his final nine appearances (4.72), but perhaps some late fatigue was to be expected. His first “full” season back from Tommy John surgery, after all, was the pandemic-shortened 2020 campaign. The 2021 season was the first time since 2017 that Cueto had started the season healthy in April and was still trying to pitch into August and September.

The end result of Cueto’s 2021 campaign was a respectable 4.08 ERA and peripherals that largely backed him up (4.05 FIP, 4.27 xFIP, 4.43 SIERA). It’s not necessarily a dominant profile, and projection systems are down on him by virtue of factoring in his ugly 2019-20 results in the wake of Tommy John surgery. ZiPS has him at 92 innings of 4.43 ERA ball. Steamer is more bullish in workload (144 innings) but much more bearish in results (5.05 ERA). You’re forgiven if you are not overly optimistic for Cueto’s outlook in 2022 and beyond. The past few years, taken as a whole, have not been great.

A team that’s more focused on Cueto’s 2021 characteristics — the increase in velocity over 2018-20, the upticks in swinging strikes and chases — might see things differently, however. Cueto shouldn’t be penciled in for a return to his halcyon days of 200-plus innings and 33 starts, but he did make all 12 of his starts in 2020 and was more healthy in 2021 than he’s been since undergoing Tommy John surgery. He’s not the complete-game threat and workhorse he once was, but Cueto averaged 5 1/3 innings per start in ’21 and had been averaging about 5 2/3 per outing up until the All-Star break. It’s not out of the question that he could bounce back a bit further and make 24 to 25 starts with average or better results. At his per-start output, that clocks in somewhere in the range of 130 to 140 innings.

Maybe 135 innings of low-4.00s ERA doesn’t jump up and excite fans, but for the right team, that’s plenty valuable. The prevailing, but often incorrect, mentality is that every team possesses some guys in Triple-A who could come up and fill that role. However, there were only 89 pitchers in MLB last season who pitched at least 80 innings and posted an ERA under 4.25 — about three per team, on average. Bulk sources of respectable innings don’t necessarily grow on trees.

Clubs that already have solid options in the top four spots of their rotation could look to Cueto as a fairly affordable means of rounding things out. The Mets, Mariners, Blue Jays, Braves, Cubs and the incumbent Giants all fit that billing to varying extents. A team in need of filling out multiple rotation spots (e.g. Twins, Nationals, Rangers) might look for a bit more reliability, but perhaps even they’d see some merit in installing Cueto as a steadying presence while awaiting the arrival of some younger arms.

Regardless of Cueto’s eventual destination, it’s a bit surprising that he’s become something of a forgotten man this time around in free agency. There’s been nary a word about his market since the Giants opted for a $5MM buyout over a $22MM club option for the 2022 season. At a net $17MM, that option was never getting picked up, but Cueto had a decent rebound campaign in ’21 and probably ought to be getting a little more consideration as fans, pundits and teams alike consider the post-lockout market. He might not command more than a one-year deal, and that comes with serious bargain potential — relative to other names who’ve signed thus far, anyway.

Corey Kluber got $8MM from the Rays, and Cueto pitched as much in 2021 as Kluber has over the past three years combined. Jordan Lyles received a $7MM guarantee from the Orioles despite leading the Majors with 38 homers allowed last year and leading the Majors in earned runs allowed since 2020. Andrew Heaney got $8.5MM from the Dodgers. The Red Sox gave $7MM to Michael Wacha. This isn’t to disparage any of those deals individually. The teams paying those salaries are paying for varying levels of perceived upside, relative youth and/or bulk innings. However, it’s hard to see those figures and think Cueto won’t command something similar, if not better. And if he does clock in south of that range due to concerns over the late elbow issue, he has some significant bargain potential.

It seems silly to call a multi-time All-Star and former Cy Young candidate who just finished up a nine-figure deal “overlooked,” but Cueto hasn’t gotten much attention even in terms of pure free-agent speculation, despite the fact that he just turned in a pretty decent season overall.

Share 0 Retweet 6 Send via email0

MLBTR Originals Johnny Cueto

76 comments

The Value Of The MLBPA’s Super Two Proposal

By Tim Dierkes | February 21, 2022 at 10:57am CDT

In its most recent proposal, the Major League Baseball Players Association asked that 80% of players with at least two years of MLB service be considered arbitration eligible.  This is up from 22%, which has been the cutoff since 2013 when it was increased from 17%.  In the ongoing CBA negotiations, MLB has shown no interest in any change to the 22% figure.  The MLBPA started these CBA talks at a position of making all 2+ players eligible for arbitration, which had been the case from the inception of salary arbitration in 1973 up until 1985.

I thought it might be interesting to attempt to quantify the MLBPA’s request.  First, we should get an idea of how many additional players would be thrown into the arbitration system each year.  As I mentioned on Twitter last week, the 80% request, if in effect this offseason, would mean changing the current Super Two cutoff from 2.116 (two years and 116 days of MLB service) to 2.028.  Keep in mind that the Super Two cutoff is always a moving target.

By my count, under the 2.116 cutoff, 26 players currently qualify as Super Two this offseason, led by Vladimir Guerrero Jr., Austin Riley, and Bryan Reynolds.

Under a cutoff reduced to 2.028, 79 additional players would qualify as arbitration eligible.  I’ve listed them below along with projected arbitration salaries from Matt Swartz.  Note that our arbitration projection model sometimes spits out a number below the league minimum, in which case we set the projection equal to the minimum.  For this exercise, we’ll use a minimum salary of $700K.

  • Yordan Alvarez, Astros – $4.6MM
  • Bo Bichette, Blue Jays – $4.6MM
  • Will Smith, Dodgers – $3.8MM
  • Kyle Tucker, Astros – $3.6MM
  • Cedric Mullins, Orioles – $3.4MM
  • Tommy Edman, Cardinals – $3.3MM
  • Ty France, Mariners – $3.1MM
  • Dylan Cease, White Sox – $3MM
  • Tyler Rogers, Giants – $3MM
  • Logan Webb, Giants – $2.9MM
  • Zach Plesac, Guardians – $2.7MM
  • Aaron Civale, Guardians – $2.6MM
  • Jordan Romano, Blue Jays – $2.5MM
  • Austin Hays, Orioles – $2.4MM
  • Zac Gallen, Diamondbacks – $2.3MM
  • Trent Grisham, Padres – $2.3MM
  • Jose Urquidy, Astros – $2.2MM
  • Sean Murphy, Athletics – $2.1MM
  • Myles Straw, Guardians – $2MM
  • Austin Gomber, Rockies – $2MM
  • Nick Solak, Rangers – $2MM
  • Gregory Soto, Tigers – $1.9MM
  • Ranger Suarez, Phillies – $1.8MM
  • Brendan Rodgers, Rockies – $1.8MM
  • Alec Mills, Cubs – $1.7MM
  • Nestor Cortes, Yankees – $1.7MM
  • Touki Toussaint, Braves – $1.7MM
  • Dustin May, Dodgers – $1.7MM
  • LaMonte Wade, Giants – $1.7MM
  • Austin Nola, Padres – $1.6MM
  • Devin Williams, Brewers – $1.6MM
  • Jaime Barria, Angels – $1.6MM
  • Josh Staumont, Royals – $1.5MM
  • Genesis Cabrera, Cardinals – $1.5MM
  • Keston Hiura, Brewers – $1.5MM
  • Griffin Canning, Angels – $1.4MM
  • DJ Stewart, Orioles – $1.4MM
  • Tyler Alexander, Tigers – $1.4MM
  • Michael Kopech, White Sox – $1.4MM
  • Cole Sulser, Orioles – $1.4MM
  • Matt Beaty, Dodgers – $1.3MM
  • Kolby Allard, Rangers – $1.3MM
  • Pete Fairbanks, Rays – $1.3MM
  • Oscar Mercado, Guardians – $1.3MM
  • Steven Duggar, Giants – $1.2MM
  • JT Chargois, Rays – $1.2MM
  • Michael Chavis, Pirates – $1.2MM
  • Jose Trevino, Rangers – $1.2MM
  • Brad Wieck, Cubs – $1.1MM
  • Zack Littell, Giants – $1.1MM
  • Josh VanMeter, Diamondbacks – $1.1MM
  • Mike Brosseau, Brewers – $1.1MM
  • Rowan Wick, Cubs – $1MM
  • Darwinzon Hernandez, Red Sox – $1MM
  • Sam Coonrod, Phillies – $1MM
  • Luis Rengifo, Angels – $1MM
  • Justus Sheffield, Mariners – $1MM
  • Dillon Tate, Orioles – $1MM
  • Jose Ruiz, White Sox – $1MM
  • Ryan Helsley, Cardinals – $900K
  • Erik Swanson, Mariners – $900K
  • Jacob Webb, Braves – $900K
  • Anthony Alford, Pirates – $900K
  • Duane Underwood, Pirates – $900K
  • Edwin Rios, Dodgers – $900K
  • Greg Allen, Pirates – $900K
  • Sam Howard, Pirates – $800K
  • Dennis Santana, Rangers – $800K
  • Colin Poche, Rays – $700K
  • Nick Margevicius, Mariners – $700K
  • Austin Davis, Red Sox – $700K
  • Hoby Milner, Brewers – $700K
  • Cody Stashak, Twins – $700K
  • Yoan Lopez, Phillies – $700K
  • Hunter Harvey, Giants – $700K
  • Jonathan Hernandez, Rangers – $700K
  • Tyler Beede, Giants – $700K
  • Javy Guerra, Padres – $700K
  • Julian Fernandez, Rockies – $700K

To calculate how much additional money MLB teams would be paying under this system in 2022, I found the difference between the projected arbitration salary, and a hypothetical $700K minimum.  So, for example, Yordan Alvarez and Bo Bichette would gain the most, an additional $3.9MM each in ’22.  Note that it’s possible a few star players might make more than the league minimum even as a pre-arbitration player, like when Mookie Betts was renewed for $950K in 2017, but we aren’t modeling that in.

So, for these 79 additional Super Two players under the MLBPA’s proposal, we estimate that teams would pay an additional $72.4MM in 2022.

By itself, MLB might be willing to stomach something of that nature.  They’ve shown a willingness to put $15MM into a pre-arbitration bonus pool, and I assume they could be pushed up higher if the players drop their request to change Super Two eligibility.

But there’s the rub: MLB doesn’t want any additional players thrown into the arbitration system.  Doing so, particularly for star players, would increase that player’s total arbitration earnings by a significant amount, and also help push up the pay scale.

To illustrate this, we asked Matt Swartz to model out a couple of players who have been through the arbitration system already.

The first is Francisco Lindor.  Lindor went through arbitration three times, earning salaries of $10.55MM in 2019, $17.5MM in 2020, and $22.3MM in 2021, for a total of $50.35MM.  Under the MLBPA’s proposal, Lindor would have been arbitration eligible four times.  This means he would have earned a lot more than the $623,200 he did in 2018 – 10.7 times as much, in our estimation.  Here’s how our model saw a Lindor who went to arbitration four times, keeping his actual statistics the same:

  • 2018: $623,200 -> $6.7MM
  • 2019: $10.55MM -> $14.9MM
  • 2020: $17.5MM -> $20.7MM
  • 2021: $22.3MM -> $23.4MM
  • Total: $50,973,200 -> $65.7MM
  • Difference: $14,726,800

Our other example is Josh Bell.  He’s also set to go through arbitration three times, earning $4.8MM in 2020, $6.35MM in 2021, and a projected $10MM in 2022 for a total of $21.15MM.  Here’s how that might have played out had he gone through arbitration four times:

  • 2019: $587K -> $2.8MM
  • 2020: $4.8MM -> $8.1MM
  • 2021: $6.35MM -> $9.6MM
  • 2022: 10MM (projected) -> $13.2MM
  • Total: $21,737,000 -> $33.7MM
  • Difference: $11,963,000

The Pirates traded Bell in December 2020, knowing he was set to get a bump from $4.8MM to $6.35MM.  MLB might argue that the Pirates would have traded Bell a year earlier if he was slated to jump from $2.8MM to $8.1MM.  They might say that not only would expanding Super Two be bad for their pocketbooks, it’d be bad for “competitive balance.”  I imagine the MLBPA would argue that the Pirates could have afforded Bell in either scenario.

There’s also the chance that shifting the arbitration pay scale a year earlier for a good number of players would simply result in them getting non-tendered a year earlier and hitting the free agent market.  If you look at the list of 79 players above, you can be assured that many of them will not make it all the way through arbitration even if they earn the league minimum in 2022.

Looking at a player like Bell, if he was coming off a poor 2020 season and was set to earn $9.6MM instead of $6.35MM, he might have simply been non-tendered.  As we’ve seen with an example like Kyle Schwarber, this is not necessarily a bad scenario for the player, since Schwarber earned more in free agency than he was projected to get in arbitration, and he’s set to parlay a strong bounceback year into a good multiyear contract.

If you wanted to model out the MLBPA’s 80% request further, you’d have to retroactively apply it to all the players who would’ve been affected and see how much money moves toward the players in that scenario.  But it’d be impossible to guess who would’ve been non-tendered when, so it’s not an exact science.  At any rate, we may learn this week whether MLB truly has any willingness to move off the 22% Super Two cutoff, even if it’s not to 80%.

Share 0 Retweet 14 Send via email0

Arbitration Projection Model Collective Bargaining Agreement MLBTR Originals

140 comments

Who’s Blocking Alek Thomas?

By Darragh McDonald | February 20, 2022 at 11:01pm CDT

In the second round of the 2018 MLB draft, the Diamondbacks selected Alek Thomas, an outfielder from Mount Carmel High School in Chicago. Just 18 years old at the time, Thomas played 56 rookie ball games that year, 28 each on two different teams, hitting .333/.395/.463, wRC+ of 133, with a walk rate of 8.9% and strikeout rate of just 13.7%.

In 2019, he got bumped up to A-ball, playing 91 games and hitting .312/.393/.479. His walk and strikeout rates were 10.7% and 17.9%, culminating in a 153 wRC+. He got promoted to High-A that year and struggled a bit, which isn’t terribly surprising given that he was more than three years younger than the average age for that level. But it was also a small sample of just 23 games.

The pandemic wiped out the 2020 season but didn’t slow Thomas down at all. In 2021, he started his season in Double-A and played 72 games there, hitting ten home runs and stealing eight bases. Along with a walk rate of 11.2% and strikeout rate of 19.8%, he hit .283/.374/.507 for a wRC+ of 134. He got promoted to Triple-A and took his game up another notch. Despite his walk and strikeout rates slipping to 9% and 20.5%, he hit eight home runs in just 34 games, adding five steals, finishing with a line of .369/.434/.658, wRC+ of 168. Thomas is now considered one of the top prospects in the game, with Baseball America ranking him #32, MLB Pipeline #40 and FanGraphs #23.

Thomas, 22 years old in April, has little left to prove in the minors, having now shown himself capable of playing well at the top parts of the D-Backs’ system. One thing standing in his way is the fact that he’s not on the team’s 40-man roster yet, since he’s still a year away from Rule 5 eligibility. Furthermore, as with all top prospects nearing MLB readiness at this time of year, there’s the possibility that they won’t get promoted until they are held back long enough for the club to gain an extra year of control over them. Though there’s also the possibility that the service time rules change, as they are currently being negotiated as part of the next CBA.

Thomas has played all three outfield positions throughout his minor league career, but more in center than the corners. FanGraphs, however, sees him as more of a left fielder in the long term. Even with that move to a less-demanding defensive position, they still view him as a future above-average regular.

At the big league level, the outfield picture for the Diamondbacks is quite murky at the moment. David Peralta is likely to continue as the team’s primarily left fielder, though this is the final year of his extension and he turns 35 in August. He also had a mediocre season at the plate last season, putting up a wRC+ of just 93, his lowest in years. Taking all that into consideration, he might not be a part of the long-term picture.

The attempts to turn Ketel Marte into a center fielder didn’t really work out and he seems poised to return to full-time second base work going forward. Daulton Varsho is a baseball oddity, capable of switching between outfield and catching duties. He was behind the plate for 41 games last year but also saw time on the grass in 54 contests. He hasn’t fully established himself as an MLB hitter just yet, but is just 25 years old and has an excellent minor league track record. Pavin Smith is in a similar position to Varsho, hitting just below league average in his MLB time thus far. But he just turned 26 and has carried himself well in the minors. Josh VanMeter is in the picture but mostly as a bench/utility option. Jordan Luplow came over from the Rays in a trade just before the lockout. He’s likely to be primarily used in a platoon capacity, given his excellent career numbers against lefties and the fact that Peralta, Varsho and Smith all hit from the left side. Thomas is also a lefty, but actually hit southpaws better than righties last year. (1.073 OPS versus lefties and .909 against righties.) Cooper Hummel was added to the 40-man roster in November but has yet to make his MLB debut. Jake McCarthy and Stuart Fairchild are also on the roster, but each has less than 25 games of MLB experience. There’s also another highly-touted outfield prospect in Corbin Carroll, though he’s only reached High-A so far.

In short, there are a lot of options written in pencil, but none in ink. The Diamondbacks had a nightmare season in 2021, going 52-110, tied with the Orioles for the worst record in the majors. They share a division with strong teams like the Dodgers and Giants. The Padres have a decent chance of being much better this year than last. The Rockies plan on spending some money and competing this year. Arizona will need a lot of things to go right if they’re going to bridge the gap with their competitors, including Thomas, and a few of these other names, cementing themselves as mainstays in the outfield.

Share 0 Retweet 11 Send via email0

Arizona Diamondbacks MLBTR Originals Who's Blocking Alek Thomas

51 comments

An Under-The-Radar Free Agent Option For Teams Seeking Rotation Help

By Steve Adams | February 17, 2022 at 6:33pm CDT

The 2021-22 free agent market was highlighted by a historically talented group of shortstops, an unusually deep collection of starting pitchers and a good deal of power bats at the outfield and infield corners. This winter’s collection of free agents is the strongest in recent memory and quite likely the strongest we’ll see for a good while. Look ahead to the 2022-23 class, and while there are certainly a few star names, it pales in comparison to this year’s group.

With any deep free agent class, there are bound to be some names who slip through the cracks or simply don’t draw much in the way of appreciation or attention. We try to minimize this each offseason when ranking our Top 50 free agents and putting forth contract predictions, highlighting a handful of “honorable mentions” who seem likely to secure decent free-agent deals even though we’ve left them sitting outside the top 50. Even still, there’s usually a name or two we wind up wishing we’d considered more closely.

Of the non-top-50, non-honorable-mention free agents in this year’s class, former Cardinals lefty Kwang Hyun Kim fits that bill for me. A combination of age, lack of velocity and lack of bulk innings made us feel comfortable leaving him off the Top 50, but taking a retrospective look at his numbers, I’m not so sure that should’ve been the case. I’ve been asked a few times in recent chats here on MLBTR whether Kim was contemplating a return to the Korea Baseball Organization in light of the MLB lockout. My understanding is that he fully intends to continue on in the Majors and sign with a big league club whenever the transaction freeze lifts.

A very surface-level glance at Kim reveals a solid set of numbers. He’s pitched in 145 2/3 Major League innings, notched a 2.97 earned run average and kept the ball on the ground at a 48.1% clip. Kim doesn’t boast elite command, but his 8.4% walk rate is a bit better than the league-average 8.7%. He’s well below average in terms of strikeout rate (17.2% versus the league-average 23.2%), but the bottom-line results are there.

Had he remained healthier and worked a full season of innings, Kim would likely have a bit more buzz. That didn’t happen, however. He missed a portion of Spring Training and the first three weeks of the season due to a back injury — an issue that sent him to the injured list for another 10-day spell in mid-June. Kim later spent another two and a half weeks on the injured list owing to some elbow inflammation. It proved minor, but the Cardinals picked up a pair of veterans at the deadline (J.A. Happ and Jon Lester) and welcomed back several other injured starters while Kim was on the mend. He did not make a minor league rehab start despite pitching just once over a month-long period, and the Cards moved him to the bullpen when activating him in late August.

The other red flags on Kim were an 89.4 mph fastball and a sub-par strikeout rate led to questionable fielding-independent pitching marks; metrics like FIP (4.34), xERA (4.48), xFIP (4.70) and SIERA (4.85) all pegged Kim as more of a mid-4.00s type of pitcher. The sub-3.00 ERA he’s posted was clearly aided by an elite Cardinals defense, but he also created some of his own luck by limiting hard contact, keeping the ball on the ground and inducing pop-ups at an above-average rate.

Kim rates comfortably above average in terms of average exit velocity, hard-hit percentage and barrel percentage. He also has a penchant for surprising hitters, as his 18% called-strike rate tied him with names like Walker Buehler, Charlie Morton and Steven Matz for the 30th-best mark among the 145 starting pitchers who’ve pitched at least 100 innings since 2020. It’s not an elite figure, but possessing the command and deception needed to freeze opponents does help Kim to offset a below-average swinging-strike rate, to an extent.

In terms of platoon splits, Kim — like most lefties — is more susceptible to right-handed opponents than lefties. That said, it hasn’t been a glaring deficiency. Lefties have posted a putrid .164/.263/.224 slash against him in 133 plate appearances, while righties are at a relatively tepid .248/.310/.397 output. Kim has only fanned a tiny 14.6% of right-handed opponents against a hefty 26.3% of the lefties he’s faced, but his walk rate, ground-ball rate and pop-up rate are all actually much better against right-handed opponents.

Some clubs may be intrigued by Kim as a reliever, given that he’s dominated opponents the first trip through a batting order, yielding a lowly .192/.260/.314 batting line the first time facing a hitter on a given day. That spikes to .290/.354/.425 the second time through a lineup, which is an obvious concern. Then again, Kim’s opponents have hit just .184/.253/.316 in 83 plate appearances when facing him for a third time, so it’s not as though he’s incapable of turning a lineup over with any success. Realistically, that third-time-through-the-order split would likely regress in a larger sample, but it’s also fair to wonder whether that second-time split might improve with more opportunities.

So, to this point, Kim has been primarily a five-inning starter — he’s completed six frames in just eight of his 28 starts — with below-average strikeout capabilities but solid command and a knack for inducing weak contact. He’s struggled a bit the second time through the order, due in no small part to a notable drop in strikeout rate in such settings, but there’s at least some reason to believe he could improve upon that when looking at his third-time splits.

It’s not necessarily an exciting package that teams should be falling over to sign, but the other reason I’ve come to expect we’ll have been light on Kim’s market is simply by looking at how the market has valued other arms this winter. Jordan Lyles can be relied upon for some bulk innings, but his results (5.60 ERA), batted-ball profile and other peripherals are all more questionable than those of Kim. He still signed for a $7MM guarantee. Michael Wacha matched that guarantee despite a third straight sub-par season. Steven Matz and Nick Martinez both beat expectations with four-year contracts — the latter being a particular surprise. The Cubs had the No. 7 waiver priority this offseason and pounced to claim Wade Miley at a year and $10MM. Miley provides more innings, but he’s two years older and, over the past few seasons, looks an awful lot like Kim on a per-inning basis.

Put more simply, it’s been a bull market for starting pitching help, and while Kim’s soft-tossing, weak-contact specialist profile isn’t necessarily a sexy one in the eyes of modern front offices, he’s managed to succeed with it to this point in his career. A team looking for a fairly steady fourth or fifth starter could do much worse than plugging in Kim for five to six innings every fifth day, and if I were reconsidering the remaining free agents on the market, I’d probably peg him for a two-year deal when the lockout lifts. Perhaps that simply won’t be in the cards — the middle class of free agents could be squeezed into some lackluster contract terms — but if he’s available on a one-year deal, it’d be a steal for the signing team.

The number of clubs still needing arms will work in the favor of Kim and other remaining free agents. The Mets still need a fifth starter, and the Mariners and Tigers are also on the hunt in that market. The Twins, Nationals and Rangers all have multiple rotation spots they’ll yet need to fill. The A’s might have a pair of starting jobs to fill, depending on their trade activity. The price tag on Kim shouldn’t be prohibitive one way or another, and the demand should get him a decent deal when all is said and done.

Admittedly, this a lengthier look than I’d normally take at a fourth starter type whose best-case scenario feels like a two-year deal. FanGraphs’ Ben Clemens predicted two years and $20MM back in November, and even after digging into Kim, I think I’m slightly lower than that figure. Still, for a pitcher who’s generated very little fanfare, Kim has a strong track record of results and, based on those first-trip-through-the-order splits, could at worst be deployed as a quality multi-inning reliever. He’ll likely prioritize a team with a clear rotation opening, which dampens the possibility of a Cardinals reunion, but there’s solid value to be had here.

Share 0 Retweet 5 Send via email0

MLBTR Originals Kwang-Hyun Kim

25 comments

Projected Arbitration Salaries For 2022

By Tim Dierkes | February 17, 2022 at 11:00am CDT

At some point, the MLB lockout will end and teams will be scrambling to address their arbitration eligible players.  We’ve updated this post, removing players no longer on 40-man rosters.  We’ve also moved traded players to the correct teams and added official service time as well as notes for pre-tender agreements.

Matt Swartz has created a model to project salaries for arbitration eligible players, which we’ve been publishing at MLB Trade Rumors for 11 years.

In the baseball industry, teams and agents determine arbitration salaries by identifying comparable players. To project the entire arbitration class in this way would take a massive amount of time and effort. So, Matt has developed an algorithm to project arbitration salaries that looks at the player’s playing time, position, role, and performance statistics while accounting for inflation. The performance of comparable players matters, but our system is not directly selecting comps for each individual player.

As a disclaimer, I should note that our projections are not to be used as a scorecard for the agent and team on an individual player level. A player doing better or worse than our projection isn’t indicative of anything. Our arbitration projections are created as a tool for our readers to get a general idea of a team’s payroll situation.

The Super Two cutoff is 2.116 in Major League service time.  The service time figures below are official.  We’ll make adjustments to any projection below the league minimum salary, once a new minimum is established.  Also, please note that contracts signed prior to the non-tender deadline aren’t generally considered to be normal arbitration comparables.

If you find MLBTR’s arbitration projections useful, please consider supporting us with a subscription.

Angels (3)

  • Max Stassi (5.049) – $2.7MM
  • Mike Mayers (4.020) – $2.2MM
  • Tyler Wade (3.088) – $700K

Astros (6)

  • Rafael Montero (5.138) – $3.1MM
  • Aledmys Diaz (5.100) – $4.0MM
  • Phil Maton (4.047) – $1.4MM
  • Ryne Stanek (4.038) – $2.1MM
  • Josh James (3.005) – $700K
  • Framber Valdez (2.163) – $3.2MM

Athletics (10)

  • Sean Manaea (5.157) – $10.2MM
  • Chris Bassitt (5.130) – $8.8MM
  • Chad Pinder (5.047) – $2.8MM.  Signed for $2.725MM prior to NT deadline
  • Matt Chapman (4.109) – $9.5MM
  • Matt Olson (4.103) – $12.0MM
  • Tony Kemp (4.098) – $2.2MM.  Signed for $2.25MM prior to NT deadline
  • Frankie Montas (4.015) – $5.2MM
  • Lou Trivino (3.163) – $2.9MM
  • Deolis Guerra (3.071) – $900K.  Signed for $815K prior to NT deadline
  • Ramon Laureano (3.014) – $2.8MM

Blue Jays (10)

  • Ross Stripling (5.115) – $4.4MM
  • Teoscar Hernandez (4.097) – $10.0MM
  • Adam Cimber (3.156) – $1.5MM
  • Trevor Richards (3.084) – $1.1MM
  • Ryan Borucki (3.066) – $800K
  • Danny Jansen (3.050) – $1.5MM
  • Vladimir Guerrero Jr. (2.157) – $7.9MM
  • Tim Mayza (2.156) – $1.2MM
  • Trent Thornton (2.150) – $900K
  • Cavan Biggio (2.129) – $1.7MM

Braves (10)

  • Adam Duvall (5.151) – $9.1MM
  • Dansby Swanson (5.047) – $10.1MM
  • Luke Jackson (5.019) – $3.8MM
  • Guillermo Heredia (4.112) – $1.6MM.  Signed for $1MM prior to NT deadline
  • A.J. Minter (3.154) – $2.1MM
  • Max Fried (3.148) – $7.1MM
  • Mike Soroka (3.146) – $2.8MM
  • Sean Newcomb (3.123) – $900K
  • Tyler Matzek (3.019) – $1.5MM
  • Austin Riley (2.138) – $4.3MM

Brewers (12)

  • Jace Peterson (5.142) – $1.3MM.  Signed for $1.825MM prior to NT deadline
  • Omar Narvaez (5.089) – $4.1MM
  • Hunter Renfroe (4.165) – $7.6MM
  • Brent Suter (4.161) – $2.3MM
  • Josh Hader (4.115) – $10.0MM
  • Brandon Woodruff (3.161) – $7.1MM
  • Willy Adames (3.105) – $4.0MM
  • Corbin Burnes (3.049) – $4.0MM
  • Eric Lauer (3.033) – $2.7MM
  • Jandel Gustave (3.027) – $800K.  Signed for $675K prior to NT deadline
  • Adrian Houser (3.010) – $2.3MM
  • Rowdy Tellez (3.004) – $1.9MM.  Signed for $1.94MM prior to NT deadline
  • Luis Urias (2.120) – $2.4MM

Cardinals (7)

  • Alex Reyes (4.056) – $3.3MM
  • Harrison Bader (4.030) – $3.7MM
  • Jack Flaherty (4.006) – $5.1MM
  • Jordan Hicks (4.000) – $1.0MM
  • Giovanny Gallegos (3.085) – $2.8MM
  • Dakota Hudson (3.066) – $1.7MM
  • Tyler O’Neill (3.059) – $3.5MM

Cubs (3)

  • Willson Contreras (5.108) – $8.7MM
  • Ian Happ (4.036) – $6.5MM
  • Harold Ramirez (2.124) – $1.6MM

Diamondbacks (7)

  • Luke Weaver (4.112) – $2.7MM
  • Noe Ramirez (4.083) – $1.8MM.  Signed for $1.25MM prior to NT deadline
  • Caleb Smith (4.078) – $2.1MM.  Signed for $2MM prior to NT deadline
  • Carson Kelly (3.161) – $3.0MM
  • Christian Walker (3.124) – $2.7MM
  • Jordan Luplow (3.112) – $1.5MM
  • J.B. Wendelken (3.028) – $900K.  Signed for $835K prior to NT deadline

Dodgers (4)

  • Trea Turner (5.135) – $19.8MM
  • Cody Bellinger (4.160) – $16.1MM.  Signed for $17MM prior to NT deadline
  • Julio Urias (4.117) – $8.8MM
  • Caleb Ferguson (3.093) – $700K

Giants (7)

  • Dominic Leone (5.168) – $1.5MM
  • Curt Casali (5.151) – $2.0MM
  • Darin Ruf (4.138) – $2.6MM
  • Jarlin Garcia (4.114) – $1.8MM.  Signed for $1.725MM prior to NT deadline
  • John Brebbia (4.078) – $1.0MM.  Signed for $837.5K prior to NT deadline
  • Austin Slater (3.147) – $2.0MM.  Signed for $1.85MM prior to NT deadline
  • Mike Yastrzemski (2.128) – $3.1MM

Guardians (7)

  • Austin Hedges (5.166) – $3.8MM
  • Amed Rosario (4.062) – $5.0MM
  • Franmil Reyes (3.115) – $4.4MM
  • Shane Bieber (3.097) – $4.8MM
  • Bradley Zimmer (3.077) – $1.5MM
  • Cal Quantrill (2.132) – $2.8MM
  • Josh Naylor (2.127) – $1.2MM

Mariners (10)

  • Adam Frazier (5.075) – $7.2MM
  • Mitch Haniger (5.048) – $8.5MM
  • Drew Steckenrider (4.094) – $2.1MM
  • Tom Murphy (4.092) – $1.7MM
  • J.P. Crawford (3.163) – $5.0MM
  • Diego Castillo (3.118) – $2.6MM
  • Paul Sewald (3.072) – $1.8MM
  • Casey Sadler (3.035) – $1.3MM.  Signed for $1.025MM prior to NT deadline
  • Dylan Moore (3.000) – $1.6MM
  • Luis Torrens (2.118) – $1.6MM

Marlins (10)

  • Jesus Aguilar (5.082) – $7.4MM
  • Richard Bleier (5.074) – $2.5MM
  • Joey Wendle (4.088) – $4.0MM
  • Garrett Cooper (4.053) – $3.0MM
  • Dylan Floro (4.053) – $2.4MM
  • Brian Anderson (4.031) – $4.5MM
  • Jacob Stallings (3.149) – $2.6MM
  • Elieser Hernandez (3.118) – $1.4MM
  • Pablo Lopez (3.093) – $2.5MM
  • Jon Berti (2.168) – $1.2MM

Mets (13)

  • Edwin Diaz (5.121) – $10.4MM
  • Seth Lugo (5.082) – $3.7MM
  • Miguel Castro (5.079) – $2.6MM
  • Brandon Nimmo (5.042) – $6.0MM
  • Trevor Williams (5.027) – $3.8MM
  • Dominic Smith (3.146) – $4.0MM
  • J.D. Davis (3.137) – $2.7MM
  • Tomas Nido (3.089) – $900K
  • Jeff McNeil (3.069) – $2.8MM
  • Joey Lucchesi (3.067) – $1.6MM
  • Drew Smith (3.034) – $900K
  • Pete Alonso (3.000) – $7.3MM
  • Luis Guillorme (2.167) – $700K

Nationals (8)

  • Josh Bell (5.053) – $10.0MM
  • Joe Ross (5.018) – $3.0MM
  • Juan Soto (3.134) – $16.2MM
  • Erick Fedde (3.099) – $1.9MM
  • Victor Robles (3.033) – $1.7MM
  • Austin Voth (2.127) – $1.0MM
  • Tanner Rainey (2.127) – $800K
  • Andrew Stevenson (2.127) – $900K.  Signed for $850K prior to NT deadline

Orioles (6)

  • Trey Mancini (5.015) – $7.9MM
  • Anthony Santander (3.162) – $3.7MM.  Signed for $3.15MM prior to NT deadline
  • Jorge Lopez (3.102) – $1.5MM.  Signed for $1.5MM prior to NT deadline
  • Paul Fry (3.075) – $1.1MM.  Signed for $850K prior to NT deadline
  • Tanner Scott (3.059) – $1.0MM
  • John Means (3.007) – $3.1MM

Padres (8)

  • Joe Musgrove (5.063) – $8.9MM
  • Dinelson Lamet (4.130) – $4.6MM
  • Emilio Pagan (4.091) – $2.3MM.  Signed for $2.3MM prior to NT deadline
  • Jorge Alfaro (4.083) – $2.7MM
  • Victor Caratini (4.051) – $2.1MM
  • Tim Hill (3.112) – $1.4MM.  Signed for $1.325MM prior to NT deadline
  • Austin Adams (3.015) – $1.0MM.  Signed for $925K prior to NT deadline
  • Chris Paddack (3.000) – $2.1MM

Phillies (4)

  • Zach Eflin (5.018) – $6.0MM
  • Jose Alvarado (4.088) – $1.9MM
  • Rhys Hoskins (4.053)  – $7.6MM
  • Seranthony Dominguez (3.131) – $800K.  Signed for $725K prior to NT deadline

Pirates (4)

  • Ben Gamel (5.029) – $2.9MM.  Signed for $1.8MM prior to NT deadline
  • Chris Stratton (4.100)  – $2.2MM
  • Kevin Newman (3.046) – $2.2MM
  • Bryan Reynolds (2.163) – $4.5MM

Rangers (4)

  • Isiah Kiner-Falefa (4.000) – $4.9MM
  • Willie Calhoun (3.033) – $1.6MM
  • Brett Martin (2.151) – $1.1MM
  • Taylor Hearn (2.140) – $1.1MM

Rays (14)

  • Matt Wisler (5.042) – $1.8MM
  • Manuel Margot (5.012) – $5.0MM
  • Tyler Glasnow (4.158) – $5.8MM
  • Ji-Man Choi (4.076) – $3.5MM.  Signed prior to NT deadline for $3.2MM
  • Ryan Yarbrough (3.147) – $4.4MM
  • Yonny Chirinos (3.137) – $1.2MM
  • Yandy Diaz (3.122) – $2.7MM
  • Austin Meadows (3.074) – $4.3MM
  • Andrew Kittredge (3.070) – $1.6MM
  • Jalen Beeks (3.070) – $600K
  • Francisco Mejia (3.062) – $1.5MM
  • Jeffrey Springs (3.055) – $1.0MM
  • Brett Phillips (3.013) – $1.2MM
  • Nick Anderson (3.000) – $900K

Red Sox (7)

  • Kevin Plawecki (5.167) – $2.0MM.  Signed for $2.25MM after NT deadline
  • Ryan Brasier (4.109) – $1.4MM.  Signed for $1.4MM prior to NT deadline
  • Rafael Devers (4.070) – $11.1MM
  • Nick Pivetta (3.166) – $3.2MM
  • Alex Verdugo (3.078) – $3.2MM
  • Christian Arroyo (3.036) – $1.1MM
  • Josh Taylor (2.121) – $1.1MM

Reds (10)

  • Tyler Naquin (5.033) – $3.6MM
  • Luis Cessa (4.131) – $1.6MM
  • Luis Castillo (4.101) – $7.6MM
  • Amir Garrett (4.099) – $2.2MM
  • Jesse Winker (4.080) – $6.8MM
  • Tyler Mahle (4.018) – $5.6MM
  • Kyle Farmer (3.129) – $2.2MM
  • Jeff Hoffman (3.105) – $1.1MM
  • Lucas Sims (3.014) – $1.2MM
  • Nick Senzel (2.150) – $1.1MM

Rockies (9)

  • Daniel Bard (5.103) – $4.8MM.  Signed for $4.4MM prior to NT deadline
  • Carlos Estevez (5.022) – $3.2MM
  • Kyle Freeland (4.144) – $7.0MM
  • Robert Stephenson (4.049) – $1.1MM
  • Raimel Tapia (4.020) – $3.9MM
  • Ryan McMahon (4.006) – $5.5MM
  • Garrett Hampson (3.030) – $1.8MM
  • Tyler Kinley (3.014) – $1.0MM.  Signed for $1.025MM prior to NT deadline
  • Peter Lambert (2.116) – $600K

Royals (7)

  • Andrew Benintendi (5.062) – $9.3MM
  • Adalberto Mondesi (4.088) – $3.2MM
  • Brad Keller (4.000) – $5.2MM
  • Cam Gallagher (3.106) – $900K
  • Scott Barlow (3.030) – $2.4MM
  • Ryan O’Hearn (3.002) – $1.4MM
  • Nicky Lopez (2.139) – $2.0MM

Tigers (8)

  • Michael Fulmer (5.157) – $5.1MM
  • Joe Jimenez (4.061) – $1.8MM
  • Jeimer Candelario (4.038) – $5.9MM
  • Jose Cisnero (4.020) – $1.9MM
  • Victor Reyes (3.075) – $1.3MM
  • Spencer Turnbull (3.020) – $1.8MM
  • Dustin Garneau (3.015) – $1.6MM
  • Harold Castro (2.141) – $1.5MM

Twins (6)

  • Taylor Rogers (5.145) – $6.7MM
  • Tyler Duffey (5.074) – $3.7MM.  Signed for $3.8MM prior to NT deadline
  • Mitch Garver (4.045) – $3.1MM
  • Caleb Thielbar (3.131) – $1.2MM.  Signed for $1.3MM prior to NT deadline
  • Jharel Cotton (3.052) – $1.2MM.  Signed for $700K prior to NT deadline
  • Luis Arraez (2.121) – $2.0MM

White Sox (3)

  • Lucas Giolito (4.080) – $7.9MM
  • Adam Engel (4.058) – $2.2MM
  • Reynaldo Lopez (4.004) – $2.8MM

Yankees (16)

  • Jameson Taillon (5.110) – $4.7MM
  • Joey Gallo (5.103) – $10.2MM
  • Gary Sanchez (5.086) – $7.9MM
  • Aaron Judge (5.051) – $17.1MM
  • Chad Green (5.050) – $4.1MM
  • Wandy Peralta (4.168) – $1.7MM
  • Jordan Montgomery (4.153) – $4.8MM
  • Gio Urshela (4.127) – $6.2MM.  Signed for $6.55MM prior to NT deadline
  • Luke Voit (3.169) – $5.4MM
  • Gleyber Torres (3.162) – $5.9MM
  • Miguel Andujar (3.117) – $1.7MM
  • Clay Holmes (3.031) – $1.0MM
  • Jonathan Loaisiga (3.022) – $1.7MM
  • Domingo German (3.017) – $2.1MM.  Signed for $1.75MM prior to NT deadline
  • Lucas Luetge (3.015) – $1.1MM.  Signed for $905K prior to NT deadline
  • Kyle Higashioka (3.005) – $1.2MM

The arbitration projections were originally published 10-11-21.  Additional information was added 2-17-22.

Share 0 Retweet 43 Send via email0

Arbitration Projection Model MLBTR Originals Newsstand

184 comments

MLB Is Trying To Trade Draft Pick Compensation For A Much Tougher Competitive Balance Tax

By Tim Dierkes | February 16, 2022 at 3:25pm CDT

In a recent article, I tried to make the point that MLB, in general, wants something resembling the status quo in these CBA negotiations.  But there’s one area where I was wrong and MLB’s proposals have been clearly worse than the status quo, and that’s the competitive balance tax.

Let’s look at how MLB’s proposed tax rates compare to the status quo from 2017-21.

MLB’s goal here is clear: make teams much less likely to exceed the base tax threshold at all.  However “soft” of a salary cap this was in the 2017-21, MLB is attempting to harden it.  These tax rates say, “If you go over the tax thresholds, we’re really going to make you pay.”

MLB doubled down on the goal of hardening the CBT as a cap by adding new draft pick penalties.  The status quo: any club that exceeds the second surcharge threshold ($250MM in 2021) would have its highest available selection in the next draft moved back ten spots.  If a team is set to pick in the top six, that is left alone and the second-rounder is moved back ten spots.

MLB’s latest offer is far more extreme than this: a team in the second tier (MLB proposes $234-254MM for 2022) entirely surrenders its second round pick, and a team in the third tier ($254MM+) forfeits its first round pick.

I don’t think anyone would argue with this: MLB’s current proposal is for a much more restrictive competitive balance tax, without even getting into the matter of the thresholds.  So, how would they defend it?  The answer is that MLB likely feels it’s proposing an even trade by eliminating draft pick compensation for signing free agents.

Every winter, somewhere between six and 20 players at the top of the free agency class receive a qualifying offer.  Under this system, the worst possible penalty for signing a qualified free agent is forfeiture of a second and fifth round pick and having your international bonus pool reduced by $1MM.    The Yankees, for example, made this sacrifice to sign Gerrit Cole.  MLB’s pitch may be that under their new CBT plan, teams would have forfeited fewer draft picks than they gave up to sign free agents during the most recent CBA (something I intend to explore).  I think that in MLB’s eyes, they are offering to transfer the burden that a certain number of players at the top of each free agent market bear under the qualifying offer system to the team level as a CBT penalty.

Elimination of the qualifying offer system would remove the Craig Kimbrel/Dallas Keuchel type situations, where those players waited until after the June draft to sign because of the drag caused by draft pick compensation.  It would also remove the dynamic where a player accepts a qualifying offer and ultimately earns less in his career as a result, like perhaps Neil Walker.

I would guess that the MLBPA doesn’t consider this an even trade whatsoever, and has likely told MLB as much.  The MLBPA likely takes major issue with drastically increased CBT penalties.  Consider Giants pitcher Alex Wood, who tweeted,”If penalties increase under the CBT/Luxury tax IT DOES NOT MATTER WHAT THE THRESHOLD IS MY GOD. Make the threshold a billion dollars it doesn’t matter. Teams already don’t spend bc they use the current penalties as an excuse not to. Imagine if the penalties got worse. SMH.”

In a theoretical sense, I disagree with Alex.  One could argue that the thresholds matter more than the penalties, because more teams stop right before the base tax threshold than actually pay the tax.  In recent years, only two or three teams have typically paid the tax.  To take Alex’s example to the extreme, if the base tax threshold actually was a billion dollars, and the penalty for exceeding it was that the team needed to play defense with only eight players on the field at all times, the MLBPA should take that deal because the penalty is irrelevant if teams don’t exceed the base tax threshold.

However, there’s a slippery slope concern here on the side of the MLBPA.  History has shown us that once the players surrender something to MLB, it is very hard to claw any of it back.  Case in point, the players moved arbitration eligibility from three years to two in 1980 and gave that back in 1985.  Since then they’ve only managed to win back 22% of the 2+ class, and MLB is currently drawing a hard line on a return to the pre-1985 arbitration structure.

That’s why the MLBPA will likely draw their own hard line and refuse to further increase the tax rates or the draft pick penalty for exceeding tax thresholds.  That might be one of the MLBPA’s non-starter stances.  And if the MLBPA thinks elimination of the qualifying offer system is of modest value, keeping it in place would not be a major problem.

MLB should stop proposing this supposedly even trade.  It’s like in a fantasy baseball league where a guy keeps making you the same offer over and offer, telling you it’s fair.  It’s just not conducive to making a larger deal.

MLB should take increased CBT penalties off the table entirely, and should also propose leaving the qualifying offer system completely intact from the previous CBA.  That would be, literally, the status quo.  Then, with the clock ticking, the two sides can get down to solving the $51MM gulf between where they think the CBT thresholds should land by 2026.

Share 0 Retweet 11 Send via email0

Collective Bargaining Agreement MLBTR Originals

147 comments

Why MLB Players Went On Strike In The Past And What It Tells Us About The Current Lockout

By Tim Dierkes | February 15, 2022 at 10:59pm CDT

A lockout is not a strike.  You probably already knew that, but in all of my in-person conversations with casual to moderate baseball fans since the lockout began, none of them knew the difference.

A lockout is a work stoppage initiated by ownership.  MLB teams locked out the players back in December, and that’s why we aren’t seeing pitchers and catchers reporting to spring training today.  If players were to show up at the stadiums, they’d literally find themselves locked out.

A strike is when employees cease going to work as a group.  Since Marvin Miller created the Major League Baseball Players Association 56 years ago, the players have gone on strike five times.  Let’s take a look at why they elected to do so.

1972 strike – 86 games lost

The union itself was only six years old.  The issue at stake is what Miller called a “modest request” of increases in the players’ pensions and health care contribution to keep up with inflation, part of which meant using an existing surplus in the pension fund.  In spring of 1972, Miller felt that an agreement was within reach.  Then, ownership surprised the players by taking a position of no increase on the pension, and a reduction on health care.  Miller saw this as an “unmistakable signal” that “management was baiting us into a strike.”

Two days prior to the expiration of the pension agreement, Miller proposed solving the dispute by using an independent arbitrator, in an attempt to avoid a strike.  The owners declined.  Miller was concerned the “still young Association” wouldn’t be able to sustain a strike, and advised the players to postpone it and negotiate during the season.  Miller found his players to be “positively militant” about going out on strike, however, so that’s what they did.  After 13 days of lost revenue, the owners folded and the first strike in professional sports was over.

1980 strike – 92 exhibition games lost

At this point, free agent compensation was the issue at stake.  Free agency had only been around for four years, and the owners felt they needed to add restrictions to it.  Specifically, owners felt that signing a free agent should require giving up a Major League player as compensation.  Faced with this issue, the players voted to cancel the final week of spring training, return to play Opening Day, and possibly strike on Memorial Day weekend in 1980.

Instead, Miller and MLB negotiator Ray Grebey settled all the other issues, including dropping the salary arbitration requirement from three years to two (something MLB considers a non-starter in these 2022 negotiations).  The two sides were able to avoid a regular season strike by kicking the can down the road on free agent compensation, forming a study committee.  As part of announcing the 1980 agreement, Grebey “poisoned the bargaining well” (in the words of John Helyar in Lords of the Realm) by telling the press the owners’ compensation plan would go into effect in 1981, which was untrue.

While the cancellation of a week of spring training makes this technically count as a strike, no regular season games were missed, and it was more of a prelude to the 1981 strike.  Helyar called it “a lull until the next battle.”

1981 strike – 712 games lost

This was the first major strike in baseball history.  The aforementioned free agent compensation study committee produced nothing of value.  Miller described ownership’s proposal thusly: “A club signing a free agent could very well lose an established player more valuable than the free agent, or lose a prospect with All-Star potential.  The scheme was designed to end free agency and would certainly had succeeded if it had gone into effect.”  After the committee issued a report with “two diametrically opposed opinions,” the two sides had 30 days to hammer out an agreement in early 1981.  That didn’t happen, allowing owners to unilaterally adopt their free agent compensation proposal.  The players were only offering a draft pick as compensation, and over this gap, they went on strike.

Miller called the 1981 strike “the most principled I’ve ever been associated with” and “the Association’s finest hour.”  He notes that the union was not making demands; it was ownership seeking what he considered excessive free agent compensation.  As the strike dragged on, federal mediator Ken Moffett “never got past first base” with his proposals, as Miller put it.  Instead, the MLBPA proposed a system where each team could protect 25 players, and all other players would become part of a pool from which teams losing certain free agents could choose.  With the owners’ strike insurance running out, this “pool” free agent compensation plan led to a settlement after 50 days.  Four years later in 1985 the owners were already asking for the pool compensation plan’s removal.

1985 strike – no games lost

This two-day strike is similar to 1980 in that it technically counts, but no regular season games were lost.  By 1985, Marvin Miller was retired “but remained a power in the union,” according to Helyar.  Still, Don Fehr was in charge of negotiations for the MLBPA.  With the union under new leadership and solidarity of the players waning, the players’ union agreed to “give-backs” for the first time, as arbitration was rolled back to three years instead of two and the pension formula was changed to the players’ detriment.  As Miller put it, “For the first time in its almost twenty years of existence, the Players Association took backward steps.”  He added, “Either you push forward or you’re going to get pushed back.”  Miller felt that Fehr’s error was “in not instilling in the players the determination to fight the good fight.”

1994 strike – 938 regular season games lost, plus cancellation of the playoffs

In 1994, as Helyar put it, “The players rejected a salary cap as repugnant at any price.”  Nonetheless, owner of the small market Brewers and acting commissioner Bud Selig was convinced a salary cap was necessary and convinced the other owners to fight for it.  Helyar explains, “The players had to go on the offensive, if only for defensive purposes. If no contract was reached by collective bargaining, the Lords could eventually shove the salary cap down their throats. Federal labor law allowed employers to declare a bargaining impasse, after a decent interval for negotiations, and impose employment terms.  The players had to try forcing a deal when they still had some leverage – during the season, when lost games meant lost money for the Lords.”

So, the players went on strike on August 12, 1994.  Ultimately the rest of the season, including the playoffs, were canceled.  Fehr and Selig wound up in court, and Justice Sonia Sotomayor granted an injunction blocking Selig’s intended use of replacement players to start the ’95 season.  The status quo was returned and the strike ended.

Why The Players Went On Strike

I worked through this little history lesson to explain the circumstances under which the players went on the three significant strikes in the 56-year history of their union.  In 1972, it was because the owners tried to test a young MLBPA by moving backwards on an issue that was key to players at the time, their pension and health care benefits.  In 1981, players went on strike because owners demanded a compensation system that would significantly devalue their newly-won right to free agency.  In 1994, players went on strike because Bud Selig attempted to force a salary cap.  The common thread: in each instance, ownership was attempting to move the players significantly backward.

How The Owners Have Justified The 2022 Lockout

Now let’s tie this into the present dispute.  MLB’s lockout is already affecting spring training and could well lead to canceled games in April, so it’s important to understand why they did it.  In his December 2 “letter to baseball fans,” Commissioner Rob Manfred provided two reasons why MLB was “forced to commence” a lockout of the players:

  1.  “We hope that the lockout will jumpstart the negotiations and get us to an agreement that will allow the season to start on time.”
  2.   “We cannot allow an expired agreement to again cause an in-season strike and a missed World Series, like we experienced in 1994.”

It’s pretty easy to dismiss the “jumpstart the negotiations” angle, given that MLB waited 42 days between its lockout and its next proposal.  In my opinion, some credibility is lost when you say that and then wait that long to make your next offer.

But let’s examine the second point, about how we can’t allow another strike like ’94.  I have already established that historically, MLB players going on strike has been rare, and pretty clearly provoked by ownership each time.  However, ownership has not done anything to provoke a strike in 2022.

As Manfred put it, “Baseball’s players have no salary cap and are not subjected to a maximum length or dollar amount on contracts. In fact, only MLB has guaranteed contracts that run 10 or more years, and in excess of $300 million. We have not proposed anything that would change these fundamentals.”  Emphasis mine.  This is completely true.  The MLBPA has plenty of concerns right now with various causes, but they’re not the result of something radical MLB is trying to impose.  MLB wants something resembling the status quo.  The difference of opinion is on whether the status quo is acceptable.

The Current Issues Are Not Strike-worthy

It’s my opinion that the current differences of opinion, which are mostly in in degrees and not concepts, are not compelling enough to cause the players to strike.  Sometimes the degrees of difference are large, like in the case of the competitive balance tax, but it’s still mostly haggling over numbers.  To be clear, the idea that the players wouldn’t strike is guesswork based on the historical precedent I’ve laid out in this post.  Publicly or even privately, if the players are disinclined to strike over the current differences, they cannot admit it.  To do so would be to lose their leverage.

MLB could lift the lockout today and everything would start on time, with negotiations continuing during the season.  So for them to keep the lockout in place and risk canceling games, under the justification Manfred provided, MLB really has to feel a midseason strike would have been likely.  Let’s game that out and envision a hypothetical strike announcement by MLBPA executive director Tony Clark.  For this exercise I’m using the current gaps, even though six months from now those gaps would presumably be smaller.

August 12, 2022: Hypothetical Press Release From Tony Clark On Behalf Of MLB Players

“On this the 28th anniversary of the 1994 strike, I’m devastated to say that MLB players have no choice but to go on strike due to the unreasonable positions of the owners.  Our differences are large enough to risk losing the rest of the 2022 season and the World Series if the owners don’t move significantly within the few weeks.  Here are the reasons we’re going on strike.

We believe all 30 teams should try to win every year.  While we have agreed with MLB on the implementation of a draft lottery, we differ on how many picks should be subject to it (three vs. eight)  and whether teams should be penalized for being bad in consecutive years.

We want the best players to be promoted as soon as they’re ready for the Majors.  Service time manipulation meant MLB stars like Kris Bryant and Vladimir Guerrero Jr. had their debuts delayed past the point of readiness.  Perhaps more importantly to the union, this practice allows teams to control players for nearly seven years instead of the agreed-upon six.  MLB has proposed extra draft picks to incentivize teams to put MLB-ready stars on Opening Day rosters, but we don’t think it’s enough to move the needle.  We feel that rookies should have the opportunity to earn a full year of service time based on factors like awards voting and WAR.  We’re also seeking a $30MM cut in revenue sharing, as we feel these transfers of wealth allow small market teams to be profitable without investing in players and trying to win.

We also believe large market teams should have fewer payroll restrictions.  When we agreed in the previous two CBAs to the competitive balance tax increasing by $32MM over a ten-year period, we didn’t anticipate large market teams would treat the base tax threshold as a de facto salary cap.  MLB has proposed moving the tax threshold by only $12MM by 2026, but we feel a $63MM increase to $273MM over the next five years is necessary.  MLB has proposed increasing the tax rates on overages as well.

As teams have de-emphasized free agency, we need to get players paid earlier in their careers.  One key is the minimum salary, which we feel should increase from $570,500 in 2021 to $775,000 in ’22.  MLB has proposed $630,000, leaving us $145,000 apart.  On a related note, we’re also looking to change salary arbitration so that all players with at least two years are eligible.  This would add dozens of players into the arbitration system each year who previously would have been making a salary close to the league minimum.

The third way we’re looking to increase pay for players earlier in their careers is by the implementation of a pre-arbitration bonus pool.  MLB has agreed to this concept.  We’re proposing each team contribute $3.33MM per year to this pool (a total of $100MM), but MLB is offering only $500K per team (a total of $15MM).

Though the MLBPA is not seeking playoff expansion, we are nonetheless willing to grant MLB an increase to a 12-team field.  They’re seeking a 14-team field.  We feel that expanded playoffs, plus MLB’s proposed addition of advertising to uniforms, would bring significant additional revenue to the teams.

We find the universal designated hitter to be mutually beneficial, and MLB has agreed to implement it.  MLB has also agreed to eliminate the qualifying offer system, which we concede would benefit several players each offseason.

Collective bargaining has been ongoing for nearly 16 months, and we’ve played out the 2022 season without an agreement in place.  While we were cautiously optimistic when MLB lifted the lockout six months ago in February, we now feel that our differences are too significant to be resolved through further bargaining.  Regretfully, a strike is our only recourse, and we hope it will prompt the required movement from MLB to lead to an agreement and save the ’22 playoffs.”

A Possible Third Motive For MLB’s Lockout

Maybe you’re like me and you can’t see Tony Clark issuing a strike announcement statement similar to the hypothetical I wrote above.  Though they wouldn’t admit it, maybe MLB also finds a strike on these grounds to be unlikely.  That leads to a third, unstated possible motive for MLB initiating a lockout in December 2021: they did so mainly to gain financial leverage over the players and get a better deal for themselves.

That’s what I think is happening, and it’s MLB’s right to do so.  In that case, the current situation boils down to MLB being willing to cancel games in April to get a better agreement.

I know it’s easy to “both sides” the current labor dispute.  Feel free to choose from among these commonly-used phrases:

  • A pox on both your houses
  • Millionaires vs. billionaires
  • Where is the fan in all of this

However, only one side can implement a lockout, and only one side can go on strike.  Currently, we’re in a lockout, and I don’t think it’s reasonable to blame the players for going on strike unless they actually do, you know, go on strike.  If the lockout is lifted and the players go on strike over these issues, then yes, the players would shoulder the lion’s share of responsibility for missed games and/or canceled playoffs.  Until then, missed games fall on ownership.

Required baseball labor reading:

  • A Whole Different Ball Game by Marvin Miller
  • Lords of the Realm by John Helyar
  • The Game by Jon Pessah
Share 0 Retweet 15 Send via email0

Collective Bargaining Agreement MLBTR Originals

314 comments
« Previous Page
Load More Posts
Show all
    Top Stories

    Rob Manfred Downplays Salary Cap Dispute With Bryce Harper

    Tanner Houck To Undergo Tommy John Surgery

    Yankees Release Marcus Stroman

    Cubs Release Ryan Pressly

    Cubs To Host 2027 All-Star Game

    MLB Trade Tracker: July

    Padres Acquire Mason Miller, JP Sears

    Astros Acquire Carlos Correa

    Rays, Twins Swap Griffin Jax For Taj Bradley

    Padres Acquire Ryan O’Hearn, Ramon Laureano

    Rangers Acquire Merrill Kelly

    Yankees Acquire David Bednar

    Blue Jays Acquire Shane Bieber

    Mets Acquire Cedric Mullins

    Padres Acquire Nestor Cortes

    Last Day To Lock In Savings On Trade Rumors Front Office

    Cubs Acquire Willi Castro

    Tigers Acquire Charlie Morton

    Yankees Acquire Camilo Doval

    Royals Acquire Mike Yastrzemski

    Recent

    Astros Release Omar Narvaez

    AL Notes: Thornton, Buxton, Rays, Vargas

    NL East Notes: Alcantara, Yankees, Anthopoulos, Ozuna, Winker, Kranick

    Patrick Sandoval, Liam Hendriks Doubtful To Return In 2025

    Scott Harris Discusses Tigers’ Deadline Approach

    White Sox Release Noah Syndergaard, Penn Murfee

    Padres “Made A Real Run At” MacKenzie Gore Trade

    Astros, Twins Reportedly Discussed Christian Walker In Carlos Correa Trade

    Outright Assignments: 8/3/25

    Red Sox Notes: Ryan, Alcantara, Prospects, Mayer, Slaten

    MLBTR Newsletter - Hot stove highlights in your inbox, five days a week

    Latest Rumors & News

    Latest Rumors & News

    • Every MLB Trade In July
    Trade Rumors App for iOS and Android App Store Google Play

    MLBTR Features

    MLBTR Features

    • Remove Ads, Support Our Writers
    • Front Office Originals
    • Front Office Fantasy Baseball
    • MLBTR Podcast
    • Trade Deadline Outlook Series
    • 2025-26 MLB Free Agent List
    • Contract Tracker
    • Transaction Tracker
    • Extension Tracker
    • Agency Database
    • MLBTR On Twitter
    • MLBTR On Facebook
    • Team Facebook Pages
    • How To Set Up Notifications For Breaking News
    • Hoops Rumors
    • Pro Football Rumors
    • Pro Hockey Rumors

    Rumors By Team

    • Angels Rumors
    • Astros Rumors
    • Athletics Rumors
    • Blue Jays Rumors
    • Braves Rumors
    • Brewers Rumors
    • Cardinals Rumors
    • Cubs Rumors
    • Diamondbacks Rumors
    • Dodgers Rumors
    • Giants Rumors
    • Guardians Rumors
    • Mariners Rumors
    • Marlins Rumors
    • Mets Rumors
    • Nationals Rumors
    • Orioles Rumors
    • Padres Rumors
    • Phillies Rumors
    • Pirates Rumors
    • Rangers Rumors
    • Rays Rumors
    • Red Sox Rumors
    • Reds Rumors
    • Rockies Rumors
    • Royals Rumors
    • Tigers Rumors
    • Twins Rumors
    • White Sox Rumors
    • Yankees Rumors

    Navigation

    • Sitemap
    • Archives
    • RSS/Twitter Feeds By Team

    MLBTR INFO

    • Advertise
    • About
    • Commenting Policy
    • Privacy Policy

    Connect

    • Contact Us
    • Twitter
    • Facebook
    • RSS Feed

    MLB Trade Rumors is not affiliated with Major League Baseball, MLB or MLB.com

    Do not Sell or Share My Personal Information

    hide arrows scroll to top

    Register

    Desktop Version | Switch To Mobile Version