Tony Clark

Major League Baseball announced Friday that the Competition Committee — an 11-person panel consisting of six ownership representatives, four players and one umpire — has voted to implement three new rule changes for the 2023 season: a pitch clock, a limitation on defensive shifting and larger bases.

Commissioner Rob Manfred issued the following statement after the vote:

“These steps are designed to improve pace of play, increase action, and reduce injuries, all of which are goals that have overwhelming support among our fans. Throughout the extensive testing of recent years, Minor League personnel and a wide range of fans – from the most loyal to casual observers – have recognized the collective impact of these changes in making the game even better and more enjoyable. We appreciate the participation of the representatives of the Major League Players and Umpires in this process.”

The league’s press release describes the changes (and provides context from minor league testing of the pitch clock) as follows:

• Pitch Timer: A Pitch Timer will improve pace of play and reduce dead time.  The Pitch Timer Regulations include the following provisions:
  • A pitcher must begin his motion before the expiration of the timer.  Pitchers will have up to 15 seconds between pitches when the bases are empty and up to 20 seconds between pitches with at least one runner on base.  Testing in the Minor Leagues involved 14 seconds with the bases empty and 18 seconds (19 seconds in Triple-A) with at least one runner on base.
  • A pitcher may disengage the rubber (timer resets) twice per plate appearance without penalty.
    • Subsequent disengagements result in a balk, unless an out is recorded on a runner.
    • The disengagement count resets if the runner advances; testing in the Minors had no reset until the following plate appearance. 
  • A hitter must be in the batter’s box and alert to the pitcher with at least eight seconds remaining.  Testing in the Minor Leagues included nine seconds remaining.
  • A hitter receives one timeout per plate appearance.
  • Umpires will have authority to provide additional time if warranted by special circumstances (e.g., the catcher makes the last out of the inning and needs additional time to get into defensive position).
    • KEY STATS:
      • Compared to last season, the Pitch Timer has reduced the average nine-inning game time by 26 minutes (from 3:04 in 2021 to 2:38 in 2022) while increasing action on the field.
      • Stolen base attempts per game have increased from 2.23 in 2019, at a 68% success rate, to 2.83 in 2022, at a 77% success rate.
      • In its most recent week of play, Minor League Baseball has averaged just 0.45 Pitch Timer violations per game.

• Defensive Shift Restrictions: A set of restrictions will return the game to a more traditional aesthetic by governing defensive shifts, with the goals of encouraging more balls in play, giving players more opportunities to showcase their athleticism, and offsetting the growing trend of alignments that feature four outfielders:
  • Lateral Positioning: Two infielders must be positioned on each side of second base when the pitch is released.
  • Depth: All four infielders must have both feet within the outer boundary of the infield when the pitcher is on the rubber.
  • No Switching Sides: Infielders may not switch sides unless there is a substitution.
    • KEY STAT: Defensive alignments that feature four players in the outfield increased nearly 6x across MLB since the start of the 2018 season.

• Bigger Bases: With the goal of improving player safety, the size of first, second, and third base will increase from the standard 15” square to 18” square. 
  • Bigger bases are expected to have a positive impact on player health and keeping Major Leaguers on the field.
    • KEY STAT: Base-related injuries decreased by 13.5% in the Minor Leagues this season, including declines at every level of the Minors. 
  • Bigger bases will reduce the distance between first and second and between second and third base by 4.5”, thereby encouraging offensive Clubs to attempt to steal bases more frequently and generally to be more aggressive on the basepaths.

The committee unanimously voted in favor of the larger bases, although as first reported by ESPN’s Jeff Passan, the players voted against both the pitch clock and the limitation of defensive shifts. The MLBPA confirmed as much in a since-issued statement, which reads:

“Players live the game — day in and day out. On-field rules and regulations impact their preparation, performance, and ultimately, the integrity of the game itself. Player leaders from across the league were engaged in on-field rules negotiations through the Competition Committee, and they provided specific and actionable feedback on the changes proposed by the Commissioner’s Office. Major League Baseball was unwilling to meaningfully address the areas of concern that Players raised, and as a result, Players on the Competition Committee voted unanimously against the implementation of the rules covering defensive shifts and the use of a pitch timer.”

With the current collective bargaining agreement set to expire on December 1, 2021, Major League Baseball and the MLB Players Association have been in talks regarding the potential structure of the next CBA. MLB made its first core economic proposal to the MLBPA this week, report Evan Drellich and Ken Rosenthal of the Athletic.

MLB’s proposal included a lower threshold for taxes on team spending, with teams subject to a 25% tax on any spending above $180MM, report Drellich and Rosenthal. There would be three additional tax brackets at some point above that mark (for a total of four tax brackets), with the tax rate increasing as teams hit those higher overage levels. As a trade-off, MLB proposed that teams be subject to a $100MM salary minimum. MLB’s entire proposal was presented as a package deal as opposed to a series of one-by-one potential provisions.

For comparison’s sake, the current CBA contains three tiers of luxury tax penalization. For the 2021 season, the first tier begins at $210MM and contains a 20% tax on overages up through $230MM. There’s a 32% tax on overages between $230MM and $250MM and a 62.5% tax on any payments beyond $250MM. Those penalties escalate for teams that pay the tax in multiple consecutive seasons.

(Under the current CBA, a team’s luxury tax number is calculated by tabulating the average annual values of its financial obligations — not its actual payroll in any given season. It’s not clear whether MLB’s proposal would continue to be based on contracts’ AAV’s as opposed to current-year obligations).

The luxury tax has become an obvious deterrent to spending for most high-payroll teams. Only the Dodgers have been comfortable blowing by the thresholds to incur the loftiest penalties associated with the third bracket this season. Teams like the Padres, Yankees, Phillies, Red Sox and Astros all have CBT numbers hovering right around the $210MM lowest threshold and either contemplated or were seemingly dead-set upon avoiding the tax during their offseason and trade deadline maneuvering. Of that group, it seems only San Diego might have exceeded the threshold by a narrow margin, although it’s not yet clear that’s the case. Even if the Friars did go over the first threshold, they didn’t exceed it by enough to incur particularly meaningful financial penalties this year.

Given that the luxury tax has served as a de facto salary cap for some of the league’s top spenders, it doesn’t seem likely the MLBPA will be particularly enamored with the idea of lowering that first threshold such a substantial amount. Indeed, it’s widely expected the MLBPA will be pushing for a dramatic increase to those thresholds during the current session of CBA talks. MLB also offered the union an option to leave the luxury tax status quo, report Drellich and Rosenthal, although it’s not clear what other conditions would be involved in that scenario.

MLB is obviously aware that getting the MLBPA’s assent on lower tax thresholds will be extremely difficult (if not impossible). That’s likely the reason for the inclusion of the proposed salary floor, with the league reasoning that setting a minimum payroll would increase some teams’ spending and more equally divide team payrolls for competitive balance reasons. Twelve teams (Pirates, Indians, Marlins, Orioles, Rays, Mariners, Tigers, A’s, Royals, Rangers, Diamondbacks and Brewers) entered the 2021 season with an actual payroll below $100MM, in the estimation of Cot’s Baseball Contracts. (Seven had an estimated luxury tax payroll below $100MM). The league’s proposal contained some method of redistributing tax money collected from the higher spenders to spur spending among those lowest-payroll clubs, Drellich and Rosenthal report.

Of course, there’s plenty about the league’s proposal that’s unknown. Drellich and Rosenthal note that it’s unclear how the league would penalize teams that don’t reach the spending minimum, or even in what season that minimum would go into effect. It’s also debatable whether the presence of a salary floor would actually increase free agent spending or truly disincentivize teams from conducting long-term rebuilds. It’s equally easy to envision a low-payroll rebuilder acquiring an underperforming veteran player on an expensive contract — along with prospect talent — from a high-payroll club looking to duck under the tax threshold.

For instance, the Padres and Rangers reportedly had pre-deadline discussions about a deal that would’ve sent first baseman Eric Hosmer (who’s on an eight-year, $144MM contract) and top outfield prospect Robert Hassell III to Texas to acquire Joey Gallo. That obviously didn’t come to fruition, but it’s a useful illustration of the creative ways teams could work around the lower tax thresholds/salary floor. The Rangers picking up Hosmer would’ve pushed their payroll up over $100MM while shedding money from San Diego’s books — without having any direct impact on the free agent market.

Of course, there’s still a few months for the two sides to bandy about proposals before the expiration of the current CBA. The MLBPA made its first proposal back in May, report Drellich and Rosenthal, with one emphasis being on earlier arbitration eligibility for younger players.

There’s obviously a significant amount of each proposal that hasn’t yet been made public. Drellich’s and Rosenthal’s report sheds some early light on both sides’ vision for the long-term future of the sport, but there’ll be plenty more back-and-forth between the league and the MLBPA over the coming months in what’s widely expected to be a fairly contentious negotiation. The full piece is worth a perusal for subscribers to the Athletic interested in the sport’s labor dynamics.